That movie was crazy amazing. My favorite part is when that reporter goes backstage and the band member says, "I think the real reason you're here is because, you're kind of hoping that all if this is for real." Ahhh. Just wonderful.
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
This was one of the few scenes in the movie that kind of accurately portrayed some atheists. Some atheists become so depressed, hurt, or scared of death, they tell themselves "There must be someone out there to make my life meaningful." But considering the way nonbelievers were portrayed in the rest of the movie (including her own character), it was all completely contrived.
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
Sure there were stereotypical representations similar to the arch-type atheists constantly portray with respect to Christians. Of course, two wrongs don't make a right.
However, there was a lot of truth that was communicated. One of those truths is how militantly antagonistic adult atheists who work in the domain of education often are to their young Christian students and, in fact, the entire Christian worldview.
I've observed and experienced this raw hostility and persecution myself repeatedly as have tens of millions of Christians in the public education system both K-12th and especially in higher education. In fact, it's routine in my observation for atheist professors to deliberately grade down and attempt to derail the future careers of budding intelligent Christian students in secular colleges for nothing more than failing to accept their own false worldview and assertions.
Sure, go see the movie. See what you have to deal with for the first twenty something years of your life if you're a Christian.
However, there was a lot of truth that was communicated. One of those truths is how militantly antagonistic adult atheists who work in the domain of education often are to their young Christian students and, in fact, the entire Christian worldview.
I've observed and experienced this raw hostility and persecution myself repeatedly as have tens of millions of Christians in the public education system both K-12th and especially in higher education. In fact, it's routine in my observation for atheist professors to deliberately grade down and attempt to derail the future careers of budding intelligent Christian students in secular colleges for nothing more than failing to accept their own false worldview and assertions.
Sure, go see the movie. See what you have to deal with for the first twenty something years of your life if you're a Christian.
I have never heard of anyone acting as the professor did in the movie - ever.
Since when? Again, this doesn't happen.
Students aren't treated anywhere near the way the students in the movie were treated. There are some examples of students getting in trouble for praying in class or talking about religion, but this often has to do with teachers misunderstanding the First Amendment and how it only applies to the government and government funded schools and not the students. And even if there were a few cases where teachers did go out of their way to mock student's religious views, these cases would be very isolated.
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
You're obviously not omniscient and so cannot make the statement that it "doesn't happen." In fact, it does happen and it happens every day all over the country. You may never have experienced or observed it but I've seen and experienced it, heard from others, and read about it occurring repeatedly. Incidents are common.
And it doesn't just happen to students all over the nation but it also happens to professors as well. Here's an example: Atheist Professor Finds Christ, Loses Promotion, Files Lawsuit
^ Fortunately, in this case at least, the university was found guilty of discriminating against him and forced to put things right: Targeted Christian scores major legal victory
"The jury concluded the school unfairly denied a promotion to a professor who was celebrated when he was hired as an atheist [and promoted as an atheist] but then faced retaliation when he became a Christian... the university subjected Adams to a campaign of academic persecution, including intrusive investigations, baseless accusations and other actions that culminated in his denial of promotion to full professor, despite an award-winning record of teaching, research and service."
The truth is that this is an outstanding teacher but they never would have hired him had he been a Christian and they began to persecute him and seek to terminate him after he became one. It took a seven year legal case that went all the way to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit to stop the militant atheists in control of that university from persecuting and terminating him and his case is NOT isolated.
Across the country, American college and university students who express their Christian faith have come under attack and discrimination for expressing their beliefs. Read 'Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging War Against Christians" by David Limbaugh.
The atheists in control of the NEC will subsidize you with taxpayer money if you piss in a jar and drop a crucifix in it but you'll need the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals if you're an outstanding professor who becomes a Christian to stop the atheists at university from implementing a fabricated campaign of systematic persecution to terminate you.
You are wrong. Recent research shows that professors in the United States are more likely to discriminate against Christians than against atheists or individuals of other religions. Here's an example: http://www.jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultyReligion07.pdf and here's another: Baylor University Press - Compromising Scholarship
It happens all over the nation both to Christian students and to Christian faculty.
And it doesn't just happen to students all over the nation but it also happens to professors as well. Here's an example: Atheist Professor Finds Christ, Loses Promotion, Files Lawsuit
^ Fortunately, in this case at least, the university was found guilty of discriminating against him and forced to put things right: Targeted Christian scores major legal victory
"The jury concluded the school unfairly denied a promotion to a professor who was celebrated when he was hired as an atheist [and promoted as an atheist] but then faced retaliation when he became a Christian... the university subjected Adams to a campaign of academic persecution, including intrusive investigations, baseless accusations and other actions that culminated in his denial of promotion to full professor, despite an award-winning record of teaching, research and service."
The truth is that this is an outstanding teacher but they never would have hired him had he been a Christian and they began to persecute him and seek to terminate him after he became one. It took a seven year legal case that went all the way to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit to stop the militant atheists in control of that university from persecuting and terminating him and his case is NOT isolated.
Across the country, American college and university students who express their Christian faith have come under attack and discrimination for expressing their beliefs. Read 'Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging War Against Christians" by David Limbaugh.
The atheists in control of the NEC will subsidize you with taxpayer money if you piss in a jar and drop a crucifix in it but you'll need the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals if you're an outstanding professor who becomes a Christian to stop the atheists at university from implementing a fabricated campaign of systematic persecution to terminate you.
You are wrong. Recent research shows that professors in the United States are more likely to discriminate against Christians than against atheists or individuals of other religions. Here's an example: http://www.jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultyReligion07.pdf and here's another: Baylor University Press - Compromising Scholarship
It happens all over the nation both to Christian students and to Christian faculty.
Tell me if this girl'career was impacted by being a Christian. You actually sound to me just like the atheists portrayed in "God is Not dead".
[video=youtube;54Sn3hLvLQk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54Sn3hLvLQk[/video]
Last edited:
M
MadParrotWoman
Guest
Maybe not all atheist behave in the way the professor was portrayed - some certainly do! I've encountered them, heard them and read their comments. Their opinion is the correct opinion, they are angry (at a God they say doesn't exist) rude and abusive. At least many new age atheists - the ones who follow the Richard Dawkins type stance behave in this way.
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
I've never seen that behavior from Percepi. Though he is in denial of a great many things, including the topic under discussion, he exhibits his own personal morality which comes across as genuine as well as his own sense of fair play. It doesn't align exactly with the Christian worldview but I've never seen him actively persecute anyone on this forum solely because they're a Christian. Ever. So I will take his side on that matter at least.
Great video though. Videos like this are all over the net, of course.
Great video though. Videos like this are all over the net, of course.
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
Dawkins [contrived] position at Oxford didn't require much teaching, of course, but how'd you like to have been a Christian in one of his classes?
LOL, I don't care if you've been a straight A student from kindergarten until the day you walked into one of his lectures: good luck getting an A in the class of a "professor" who advocates mocking Christians with contempt.
LOL, I don't care if you've been a straight A student from kindergarten until the day you walked into one of his lectures: good luck getting an A in the class of a "professor" who advocates mocking Christians with contempt.
I do not act anything like the atheists in the movie. I do feel love and compassion for others (unlike the businessman), I don't demand Christians stop believing in God (like the prof.), I don't hate God, I don't force others from talking about God, etc.
I'll address the video you linked later on in my post.
You bring up an interesting point that contains some truth, but allow me to start off with a few corrections first.
You claim many of these atheists are angry at a God they say doesn't exist. This just isn't true. Many atheists are angry at the idea behind Christianity. They aren't angry at God, but at how people can worship something that seems so made up. You'll also find many atheists, myself included, who will sometimes speak as if God does exist. For example, an atheist might say, "How can you worship a God who demands the death of children?" It's easy to see how such a question might hint that someone is referring to a God they know exists. Indeed, it might be more productive to add "Assuming God is real, how can you worship a God who demands the death of children?", because this is what atheists are doing when they word questions in such a particular way - they're assuming God is real only for sake of argument. Christians will do this too when they're referring to atheism saying things like, "Alright, God isn't real. Now tell me, what purpose is there to live now?" Obviously, a Christian who says this didn't just decide God isn't real, it should be clear from their position that they're assuming only for sake of argument.
The professor in the movie said he was mad at God for not saving his mother. It was clear that he wasn't assuming God was real for sake of argument, but legitimately believed there was a God who didn't help his mom. The student in the movie said, "How can you hate something that doesn't exist?" which was the only thing he said that actually made sense. I'm going to digress for a moment and let you know that anger towards God can allow someone to question his existence, and allow them to conclude there was never a God in the first place - but this is much more different than believing God is real, being mad him, and denying his existence despite what they actually believe.
I hope that makes sense to you. I can try to clarify if there's any confusion.
I claimed Christian students aren't being forced to reject God in order to pass their classes. This just doesn't happen in the U.S. But even if it did, they would receive not only harsh criticism from Christians but secularist atheists as well. I never said Christians were never persecuted or discriminated against, but I'll address your link anyway.
First, I'd like to state that since she was applying for a private sector job and not a government one, I believe it was her employers right to use whatever reason he wanted not to hire her. The same is true when employers refuse to hire homosexuals, even if I disagree with their decision. It is their right, regardless as to whether I agree or disagree.
The employer didn't hire Bethany because she came from a university that expelled homosexual students. The employer may have been acting hypocritical by not hiring Bethany, but he was simply treating a student from the university the same way the university treated homosexuals - a group of people the employer obviously felt were being wrongfully discriminated against.
Reading some of the other things the employer wrote, it sounds as if he may not hire anyone who's a Christian, though it's possible he was simply mad that a person from Trinity Western applied for the job.
Many Christians argue that employers should be able to hire whomever they want and reject whomever they want based on their religious views. If this is true, then the same must also be said for this particular company as well.
All of that said, it differs from university which should remain secular. But, as you can tell from the above story you brought up, some universities do discriminate against homosexuals - and I'm sure atheists too (but why would an atheist want to join a deeply Christian university anyway?).
Even if we concluded that the company was entirely wrong to discriminate, their discrimination was simply a way of responded to the discrimination presented by the University. So it's obviously not a black and white issue.
The portion of Conservapedia you linked quoted a reverend, but it didn't actually reference anything that proved his claims to be true. This is probably because Conservapedia is run by some of the most idiotic people I have ever witnessed. This is the same website that concluded volcanos fired animals through the air, back to their homelands, after the great flood. : |
But I've never heard of anyone such as Richard Dawkin's failing students who refused to admit there was no God. In fact, I'm not sure he even mocked God during his scientific lectures. Dawkins would, however, often speak openly against God - but he never required students to attend those speeches.
And if anyone is under the impression that atheists are never discriminated against, you'd be quite surprised. One example that comes to mind is a YouTuber who goes by the name GrapplingIgnorance. Even though he never brought up religion to his students, videos he posted questioning the validity of his job resulted in him losing his position, while also receiving much hate from students and faculty. He obtained a new teaching position but created a new YouTube account where he now hides his identity to protect himself as a teacher.
Last edited:
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
How magnanimous. I'll tell you what Percepi, if you ever take my class; I'll grade you down for being an atheist, refuse to advance your aspirations, maybe ridicule your views in front of the class, and quietly derail your entry into careers that I don't believe atheists should be involved in through my peer network just like atheists do to Christian students and faculty all over the nation. But I'll let you grudgingly pass my class. Deal?
The persecution of Christians in the public education system and at secular universities is now well documented in recent studies and supported by a LARGE body of narrative from Christian students and faculty.
That's why it IS receiving "harsh criticism" from the Christian community. The reason it is not receiving "harsh criticism" from the secularists is because they're the ones who are wrongfully committing the systematic discrimination against Christians in the public education system which is supported by public tax dollars including those of Christians.
The public school system and publicly funded secular colleges are NOT private employers that have a right to discriminate against Christians.
And it should be noted that, in fact, the public education system and higher education was founded in the U.S. by genuine Christians. It's not unreasonable to hold atheists accountable for systematically discriminating against Christians in a system they enrich themselves off of that the Christians founded.
Now your inference that normative morality and immorality are equitable is false. It IS too in the interest of humanity to favor a normative morality over immorality. But that aside for a minute, your assertions about the case in the video are misconstrued.
First of all Amaruk is a Canadian company not a U.S. one and under Canadian law religious discrimination is against the law... all of it. So it won't be a surprise when the tribunal fines them for breaking the law.
In the U.S., things work somewhat differently. We have a different Constitution and a different body of law. If you want to compare two companies for fun (despite being in two different countries) you see that, in this example, one is a closely-held secular company whose owners did not construct the business upon any particular metaphysical worldview (even though some of its executives purport to align with Nordic neo-paganism) and the other is a closely-held company whose owners are committed Christians the certainly did construct the business upon the Christian worldview (which the Supreme Court affirmed recently).
Read each of their company 'about' pages for more information. They're apples and oranges. AMARUK's owners constructed a secular company upon no particular metaphysical worldview while Hobby Lobby's owners constructed a Christian oriented company upon the Christian worldview.
Now read the recent Supreme Court rulings:
Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC
Spencer v. World Vision
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby
etc...
Religious organizations (such as churches and private religious schools) and closely-held corporations are protected under the Constitution and legislation such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act [RFRA]. They cannot be coerced by government to act in ways that violate their religious beliefs (or for closely-held corporations the religious beliefs of the corporation’s owners).
In fact, both the Constitution and subsequent legislation holds even the federal government responsible for accepting additional obligations to protect religious exercise, not just without, but also within the "internal operations of the federal government."
What happened in this video is that a moral Christian person applied for a job at a secular company who's owners have not constructed their organization on any particular metaphysical worldview and an immoral neo-pagan in the HR department discriminated against the applicant for being a moral Christian person.
That is against Canadian law. That is also against U.S. law.
Now if the immoral person in the HR department had discriminated against an applicant for committing immorality such as murder, embezzlement, pedophilia, etc... then it could be legal under the right circumstances.
And it should be legal under the right circumstances for as I stated, immorality is not a suitable nor desirable replacement for normative morality. This is true even when spiritually blind atheists and deceived neo-pagans assert otherwise.
The persecution of Christians in the public education system and at secular universities is now well documented in recent studies and supported by a LARGE body of narrative from Christian students and faculty.
That's why it IS receiving "harsh criticism" from the Christian community. The reason it is not receiving "harsh criticism" from the secularists is because they're the ones who are wrongfully committing the systematic discrimination against Christians in the public education system which is supported by public tax dollars including those of Christians.
The public school system and publicly funded secular colleges are NOT private employers that have a right to discriminate against Christians.
And it should be noted that, in fact, the public education system and higher education was founded in the U.S. by genuine Christians. It's not unreasonable to hold atheists accountable for systematically discriminating against Christians in a system they enrich themselves off of that the Christians founded.
Now your inference that normative morality and immorality are equitable is false. It IS too in the interest of humanity to favor a normative morality over immorality. But that aside for a minute, your assertions about the case in the video are misconstrued.
First of all Amaruk is a Canadian company not a U.S. one and under Canadian law religious discrimination is against the law... all of it. So it won't be a surprise when the tribunal fines them for breaking the law.
In the U.S., things work somewhat differently. We have a different Constitution and a different body of law. If you want to compare two companies for fun (despite being in two different countries) you see that, in this example, one is a closely-held secular company whose owners did not construct the business upon any particular metaphysical worldview (even though some of its executives purport to align with Nordic neo-paganism) and the other is a closely-held company whose owners are committed Christians the certainly did construct the business upon the Christian worldview (which the Supreme Court affirmed recently).
Read each of their company 'about' pages for more information. They're apples and oranges. AMARUK's owners constructed a secular company upon no particular metaphysical worldview while Hobby Lobby's owners constructed a Christian oriented company upon the Christian worldview.
Now read the recent Supreme Court rulings:
Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC
Spencer v. World Vision
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby
etc...
Religious organizations (such as churches and private religious schools) and closely-held corporations are protected under the Constitution and legislation such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act [RFRA]. They cannot be coerced by government to act in ways that violate their religious beliefs (or for closely-held corporations the religious beliefs of the corporation’s owners).
In fact, both the Constitution and subsequent legislation holds even the federal government responsible for accepting additional obligations to protect religious exercise, not just without, but also within the "internal operations of the federal government."
What happened in this video is that a moral Christian person applied for a job at a secular company who's owners have not constructed their organization on any particular metaphysical worldview and an immoral neo-pagan in the HR department discriminated against the applicant for being a moral Christian person.
That is against Canadian law. That is also against U.S. law.
Now if the immoral person in the HR department had discriminated against an applicant for committing immorality such as murder, embezzlement, pedophilia, etc... then it could be legal under the right circumstances.
And it should be legal under the right circumstances for as I stated, immorality is not a suitable nor desirable replacement for normative morality. This is true even when spiritually blind atheists and deceived neo-pagans assert otherwise.
Q
Quake10
Guest
It was dumb, stupid and had a rather horrible ending where a whole crowd of people danced and partied and cheered on the death of a person. It had a stupid Duck Dynasty cameo too.
But.... one thing it has going for it, it wasn't as stupid lame and ignorant as 'The Unbelievers'. Atheists are going around and talking like that was an amazing film. Huh? What?? Worst film of the year: The Unbelievers.
But.... one thing it has going for it, it wasn't as stupid lame and ignorant as 'The Unbelievers'. Atheists are going around and talking like that was an amazing film. Huh? What?? Worst film of the year: The Unbelievers.
A
