Marriage today is struggling. Divorces, adultery, misconceptions, etc are plaguing not only the marriage itself but products of those marriages (my generation and the next). My hope in this poem is to highlight the most frequent and problematic issues marriages face today while also pointing to Jesus as the ultimate healer, redeemer, and restorer of every marriage. Whether single or married, my intention would be that this poem would allow you to look more deeply to Jesus to either better your current marriage, or prepare for your future marriage.

There seems to be a trend with Bethke which is that I happen to agree with half and only half of what he says. He does point out legitimate problems in the world. Religion, the destruction of a nice marriage, etc. But his solutions are monotonously the same. Jesus. It’s always Jesus. This poem basically says that marriages are falling apart and the only way to fix them is with Jesus.

He seems, thoughtfully ignorant, and yes that is a phrase I have just made up. This is where someone is wrong yet still fills the vacant following space, which is supposed to be occupied with reason, with empty meaningless words. Yes, marriage in this country is falling apart, becoming less sacred, and lo and behold, it’s mostly Christians who get divorces. However, Bethke appears to acknowledge this because it seems like this group of individuals is also within his scope of targeted recipients.

He disables the comments on his videos because he probably does not want to hear criticism. However, there are mirrors of his video which actually show some of the feedback he receives. Granted, most of it is Christian support, however the atheists and non-Christians are the most interesting. For instance, here is the most thumbed up comment on one of his mirrors:

I am an Atheist and so is my wife, we have been married nearly 20 years and share a beautiful life. We have three amazing children and have been through a lot. We have been there for each when everyone else would not. To claim that a marriage must be recognized by your lord in order to be legit, is disrespectful, hateful, egomanical, and just full of sh*t. Do not look down on us who are happy without god because we do not look down on you for claiming that we cant truly be in love.

I think that pretty much says it all. I am beginning to think all of his recent popularity is going to his head. He is thinking he’s high and mighty on a pedestal because he can speak well and have nice camera and video effects in his productions. However, when it comes to his content, in my opinion, the end result leaves a lot to be desired.

Forget the James Randi foundation. I’m talking about any university scientist or university graduate student looking to do a thesis. Certainly, if they really did have something to show off, for which I have serious skepticism, they would be able to find scholars in a heartbeat who would love and pay to study their abilities.

As it turns out, there are no papers regarding telekinesis. Not a single scientific peer reviewed paper demonstrating in laboratory conditions the effects of telekinetic abilities. Why is that? Why aren’t they bringing their abilities forward?

The question isn’t whether or not WE are believing them or too stubborn to take them seriously, but it’s why they aren’t stepping up to the plate.

Hey “psions,” are you tired of skeptics? Go ahead and prove them wrong in a way they will understand: scientific literature. Submit your claims. Go on. You can. Contact ANY university, even their operator, tell them what you want to do or what you want to share, they will direct you to the right person.

It’s not our fault that we don’t believe you, it’s yours.

With over 6 million views in only 3 days, this video seems like it has some deep insight- especially by the tone of his voice, the background and setting, the music, and the cinema-like quality. Don’t get me wrong, this is an amazingly well written and well spoken poem and he delivered it quite well. So well that it even took me to the second watch to completely form my thoughts as to why this is yet another self-contradicting Christian promoting video. Let me explain:

He starts off by saying how much he hates religion because religion has started many wars, builds churches, but doesn’t feed the poor. I agree. In fact I agree with half of the entire poem 100%. That was until he started sneaking Jesus into it and then at the end, full-blown Christianity. He claimed that there is a difference between Jesus and religion. My response? No there isn’t.

re·li·gion noun – a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

This definition is taken from Dictionary.com. At first glance, you very well have every opportunity to buy into the idea that religion and Jesus are different things; especially when promoted as the idea that Jesus is a relationship, while religion is a set of rules and guidelines.  So what are the requirements to believe in Jesus? Well since the guy in the video, Jefferson, made it clear that he holds is “Jesus is different than religion” views while at the same time making it clear that he loves churches and loves the bible, you can probably see how this is beginning to seem more and more religious than Jefferson is intending this to be.

http://www.creationtoday.org/the-thinking-atheist/

In case you were actually too lazy to read it, it basically says the following: If god doesn’t exist and we are all products of random chemical reactions, why even argue to begin with if nothing really matters?

Well allow me to retort. This has got to be the most dishonest tactic anyone can ever use in any argument ever. What this is essentially saying is for atheists NOT to argue back (if they are “true” atheists) because if they DO argue back, they just must not be very solid atheists. Let me rephrase this so you get an even clearer understanding of the underlying message of this tactic. They are saying that if you do not agree with them, don’t argue.

How low does your argument have to be in order to justify the act of telling your opponent not to argue back because IF they argue back, they lose by default. To even say or imply such a tactic is ridiculous. Personally, I cannot wrap my mind around the idea of telling someone to just save it and not argue back if they have a point, or at least think they have a point.

When it comes to why atheists argue back, that is simply left up to the individual. There could be a myriad of reasons why they are arguing. To make such a blanket statement like what is displayed on that creationist page is unbelievable. Here, I got one for you: If you imply that your opponent should not argue in the first place, why are YOU arguing?

Materials:

two birds
cedar wood
red yarn
little purple plands (hyssop)
two male lambs
1 one year old lamb
flour
olive oil
alter

Procedure:

Step 1) Kill one of the birds over fresh water in a clay pot

Step 2) Take live bird, cedar wood, red yarn, and hyssop.. dip it all into the blood of the bird that was killed over the fresh water

Step 3) sprinkle blood bird wood yarn hyssop water onto the diseased person 7 times.

Step 4) release living bird

Step 5) shave all hair off body of diseased person

Step 6) 8 days later, bring two male lambs and the little lamb, flour, olive oil, and the diseased person into a tent

Step 7) Kill one of the male lambs and give up the olive oil, burn the other lamb.

Step 8) take some of the blood from the killed lamb and smear it behind the diseased person’s right ear lobe, smear some on the thumb of their right hand, and on the big toe of their left foot

Step 9) Pour some of the olive oil into the palms of your own hands, dip your finger in the olive oil in your hand, sprinkle some of it on the ground

Step 10) smear some more olive oil on the right earlobe, right thumb, and right big toe of the diseased person ALL on top of the killed lamb.

Step 11) Dump the rest of the oil on the diseased person’s head

Step 12) Slaughter the burnt lamb, bring it to an alter

cured of leprosy

Here on the DrDrino article, you can clearly see them asserting a presumption.

Just something funny I would like to share from DrDino, Kent Hovind’s website which is currently run by Eric Hovind (his equally mentally inept son). So if creationists say that don’t start with pre assumed conclusions (though most of them admit it anyway) here is another piece of blunt evidence that an authority of creationist stupidity does.

http://www.drdino.com/how-could-light-travel-millions-of-years/

“If you actively seek god, he will reveal himself and make himself evident to you”

At first, this does sound pretty plausable. But only at first. You don’t have to think too far outside the box in order to see that in order to follow those exact instructions, you have to assume that god exists to begin with. “If you actively seek god…” How can one “actively seek god” if he or she does not pre-assume his existence? Two points: Either this is a shameful example of ‘confirmation bias,’ which is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true, OR the user simply means that you must be “open to the evidence.” Well if a person is “open to the evidence” yet still doesn’t believe in god, nor is convinced of god’s existence, nor has changed their mind, the excuse can no longer be made about having a “closed heart” or for not “actively seeking god.”

Confirmation bias is not an argument, it’s more of a fallacy. Is that the best you can do? Is that the best argument you have? In my opinion, you must have a pretty low callibur argument to even CONCEIVE of rationalizing the idea of making your opponent assume the conclusion is true before accepting any of the evidence.

     What kept religion alive all this time? What kept Christianity thriving? From any angle you look at it, it boils down to marketing. Christianity (along with other religions) are marketed effectively. Possibly the best examples of marketing one can come across.

I look at it this way: with any major or specialty, you can use it for good or you can use it for evil. If one becomes a chemist, he or she can  make a living creating new medicines for sick people (good), or they can create new hard drugs for addicts and become drug dealers (evil). The same concept applies with all specialties, including marketing. One can spread good ideas and messages (good), or one can make a living selling and marketing Power Bracelets and other scams (evil).

Science and reason can be promoted (good), and religion and superstition can be promoted as well (evil).

     Nearly ever tenet of consumer behavior is exploited for the benefit of religious propagation. Appeals to fear with the threat of Hell, appeals to emotion with the idea that Jesus died for you so you should live for him, behavioral influence, celebrity endorsement.. almost every single one except for the sex appeal. One can imagine, though, how religions would be if they allowed themselves to use the sex appeal in their advertising, marketing, and propagation.

     With every new product, there’s what’s called the “product life cycle.” The introductory phase, the growth phase, the maturity phase, and the decline phase. Most products last a few years to a couple decades, while religion has lasted an immense amount of time. Christianity is well past the introductory phase. The parts of it’s introduction and beginning story have long come and gone. Over the past couple thousand years, it has spend a lot of its time in the growth phase. More and more people becoming Christian, being loyal to Christianity, and becoming increasingly reluctant to switching brands. Right now, I believe it is safe to say Christianity (and I think religion as a whole) is jumping up and down around the maturity phase. If there weren’t new promotions and more market penetration, religion would eventually slip into the decline phase and go out of style. Alas, there are new religious promotions and market penetrations pretty frequently which raises the stocks of religion yet another spike. There new rapture predictions every few years, Noah’s Ark is found every few years, religious holidays are sprinkled throughout the year, and every passing year, we are apparently getting ever closer to the “end times.” When people start doubting the scriptures, a safeguard comes along and blows the whistle exclaiming that the bible predicted that there would be doubters in the end times, therefore the bible is true… and there is yet another spike.

     Of course, there are competing brands of superstitious belief that exist, such as Islam, Judaism, Hindu, etc. and some of those brands are more competitive than others- wanting a higher share of the market. Like cell phone companies, some will engage in deception, misleading claims, and will always claim their brand to be the best.

     Some major brands and names in the world have smaller companies under them. Christianity has many denominations under its name. The major brands and bigger brands that have been around longer have a higher customer loyalty base than the new brands that come out. Christianity is a big religion, has been around for quite some time, therefore it has many followers. Occasionally there will be knockoff brands, spoofs, frauds, counterfeits, etc. just like how Scientology, Mormonism, and some of the New Age stuff popped out of virtually nowhere. This of course is definitely not to say that the original brands or religions are the best, more real, or more true- but it just goes to show a stiking parallel.

     Religions have simply been the masters of marketing. They utilize almost every human weakness (except sex appeal) and only those who see them for what they really are, are the ones who have the knowledge to break free.

As a Marketing major, I began to see religion as a perfect example of the evils of marketing and the potential it could bring to an entire society of possibly billions of people. If all it takes is marketing to promote such mental atrocities, then marketing can indeed be used for good to promote clear thinking, rationality, and science.

The world can be changed with a single idea. All it takes is one person, one mind, one single thought. One person can say “you know what? This would be kinda cool,” and from that, a chain of reactions can set off which could revolutionize the world. (“revolutionize” in this sense does not mean start a war against an oppressor).

I feel that people are too silent at times. Someone might have an idea to make something or to improve upon something. Perhaps they are not confident that their idea will be taken seriously. Maybe they are too afraid their idea might fail. Possibly, they tried one time and failed once before and got discouraged.

Or maybe some people simply don’t have any ideas at all. Maybe they have no imagination, or possibly severely lacking one.

I’ve had many ideas in my life- many of which I’ve acted upon. I’ve failed many times as well- more times than I’ve succeeded. My YouTube channel was an idea. After watching a lot of videos, I thought, “you know what? It would be pretty cool if I got involved in this.” And now I have a channel with almost 5,000 subscribers. I am currently at a slow point, my last bunch of videos got very few views and I have very little time to make videos anymore, but I’m not discouraged. I have a better idea of what works and what doesn’t.

I had an idea to make a parody campaign of creation.com’ “Question Evolution” campaign. It started the same way. I also have an idea to start my own website with content completely unrelated to the evolution/creation/theism/atheism game. An idea that I think has the potential to take off and be successful. The machine is turned on and the gears are rolling. If it takes off, you will know. I will look back at this blog post and smile knowing that once again, through a sea of failures, another idea has succeeded yet.

The human mind is too great of an asset to waste. I think time is better devoted to setting good ideas into action, than mindlessly feeding off of and consuming premade concepts.

Just a thought.

And with that said, I couldn’t give a shit about Kim Kardashian’s love affairs or what’s tattooed on Selena Gomez’s wrist.

““180” is unique from other pro-life movies in that it appeals to the intuitive knowledge that God has given to human beings.”

No. It appeals to emotion and the exploitation of loaded questions and false analogies.

“We are not primates as so many of this Darwin-embracing generation believe.  Man is above the beasts in that he has a sense of justice and truth. Animals don’t care about setting up court systems and punishing wrong-doing.”

We are primates in every way possible. Primate does not mean shitflinging monkey. Look up what primate means and be amazed. ‘Justice’ isn’t a sense and neither is ‘truth,’ so no it doesn’t set us apart from animals. We have bigger brains and stronger nervous systems and therefore are able to discover more aspects of the universe. Animals don’t care about setting up court systems. True. Congrats on that.

“That is unique to human beings because we are made in the image of God. We intuitively know that it’s wrong to lie, steal, commit adultery, and to murder.”

Yeah because think of how many of us would be around if 150,000 years ago, murder wasn’t frowned upon. Please..

“When a person has been brainwashed into being pro-choice—believing that the baby that is growing in the womb isn’t a baby, then termination of this substance isn’t murder at all.”

When a person has been brainwasehd into being pro-life– believing that the substance that is growing in the womb is actually a person, then termination of this person is indeed murder. Gasp!!!

“However, when the person becomes convinced that a “fetus” is a human being, the conscience begins to do its God-given duty and say “You shall not kill.” It’s then up to the individual as to whether or not he or she will listen to its voice.”

There’s a difference between something that is genetically considered a “human” and something that is considered a “person.”

“Notice that this person (after watching it three times) said that her “perspective” changed.  Allow me to change your mind about something of which I think you are probably sure, by giving you another perspective.  Where is up? If you are normal, you will probably point above your head.  But someone from New Zealand (down-under) would tell you that you are actually pointing down.  We live on a big ball called “earth,” and up and down don’t really exist. They are relative to where you are standing on this earth.  This new information gives you knowledge so that you can see things from a different perspective, and therefore change your mind about something of which you were sure a few minutes earlier.”

I’m pro-life now

“That’s what “180” does. It gives new information and that gives people another perspective, causing them to change their minds about something of which they were sure just a few minutes earlier.”

I think 180 is preaching to the choir. If it changed your mind, great. More power to you. I guess loaded questions and appeals to emotion are still alive and well.