Audience of One | Watch "Audience of One" Documentary Online for Free

Recent Comments

Shadow Company by ParaMythos: From a moral and ethical standpoint I can easily say I disagree with the idea and use of “Guns for Hire”. There is the issue of...

From Christian to Atheist by David Broman: Thx for your long and thoughtful response. In your research of religion, what do you think is the best modern example of how...

From Christian to Atheist by mills: I think that this is an excellent rough cut. I would encourage you to take the focus off of Christianity and place it more squarely on the...

From Christian to Atheist by David Broman: This is encouraging. Thank you :)

Guys and Dolls by Revanhavoc: So effin weird

A Tangled Web of Hate by ssg45: I was cyberbullied to the point where I contacted a lawyer, and I’m in my 20′s. It’s like the internet’s capable of...

From Christian to Atheist by Servus Humilimus: Verry nicely done and I like your examples as they seem more effective to me than many that are offered by Dawkins and...

From Christian to Atheist by ssg45: And respecting someone’s beliefs/right to believe does not mean they should be exempt from criticism.

From Christian to Atheist by ssg45: Respecting people is a given in modern society; compassion and empathy is warranted, usually deserved, and necessary for us to live in...

From Christian to Atheist by David Broman: Thanks. I would appreciate if you could describe a particular slide or statement that was particularily disrespectful so I can change...

From Christian to Atheist by David Broman: Thanks. I will. Not everyone is ok with this kind of humor, I guess.

World’s Scariest Drug by Mactighe: I am an Irishman who lives in Bogota and this whole documentary is a compete utter exaggeration!! The “drug dealer” is...

Home » Documentary Trailers » Audience of One

Audience of One

Audience of One

Ten years ago (1994 from date of talking), a Pentecostal pastor from San Francisco was praying on a mountain top when he received a vision from God to spread the Gospel through filmmaking. Using donations from his congregation, he slowly transformed his church into a fully functioning movie studio, and the production company Christian WYSIWYG Filmworks was born.

After experimenting on a number of small projects, Pastor Richard Gazowsky announced that he and his WYSIWYG crew were going to make a film entitled, Gravity, the Shadow of Joseph, a biblical science fiction movie that would redefine the Hollywood epic.

Audience of One is a documentary that chronicles the making of Gravity. This verite style film goes inside a Pentecostal church, where the charismatic Gazowsky leads his loyal cast and crew on an incredible journey that tests the limits of faith.

From pre-production at their church, to shooting principal photography in Italy, to leasing an enormous studio on an island in the San Francisco Bay, Audience of One keeps pace with an embattled church production who look to God in order to keep their dream alive. Full of humor and pathos, what transpires is a story of obsession, faith and delusion.

Director: Mike Jacobs. Audience of One website. Aired 2007

“THE DIRECTOR HAS MADE ONLY A PREVIEW AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME”

GD Star Rating
loading...

Share This Documentary

Get Shareaholic

Similar Documentaries

Discuss This Documentary

gerry
‘Well, I’ll leave it to the debate judges to determine if calling someone’s argument out as fallacy amounts to the nullification and subsequent defeat of that argument.’
Of course it does if you can prove it…but you havent..calling someones argument out isnt the same as producing irrefutable evidence to the contrary.
‘And the Beano comic isn’t complete. It might provide good advice but the advice isn’t thorough. You can’t say “everything I learned in life I learned from the Beano comic.” But you can say that about the Bible.’
Your answer was ‘because it provides sound advice’ ….so does the Beano. Is the bible complete?…to suggest you learned everything you know from the bible is a fallacy…did the bible teach you how to kiss someone on a first date?…argument defeated (Im funning)
However, can you see where Im going with this at least? I can appreciate your adherence to what you perceive to be the word of god.Thats obviously your prerogative What Im saying is the only proof you have that it actually is the word of god is a feeling and the fact that someone told you it was.
Alex
Well, I’ll leave it to the debate judges to determine if calling someone’s argument out as fallacy amounts to the nullification and subsequent defeat of that argument.
And the Beano comic isn’t complete. It might provide good advice but the advice isn’t thorough. You can’t say “everything I learned in life I learned from the Beano comic.” But you can say that about the Bible.
That’s why you shouldn’t “believe in the Beano comic that people found and dedicate your life to it,” but it’s okay to dedicate your life to the Bible.
gerry
Argument defeated because your beano statement was a strawman and a red herring and it attempted to defeat my point by comparing it to a ridiculous statement.
Why was it a ridiculous statement? Its a a genuine and pertinent statement that you have dismissed either because you havent understood it or you have no answer, Let me expand further…The beano was a comic book which was packed full of morally sound example and advice, each story had a message each character had a role to play, parents were happy to let their children read it and kids were fulfilled and dare I say educated by it. Its advice was sound!
I obviously picked the Beano to highlight the folly of the notion that you would choose it as a life guide. However, I happen to see the bible in exactly the same way and nothing you have said so far has made me think any different.To reiterate…the argument has not been defeated because you deem it so.
Alex
“Argumets just dont get defeated beacuse you deem it so.”
Right. They get defeated when they are defeated. And I defeated your argument because I pointed out that it was fallacious and it didn’t have anything to do with the question.
Let’s examine, shall we?
Question: “why should we believe in a book that people found and dedicate our lives to it?”
Answer: Because its advice is sound.
Response: So is the beano’s but im not gonna fall down and worship desperate dan
Rebuttal: And you just committed a logical fallacy. Strawman? Red Herring? Reductio ad ridiculum?
Argument defeated because your beano statement was a strawman and a red herring and it attempted to defeat my point by comparing it to a ridiculous statement.
“And who was changing the subject? My example was neither a red herring or whatever you decide to call it. My point was why should we choose to follow the teachings of one book over another and subsequently choose the hero of the book to be our deity? The moral messages found in the book maybe sound (although imo many of them arent, nor even close to it) I posed the question…why would you choose this book over any other to decide to dedicate your life to it…which you still havent answered.”
We choose it because the advice is more sound than any other book in existence.
gerry
“‘Because its advice is sound.’
So is the beano’s but im not gonna fall down and worship desperate dan…with all due respect (without the passive agressive snidey little remark this time) you havent answered anything…”
And you just committed a logical fallacy. Strawman? Red Herring? Reductio ad ridiculum?
Don’t change the subject. The question was “why should we believe in a book that people found and dedicate our lives to it?” My very reasonable response was “the advice is sound.” And that is true and your rebuttal doesn’t negate that fact.
Argument defeated.
Argumets just dont get defeated beacuse you deem it so. And who was changing the subject? My example was neither a red herring or whatever you decide to call it. My point was why should we choose to follow the teachings of one book over another and subsequently choose the hero of the book to be our deity? The moral messages found in the book maybe sound (although imo many of them arent, nor even close to it) I posed the question…why would you choose this book over any other to decide to dedicate your life to it…which you still havent answered.
Lee
Here is a recent snippet of ‘christian’ logic and reason
Herr Ratzinger…{the infallible!!} in his christmas address to cardinals claimed that paedophilia wasn’t considered “an absolute evil” as recently as the 1970′s. He also claimed that child pornography was increasingly considered “normal” by society. “In the 1970′s paedophilia was theorized {treated with logic & reason} as something fully in conformity with man and even with children”….he said.
“it was maintained – even within the realm of catholic theology- that there is NO such thing as evil in itself. There is only a “better than” and a “worse than” . Nothing is good or bad in itself.
There is absolutely nothing in any of that which to my mind stands up to reason. Which way would your god approach that.
Given the premiss that his god is also your god because there is {allegedly} only one god . His bible, your bible, same author. There is nothing reasonable or logical within the christian mindset. Mythological stories from the bronze age packaged to keep people on their knees and money rolling into churches coffers.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
Interesting. Verrrry interesting. You might like hearing that I feel that the Catholic religion is heretical. Needless to say, I don’t get my beliefs from that organization. We might believe in the same God, but we interpret scripture differently.
That doesn’t mean we don’t agree on SOME issues though. The one you brought up is one of the issues that I agree with. In the past 5 years ago or so in my philosophical musings I’ve also come to the conclusion that evil (people) can not exist. This is of course not because I was told by some Catholic leader. It’s because I used reason to figure it out.
It all boils down to free will. For someone to BE evil, he MUST have the free will to do evil. To recognize that it is an evil act and he should not do it and he must DECIDE to do it anyway. But, people who do evil acts always do them without free will. They don’t DECIDE to do the evil act. They are COMPELLED to do the evil act. Murder is always a result of a corrupted mind. A person “loses his mind” or “loses his temper” when he commits a murder. Even premeditated murder requires a mind that has been corrupted. “She’s going to cheat on me? Why I’ll get even.” That is a corrupted mind. The pedophile is derranged. He lacks enough free will to overcome his temptations.
Free will is the way I measure morality. Have you ever heard good and evil defined with free will before? I’ll bet not. This is why my discussions are different. I have a unique understanding of good and evil, but it is easy to understand. If an act maintains or increases the level of free will in the world, then the act is good. If it decreases the (OVERALL) level of free will in the world, then the act is bad. Obviously murder is the elimination of free will. Genocide, even more-so. So these acts are evil. But the PEOPLE who do these acts are not evil. Yes, Hitler was not evil. He was deranged. PEOPLE can only be good or deranged. Every sane person on Earth wants to be good. Yes. I do believe that. If they do not, then they have been corrupted and twisted. They feel compelled to do evil. How can you blame someone for doing something they have no control over? Obviously I don’t advocate letting out prisoners. The corrupted people must be removed from the sane world. But it’s not right to call them evil for doing something they had no control over.
And I do believe that it is important to not call people evil. If you change your perspective on the people you consider to be evil, if instead of blaming them, you have compassion. You HEAL them. You don’t necessarily release them from prison. But at least you can eliminate the causes of evil in the world. If we can slowly eliminate the causes of evil acts in the world, we will eventually bring peace. Obviously it won’t be perfect. But we can drop it down drastically.
Imagine a world where the causes of evil acts are rooted out and purged. If a child becomes a mass murderer and during treatment we find that he was abused as a child, we punish the people who abused him. We treat THEM. And we watch the people those people interacted with. We watch their family and friends. If THEY need treatment, then we step in and treat them. Eventually, over a period of a couple hundred years, crime will drop and practically all violent acts will be eliminated. I don’t think this would be a bad thing to do. I think it would be very good for helpful people to step into troubled people’s lives and give them a helping hand so they don’t turn to evil acts. Eventually, evil will largely be purged from the world. I might be a bit idealistic, but it can be done. We just have to change our perspective. We have to stop blaming people for the actions they had no control over and we have to start encouraging healthy human behavior.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
Incidentally, this approach to evil coincides with scripture. God forgives everyone of their evil sins because He understands that, though men do evil acts, they themselves can not be blamed for doing the evil acts under compulsion. So He gives us the opportunity to be forgiven for committing those evil acts. And when we willingly receive that grace, there is a change of heart within us. We are grateful so much a healing comes over us (through the power of the Holy Spirit) and the compulsion to do the evil acts is removed.

Hib
Funny how these discussions always are the same. People make up their mind and and make the story fit their belief. Thats why i find relativism so beautiful. I try to go where the (objective, tested, quantifable, documented) evidence leads me, but i’m still aware that i’m just human and basically unable to grasp the complexities of nature without translating it into models – which aren’t always perfectly adequate.
Why insist that something exists. Why not just end the discussion at “I just don’t know, but the evidence I have been presented lead me to BELIEVE”. It tires me each and every time someone says my soul is in peril and that they’re just trying to help me. I believe the soul is a chemical reaction. Thats it, and thats rarely accepted as a argument….
Think i’ll stop here… Merry christmas ;)

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
The only thing that’s the same about this argument is there is someone joining in who thinks it’s the same as every other religious argument. I take pride in the way I approach Christianity with reason and logic. Don’t put me in the same camp as the closed minded sheep who just do what their leaders tell them to do. I’m not like that. Did you even read the argument? It was over an atheist’s closed mind vs. a Christian with an open mind who has explored the existence of God at great length. Almost lost my faith. But in the end I didn’t. Why? Because Christianity stands up to reason as long as you approach it the way God intended, with faith and an open mind. Indeed, you can even have a mind that is open to the possibility that God does not exist. But you must also maintain a mind that is open to the idea that He does.
Relativism is evil. It is leading our world towards confusion. We need to find truth. Something is either true, or it is false. I might BELIEVE that taking the highway to work is going to be faster than taking the back roads. But if there is an accident, then I am wrong. Belief has nothing to do with it. I am either right or wrong.
God is either real or He is not. There is nothing relative about it. Either I am right, or you are right. Why insist that God exists? Because the question IS black and white. He REALLY only exists, or He does not exist. It is only relative IF you are right. And that makes the belief in relativism fallacious, which means it is completely illogical.
I present my argument with logic. That is how you must approach questions like this.

sleepstatic
Good idea everyone – argue about religion through the internet!
Let’s all take a few deep breaths, maybe make some tea and take a step outside and appreciate the world for what it is.
http://documentarystorm.com x
Discussions and debates are always welcome, but please don’t fight or make it personal. Let’s be civil ^_^
Lee
Makes more sense than any of your B/s
Lee
Alex you were done a long time ago.
Maybe you will understand this..
“If” I were to deny the existence of Santa {or your god} = then I give credence that Santa {or your god} {somewhere!!} …. actually exists.
Is that too much to get your brain around?
Now go on your way rejoicing.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
Your reply speaks for itself.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
“I find that I cannot deny the existence of something I do not believe exists {nothing unreasonable there either….I trust}”
**DEFINITELY UNREASONABLE!** Are you kidding me???
“I can not deny the existence” means “I believe in the existence”
I most CERTAINLY can deny the existence of Santa even though I believe he does NOT exist. My denial of his existence is the same thing as my belief that he does not exist.
Maybe you’ll understand it this way…
[I deny the existence of Santa] = [I do not believe Santa exists]
THEY ARE THE SAME FRIKKIN THING!
So no wonder you are confused. You say that you can NOT deny the existence of Santa.
(Why am I arguing against someone who fails logic so badly?) You are wasting my time. I’m done.
http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
So you are saying, if you were her eye doctor and had seen her eyes,
and a church full of teenage missionaries came into town and started praying for the people,
and the mother of the child came to them and asked for healing,
and one of the young men took her in his arms and prayed for her,
and then felt a compulsion so strong and so bizarre that he had to ask his leader for permission,
and he had to ask for permission from the mother,
and they both gave it,
and he took some dirt, spat in it, and rubbed it in the child’s eyes,
and she blinked, rubbed her eyes,
and ran around the village screaming that she could see,
and you then examined her eyes
and couldn’t explain it but her eyes were now functioning perfectly.
You would accept that God exists and works miracles?
Because when you said this…
“After all your ‘christianutty’ (SIC) has…
the unexplained temporary suspensions of universal laws{miracles!}…”
you indicated that witnessing this miracle would further prove to you that God does *NOT* exist. Well, you just had proof. But apparently instead of proving that God is real to you it would prove to you that God is NOT real. Reason would pretty much require you to admit that you had witnessed a genuine miracle. Reason would require you to admit that God must then exist. But you seemed to indicate that (despite reason) you would find this evidence that God does NOT exist.
So? Which is it? When you witness this miracle? Do you believe in reason and God? Or does reason prove to you that God doesn’t exist?
Lee
@ Alex
1} To ascertain the validity of this video I would have first wanted to physically examine this young girls eyes {before & after this alleged temporary suspension of universal law} in person and correlate my findings with an as accurate account of her past medical history as possible {nothing unreasonable in that I trust}.
2}As for the existence of ‘your’ god , I find that I cannot deny the existence of something I do not believe exists {nothing unreasonable there either….I trust}
3}Give me reason over religion every time.
Nothing in our earths history has filled so much space as religion & left it so wanting of repair.
Lee
Alex
Well if my credibility is to be impuned so mote it be.
My advanced years , failing eyesight & arthritic fingers dont help.
Now then if you are asking me to believe that what you saw on a video,…… that being an allegedly blind girl having her sight returned as if by magic by having dirt & spit rubbed into her eyesockets proves that {your} god made that massive suspension of universal law happen & therefore giving proof that {your} god exists, because I assume that you assume that this{god} perpatrated this miracle.
I would strongly suggest that the makers of the video are duping you , probably for financial gain or possession of your mind.
In the real world these occurances do not & cannot happen.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
The video was taken by my friends who did nothing but share it with their families.
Don’t be so quick to judge.
http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
AND you still didn’t deny that you would use evidence such as a video of a genuine miracle as proof that God does NOT exist.
If you fail to see the problem with logic here, then I think that’s all one needs to see to recognize what’s going on in your mind. You are willing to sacrifice reason as long as God doesn’t exist in your mind. What’s important? Reasoning, or the denial of God’s existence?
Clearly for you, it’s the denial of God’s existence, since you chose THAT over reason.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
“In all my years as a practicing proffesor of opthalmics , I have never heard such bunkum.”
Well, I have a video.
And you are using a red herring tactic, designed to take me off course. I can play fallaciously too.
You are a proFeSSor and you can’t spell professor nor opHthalmics? How does that affect your credibility?
But let’s stay on topic. If you WITNESSED this miracle, you would use that as proof that God does NOT exist?
Lee
Alex
The burden of proof lies with you.
After all your “christianutty” has the dogma, the churches, the hierarchy, the art treasures, the dressing up & the fancy hats, the clergy pension schemes, the tax breaks, The Word, the moral assumption, the unexplained temporary suspensions of universal laws{miracles!}……..what you dont have is one single iota of ‘proof’. Your god is man made……
“We have made much from this myth of christ” Leo X

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
“The burden of proof lies with you.”
It’s your soul, not mine, at stake. I’ve done all I can do.
“After all your “christianutty”"
My what?
“has the dogma,”
nope
“the churches,”
well of course. So what? Science has universities. Oh nnnnnoooooo! Buildings!!!!
“the hierarchy,” Well, doy… 1)God, 2)other people, 3)me.
“the art treasures,”
uhhhh… nnooo.
“the dressing up & the fancy hats,”
Huh???? 3 piece suits and baseball caps are fancy?
“the clergy pension schemes,”
What pension schemes?
“the tax breaks,”
well our churches ARE nonprofit organizations.
“The Word,”
OF COURSE
“the moral assumption,”
the moral proof is more like it.
“the unexplained temporary suspensions of universal laws{miracles!}”
Miracles actually cause to you to NOT believe??? Seriously? You witness a missionary spitting in dirt and rubbing it in the eye of a blind girl, restoring her sight and you point and shout “LOOK!! There is PROOF that God is not real!” Seriously? What is wrong with your pre-frontal cortex?
“what you dont have is one single iota of ‘proof’.”
Sure I do. Every human on the planet believes it is good to be good. We differ on the definition of good but every(sane)one strives to be what they consider to be good. Explain that with science. Explain the concept of goodness with science.
“Your god is man made.”
Think again.
So many closed minded assumptions.
You seem to think that I’m a Catholic or Orthodox Christian or something. How about you stop listening to the status quo and study Christianity for yourself. M.K.? You sound like a closed minded sheep thinking what your media masters tell you to think.
And remember, some “christians” do give real Christians a bad name. Don’t let the minority sway your opinion of the majority. And we Christians at least accept that we are imperfect. Why does everyone think Christians have to be perfect???
Cheese!

Lee
Alex
Are you sitting comfortably?
what is wrong with your frontal cortex when you tell a tale of a blind girl having mud and spit ground into her eye-sockets & returning her sight.
In all my years as a practicing proffesor of opthalmics , I have never heard such bunkum.
Your analogy serves nothing more than to illuminate how medieval your christianutty is. Furthermore if you are saying that humanity needs your doctrine of filth {bible} to know the diffrence between right & wrong ….
think again. Millions of people worldwide have opened their eyes to the truth & are turning their backs on your outdated & evil diestic tyranny.
And most christians give christianutty a bad name.
You are deluded, your god isnt there.
Chrisianutty is poison………Reason is the anti-dote

Gerry
What a load of old tosh. There are many other books that were we to adhere to the lessons in them we would be in much better shape as a society…far moreso than the bible I might add. You dont see people dedicating their lives to or living in fear of Shakespeare for example. You hold the ‘evils’ of fornication up as an example of the state society finds itself in and suggest conforming to the lessons in the new testament as some sort of panacea for all societys ails…sorry mate but even though I think Jesus sounded like an alright bloke, just because a few people wrote about him it doesnt mean anyone should actually believe the stories, or suspend disbelief for long enough to see him as the son of a big guy in the sky who made us all. I’ll put the question to you again…why should we believe in a book that people found and dedicate our lives to it? If I were to write another book (without the nasty bits this time) and bury it for a few thousand years would there be temples springing up to the new deity Gerry?

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
“why should we believe in a book that people found and dedicate our lives to it?”
Because its advice is sound.
With all due respect, I doubt that your book would be able to say that.

gerry
‘Because its advice is sound.’
So is the beano’s but im not gonna fall down and worship desperate dan…with all due respect (without the passive agressive snidey little remark this time) you havent answered anything…people like you never do…your ‘logic’ dissapears in ever decreasing circles until youre forced to resort to the ‘faith’ catchall thats supposed to make us feel that theres a higher power at work…there isnt…you have no proof other than a ‘feeling’ that whats contained in the bible is a ticket to heaven (whatever that might be) Dedicating your life to a ‘feeling’ is no less ridiculous than being a trekkie.Spending inordinately foolish amounts of time and money chasing after a myth and pretending it gives you fulfillment is delusional at best and cruel to your children at worst.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
“‘Because its advice is sound.’
So is the beano’s but im not gonna fall down and worship desperate dan…with all due respect (without the passive agressive snidey little remark this time) you havent answered anything…”
And you just committed a logical fallacy. Strawman? Red Herring? Reductio ad ridiculum?
Don’t change the subject. The question was “why should we believe in a book that people found and dedicate our lives to it?” My very reasonable response was “the advice is sound.” And that is true and your rebuttal doesn’t negate that fact.
Argument defeated.
(Also, people didn’t “find” the Bible. It was passed down through the centuries.)
And about my logic…. you don’t know me so I forgive you for putting me into the same category with everyone else. I am not like the illogical masses who can not use reason. My aim is to study scripture from a logical perspective. And I find that scripture is very logical. But to see it you have to study it. If you just chuck it aside, you’ll be in no position to argue about its usefulness. I could pick up a calculus book, open to a page in the middle, read a little and say “bollucks!” then chuck it aside, claiming it’s “illogical” and “meaningless.” That would be pretty ridiculous to do, right? Because I didn’t read all of it, and I came to a conclusion based on limited information.
If you haven’t studied scripture, then clearly you don’t know enough to come to any conclusion about it. Study it (without prejudging it) to determine if it is logical.
Now THAT is reasonable.

Gerry
Atheism? Theism? what you babbling about? All I know is people found a book one day and told me to live my life according to it and I said no.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
You probably haven’t studied it, especially the new testament. Jesus Christ summed up the entire Bible in what He called the greatest commandment: Love God and Love your neighbor as yourself. Maybe you have a problem with loving God, but you can’t escape the practicality of living a sound moral life.
The Bible really has a LOT of good advice in it about living. If everyone lived their life as described in the new testament, we would have peace. A lot of people live their lives and don’t realize the long term effects their wanton ways have on the rest of society. Witness the sexual revolution. These days if you have a boyfriend, you ARE having sex with him. It’s expected. But we also have hundreds of thousands or millions of unplanned pregnancies each year. And contraception is no solution. Even sterilization is not 100% effective. 3/1000 sterilized couples become pregnant within one year. Check the statistics. But your typical contraceptive is no better than 99% effective. Consider the amount of rampant sex going on and you HAVE to realize that this “measly” 1% equates to hundreds of thousands of unplanned pregnancies each year. That in turn equates to children being born to young single mothers. Young single mothers have to work to provide for the child so many kids grow up neglected or at least unsupervised and it’s no wonder they succumb to the temptations of drugs and crime. It all started with the belief that you have the right to engage in PROTECTED premarital sex. But there is no such thing as protected sex.
If society had listened to the teachings in the new testament, drugs, gangs, and general crime would be a percentage of what it is now.

jack
“Love your neighbor as yourself. ”
That’s called “The Golden Rule” or the ethic of reciprocity. More specifically The Golden Rule goes, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” It is the only moral code one needs. And it far predates The Bible, The Koran and The Torah. It’s a concept that came from Man. Therefore, one does not need any religious text to have ethics and morals.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
Don’t cheapen Jesus’ words. The Greatest Commandment is more than The Golden Rule. The golden rule (spoken by Jesus but still different than the Greatest Commandment) is cited elsewhere. The Greatest Commandment is a complete summary of the law. The golden rule is a sound-bite.
And I would argue that the golden rule is not complete enough to be the only moral compass. You must consider the long term consequences of your actions and the actions of other people you have influence over. The golden rule is a poor guide for that, because people want us to TOLERATE their poor behavior.
TOLERANCE today has replaced morality. The golden rule supports unhealthy adherence to tolerance. Not that I’m against the golden rule, but you must temper it with mature responsibility.

Lee
Very well said Epicurus,
Alex,
Your slave-making, parasitical, historically dubious, self-serving, delusional, morally corrupt, knee-bending, capricious, sexually repressive, backward thinking, manufactured, discordant, sadomasochistic, two faced, lying, careless, hypocritical, coersive, inconsistent, manipulative, disgusting, barbaric & superstitious Johnny come lately thieism is toxifying you.
Choose athiesm……..you know it makes sense.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
Again, study logic. Atheism has none. At least embrace agnosticism. Agnosticism at least admits that it lacks sufficient data to make a determination about God’s existence. A truly open mind accepts the possibility that He MIGHT exist.
And if you go one step further, search for God (but don’t test Him by saying something like, “God if you are real let me win the lottery”) He will reveal Himself to you. If your attitude is humble and not expecting failure, and you seek Him, He will show Himself to you.
http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
And how does believing in God make me morally corrupt? Or sadomasochistic? Or a liar? Or two faced – or hypocritical… (aren’t those the same thing)? or coersive? or manipulative… (wait… aren’t THOSE the same thing)? LOL or disgusting? Or barbaric?
Some believers are those things and everything you’ve said (and more) but they don’t represent what is taught in the Bible. And they CERTAINLY don’t represent the Christian religion as a whole.
You’ve succumbed to yet another fallacy, thinking a small portion of a population represents the whole of the population. Why are so many atheists so frikkin fallacious??? Do you know what a fallacy is? It’s a scientific and logical principle.
Christianity is a religion of love.

Lee
I watched about 5 minutes of this and had to turn it off.
Gerry
ummm…but gods not real

Alex
Prove that God’s not real.
He doesn’t prove Himself to closed minded atheists. He proves that He is real to OPEN MINDED agnostics. If you can’t hear the evidence of His existence, you are an atheist. You aren’t an agnostic because agnostics are open minded. If you are truly open minded, you’ll hear Him speak to you.
Remember, atheism is illogical because you can not logically prove a negative.

Epicurus
> atheism is illogical because you can not logically prove a negative
Uhm… that’s not how logic works, mate.
First a positive has to be proved. As long there is no positive, no negative can be proved.
One cannot prove the absence of something, if there is no valid provable certainty of it’s existance in first place.
That’s the point …
Also .. teapot.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
HAHAHAHAHAH!!! Your fallacious slip is showing. Ever heard of the logical fallacy called argumentum ad ignorantiam? It’s also known as argument from ignorance. It states that a proposition is necessarily true because it has not been proven false. Theists use this fallacy… but SO DO ATHEISTS! It’s like this…
Theism: There is no proof of God so I believe that He is real.
Atheism: There is no proof of God so I BELIEVE that he is not real.
They are BOTH BELIEFS with incomplete data. So atheism is actually as much a religion as Christianity, just without the pomp.
The only difference is the truly open mind of the Christian eventually gets him proof from the living God that He is real. So I have proof that God is real. You don’t have proof that He is not.
But getting back to logic, in simple terms… absense of proof is not proof of absense.

http://smartalx.blogspot.com Alex
Prove to me that you do NOT have $10,000. You can’t do it. There will always be the possibility that you have a shoebox full of money hidden somewhere.
God is juuust like that $10,000. You can NOT prove that He does NOT exist. So the smart thing to do is to accept the possibility that He MIGHT exist, and go on with your life.