My mom--who is still an active Southern Baptist--was telling me about a television preacher who she saw doing a sermon based on the King James version of Matt 24:7

Apparently this preacher--named Jensen or Jenson--had decided that "divers places" meant the bottom of the ocean.  You know, where divers go.  So he had this whole long scheme worked out about how all these recent underwater earthquakes in the Pacific were signs that the end of the world is on its way soon. 

It's a long video, but the good part is near the beginning.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/7124569.stm

Unfortunately there is no news about the fate of the poor teddy bear

This is from the GameFAQs poll of the day.

Have your religious beliefs ever conflicted with your gaming?

According to their own bible they are not to celebrate festivities with cutting down the tree, trimmings, etc.

Do they read their bible?

Anyone else see this and or show this to a christian?

Jer 10:2 Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.

Jer 10:3 For the customs of the people [are] vain: for [one] cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.

Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.  -- Ambrose Bierce

Ever since a friend linked me to some of the blasphemy challenges on youtube this time last year, I thought the whole idea was kind of funny, albeit in a sophomoric sort of way. I mean, I suppose it served its purpose in the long run - exposure, including an unprecedented nationally televised debate - but this isn't what concerns me most about the challenge.

The blasphemychallenge.com website states that "You may damn yourself to Hell however you would like, but somewhere in your video you must say this phrase: 'I deny the Holy Spirit'."

It's the word "deny" that keeps nagging me. A denial is a declaration of untruth, correct? I wouldn't have a problem if you required potential blasphemers to say something like "I don't believe in the Holy Spirit" - then it would be different. As it stands, the "I deny the Holy Spirit" portion of the Blasphemy Challenge seems to be as intellectually dishonest as when the theist says "I affirm the existence of the Holy Spirit."

The previous 5 essays were all about logic and reason.
There were two points to be made from this:
1) Even if the theist was wrong about their belief, and even if they couldn't put forward a rational argument to defend it, that didn't mean that they were being irrational in holding it.
2) Whether a belief itself is rational or irrational (i.e. whether an absolute analysis of all the evidence, possible arguments, justifications would vindicate it or refute it) depends a lot on the discourse/purpose/language game that the belief is grounded in.

The modern liberal/moderate religious person tends to agree with contemporary science, yet still hold that 'God is important to them' and might appear to hold beliefs that are contradictory to science. This essay is to paint a picture of religion that would make it a practice that could be considered rational (as in point 2).

Welcome to essay number 5.
The introduction to the fourth essay summarises what has come so far.
The essays have focused on the conditions for reason, so also its limits and where it is applicable to our problems of everyday life. This one attacks a certain attitude to reason that many people hold, and I try to show that it is based on assumed premises of practical reason that are unjustified.

Special Note for Hamby
This topic will not really effect our debate.
These essays were written to address a wide range of concerns, and the debate between me and you on whether theism can be 'rational' (that is, using the definition of 'rational' that you use) won't really be touched on in this essay.

This is known as "The Great Debate" that occured between Greg Bahnsen and Gordon Stein in 1985 (I believe this is the correct date).

I doubt any atheist here has heard it. Don't listen to any critical review of the debate. Listen to it yourself.

 I ask that Brian and Kelly listen to it with great attention.

It requires that you have some level of intelligence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6iEUanJbsw