Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "Host FED UP With Republican's Idiotic Bible Fascism" video.

  1. To both comments here. 1) Sorry, but it is a historical document. Its her application of that document that is insanely out of touch with reality. 2) The wording has not changed since it was originally written and that has been proven by things like the Dead Sea Scrolls. However, THE WAY people like her have APPLIED and INTERPRETED those words has changed countless times over the centuries. The WORST of their behavior has been the double standards of applying them harshly onto others while letting it skip over them and their friends. The crazy thing about people like her is that the Bible REPEATEDLY WARNS about people like her. It tells the rest of us to watch out for these people and the best example of that is from Jesus himself. Most people have heard of the Sermon on the Mount and that its about treating people with decency and respect and having empathy and caring about them. That's what's found in Matthew Chapters 5 & 6, but Chapter 7 is all about how to identify the frauds and recognise them for what they are. If you ever want to slap down a self righteous Christian then ask them to explain Matthew Chapter 7 and why Jesus is pointing a finger at their behavior and UNDERSTAND Jesus doesn't condemn them as people, he condemns their BEHAVIOR.
    2
  2. ​ @jlighter1  YES I know about those things. I was referring to the original text NOT the translations AND EVEN then most translations can't hide the basic meaning of the straight forward things and the Ten commandments are fairly straight forward things. For example the commandment to not murder. In English that can be written "Thou shall not murder" or "You should not murder" or "You must not murder." You could even paraphrase it to "Murder is wrong." or even "Murder is a crime against God's will (or God's commandments)." And none of those actually change the basic meaning that Murder is against the law. And YES I am very well aware that many other parts of the Bible are open to wild interpretations and sadly that there are many who will twist things to their advantage. That was what Jesus warned people about and sadly that is also one of the things many many "so called" Christians ignore. Its why I raise Matthew 7 and advise people that if a Bible thumper annoys them then ask them to explain their behavior with respect to Matthew 7. I'd also warn to be careful because they can also be ready for that and have all sorts of counters about how it doesn't apply to them. NEVER underestimate a person will bad intentions or you will end up like the frog that gave the scorpion a ride across the river.
    1
  3. ​ @davidhutchinson5233  What prove Jesus existed? You would have to be insane NOT to accept he existed. You can debate the narrative and interpretations people use but not the existence. Do you know that several contemporary historians of the time like Josephus said he existed. No historian doubts the writings of Josephus or that he lived in that time period. If you want to criticise the So called Christians and their insanity fine. I AM ON YOUR SIDE. I think its pretty obvious I have NO TIME for them or their stupidity. But to argue if Jesus existed or not is just as ridiculous and is like trying to argue if the Earth is flat or round. And just in case you didn't know the reference that Josephus makes about Jesus is actually regarding one of his brothers and it highlights just how bad the narratives have been and for how long they have been in place. One of the more ridiculous parts of Catholic Dogma was that Mary is the eternal virgin. That's NOT in the Bible at all. Many critics of Christian practices point out what happened in Nazareth on one occasion. The locals and these were people who knew Jesus and his family got incensed when he tried to teach them. Its in Matthew 13:54-57. That actually point out that he's JUST the carpenters son, who's mother is Mary and that his 4 brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas and his sisters are right there. AND WE KNOW THESE ARE NOT his disciples because there's a passage where his bothers go and tell him to be with his disciples. So that whole Catholic narrative of the eternal virgin is bunk. Historically speaking Josephus agrees with the Bible, but disagrees with Christian tradition. Then there's things like Christmas and Easter which also aren't in the Bible. They're just traditions taken from other cultures. More than a few academics have written on the subject that Christianity didn't defeat paganism but subjugated it by adopting many of its practices and most of that was done by the Catholic Church way back in Roman times at its foundation. This is actually a common across all the religions. Most religious people have never taken time to read and think. Instead they sit and listen and blindly accept.
    1
  4.  @Gambit0590  Totally incorrect there's Josephus for one and his writings are accepted by historians across the world. We also know Pontius Pilate existed. It was doubted for centuries until evidence turned up in the form of bricks with his name on them were found. As I said to others if you want to argue the narratives and stories fine but do not try and argue if Jesus existed. Its ridiculous when you consider what fragments various historians take as accepted regarding many other people and historical events AND THEY ARE ALL accepted as having existed. Example: The Viking leader Ragnar Lodbrok does not exist outside of the Viking Saga's but his existence is accepted because we know his 4 sons existed. Their interactions with other peoples was recorded. You'd be amazed how much of accepted history is in fact inferred from fragments, but we accept it anyway. I think you and others would agree. The problem isn't if certain people existed or NOT. The problem is people filling in the gaps with their own biased narratives.
    1
  5.  @Gambit0590  Your spiderman comment - GROW A BRAIN. Biden met an actor who played spiderman. Are you implying or arguing that actors who play fictional characters don't exist???? How do we classify Jack Nicholson? He played Jimmy Hoffa (who existed) and also played The Joker in Batman. So by your argument does Jack Nicholson exist or NOT and if you met him does that prove Jimmy Hoffa is still alive? On your comment about Josephus - you've only proven my point that he was writing about things in that time period THAT HE OBSERVED or HEARD ABOUT and historians pretty much all agree he heard and saw the things he wrote down. Do people like you ever bother to stop and think or is that too much to ask???
    1
  6.  @Gambit0590  YOUR COMMENT WAS: "as to your point about Pilate, spiderman met Obama, Obama exists, therefore spiderman exists" What is anyone meant to make of that other than you are referring to the comic book character spiderman? This is the problem with people like you. You think that everything you write is gold and perfect and everyone should get what your claiming instantly and that nobody could possibly misunderstand what you mean.
    1
  7.  @Gambit0590  AND YOUR OTHER COMMENT "and the point about Josephus was the crew that he's not a contemporary source" What is anyone meant to make about that comment and the part "Josephus was the crew..."? The "crew" of what? He was a writer and recorded the events of his time. He wasn't a sailor You don't even check what you are writing to see if it makes sense and then get bent out of shape when people see it for what it is - pure gibberish. Whatever your issues are just go and bother someone else with them.
    1
  8.  @Gambit0590  Can you simply just stop being such a pretentious clown. Then what sort of a source is he? He was alive at the same time as Jesus brother which means was there in the same era. I'd ask if you what your idea is of "historical context? except I know you don't know what the what the term "historical context" means. And you certainly have no idea what the word contemporary means when applied to to history or many other fields. I don't know what failure of an education system you came from but go and get your money back.
    1