I can imagine the amount of alcohol and blunts necessary to come up with something so shallow and at the same time, so stupid. Then again, these dorks may just be that naturally stupid with their flatulent arrogance.
The Rational Response Squad is giving away 1001 DVDs of The God Who Wasn't There, the hit documentary that the Los Angeles Times calls "provocative -- to put it mildly."
There's only one catch: We want your soul.
It's simple. You record a short message damning yourself to Hell, you upload it to YouTube, and then the Rational Response Squad will send you a free The God Who Wasn't There DVD. It's that easy.
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."
Why? Because, according to Mark 3:29 in the Holy Bible, "Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin." Jesus will forgive you for just about anything, but he won't forgive you for denying the existence of the Holy Spirit. Ever. This is a one-way road you're taking here.
Several problems wit this, which I'll begin explaining with my response to a twit who mentioned it on myspace. I've also dealt with this particular dingledork before, here.
His original post:
Synaptic Chaos wrote:
Anyone on the West coast, check out RRS and BF on the news tonight. The feature will be on the Blasphemy Challenge, which is gaining huge momentum among rational thinkers everywhere.
Check it out:
and after I fixed his typos:
Synaptic Chaos wrote:
Anyone on the West coast, check out RRS and BF on the news tonight. The feature will be on the Blasphemy Challenge, which is gaining huge momentum among irrational thinkers, people too cheap to pay for crap scholarship with cheap production values and those who have little understanding of the Bible everywhere.
Check it out:
Just to warn you, the video link I provided has profanity.
Their misunderstanding of this particular passage is dealt with in several ways as there are a couple of views on what the verses mean, within Christianity. One criticism, is that the blasphemy requires first knowing that this is a working of the Holy Spirit, and while denying it, to attribute it to the work of Satan and be an act of apostasy that hardens the heart beyond repentance. Clearly, no one in these videos and by the rules the (ir)rationals have laid out, will run afoul of such criteria.
There is another view of the passage that I ,however, find more preferable. From Tekton Ministries:
There's been a ton of concern by various parties over this verse in Mark, with some wondering if they have committed this "unpardonable sin" of blaspheming the Holy Ghost, and this is held against the Acts verse by skeptics. But the discussion really warrants no consternation by the believer because the "unpardonable sin" is this and nothing more: UNBELIEF. Thus, there is no contradiction with Acts 13:39 at all, for it sets as a pre-condition, "those who believe" -- and once you believe, you are of course "justified" from your unbelief!
Much more is there, including the testimony of a believer who felt he had committed the unpardonable sin.
One final item to deal with concerning the (ir)rational responders. Brian Sapient, i.e. The Sap, had accused several Christians, myself included, of lying when we criticized their actions over a previous contest they had and that I covered in this post.
The point of dispute being that Christian Cadre, who I referenced in the post, had said that their comments at the (ir)rational's website had been deleted after they had shown the foolishness of their rules for the contest.
It turns out, the (ir)rationals had moved the thread without notification. They said nothing at the Christian Cadre blog about this or at their site until asked, and immediately began calling Christians liars, rather than considering that it was an honest mistake, however, one forced by the (ir)rationals. At best, once it had been made clear that the thread was moved, all they had was a lapse in blog etiquette for the Christian Cadre. They've since updated their blog post concerning this, as you can see here, so the (ir)rationals don't even have that.
Somehow, I just don't see them conceding anything on this matter, judging by how The Sap reacted to an atheist critical of his little group here in the blog comments.
Trackposted to: Is It Just Me?, Perri Nelson's Website, The Random Yak, Adam's Blog, Don Surber, basil's blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Jo's Cafe, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, Rightwing Guy, The HILL Chronicles, third world county, Wake Up America, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, Pirate's Cove, Planck's Constant, Dumb Ox News, High Desert Wanderer, and bRight & Early, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.