Religion doesn't tell us why! God must be explained scientifically for them both to coexist and God is a supernatural figure then it can't be explained scientifically. Sorry you stupid Christians but religion doesn't explain why. Also if Christianity DID explain why what about all of the other religions? Are they just a load of shit and you are the one true answer? Because every religion says that.
Science contradicts literal biblical doctrine. If however the the scriptures are taken as metaphor OR (as common with many Christians) spun to make them say what the believer wants them to say then science doesn't conflict.
Some details about the video are a little overally general, but the point about the "conflict thesis" being largely invented by social provoquers is correct.
@megaead69 No it can't. "Faith" means to believe in something without any proof what so ever. That is directly against all scientific teachings of today which is to prove everything. Eventually God will be either disproved or proven (most-likely the latter) and it won't be faith anymore regardless of the outcome.
"I think you're an overeducated 27-year-old virgin who likes to hold the hands of superstitious old ladies and promise them everlasting life." -Gran Torino Religion is bullshit. Relgion is a money making scam. Religion is brainwash. Religion is suicide. Religion is War. Religion is hate.
the purpose of this video is to tell us theists and atheists to just forget our differences and do on something that matters.. like helping those poor children in Africa or saving the environment..
whoever made this video needs to read up on the scopes monkey trial...and while they are at the library, also galileo's house arrest, and the burning at the stake of michael servetus.
i'm just going with who ever presents me with the best facts and evidence.
religion never presented anything factual. all religion did was tell stories and forced us to believe in it "just have faith" is the religious mans favorite line .
prove to us that jesus is god..oh wait..you can't. we're not even sure that he even existed.
@BarrioAztrologist89 tell that to the thousands of other atheists who admit that every present conclusion is a hard fact, without knowing there is still room for improvement..
Current beliefs indicate that Copernicus died from a stroke induced by arsenic poisoning given to him by the king as his death sentence. Arsenic given to him through a bible (Seems very Christian)
As for what happened hundreds of years ago, it is irrelevant. All that matters is that people learn to life happily together and live in what is deemed to be 'the correct path to god'
Not sure what it is (I'm atheist) but I intend to find out and see how close I come
@BenC303 Can you provide a scholarly source to back up your claim that Copernicus was poisoned at the hands of a king? A cursory search of Google Books turned up nothing. Good luck in your personal search!
@BenC303 Whats you source. The source I had was exactly reliable. And yes things 100s of yrs ago do matter. If the video lies about the past position of the church to fit their position then some one needs to point that out before people get confused.
cont. Christianity defies human nature: Evolution tells us that Humans are merely animals with animal instincts. It seems very convenient that in Christianity every animal instinct is a sin. Jesus, had no education and therefore should have been susceptable to human nature yet he corrected the teachings of Judaism in such an inhuman manner, for example his attitude to those who were not humble, or those who desired revenge.
Science and proper religion are in no way in conflict, Catholicism for example agrees completely with all scientific fact, which of course is no surprise since the amount of evidence proving that Evolution occured for example is astounding! The old testament is diluted with incorrect information, Jesus himself said this and straightened out many of the diluted rules, any christian who denies scientific fact is a fool. If anything Evolution proves the existence of God.
@jeremyhansen100 how is it contradictory? I am a Catholic, do you not know what Catholics believe? Sure medieval Catholicism acted against some scientific advancements but that was Long ago when the old testament was literally interpreted, wake up my friend, some Catholics are amongst the greatest scientists in many different fields all over the world. Its only really in the US that there is a large proportion of creationist christians anyway. (tells u a lot about america..)
@Schism704 contradiction #1 Catholics..agree..science, then you prove it by bringing up evolution, something that wasn't accepted by the church until resently and alot of catholics atill don't accept it.
@Schism704 #2 Proper religion=catholic, then you pretty much say old t is crap and shouldn't be taken literally, it is holy perfect word of god after all why should it make sense, and prove that by saying Jesus said it was bad, even though he did help write it because he is god after all, in the new t that is just as bad as far as contradictions and bad science as the old t.
@Schism704 I don't see what famous catholic scientist half to do with any thing. Yes I agree that America took a turn for the worst as far as being religous when in the 1860s the added in god we trust to the coins.
@jeremyhansen100 Evolution helps to prove Gods existence because nature is a selfish battle all about passing on genes to the next generation. The very fact that Christianity is all about battling our Nature (e.g. the sins known as Lust and Selfishness) suggests that God wants us to break free of what makes us Animals in order to achieve a more perfect state of existence. Also let me clarify, the old testament is not to be 100% literally interpreted as it is wrong in SOME areas.
@Schism704 The fact that the god of the bible tries to stop natural tendencies, even though he sometimes endorses them, doesn't prove anything.
What is your method for determining what parts are good or bad in the old t. If you are just going to dismiss the parts that you don't agree with, then why should I believe the parts you do agree with?
@jeremyhansen100 Because these parts are verifiable, either archaeologically or from Jesus himself. They also do not contradict what Jesus tells us and do not contradict known scientific fact. So Genesis, for example is largely false due to scientific fact, as is noahs ark. Also stories such as jonah being swallowed by a whale are simply stolen from earlier Greek Mythology. Using methods such as this we can whittle down the rights and wrongs of the Old Testament.
@Schism704 You know what makes you an animal? The fact you breath with the same kind of lungs as every other mammal. You have the same kind of processing organs (aka the brain/nervous system) as every other animal. Nothing in your mind makes you an animal because you are an animal whether you want to admit it or not. Evolution doesn't prove god exists because Christianity believed that nothing even eroded, let alone evolved.
@pacdaman15557 No your incorrect, most modern christians agree with evolution and all scientific fact due to the lack of historical and scientific evidence supporting what is said in the OLD testament. The Genesis story is one of those examples, as science contradicts it, similarly the Jonah story (the 1 involving a man getting swallowed by a whale) was simply stolen from Greek mythology. Some parts of the old testament are verifiable, many other parts are not.
@pacdaman15557 Have you actually read the new testament? He does nothing but correct incorrect teachings from the Old Testament, take the Jews views on "unclean" food, Jesus said nothing that enters a man is "unclean", only things leaving a man can be "unclean" like arrogence, lust, greed etc... He was only classed as a Jew by the people of that period because christianity didnt exist at that time, he didnt follow a lot of Jewish rules.
Prominent historians of science (Grant, Lindberg, Numbers) all mention two things when talking about the conflict thesis: 1) the influence of the works of Draper and White has been immense, and 2) modern research has exposed these works as propaganda
"islam has all the answers with science and logic"
The very garbage the Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, etc say about their own religions. It's all bollocks. Religionists reinterpreting verses AFTER a discovery to attribute credit to their holy book. Islam is anti-science, anti-logic, especially considering the toasty fate that awaits those who are skeptical of religious claims. Flying donkey with wings anyone?
@AM9841 Is this a serious claim? Science in Islamic countries suffered a stillbirth 500 years ago. And I don't see any sort of link between logic and Islam. Unfortunately, many parts of the Muslim world have abandoned reason altogether.
@akasseb You want a person, fine. How about Copernicus who was imprisoned and then put to death for suggesting that the earth was round and it wasn't the center of the universe. Galileo was lucky, he only got life imprisonment after writing his book. As a side note this video flat out lies. I checked the scriptures and they never mention spheres, it has circles which BTW are 2D. When I say round it mean opposed to flat, and circles are flat.
@jeremyhansen100 I'm sorry, but your claims are inaccurate. Copernicus was neither imprisoned nor put to death. In fact, his book outlining his heliocentric cosmology was dedicated to the pope. And the Galileo affair was not about the earth's sphericity.
@akasseb You're right, he did dedicate his book to the pope, I am well aware of that. Guess what happened next. The pope wasn't happy about this book, so he jailed him because he didn't have the legal power to kill him. Guess who did, the king, and so ended the Copernicus's story. Galileo's book talks about a number of different topic such as the motion of the planets, and yes the spherical shape of the planets.
@jeremyhansen100 In my last comment I said that Copernicus was neither jailed nor put to death. For some reason, you ignored this and stated the inaccurate claims a second time. Copernicus died a natural death as a loyal son of the Church. Also, you mischaracterize the debate in Galileo's time about sphericity. By observing craters on the moon, Galileo overturned the Aristotelian notion that the heavenly bodies were perfect spheres. It wasn't a debate about whether the earth was spherical.
@akasseb I ignored you comment because you were wrong. Just because he dedicated a book to the pope doesn't mean the pope liked it. Galileo did mention in his book Dialogue on the Two Chief Systems of the World did describe planets in general as being round.
@jeremyhansen100 I have a simple request: please provide evidence that Copernicus was either imprisoned or put to death. You have made this claim twice, and I asking you to substantiate it.
@akasseb I checked my source and its utter crap, and it turns out that what you said was also utter crap. It turns out that he died with the manuscript in his hands, it was published but not by him. The main propose of my original statement was to point out the fact that people were greatly oppressed by the church if they disagreed with the doctrine, and to point out that the church most certainly did not always know the earth was round. Yes, it was a bit of an exaggeration.
@jeremyhansen100 Thank you for owning up to your mistake. But I am unsure of which statement of mine is 'utter crap'. If I have made a mistake I will own up to it too. In regards to issues pertaining to the flat earth, I would recommend reading the book 'Inventing the Flat Earth' by Russell. It is also worth noting that the most influential cosmological textbook of the Middle Ages was called 'The Sphere' (Sacrobosco).
@akasseb I not interested in reading a bios book that twists fact to prove a point. No The Sphere doesn't make a difference. Even if it was written by a preist it doesn't represent the position of the church. Just look at Luther he wasn't respesenting it even though he wonted to. It doesn't change the fact that the church warned Columbus that he would fall off the edge of the earth. If there is any book that is relavent to would be its holy book, and the bible supports the idea of a flat earth.
@jeremyhansen100 The book is not biased. Prominent historians of science often cite this book when talking about the flat earth myth. The author shows no signs of being Catholic or even Christian.
@jeremyhansen100 Jeffrey Russell. The book describes what the people of the Middle Ages believed about the shape of the earth and the history of the development of the flat earth myth. It has been a few year since I read it, but I remember that it was quite convincing.
@jeremyhansen100 Also, please document the claim that the Church warned Columbus that he would fall of the edge of the earth. There was debate before Columbus set off on his voyage, but it didn't concern the earth's sphericity. The concern was that Columbus had erred in calculating the earth's circumference. I can't blame you for believing in the flat earth myth, as it is commonly held today. Indeed, I was taught this myth in grade school as well!
@akasseb How come any statement I make has to be sighted but anything you say doesn't. If you really want to know please retake your high school history class.
Science is full of contrasting ideas, but nothing is ever accepted as true unless it is proven.
And yes, everything that is accepted has been proven.
Religion on the other hand, agrees on nothing. There is never any proof to back it up, because the claims are purposely un-testable. There is no reason to believe any one religion over the thousands of others, so how can anyone suggest that any religion is more accurate than science?
@TheKeenMind Sorry bud but there is lot's of archeological, historical, and scientific evidence for the Bible. Science vs Religion is not the battle. It's Atheists vs Religion. There is a lot of amazing science and evidence for my religion.
@bumper212 No, no there is not. Show me one piece of evidence that supports anything supernatural that happened in the bible. Additionally, the evidence must be accepted by the majority of scientists as reliable. Finally, the evidence must not be open to interpretation, it must point to something that exists in only in your religion, and it must only reasonably point to that. If this is too hard, go back to your silly bible and stop insulting scientists by insinuating that religion is rational.
@TheKeenMind If you knew anything about science you would know that it's foundation was laid by religious men. Science is science regardless of what you think the Bible is. My point was that science backs up the Bible. Why then would you go immediately to the supernatural which by definition cannot be explain by the science of this world? Why should I show you the evidence? You are obviously blind to it, what makes you think me posting it would make a difference?
"science vs religion" any moron who blindly buys into this cliche' is more of a fool than they think. truth is, nobody cares about religion, they just don't want God interfering in life so they're willing to stoop to the ultimate reasonable-retardation: atheism.
@OptimalElement Did you know that the man who proposed what is now known as the Big Bang Theory was a Catholic priest? And the father of heliocentric cosmology was Copernicus, who was a Catholic churchman.
@OptimalElement The creation account was never intended to be taken literalistically. That this is the case can be seen from the fact that the two accounts differ. The Big Bang Theory actually squared better with the Christian account of creation ex nihilo than it did with the science of the time (which proposed a steady state university). If you'd like a reasoned and scientific explanation of the Catholic perspective, check out Fr. Spitzer's work at the Magis Center of Reason and Faith. Best,
Oh trust me, for a true christian bible is the literate interpretation. As for a man who proposed big bang theory it was based on evidence and scientific method, not the bible or superstition. The fact that a catholic proposed a big bang theory doesn't prove that there is a supernatural entity. And he formed the theory based on already existent understanding in cosmology and physics which are sciences, not his knowledge on the bible and theology.
@OptimalElement Do you mind describing what it means to be a true Christian? I never claimed that Lemaitre based his theory on the Bible or that his discovery proved the existence of a supernatural entity. I was simply pointing out that the the line between 'science' and 'religion' is not as tidy as your had described in your initial post. All the faithful Catholics I know believe in Evolution, the Big Bang, and that the universe is billions of years old. Maybe I'm lucky.
@OptimalElement Because large areas of the Islamic world have abandoned reason altogether. As for the U.S., there are elements of Protestantism that not only believe in sola scriptura but also in a literalistic approach to Genesis. The problem is fideism. But if there is a God, He created the world and human reason. This is why the Catholic Church stresses the harmony between faith and reason.
@OptimalElement I said IF there is a God he created the world. And I think the existence of God can be discovered through the use of reason alone. There can't be an infinite regress of causes. If you want to hear a reasoned explanation of modern cosmological and philosophical arguments for the existence of God, I recommend watching the modules at the Magis Center of Reason and Faith.
Even a reasonable argument can be false. You need testable evidence. For example Louis Pasteur proved that bacteria were causes of disease. But he did it by conducting controlled experiments, recording his work and gathering evidence. He didn't just sit and reason with words. One can reason otherwise:''Evil demons bring suffering and pain, disease involves suffering and pain hence disease caused by demons. Bacteria, nonsense.'' God can't be tested for, so for science his irrelevant.
BTW the quote by Einstein has been commonly misconstrued by many. Hopefully, the makers of this video knows his position on science and religion and not simply nitpicking quotations. As for the "Why" question? Nope, religion doesn't provide answers either. Not even philosophy. These are simply points of discussions that brings out more questions than answers to the table.
@LameCrippled I agree that that the Einstein quote is often misused. What Einstein meant by religion is quite different than the common Christian view. There is a chapter on his religious beliefs in the book 'Galileo Goes to Jail'
Serious proponents on both sides of the debate never claimed that intellectuals in medieval europe believed that the earth was flat. Yes, I do agree that such misunderstandings are widespread, and most lay people just can't be bothered with doing their own serious research. Honestly, I do find this video simplistic approach to the issue rather ridiculous. Personal faith has nothing to do with science unless it falls into realm of scientific inquiry. Science is neutral.
At some point though there comes a leap of faith. We are trying to figure out what has happened in this universe by extrapolating data from a few centuries over billions of years. Whether or not you accept everything the bible takes a leap of faith. But believing that science explains everything requires, I believe, an even bigger leap of faith. Where did flight come from? How did the first independent cells become dependent on other living things? Where did morality arise from?
They obviously are opposed, any attempt to reconcile them is pretty pointless, consider the core methods of people on each side.
The scientific method is to observe, test, reproduce results and confirm the logical conclusion from all the evidence via peer review.
The religious method is to read the conclusion in say the bible, then look for any facts, data that can be shifted, distorted or taken out of context to back up the conclusion.
Next time you write a comment consider being more clear because your comment could be aimed at any number of things, in fact without more context it just plain doesn't make sense.
@mrgejwaites We can talk in generic terms about religion and science, but the Catholic Church teaches that there is no conflict between faith and reason. As an example, there are hundreds of Catholic churchmen who have made significant contributions to the development of science.
this was well made but the subject matter is a bit lacking in verifiable information for example so that i'm not being hypocritical to make a claim "many scientific findings came from religion" and not listing one such finding is a very pour way of seeking acceptance and belief in your cause.
Just shows how naive atheists are in falling for the idea that there is this conflict. They have to make it so as its one of their only legs to stand on.That and the spaghetti monster fairy goblin thing. God and science for the win!!
@MrStripeyDog If we all just kept believeing in science a thousand years ago people would still be dying from massive plagues while others shouted "GOD WILLS IT!". HAHA give me a break. Hopefully within a few hundred years our knowledge will be expansive enough to reveal that if god does exist he is nothing, does nothing, and sits on his ass just like hes been doing for all of eternity lol. If god is real he is a stupid worthless asshole, and he should strike me down with lightning right now LOL
I get the feeling that when they say religion they are only thinking about one particular religion, or at least only western religion. They fail to acknowledge that religion in general is already in conflict with itself.
@luminaeus You say that.. But I highly doubt you've ever read a Bible. It's more then that. Everything has a purpose in the world, we have problems in our society because God made us with imperfections and freewill. If you actually read a Bible, Quran, etc. I'm pretty positive, you'd grow up and realize not all religious people are mindless zombie who say stuff like that, and that's definitely not how we think.
God made us with free will? Have YOU read a bible before?
"Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." 2 Timothy 1:9
There are at least eight separate passages in the bible that pretty much state that your entire life is predetermined. The majority of these are in the new testament. So much for your apologetics.
@luminaeus If you know the nature of Jesus' sacrifice, you would know what that text means. 2 Timothy 1:9 is stating that our salvation does not come as a result of our works, but as a result of our faith for "all our righteous acts are like filthy rags" ~ Isaiah 64:6.
We can only be saved through the grace of God. We do not keep the commandments of God in order to be saved. It is because we are saved that we keep the commandments of God.
@luminaeus If you want evidence, study the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation. You will come to realize that every one to date has come true.
Take some time to listen to some Bible studies on prophesy and decide whether the Bible is true or not for yourself. This is a great resource:amazing facts.org
But if you're not looking for truth and you want to continue to hold to your assumptions, that's fine by me.
@luminaeus I believe that if God is who He says He is and is truly absolute, then He must be a God of science. If this is true, then there must be a scientific truth which is coherent to the Word of God. There is no reason for science to be in contradiction to the Bible, and there is no reason for the religious community to reject any scientific reasoning. As the same goes, the Word of God should be tested as any scientific evidence. God does not expect you to follow His every word blindly.
Test the word of god? The very first sentence of the bible is wrong. "In the beginning god created heaven and Earth." Wrong. The universe is almost 10 billion years older than the Earth. There's no point in continuing because everything else is wrong as well.
Or should I take your approach and simply ignore the 99.9% of staggeringly scientifically false material because that 0.1%, with extremely liberal and out of context interpretation, might appear to some as correct?
@luminaeus Psalm 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, you are God.
I wonder if you think God started being God when the Earth was created. It is quite probable that the universe is much older than the Earth, nothing is weird about that. God didn't just poof the Earth together out of nothing. Look at Genesis 1:2. The EARTH was void and without form. That doesn't mean all the ingredients weren't there.
Your willful stupidity is amazing. Read your own fucking book before you start rambling on to me about it.
According to Genesis, the very first thing God created was light, but it would be a few days before he actually got around to making the sun and stars. What kind of verbal fucking acrobatics do you have to do to explain that massive error?
Or maybe god doesn't exist and the story is nothing more than a primitive bronze-age explanation of how the fuck we got here?
@luminaeus Revelation 22:5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no lamp, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God gives them light: and they shall reign forever and ever.
This verse clearly states that in Heaven, God will produce light, without a Sun. Likewise, God DID produce light, without a Sun in the beginning. You're arguing against a God you know NOTHING about.
Didn't you just say, not more than two comments ago, that your religion is fully compatible with science? And now you're talking about how light can be magically created without a source?
Oh man, I can only hope you are the type that argues against the big bang theory by saying "You can't get something from nothing." That would be fucking hilarious.
I love how you people jump through hoops to make nonsense seem rational.
@luminaeus you don't have to argue against the big bang theory to claim that something can't come from nothing, it is perfectly possible that something caused the big bang to occur. Just a tip, don't stereotype people by grouping them into a statement such as "you people" it just makes you sound childish and less credible.
The Zero Energy Hypothesis proves that the total energy of the universe is exactly 0. Thereby making our universe the only type of universe that can come from nothing .
@luminaeus The age of your building blocks and the age of your finished product aren't the same thing. The carbon in your body might have been around for the past billion years, but that doesn't make you a billion year old person, does it? Talk about logic.
@luminaeus (Cont.) You may not understand where I am coming from now, but you will someday. In any case, understand this. There are MANY terrible Christians in the world. Hypocrities, liars, thieves, rapists, and nut jobs with screwed up views. I know atheists nicer than some Christians. And this is what the world needs to understand. The world has a problem with Christians, not Christ. Search the scriptures in prayer with an open mind and heart and discover who God truly is for yourself.
Why questions become meaningful if you don't know the answer of how question.
For example, in the past the cause of earthquakes are unknown. So people are asking "why". The answer was (and even today) because God punished the sinners, gays, abortions etc etc.
But today we know how earthquake happens and it has nothing to with actions of man. If natural disaster are determined by humans actions, then we should expect a daily meteor hit to Amsterdam or Las Vegas:))
@kemalcs Matthew 5:45 "...for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."
Whether good or bad, people prosper and people suffer. The Bible does recognize this. It was always a misconception that if you suffered, it was because you were a sinner, but that was a mindset of the Jews, not scriptural. Read John 9:1-3. Jesus clearly states that his sufferings were not a result of sin, but that is what the people believed.
@kemalcs Well...that's the problem with Christianity. There are so many people who preach false doctrines or take the Bible out of context and then the rest of the world looks down on God and Christians. I know so many people who avoid Christianity all together because we preach so many different messages.
I don't disagree that what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah was not an act of God, the Bible is clear on that. But equally, its not a "good live, bad die" thing either. God is merciful and just
@kemalcs If I wanted to trick you into taking counterfeit money from me, I can't give you a black piece of paper, You know better than that. But if I give you something that's so close to the real thing, you might just take it.
How can you tell the difference? You have to become familiar with the genuine one. Know ever detail so when the fake comes around, you know it.
Base truth on the Word of God, rather than what others try to say. Challenge everything based on His word, not man's.
@xSeiichix So if there is a case like Sodom and Gomarrah, then why it is unreasonable to think that natural disasters are acts of god? Because science find out that, earthquakes or other stuff has nothing to do with human activities or bible say the natural disasters has nothing to do with god.
@kemalcs Matt 4:8 suggests the Devil is the ruler of this world. However in Job 1, the Devil could not hurt Job without God's permission. We also learn suffering came through the Devil, not God. God only 'allows' it to happen. Also, read Matt 24. This chapter speaks all about the disasters we experience today, though none are claimed to be of God. Also see Rev. 7:1.
Disasters, suffering and destruction may not be a direct action go God, but nothing can take place without his allowance.
@kemalcs If you are honestly seeking answers, I would gladly guide you to scriptures of passage to have them answered. Any answer I cannot provide through the Bible, I'll honestly say, I don't know and I'll do whatever I can to find that answer. As I've told you to test everyone else, I don't expect you to take anything I say for granted. Read the bible, cross reference and decide for yourself.
If you're not interested, that's fine by me. My only advice for you is to follow Proverb 3:5-6.
Apologist propaganda and bullshit. Logical fallacies all over the place.
The only time religion ever becomes "cooperative" with Science is when it is forced to shed Bible teachings and adapt to science; they adopt scientific facts as it becomes necessary, that is, when they will be seen as idiotic for not adopting it.
Here's news for you: The followers dictate the gospel; your church will change depending on what they believe you will believe.
True, religion and science do not always have to be in conflict when standing alone. It is only when religion claims to be science that the two then clash as religion has no scientific basis whatsoever. Example: Even if the Bible did say the earth was a sphere (which it didn't) it wouldn't make the existence of god true, verify creation, or prove any of it's supernatural content had taken place. Therefore the only conclusion that can be drawn is that this video is pure creationist nonsense.
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.
Job 26:7 7He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
religion does not tell us why. most religions only tell us to be have or face incredible amounts of suffering in the next life which neither science or religion can prove even exists
The problem with religion and science is that they are two completely different thought processes.
In science, you start with a question, invent possible ways the question could be answered, scrutinize these answers with logic or experiments, come to a conclusion and you are then free to evaluate.
Religion starts with a conclusion. Each religion has its own, and different denominations have their own evaluations. But nobody knows or cares where the conclusion came from.
the belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically re arranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits then turned into dinosaurs
Science is where things are discovered, Religion is where things are made. Science is always changing it's mind (pluto one day planet, next day dwarf planet)
if you would take the time to figure out, u would know, religion always stays the same. You have a brain that GOD gave u. use it and think...
@tiffany09871 "religion always stays the same. " So why did the pope stop believing in purgatory? Why don't we marry rape victims to rapists anymore? Why can't we use Jesus' tips on how to beat our slaves anymore? Why did the god in Mormonism change his mind about black people in the 70s? God is imaginary. It's pretty stupid to believe in such a fairytale. I'd sooner believe in frost giants, Odin, and Thor. Even the flying spaghetti monster has more evidence behind it. Science refines.
@Enginmaster well last time I checked, EXACTLY how did your brain "evolve" everything in religion has something to do with the earth or "science" 7 days a in a week (7 lucky number in the bible) 24 hours in a day (24 elders sit in heaven) 24th = easter, the day GOD rose. 666 satans number, 6th day od the week saturday, satan, santa see the simalarities? b.c= before christ ecen science uses that term to describe "big bang" Again, you have a brain that GOD gave you, use it and think! yes it does:)
@tiffany09871 Please use sentences next time. The "stream of consciousness" thing makes you look pretty disorganized and stupid. How did my brain evolve? Similarly to how a chimp's brain evolved, the dolphin brain evolved, the cat brain evolved, etc. Each generation, those who had better reasoning, instinct, etc, survived and passed their genes on. Pretty simple. 666's actually a mistranslation. Hebrew didn't use the decimal system. BCE = before common era. God is imaginary. Science isn't.
@tiffany09871 Numerology is the study of BS by mathematically illiterate people. Hours have no significance in the time of the bible. Wow 7 is a lucky number? REALLY?! That's so awesome!!! And it has no significance at all. 8 is a lucky number in China. 4 has good significance to the Native Americans. So what? The week is not a geology thing. It's just human calendars.
And none of this goes to answering for your gaffe earlier where you say "religion is always the same" wrong!
@tiffany09871 Umm...the 6th day of the week isn't Saturday. You believe that because the Papacy believe it has the authority to change the day of the Sabbath to Sunday and over the years, the tradition followed throughout the world. Obviously, you don't know that but you can find the evidence in any Catholic material.
@tiffany09871 Religion doesnt always stay the s as me, but even if it did, you think thats a good thing? If you aquire new information and you want to stay correct, you have to change to the new information. Why do people think that the one that stays the same is correct? We all used to think that the world was 6000 years old, when we discovered the truth, the scientists changed, but the religious nuts didnt, and even turned violent. Ps, last time I checked, my brain evolved, not just get here.
The thing is, science and religion are in conflict in the same way that a car and a squirrel are in conflict. Science (the car) gets places, and doesn't really care too much where the road leads, what questions it answers, etc. The religion (squirrel) claims his various positions, and stands on them, collecting nuts on the way. Sometimes they cover the same ground. If the religion-squirrel is lucky, science-car glides over, and doesn't totally collide with it. If it's not lucky, it gets CRUSHED.
Really...religion tells us "why"? Then why is it ALL of the religions don't say even remotely similar things? When science tells us how and what, there's consensus across the globe. You don't have one country's scientists supporting geocentrism, while another scientist supports heliocentrism, etc. Science's consensus IS truth. But religion...it's making shit up and having shouting matches to find out which imaginary friend is stronger. (hint, they're all imaginary)
Religion doesn't tell us why! God must be explained scientifically for them both to coexist and God is a supernatural figure then it can't be explained scientifically. Sorry you stupid Christians but religion doesn't explain why. Also if Christianity DID explain why what about all of the other religions? Are they just a load of shit and you are the one true answer? Because every religion says that.
pacdaman15557 6 days ago
I completely disagree. Science all the way, religion is just a fairy tale
StudioOfDah 1 week ago
Science contradicts literal biblical doctrine. If however the the scriptures are taken as metaphor OR (as common with many Christians) spun to make them say what the believer wants them to say then science doesn't conflict.
sweetsweatyfeet 1 week ago
Very true, religion and science can and should co-exist.
madlandlizard 1 week ago
christians new the world was a sphere? funny that the never taught that.
mzyzer19 1 week ago
@mzyzer19 As they said; they did teach this. The idea that they didn't was an invention in the 1800s in a "straw man" argument.
masterkeep 1 week ago
Some details about the video are a little overally general, but the point about the "conflict thesis" being largely invented by social provoquers is correct.
onewhoseeks17 2 weeks ago
Science and Faith can coexist.
megaead69 2 weeks ago
@megaead69 No it can't. "Faith" means to believe in something without any proof what so ever. That is directly against all scientific teachings of today which is to prove everything. Eventually God will be either disproved or proven (most-likely the latter) and it won't be faith anymore regardless of the outcome.
pacdaman15557 6 days ago
What a load of shit.
Cringeage 2 weeks ago
"I think you're an overeducated 27-year-old virgin who likes to hold the hands of superstitious old ladies and promise them everlasting life." -Gran Torino Religion is bullshit. Relgion is a money making scam. Religion is brainwash. Religion is suicide. Religion is War. Religion is hate.
sinkman666 2 weeks ago
Deism is in my opinion the closest of combining the 2
TheCaptainjuicy 2 weeks ago
Yuk. So biased. Yes, priests like to 'tell' but they have no knowledge to impart.
Scientists like to ask and investigate if there is any evidence.
profpop 2 weeks ago
388 atheist disliked this video!!
KingofKingsProd 3 weeks ago
the purpose of this video is to tell us theists and atheists to just forget our differences and do on something that matters.. like helping those poor children in Africa or saving the environment..
lion95805 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
castelgandalf 3 weeks ago
whoever made this video needs to read up on the scopes monkey trial...and while they are at the library, also galileo's house arrest, and the burning at the stake of michael servetus.
castelgandalf 3 weeks ago
Can somebody tell me the name of the software to create this this animations?! Thanks )
DrVladUs 3 weeks ago
you can tell this video is on the side of the christians because of how many negative votes it has.
funnyhead222 3 weeks ago 13
i'm just going with who ever presents me with the best facts and evidence.
religion never presented anything factual. all religion did was tell stories and forced us to believe in it "just have faith" is the religious mans favorite line .
prove to us that jesus is god..oh wait..you can't. we're not even sure that he even existed.
paulgnc24 3 weeks ago
"religion tells us why" WTF???
NO, ACTUALLY IT DOESNT IT JUST CREATES A MYTH. SCIENCE DOESNT EITHER, BUT AT LEAST SCIENCE ADMITS IT DOESNT KNOW AND IT STILL WORKING ON IT.
BarrioAztrologist89 4 weeks ago 7
@BarrioAztrologist89 tell that to the thousands of other atheists who admit that every present conclusion is a hard fact, without knowing there is still room for improvement..
lion95805 3 weeks ago
[ @akasseb and @jeremyhansen100 ]
Current beliefs indicate that Copernicus died from a stroke induced by arsenic poisoning given to him by the king as his death sentence. Arsenic given to him through a bible (Seems very Christian)
As for what happened hundreds of years ago, it is irrelevant. All that matters is that people learn to life happily together and live in what is deemed to be 'the correct path to god'
Not sure what it is (I'm atheist) but I intend to find out and see how close I come
BenC303 1 month ago
@BenC303 Can you provide a scholarly source to back up your claim that Copernicus was poisoned at the hands of a king? A cursory search of Google Books turned up nothing. Good luck in your personal search!
akasseb 1 month ago
@BenC303 Whats you source. The source I had was exactly reliable. And yes things 100s of yrs ago do matter. If the video lies about the past position of the church to fit their position then some one needs to point that out before people get confused.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
cont. Christianity defies human nature: Evolution tells us that Humans are merely animals with animal instincts. It seems very convenient that in Christianity every animal instinct is a sin. Jesus, had no education and therefore should have been susceptable to human nature yet he corrected the teachings of Judaism in such an inhuman manner, for example his attitude to those who were not humble, or those who desired revenge.
Schism704 1 month ago
Science and proper religion are in no way in conflict, Catholicism for example agrees completely with all scientific fact, which of course is no surprise since the amount of evidence proving that Evolution occured for example is astounding! The old testament is diluted with incorrect information, Jesus himself said this and straightened out many of the diluted rules, any christian who denies scientific fact is a fool. If anything Evolution proves the existence of God.
Schism704 1 month ago
@Schism704 I'm confused, are you a satirical atheist, because that has to be the most conterdictory reply I've ever seen.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 how is it contradictory? I am a Catholic, do you not know what Catholics believe? Sure medieval Catholicism acted against some scientific advancements but that was Long ago when the old testament was literally interpreted, wake up my friend, some Catholics are amongst the greatest scientists in many different fields all over the world. Its only really in the US that there is a large proportion of creationist christians anyway. (tells u a lot about america..)
Schism704 1 month ago
@Schism704 contradiction #1 Catholics..agree..science, then you prove it by bringing up evolution, something that wasn't accepted by the church until resently and alot of catholics atill don't accept it.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@Schism704 #2 Proper religion=catholic, then you pretty much say old t is crap and shouldn't be taken literally, it is holy perfect word of god after all why should it make sense, and prove that by saying Jesus said it was bad, even though he did help write it because he is god after all, in the new t that is just as bad as far as contradictions and bad science as the old t.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@Schism704 #3 You say evolution proves god, even though by its nature evolution does need intervention, infact it works beter without intervention.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@Schism704 I don't see what famous catholic scientist half to do with any thing. Yes I agree that America took a turn for the worst as far as being religous when in the 1860s the added in god we trust to the coins.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 Evolution helps to prove Gods existence because nature is a selfish battle all about passing on genes to the next generation. The very fact that Christianity is all about battling our Nature (e.g. the sins known as Lust and Selfishness) suggests that God wants us to break free of what makes us Animals in order to achieve a more perfect state of existence. Also let me clarify, the old testament is not to be 100% literally interpreted as it is wrong in SOME areas.
Schism704 1 month ago
@Schism704 The fact that the god of the bible tries to stop natural tendencies, even though he sometimes endorses them, doesn't prove anything.
What is your method for determining what parts are good or bad in the old t. If you are just going to dismiss the parts that you don't agree with, then why should I believe the parts you do agree with?
jeremyhansen100 4 weeks ago
@jeremyhansen100 Because these parts are verifiable, either archaeologically or from Jesus himself. They also do not contradict what Jesus tells us and do not contradict known scientific fact. So Genesis, for example is largely false due to scientific fact, as is noahs ark. Also stories such as jonah being swallowed by a whale are simply stolen from earlier Greek Mythology. Using methods such as this we can whittle down the rights and wrongs of the Old Testament.
Schism704 4 weeks ago
@Schism704 You know what makes you an animal? The fact you breath with the same kind of lungs as every other mammal. You have the same kind of processing organs (aka the brain/nervous system) as every other animal. Nothing in your mind makes you an animal because you are an animal whether you want to admit it or not. Evolution doesn't prove god exists because Christianity believed that nothing even eroded, let alone evolved.
pacdaman15557 6 days ago
@pacdaman15557 No your incorrect, most modern christians agree with evolution and all scientific fact due to the lack of historical and scientific evidence supporting what is said in the OLD testament. The Genesis story is one of those examples, as science contradicts it, similarly the Jonah story (the 1 involving a man getting swallowed by a whale) was simply stolen from Greek mythology. Some parts of the old testament are verifiable, many other parts are not.
Schism704 6 days ago
@Schism704 Jesus was Jewish and believed in the Old Testament. What your saying is you disagree with what your Messiah believed in?
pacdaman15557 5 days ago
@pacdaman15557 Have you actually read the new testament? He does nothing but correct incorrect teachings from the Old Testament, take the Jews views on "unclean" food, Jesus said nothing that enters a man is "unclean", only things leaving a man can be "unclean" like arrogence, lust, greed etc... He was only classed as a Jew by the people of that period because christianity didnt exist at that time, he didnt follow a lot of Jewish rules.
Schism704 4 days ago
@Schism704 Cool story bro, Can the next fairy tale be about dragons?
pacdaman15557 4 days ago
Prominent historians of science (Grant, Lindberg, Numbers) all mention two things when talking about the conflict thesis: 1) the influence of the works of Draper and White has been immense, and 2) modern research has exposed these works as propaganda
akasseb 1 month ago
"Why" is the sky blue?
Religious explanation = God dun dud it.
Scientific explanation = Probably too complex for your head to grasp, but feel free to try, Google will tell you the scientific explanation :)
TurboDally 1 month ago
@TurboDally Did you know that the first reasonable explanation for why the sky is blue came from a Catholic priest?
akasseb 1 month ago
islam has all the answers with science and logic
AM9841 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AM9841
"islam has all the answers with science and logic"
The very garbage the Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, etc say about their own religions. It's all bollocks. Religionists reinterpreting verses AFTER a discovery to attribute credit to their holy book. Islam is anti-science, anti-logic, especially considering the toasty fate that awaits those who are skeptical of religious claims. Flying donkey with wings anyone?
TurboDally 1 month ago
@AM9841 Is this a serious claim? Science in Islamic countries suffered a stillbirth 500 years ago. And I don't see any sort of link between logic and Islam. Unfortunately, many parts of the Muslim world have abandoned reason altogether.
akasseb 1 month ago
Yea religion always knew the world was round, that's exactly why any telling the church that the earth is round got burned at the stake.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 Please provide one example of a person burned at the stake for believing that the world is round.
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb You want a person, fine. How about Copernicus who was imprisoned and then put to death for suggesting that the earth was round and it wasn't the center of the universe. Galileo was lucky, he only got life imprisonment after writing his book. As a side note this video flat out lies. I checked the scriptures and they never mention spheres, it has circles which BTW are 2D. When I say round it mean opposed to flat, and circles are flat.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 I'm sorry, but your claims are inaccurate. Copernicus was neither imprisoned nor put to death. In fact, his book outlining his heliocentric cosmology was dedicated to the pope. And the Galileo affair was not about the earth's sphericity.
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb You're right, he did dedicate his book to the pope, I am well aware of that. Guess what happened next. The pope wasn't happy about this book, so he jailed him because he didn't have the legal power to kill him. Guess who did, the king, and so ended the Copernicus's story. Galileo's book talks about a number of different topic such as the motion of the planets, and yes the spherical shape of the planets.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 In my last comment I said that Copernicus was neither jailed nor put to death. For some reason, you ignored this and stated the inaccurate claims a second time. Copernicus died a natural death as a loyal son of the Church. Also, you mischaracterize the debate in Galileo's time about sphericity. By observing craters on the moon, Galileo overturned the Aristotelian notion that the heavenly bodies were perfect spheres. It wasn't a debate about whether the earth was spherical.
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb I ignored you comment because you were wrong. Just because he dedicated a book to the pope doesn't mean the pope liked it. Galileo did mention in his book Dialogue on the Two Chief Systems of the World did describe planets in general as being round.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 I have a simple request: please provide evidence that Copernicus was either imprisoned or put to death. You have made this claim twice, and I asking you to substantiate it.
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb I checked my source and its utter crap, and it turns out that what you said was also utter crap. It turns out that he died with the manuscript in his hands, it was published but not by him. The main propose of my original statement was to point out the fact that people were greatly oppressed by the church if they disagreed with the doctrine, and to point out that the church most certainly did not always know the earth was round. Yes, it was a bit of an exaggeration.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 Thank you for owning up to your mistake. But I am unsure of which statement of mine is 'utter crap'. If I have made a mistake I will own up to it too. In regards to issues pertaining to the flat earth, I would recommend reading the book 'Inventing the Flat Earth' by Russell. It is also worth noting that the most influential cosmological textbook of the Middle Ages was called 'The Sphere' (Sacrobosco).
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb I was talking about how C dedicate the book and how he died a loyal cathlic.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@akasseb I not interested in reading a bios book that twists fact to prove a point. No The Sphere doesn't make a difference. Even if it was written by a preist it doesn't represent the position of the church. Just look at Luther he wasn't respesenting it even though he wonted to. It doesn't change the fact that the church warned Columbus that he would fall off the edge of the earth. If there is any book that is relavent to would be its holy book, and the bible supports the idea of a flat earth.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 The book is not biased. Prominent historians of science often cite this book when talking about the flat earth myth. The author shows no signs of being Catholic or even Christian.
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb If that is true than I suppose I should look into it. What is the authors name. What is it about.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 Jeffrey Russell. The book describes what the people of the Middle Ages believed about the shape of the earth and the history of the development of the flat earth myth. It has been a few year since I read it, but I remember that it was quite convincing.
akasseb 4 weeks ago
@jeremyhansen100 Also, please document the claim that the Church warned Columbus that he would fall of the edge of the earth. There was debate before Columbus set off on his voyage, but it didn't concern the earth's sphericity. The concern was that Columbus had erred in calculating the earth's circumference. I can't blame you for believing in the flat earth myth, as it is commonly held today. Indeed, I was taught this myth in grade school as well!
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb How come any statement I make has to be sighted but anything you say doesn't. If you really want to know please retake your high school history class.
jeremyhansen100 1 month ago
@jeremyhansen100 I would be glad to document any claim or point you to respectable sources.
akasseb 4 weeks ago
"Religion tells us why."
Quick question. Which one???
Science is full of contrasting ideas, but nothing is ever accepted as true unless it is proven.
And yes, everything that is accepted has been proven.
Religion on the other hand, agrees on nothing. There is never any proof to back it up, because the claims are purposely un-testable. There is no reason to believe any one religion over the thousands of others, so how can anyone suggest that any religion is more accurate than science?
TheKeenMind 1 month ago
@TheKeenMind Sorry bud but there is lot's of archeological, historical, and scientific evidence for the Bible. Science vs Religion is not the battle. It's Atheists vs Religion. There is a lot of amazing science and evidence for my religion.
bumper212 1 month ago
@bumper212 No, no there is not. Show me one piece of evidence that supports anything supernatural that happened in the bible. Additionally, the evidence must be accepted by the majority of scientists as reliable. Finally, the evidence must not be open to interpretation, it must point to something that exists in only in your religion, and it must only reasonably point to that. If this is too hard, go back to your silly bible and stop insulting scientists by insinuating that religion is rational.
TheKeenMind 1 month ago
@TheKeenMind If you knew anything about science you would know that it's foundation was laid by religious men. Science is science regardless of what you think the Bible is. My point was that science backs up the Bible. Why then would you go immediately to the supernatural which by definition cannot be explain by the science of this world? Why should I show you the evidence? You are obviously blind to it, what makes you think me posting it would make a difference?
bumper212 1 month ago
What a crock!
MrAbfackeln 1 month ago
"science vs religion" any moron who blindly buys into this cliche' is more of a fool than they think. truth is, nobody cares about religion, they just don't want God interfering in life so they're willing to stoop to the ultimate reasonable-retardation: atheism.
saintstrawman 1 month ago
Religion: Genesis, 6 day creation, man out of mud, woman out of rib, 6000 year old universe.
Science: Evolution, cosmology, big bang theory, abiogenesis.
Don't know about you people, but I have a bit of a difficulty following this video...
OptimalElement 1 month ago
@OptimalElement Did you know that the man who proposed what is now known as the Big Bang Theory was a Catholic priest? And the father of heliocentric cosmology was Copernicus, who was a Catholic churchman.
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb
Maybe he was. But the bible clearly teaches the world was created in 6 days. I don't see any similarity with that and the big bang theory.
OptimalElement 1 month ago
@OptimalElement The creation account was never intended to be taken literalistically. That this is the case can be seen from the fact that the two accounts differ. The Big Bang Theory actually squared better with the Christian account of creation ex nihilo than it did with the science of the time (which proposed a steady state university). If you'd like a reasoned and scientific explanation of the Catholic perspective, check out Fr. Spitzer's work at the Magis Center of Reason and Faith. Best,
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb
Oh trust me, for a true christian bible is the literate interpretation. As for a man who proposed big bang theory it was based on evidence and scientific method, not the bible or superstition. The fact that a catholic proposed a big bang theory doesn't prove that there is a supernatural entity. And he formed the theory based on already existent understanding in cosmology and physics which are sciences, not his knowledge on the bible and theology.
OptimalElement 1 month ago
@OptimalElement Do you mind describing what it means to be a true Christian? I never claimed that Lemaitre based his theory on the Bible or that his discovery proved the existence of a supernatural entity. I was simply pointing out that the the line between 'science' and 'religion' is not as tidy as your had described in your initial post. All the faithful Catholics I know believe in Evolution, the Big Bang, and that the universe is billions of years old. Maybe I'm lucky.
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb
Then why is there such controversy over evolution and big bang and so on in many islamic countries and US?
OptimalElement 1 month ago
@OptimalElement Because large areas of the Islamic world have abandoned reason altogether. As for the U.S., there are elements of Protestantism that not only believe in sola scriptura but also in a literalistic approach to Genesis. The problem is fideism. But if there is a God, He created the world and human reason. This is why the Catholic Church stresses the harmony between faith and reason.
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb
You speak of god creating the world with no shred of evidence and before that mention reason HA
OptimalElement 1 month ago
@OptimalElement I said IF there is a God he created the world. And I think the existence of God can be discovered through the use of reason alone. There can't be an infinite regress of causes. If you want to hear a reasoned explanation of modern cosmological and philosophical arguments for the existence of God, I recommend watching the modules at the Magis Center of Reason and Faith.
akasseb 4 weeks ago
@akasseb
Even a reasonable argument can be false. You need testable evidence. For example Louis Pasteur proved that bacteria were causes of disease. But he did it by conducting controlled experiments, recording his work and gathering evidence. He didn't just sit and reason with words. One can reason otherwise:''Evil demons bring suffering and pain, disease involves suffering and pain hence disease caused by demons. Bacteria, nonsense.'' God can't be tested for, so for science his irrelevant.
OptimalElement 4 weeks ago
BTW the quote by Einstein has been commonly misconstrued by many. Hopefully, the makers of this video knows his position on science and religion and not simply nitpicking quotations. As for the "Why" question? Nope, religion doesn't provide answers either. Not even philosophy. These are simply points of discussions that brings out more questions than answers to the table.
LameCrippled 1 month ago
@LameCrippled I agree that that the Einstein quote is often misused. What Einstein meant by religion is quite different than the common Christian view. There is a chapter on his religious beliefs in the book 'Galileo Goes to Jail'
akasseb 1 month ago
Serious proponents on both sides of the debate never claimed that intellectuals in medieval europe believed that the earth was flat. Yes, I do agree that such misunderstandings are widespread, and most lay people just can't be bothered with doing their own serious research. Honestly, I do find this video simplistic approach to the issue rather ridiculous. Personal faith has nothing to do with science unless it falls into realm of scientific inquiry. Science is neutral.
LameCrippled 1 month ago
At some point though there comes a leap of faith. We are trying to figure out what has happened in this universe by extrapolating data from a few centuries over billions of years. Whether or not you accept everything the bible takes a leap of faith. But believing that science explains everything requires, I believe, an even bigger leap of faith. Where did flight come from? How did the first independent cells become dependent on other living things? Where did morality arise from?
MrBenbenbenbenny 1 month ago
They obviously are opposed, any attempt to reconcile them is pretty pointless, consider the core methods of people on each side.
The scientific method is to observe, test, reproduce results and confirm the logical conclusion from all the evidence via peer review.
The religious method is to read the conclusion in say the bible, then look for any facts, data that can be shifted, distorted or taken out of context to back up the conclusion.
The religious method is pretty much anti science.
mrgejwaites 1 month ago
@mrgejwaites not biased at all
TheIncredibleKrunk 1 month ago
@TheIncredibleKrunk Thank you?
Next time you write a comment consider being more clear because your comment could be aimed at any number of things, in fact without more context it just plain doesn't make sense.
mrgejwaites 1 month ago
@mrgejwaites it should be pretty obvious though
TheIncredibleKrunk 1 month ago
@TheIncredibleKrunk Not really, if your saying my comment was not biased I don't really understand why you'd point that out?
I'm sure if you were being sarcastic you'd have the intellect to actually point out how my comment was biased instead of just saying it was.
mrgejwaites 1 month ago
@mrgejwaites its painfully obvious, like at your description of science versus your description of religion
TheIncredibleKrunk 1 month ago
@TheIncredibleKrunk If you say so. Maybe next time try and make an intelligent observation, rather than an empty accusation.
mrgejwaites 1 month ago
@mrgejwaites not empty at all
TheIncredibleKrunk 1 month ago
Comment removed
mrgejwaites 1 month ago
@TheIncredibleKrunk Of course, well your comment was clearly bias.
mrgejwaites 1 month ago
@mrgejwaites We can talk in generic terms about religion and science, but the Catholic Church teaches that there is no conflict between faith and reason. As an example, there are hundreds of Catholic churchmen who have made significant contributions to the development of science.
akasseb 1 month ago
this was well made but the subject matter is a bit lacking in verifiable information for example so that i'm not being hypocritical to make a claim "many scientific findings came from religion" and not listing one such finding is a very pour way of seeking acceptance and belief in your cause.
TheRandomguy112 1 month ago
Religion told Giordano Bruno how the world works.
khmer41980 1 month ago
@khmer41980 While the Bruno incident is an unfortunate fact in the Church's history, it had nothing to do with science.
akasseb 1 month ago
@akasseb you are right. The Bruno incident had nothing to do with science if it did the Church would not have burned Giordano Bruno at the stake.
khmer41980 1 month ago
Just shows how naive atheists are in falling for the idea that there is this conflict. They have to make it so as its one of their only legs to stand on.That and the spaghetti monster fairy goblin thing. God and science for the win!!
MrStripeyDog 1 month ago
@MrStripeyDog If we all just kept believeing in science a thousand years ago people would still be dying from massive plagues while others shouted "GOD WILLS IT!". HAHA give me a break. Hopefully within a few hundred years our knowledge will be expansive enough to reveal that if god does exist he is nothing, does nothing, and sits on his ass just like hes been doing for all of eternity lol. If god is real he is a stupid worthless asshole, and he should strike me down with lightning right now LOL
mercneo 1 month ago
@mercneo errm ok, do you have anger issues?
MrStripeyDog 1 month ago
I get the feeling that when they say religion they are only thinking about one particular religion, or at least only western religion. They fail to acknowledge that religion in general is already in conflict with itself.
aquateeno 1 month ago
-3 God is good -3 (:
CarinaCorn 2 months ago
how does religion tell us why the world works
matthewb20395 2 months ago
painfully simplistic
Hufflewaffle 2 months ago
Without science there would be no internet. Without religion there would be no dumbass behind all these religious is right videos.
imthetank3 2 months ago
U mad christianity?
jibbefrik 2 months ago
This is complete bullshit
DaJbro024 2 months ago
@DaJbro024 Did you come to this conclusion by way of the scientific method?
akasseb 1 month ago
Blasphemous.
kioskia1 2 months ago
Religion tells us why? LOL
If something good happened, the religious explanation is: "God is good!"
If something bad happened, the religious explanation is: "God is mysterious."
If you think that's a valid explanation of anything then you're a fucking moron.
luminaeus 3 months ago
@luminaeus You say that.. But I highly doubt you've ever read a Bible. It's more then that. Everything has a purpose in the world, we have problems in our society because God made us with imperfections and freewill. If you actually read a Bible, Quran, etc. I'm pretty positive, you'd grow up and realize not all religious people are mindless zombie who say stuff like that, and that's definitely not how we think.
LilyProductions10110 3 months ago
@LilyProductions10110
God made us with free will? Have YOU read a bible before?
"Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." 2 Timothy 1:9
There are at least eight separate passages in the bible that pretty much state that your entire life is predetermined. The majority of these are in the new testament. So much for your apologetics.
luminaeus 2 months ago
@luminaeus If you know the nature of Jesus' sacrifice, you would know what that text means. 2 Timothy 1:9 is stating that our salvation does not come as a result of our works, but as a result of our faith for "all our righteous acts are like filthy rags" ~ Isaiah 64:6.
We can only be saved through the grace of God. We do not keep the commandments of God in order to be saved. It is because we are saved that we keep the commandments of God.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@xSeiichix
So says your religion. There's a thousand other religions, past, present, and future, that have, do, and will say pretty much the same thing.
You know what they all have in common? They have absolutely NO evidence to support their claims.
luminaeus 2 months ago
@luminaeus If you want evidence, study the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation. You will come to realize that every one to date has come true.
Take some time to listen to some Bible studies on prophesy and decide whether the Bible is true or not for yourself. This is a great resource:amazing facts.org
But if you're not looking for truth and you want to continue to hold to your assumptions, that's fine by me.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@luminaeus I believe that if God is who He says He is and is truly absolute, then He must be a God of science. If this is true, then there must be a scientific truth which is coherent to the Word of God. There is no reason for science to be in contradiction to the Bible, and there is no reason for the religious community to reject any scientific reasoning. As the same goes, the Word of God should be tested as any scientific evidence. God does not expect you to follow His every word blindly.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@xSeiichix
Test the word of god? The very first sentence of the bible is wrong. "In the beginning god created heaven and Earth." Wrong. The universe is almost 10 billion years older than the Earth. There's no point in continuing because everything else is wrong as well.
Or should I take your approach and simply ignore the 99.9% of staggeringly scientifically false material because that 0.1%, with extremely liberal and out of context interpretation, might appear to some as correct?
luminaeus 2 months ago
@luminaeus Psalm 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, you are God.
I wonder if you think God started being God when the Earth was created. It is quite probable that the universe is much older than the Earth, nothing is weird about that. God didn't just poof the Earth together out of nothing. Look at Genesis 1:2. The EARTH was void and without form. That doesn't mean all the ingredients weren't there.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@xSeiichix
Your willful stupidity is amazing. Read your own fucking book before you start rambling on to me about it.
According to Genesis, the very first thing God created was light, but it would be a few days before he actually got around to making the sun and stars. What kind of verbal fucking acrobatics do you have to do to explain that massive error?
Or maybe god doesn't exist and the story is nothing more than a primitive bronze-age explanation of how the fuck we got here?
luminaeus 2 months ago
@luminaeus Revelation 22:5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no lamp, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God gives them light: and they shall reign forever and ever.
This verse clearly states that in Heaven, God will produce light, without a Sun. Likewise, God DID produce light, without a Sun in the beginning. You're arguing against a God you know NOTHING about.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@xSeiichix
Didn't you just say, not more than two comments ago, that your religion is fully compatible with science? And now you're talking about how light can be magically created without a source?
Oh man, I can only hope you are the type that argues against the big bang theory by saying "You can't get something from nothing." That would be fucking hilarious.
I love how you people jump through hoops to make nonsense seem rational.
luminaeus 2 months ago
@luminaeus you don't have to argue against the big bang theory to claim that something can't come from nothing, it is perfectly possible that something caused the big bang to occur. Just a tip, don't stereotype people by grouping them into a statement such as "you people" it just makes you sound childish and less credible.
philosophizer149 2 months ago
@philosophizer149
The Zero Energy Hypothesis proves that the total energy of the universe is exactly 0. Thereby making our universe the only type of universe that can come from nothing .
mynameszz 2 months ago
@philosophizer149
Reading comprehension not one of your strengths?
luminaeus 2 months ago
@luminaeus making valid points not one of yours?
philosophizer149 2 months ago
@luminaeus The age of your building blocks and the age of your finished product aren't the same thing. The carbon in your body might have been around for the past billion years, but that doesn't make you a billion year old person, does it? Talk about logic.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@luminaeus (Cont.) You may not understand where I am coming from now, but you will someday. In any case, understand this. There are MANY terrible Christians in the world. Hypocrities, liars, thieves, rapists, and nut jobs with screwed up views. I know atheists nicer than some Christians. And this is what the world needs to understand. The world has a problem with Christians, not Christ. Search the scriptures in prayer with an open mind and heart and discover who God truly is for yourself.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
Why questions become meaningful if you don't know the answer of how question.
For example, in the past the cause of earthquakes are unknown. So people are asking "why". The answer was (and even today) because God punished the sinners, gays, abortions etc etc.
But today we know how earthquake happens and it has nothing to with actions of man. If natural disaster are determined by humans actions, then we should expect a daily meteor hit to Amsterdam or Las Vegas:))
kemalcs 3 months ago
@kemalcs Matthew 5:45 "...for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."
Whether good or bad, people prosper and people suffer. The Bible does recognize this. It was always a misconception that if you suffered, it was because you were a sinner, but that was a mindset of the Jews, not scriptural. Read John 9:1-3. Jesus clearly states that his sufferings were not a result of sin, but that is what the people believed.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@xSeiichix You shall say those to Pat Robertson or other crazy evangelists not me
kemalcs 2 months ago
@kemalcs Well...that's the problem with Christianity. There are so many people who preach false doctrines or take the Bible out of context and then the rest of the world looks down on God and Christians. I know so many people who avoid Christianity all together because we preach so many different messages.
I don't disagree that what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah was not an act of God, the Bible is clear on that. But equally, its not a "good live, bad die" thing either. God is merciful and just
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@xSeiichix Then how do we know that your understanding of Bible is true and others are false.
kemalcs 2 months ago
@kemalcs If I wanted to trick you into taking counterfeit money from me, I can't give you a black piece of paper, You know better than that. But if I give you something that's so close to the real thing, you might just take it.
How can you tell the difference? You have to become familiar with the genuine one. Know ever detail so when the fake comes around, you know it.
Base truth on the Word of God, rather than what others try to say. Challenge everything based on His word, not man's.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@xSeiichix So if there is a case like Sodom and Gomarrah, then why it is unreasonable to think that natural disasters are acts of god? Because science find out that, earthquakes or other stuff has nothing to do with human activities or bible say the natural disasters has nothing to do with god.
kemalcs 2 months ago
@kemalcs Matt 4:8 suggests the Devil is the ruler of this world. However in Job 1, the Devil could not hurt Job without God's permission. We also learn suffering came through the Devil, not God. God only 'allows' it to happen. Also, read Matt 24. This chapter speaks all about the disasters we experience today, though none are claimed to be of God. Also see Rev. 7:1.
Disasters, suffering and destruction may not be a direct action go God, but nothing can take place without his allowance.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@kemalcs I wish Youtube gave me more space to write... I have a lot to say but no little space to say it. So frustrating, lol.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@kemalcs If you are honestly seeking answers, I would gladly guide you to scriptures of passage to have them answered. Any answer I cannot provide through the Bible, I'll honestly say, I don't know and I'll do whatever I can to find that answer. As I've told you to test everyone else, I don't expect you to take anything I say for granted. Read the bible, cross reference and decide for yourself.
If you're not interested, that's fine by me. My only advice for you is to follow Proverb 3:5-6.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@kemalcs through reason
philosophizer149 2 months ago
Apologist propaganda and bullshit. Logical fallacies all over the place.
The only time religion ever becomes "cooperative" with Science is when it is forced to shed Bible teachings and adapt to science; they adopt scientific facts as it becomes necessary, that is, when they will be seen as idiotic for not adopting it.
Here's news for you: The followers dictate the gospel; your church will change depending on what they believe you will believe.
Look at the history.
Disliked for spins and lies.
EmbraceTheThunder 3 months ago
@EmbraceTheThunder
the church always reminded me of cosmic irony. it adapts to the world (evolution)
raidersSolja 3 months ago
@raidersSolja
Haha, it really is ironic, isn't it.
EmbraceTheThunder 3 months ago
True, religion and science do not always have to be in conflict when standing alone. It is only when religion claims to be science that the two then clash as religion has no scientific basis whatsoever. Example: Even if the Bible did say the earth was a sphere (which it didn't) it wouldn't make the existence of god true, verify creation, or prove any of it's supernatural content had taken place. Therefore the only conclusion that can be drawn is that this video is pure creationist nonsense.
VoR8705 3 months ago
@VoR8705 Correction: Isaiah 40:22
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.
Job 26:7 7He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
religion does not tell us why. most religions only tell us to be have or face incredible amounts of suffering in the next life which neither science or religion can prove even exists
drewnut 3 months ago
Religion is fucking BULLSHIT, this is a bullshit video, thumbs down.
lanuevagranada 3 months ago
The problem with religion and science is that they are two completely different thought processes.
In science, you start with a question, invent possible ways the question could be answered, scrutinize these answers with logic or experiments, come to a conclusion and you are then free to evaluate.
Religion starts with a conclusion. Each religion has its own, and different denominations have their own evaluations. But nobody knows or cares where the conclusion came from.
HeatherMeadow 3 months ago in playlist More videos from WhatisMedia
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheism:
the belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically re arranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits then turned into dinosaurs
That totally makes sense
Lewdd9Live 3 months ago
Science is where things are discovered, Religion is where things are made. Science is always changing it's mind (pluto one day planet, next day dwarf planet)
if you would take the time to figure out, u would know, religion always stays the same. You have a brain that GOD gave u. use it and think...
tiffany09871 3 months ago
@tiffany09871 "religion always stays the same. " So why did the pope stop believing in purgatory? Why don't we marry rape victims to rapists anymore? Why can't we use Jesus' tips on how to beat our slaves anymore? Why did the god in Mormonism change his mind about black people in the 70s? God is imaginary. It's pretty stupid to believe in such a fairytale. I'd sooner believe in frost giants, Odin, and Thor. Even the flying spaghetti monster has more evidence behind it. Science refines.
Enginmaster 3 months ago
@Enginmaster well last time I checked, EXACTLY how did your brain "evolve" everything in religion has something to do with the earth or "science" 7 days a in a week (7 lucky number in the bible) 24 hours in a day (24 elders sit in heaven) 24th = easter, the day GOD rose. 666 satans number, 6th day od the week saturday, satan, santa see the simalarities? b.c= before christ ecen science uses that term to describe "big bang" Again, you have a brain that GOD gave you, use it and think! yes it does:)
tiffany09871 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tiffany09871 Please use sentences next time. The "stream of consciousness" thing makes you look pretty disorganized and stupid. How did my brain evolve? Similarly to how a chimp's brain evolved, the dolphin brain evolved, the cat brain evolved, etc. Each generation, those who had better reasoning, instinct, etc, survived and passed their genes on. Pretty simple. 666's actually a mistranslation. Hebrew didn't use the decimal system. BCE = before common era. God is imaginary. Science isn't.
Enginmaster 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tiffany09871 Numerology is the study of BS by mathematically illiterate people. Hours have no significance in the time of the bible. Wow 7 is a lucky number? REALLY?! That's so awesome!!! And it has no significance at all. 8 is a lucky number in China. 4 has good significance to the Native Americans. So what? The week is not a geology thing. It's just human calendars.
And none of this goes to answering for your gaffe earlier where you say "religion is always the same" wrong!
Enginmaster 3 months ago
@tiffany09871 Umm...the 6th day of the week isn't Saturday. You believe that because the Papacy believe it has the authority to change the day of the Sabbath to Sunday and over the years, the tradition followed throughout the world. Obviously, you don't know that but you can find the evidence in any Catholic material.
xSeiichix 2 months ago
@tiffany09871 Religion doesnt always stay the s as me, but even if it did, you think thats a good thing? If you aquire new information and you want to stay correct, you have to change to the new information. Why do people think that the one that stays the same is correct? We all used to think that the world was 6000 years old, when we discovered the truth, the scientists changed, but the religious nuts didnt, and even turned violent. Ps, last time I checked, my brain evolved, not just get here.
ThatFuckingAtheist 3 months ago
The thing is, science and religion are in conflict in the same way that a car and a squirrel are in conflict. Science (the car) gets places, and doesn't really care too much where the road leads, what questions it answers, etc. The religion (squirrel) claims his various positions, and stands on them, collecting nuts on the way. Sometimes they cover the same ground. If the religion-squirrel is lucky, science-car glides over, and doesn't totally collide with it. If it's not lucky, it gets CRUSHED.
Enginmaster 3 months ago
@Enginmaster I have to tell that to my friends sometime!
ThatFuckingAtheist 3 months ago
Really...religion tells us "why"? Then why is it ALL of the religions don't say even remotely similar things? When science tells us how and what, there's consensus across the globe. You don't have one country's scientists supporting geocentrism, while another scientist supports heliocentrism, etc. Science's consensus IS truth. But religion...it's making shit up and having shouting matches to find out which imaginary friend is stronger. (hint, they're all imaginary)
Enginmaster 3 months ago
What the hell? 0:40 is blatantly false. People were tortured to death by the christians for not agreeing that the earth was flat.
This is definitely not a neutral video.
Piece0fDust 3 months ago
Great vid but I don't think the two will really play nice.
greendusk 3 months ago