@gnolmahp do not you call a priest father? when the message is the same the goal is the same then the full teem is even one???i am sure you herd this from the sports even! i believe that if Jesus says" I am God "then there is discussion.Jesus dealt the evils directly and he fought with the most powerful enemies bravely you think he was scared to say it directly???? It was created for political reasons !
@iltamian Jesus wasn't afraid to say it explicitly, otherwise why would the Jews accuse him for this very reason he was crucified? They claimed he was blasphemous to claim to be God. The reason why it wasn't explicit was the same for the "clever" responses he gave when people asked him "what is the greatest commandment", "should we pay taxes", etc. When God sent Moses, he said to refer to him as "I am". A spiritual leader isn't always expected to be explicit to achieve his goals.
@gnolmahp Man i am getting tired to answer the atheists on richard dawkins vidios !that is what we need to attend the most as he is driving lazy people towards atheism and it is not as simple as it looks as they have a v strong political motive behind .they work like a team to answer and well organized.please go to these sites and break this ignorance ,u have to answer to your lord for this,you have an ability to express yrself and knowledge,
@iltamian Man can engineer molecules! It shows how it takes INTELLIGENCE in controlled laboratory conditions to mimic, manipulate, plagiarize a cell's Design! Scientists COPY genetic sequences!! They dont create anything!!
Its all Man made Synthetic chemistry! and it has nothing to do with the origin of life!!!! atheists are MORONS! Homochirality is a disaster for any sort of naturalistic origins!
@gnolmahp Man can engineer molecules! It shows how it takes INTELLIGENCE in controlled laboratory conditions to mimic, manipulate, plagiarize a cell's Design! Scientists COPY genetic sequences!! They dont create anything!!
Its all Man made Synthetic chemistry! and it has nothing to do with the origin of life!!!! atheists are MORONS! Homochirality is a disaster for any sort of naturalistic origins!
@gnolmahp do not you call a priest father? when the message is the same the goal is the same then the full teem is even one???i am sure you herd this from the sports even! i believe that if Jesus says" I am God "then there is no discussion.Jesus dealt the evils directly and he fought with the most powerful enemies bravely you think he was scared to say it directly???? It was created for political reasons !
Interesting when you go down the "nothing but" path of "if it works it must have evolved", leaving only things that don't "work", like radical altruism, as inexplicable. But this is in fact part of Jesus' challenge to us, to trust and have "hope in things unseen". So there is no getting away from supernaturalism and rewards after death. Collins barely touches on this aspect. I think it reflects the dislike of scientists for history - the record of agency, which is the primary arena in which God
What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.
It is impossible to manage this world without "GOD". Inside and Outside. Think carefully and open your eyes. How possibly could the earth been created without Creator? Simple Example: Look at the face of Tiger. See how beautifully the face is designed with black lines and it is the exact type if you cut the face in half. Now you know if it was by humans hand, we knew someone has done that... ... Look for other examples...
Collins commits a "God of the Gaps" argument himself when he says the Big Bang is suggestive of God. If science is able to explain why the BB occurred or what happened before, as it already is, this argument will be in trouble.
He's sadly inept in reasoning his arguments for faith. He makes some wildly inaccurate assertions about what the scientific options are in physics and cosmology.
He claims the BB was the beginning of our universe and that it needed a deliberate creator. How did he arrive at that point? It may be the earliest point we currently know about but it doesn't have to be the beginning. He continues this type of reasoning solely designed to arrive at the conclusions he needs to make his point.
I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general atheistic social perspectives
@lardcarcass He actually said most scientists believe that the BB was the beginning. If the beginning was earlier then his arguments would extend to that earlier time I suspect.
@lardcarcass I agree to some extent. I'm also afraid that he's falling into a God of the Gaps argument himself by arguing that an intelligent designer is a more plausible explanation for the origin of the universe than the mutliverse hypothesis.
@ivlfounder Not when you take into account the experiments and observations we've done. We do not have observable evidence for the multiverse yet. The multiverse approaches us with mathematics and experimental observations. It is perfectly logical to presume there is one. And it is actually accepted among many physicists.
You cannot have faith in God from the bible. The bible is the old law and history about other peoples faith. You must get your faith from Jesus through the Holy Ghost.
If you are still trying to obey the bible then you are under the curse of the law. Jesus died to remove the curse and send the Holy Ghost to lead us with. To get rid of the curse, get rid of your law book and ask Jesus to fill you with the Holy Ghost.
@woweixiaomiandui Earthquakes, eclipses, floods, lighnning and such were once believed to be manifestations of the god(s). Science has demonstrated Natural causes negating these old beliefs..
ID is just an educated attempt to replace the old beliefs with new "manifestations", since no gods can be detected or produced. Collin's argument fails for ID and his "type" of Christianity is in question.
@gjsterp well if you'd read the book you'll know that he is not for ID, he thinks that it harms theology, kinda in the same way that creationism harms science...
@gjsterp yes, he is interesting to listen to, but i think his thoughts are better discussed in the book. It's not a long book, so it doesn't take long to read.
Well, he isn't deist either, and his thoughts do go along with the christian "credos", so in that way i can very well see him as a christian..
Radical altruism can be explained by a misfiring of mirror neurons in the brain.
Mirror neurons allow us to empathize with others; these neurons allow us to feel what others feel, and experience what they experience. If these neurons misfire, they might allow us to feel overwhelming sympathy for those in pain; we might even be willing to risk our lives to help others.
@ClamCrunchy Why would we evolve that? And can you really call something which brings us to donate money to starving children in third world countries a misfiring? It seems to be the rule; not the exception.
@owchywawa Well, for example, a mother will be more likely to care for her offspring if she has mirror neurons. When her offspring are in pain, hungry, scared, etc. the mother's mirror neurons allow her to experience what her offspring must be experiencing, which can motivate her to take action.
Altruism is perfectly explainable by evolution. And cooperation, rather than ruthless competition, does play some role in evolution.
Anyone figured out how Francis Collins could combine the idea that there was death before sin. How can this be the work of God? How can it be the way he shapes his creations? I think there is some major problems with theistic evolution. If you look in Genesis it seems like that animals and humans were created complete and complex.
@ivlfounder I don't take it literally since man cannot express how God created the univers etc. But nothing biblical supports the fact that we gradually evolved. And why should God limit himself by the method evolution? Why not just create the same way (hopefully) He created light - not gradually.
KUDOS To DR. FRANCIS S. COLLINS:-) In 3 yr college, in deep thought to some physics, something scared me, the idea of heat as life source...,But I do not fear it anymore, a few days after that thought came to me, for a Reconciliation of such idea & truth with Faith was cogent. But the details and bigger pictures are Still out there to be Found and fully explained by Science, that's why I LOVE Studying and Learning Science, in GLORY TO GOD! :-D .".....PEACE and LOVE to All Mankind!!! :-D:-D:-D
Since Grade 3 I knew of evolution, quite independently...but since 2nd yr HS "I Don't Take its proponents' views as for it to be an explanation of Life. Indeed! What Dr. Francis M. Collins did is what I have Hoped to do in my journey through Science, which is my great Love (and wife). But Really, "There is NO Conflict in Evolution and Faith. That's why Dr. Albert Einstein said, "Religion Needs Science, and Science Needs Religion, religion w/o Science is maimed, and science w/o Religion is blind'
Since Grade 3 I knew of evolution, quite independently...but since 2nd yr HS "I Don't Take its proponents' views as for it to be an explanation of Life. Indeed! What Dr. Francis M. Collins did is what I have Hoped to do in my journey through Science, which is my great Love (and wife). But Really, "There is NO Conflict in Evolution and Faith. That's why Dr. Albert Einstein said, "Religion Needs Science, and Science Needs Religion, religion w/o Science is maimed, and science w/o Religion is blind"
There is N O T H I N G "Veritas" about religion. Religion and the "god claim" is a FRAUD - the geatest FRAUD in all history.
The 300+ "god claims" throughout history have failed to provide anything as credible evidence to support their supernatural, physics-defying stories of miracles.
WAKE UP WORLD.
Is it true that Collins is on the payrole of a certain Christian group?
@goldstead He may be, but he is doing more to discredit Christianity than anything. The way he equivocates when he comes to the contradictions in his belief system is really proof that he is just involved in wishful thinking.
Give examples to support your claim, so that perhaps those reading your comment can examine the particular instances you speak of, so that they can decide for themselves.
@v01741r31 When confronted with the question of Adam and Eve, since he KNOWS the story is not true, he decides to avoid dealing with the question and just says "it makes him uncomfortable." That discomfort he is dealing with is called cognitive dissonance. As a pastor's son, I dealt with it for many years as a Christian. When I let go of god and religion I freed my mind from its eternal slavery and all the exhausting effort it took to maintain faith in a belief system that was nonsensical.
Contrary to what you may think, throughout the history of the church, there have been a myriad of opinions on Genesis, long before Darwin or modern geology or whatever else. Some say the genre of language used in Genesis would fall under theology, mysticism, or poetry. Regardless of if its true at face value or not, it gets the point across. Collins holds to the allegorical side. Perhaps he was speaking to an asshole who didn't want his answer, like Bill Maher.
@v01741r31 That's because it is just a fable. Like the rest of the bible. "Gets the point across"?? What exactly is the point? A fake story about two people who never existed is supposed to convince us that we are born evil and thus need a blood sacrifice so we can live forever in a place with streets of gold? This is just nonsense, childish nonsense. Barbaric, bronze age thinking which is no longer necessary. Also, I am referring to Collins answer in this video in the Q&A portion.
I also don't see why a literal interpretation is an absolute must, even though I generally try to hold it at face value. I mean it could have been written as a polemic against other pagan stories. Or maybe the author was trying to pander to a common audience by using easier to understand metaphors and analogies, like depicting the Devil as a snake. Most would get the point. Do I believe that there was a snake with a moving jaw who talked? No. It is very likely an analogy. Doesn't discredit it...
@MrTruthAddict you do realize that top christians like Augustine in 300's knew that genesis was probably allegorical and not literal? this was obviously before the theory of evolution came about and scientific skepticism.
considering that Collins is shunned by every Christian group with any money, I would say he's not on the payrole of a religious organization. This is clearly a man who thinks for himself, and the conclusion he has made about God were clearly not the ones he was looking for originally. First he was forced, by 'scientific fact', into believing in God, now he serves him willingly.
there are limits to this kind of argument, leaps of faith. In his book he often uses the word concept in relation to God as in "... you are right to hold fast to the concept of God as Creator". Well, in my book, if it is a concept, it is not the ultimate truth. All concepts are limited and the God he claims to talk about is unlimited and therefore undescribable and certainly not reducible to a concept.
Coolins may be fantastic at DNA and the human genome BUT completely stupid when he claims that he believs there is proof for a "god". Collins must be 50% brilliant and 50% dumb stupid - to consider the graetest FRAUD in all history (religion) to be anything close to reality.
@goldstead, Does Colins claim there is proof? I thought he was presenting what he saw as reasonable and then presents it to the viewer to make their own decision.
I think the estimeed professor makes a bit of a hash of his argument about mathemathics pointing towards their being a god. He said that the universe was created by a mathematical mind, as everything can be explained in mathematics, but then talks about constants that can't be derived from equations. Firstly, sure that is a direct contradiction, secondly sure maths was developed to describe the universe rather than the other way around. We observe the universe to decide which equations are true.
Many philosophers had examined the idea of the Moral Law. For example , Karl Popper had made in his book“Open society and its enemies” a reasonable distinction between the Natural Law and the Moral Law. Anyway, I believe the Moral Law exists only as a result of there being people reflecting on their own behavior,without the need of postulating of anything supernatural.
@kokorosindeyiru Then how can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
@1tabligh I suggest that you read something about I remember someone have said that science's strength consists in its limitations.A theory is true because it is in accordance with what we are able to obsersve or experience. Science never claims final victory in the enterprise of human knowledge.
@kokorosindeyiru Before he enters the realm of science and knowledge with all its concerns, man is able to perceive certain truths by means of these innate perceptions. But after entering the sphere of science and philosophy and filling his *brain* with various proofs and deductions, he may forget his natural and innate perceptions or begin to doubt them. It is for this reason that when man moves beyond his innate nature to delineate a belief, differences begin to appear.
Respond to this video... It is open to rational discussion, and the conclusions from this kind of discussion have a strength that any religion didn't ,do not and possibly never will have in the sense that it's humble to any attack as long as it is supported by evidence. On the contrary, from the first day religion began, it have been claiming to be omnipotent and omniscient.
One of the most destructive and misleading factors in thoughts concerning God is to restrict one's thought to the "logic" of the empirical sciences and to *fail* to recognize the *limits* and boundaries of that "logic".
Is that which is necessary in essence and which is considered the first source of existence matter itself or something else beyond the limits of matter?
Physical world is the world we can not change solely by our "will". In the physical world, I see nothing beyond the empirical realm. If today I claim this morning God speaks to me and says he will never do that again, can you identify it is a fact or not?
Is that which is necessary in essence and which is considered the first source of existence matter itself or something else beyond the limits of matter?
If you believe the truth of innate perceptions, please give us the evidence.I cannot just believe something just because anyone else believe it, I am a person of reason(though not only of reason)
Father, I ask that You fill gjsterp with the knowledge of Your will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding. I ask you father to bring gjsterp to a saving grace, and to believe in the lord jesus and have everlasting life. In Jesus' name I pray, Amen.
I suggest that you read some scholarly books or articles about the origins of your religion. There is a notable scholar that has several very informative videos on YT.
There is a link to him to the right on this page.
Bart D Ehrman.
He is JUST ONE of many scholars who have spent their LIVES researching Biblical origins and have similar findings.
Who are you going to believe a scholar or you pa$tor or prie$t?
You can't expect me to post them ALL here. That would fill a volume as big as the Bible.
I sent you an email with about 20 Biblical Errors.
Just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak.
You can do a search and see how Fundis answer these errors.
There have been apologetics almost as long as the Bible has been around, but especially after it was translated into English, after people actually began to read it.
@gjsterp Did you watch ANY of Bart Erhman's History of the Bible on the same site as this video is located?
interesting, but it proves my point.
in spite of the differentiation, the details of what Christ did are not lost.
if you really wanted to take what Bart is saying seriously, consider what Historians say about Alexander the Great and his Biographies, each of them written hundreds of years after he died. They are considered to be supremely accurate by Historians today.
@agreatflood2121 "those are the laws that produced our universe, take any one of them away, our universe disappears."
You are obviously relying on science for some of your statements.
How can we be sure that if one of those forces did not exist as they do, or if they were modified that the universe would not be just a different place?
We can't know. It is speculation, using what we think we know.
@agreatflood2121 I pointed out black holes because our science and math fails to explain what is happening there.
It is obviously a bizarre "place."
The universe was most likely just as bizarre before it took the shape it has, so to THINK that we can explain everything after only 450 years of men studying, is a giant leap of faith.
It is unfair to science to demand that it should have ALL the answers after ONLY 450 years.
@agreatflood2121 "the world is falling apart, the world is not a an enjoyable place to be."
I am sorry you feel that way. Are you having any hardships?
I never said "ALL is Well." The world has problems. Most of them we have caused.
But, praying is not going to help.
It will take hard work, knowledge and a commitment of people to make the changes we need. It will take people focusing on the problems, rather than wasting time on their knees.
@gjsterp "I am sorry you feel that way. Are you having any hardships?"
I am speaking on what I have studied about World Economics, International Politics, and World Events. Something I think you should examine more thoughtfully.
"It will take hard work, knowledge and a commitment of people to make the changes we need."
Thats what Christian Missionaries are doing, and they put themselves in far greater danger to change the world and make it a better place.
You should argue your point with someone like Galileo or Giordano Bruno who was burnt at the stake (for religious hearsay). Bruno's cosmological theories went beyond the Copernican model ( earth revolves around the sun ) in identifying the Sun as just one of an infinite number of independently moving heavenly bodies.
@gjsterp "Sounds like Religion vs Science to me."
like I said before the Church sided itself with the popular philosophical view of Aristotle. Which most "secular" Philosophers and Scientists held.
Giordano Bruno was a Dominican Friar, Galileo was a Christian , so was Copernicas
the evolution debate, as far as I know Sam Wilberforce used a Scientific argument against Evolution. in which Darwin himself considered an excellent argument
The church held up Aristotle as proof of church dogma, because his view of the universe fit its model - earth centered.
The church did not discourage learning, in fact the clergy were the most educated for a long time, and did most of the teaching.
It was not until men found evidence that church dogma was in err that learning became more restrictive, and those who voiced their opinions were silenced one way or the other.
@agreatflood2121 "If you study Philosophy of Science, you'd ask the question how did Science begin."
The study of science began when people, such as the ancient Greeks, began looking for explanations for natural phenomenon while discounting religious claims.
Scientific thinking diverged from the general view that the "Gods did it."
"Science vs. Religion is a myth."
The way you stated this IS a myth.
It should read: Religion vs Science, which was true then as it is now.
@gjsterp "Scientific thinking diverged from the general view that the "Gods did it.""
not when you listen to Plato or Aristotle.
"One must note that these men adjust(ed) their religious beliefs to fit their findings."
Newton like I said before was practically fundamentalist, his belief in God was magnified by his exploration of Science. Same could be said of many others.
"Their faith became closer to the truth, than anything in the Bible.."
@agreatflood2121 I think that most men that study a field of science come to a point where they feel in awe of it, and usually they can only study ONE field.
Newton realized that there was so much to know, and felt awed.
It's not uncommon. Look through a large telescope or a microscope, and tell me you don't feel in awe of what you see.
The Bible has some original stories from a literary point of view. But as far as it teaching about life, except for a dozen of Jesus' saying, it holds little.
@gjsterp "Please give an example of what he says about family..."
He taught us to love those we do not want to, to give without thought of reward, he taught us how to love our neighbor, he taught us how to forgive others.
He taught us to be like himself, constantly understanding, always forgiving, helping others, and the rest follows.
@gjsterp "If Newton had not been distracted by religion, who knows what else he might have discovered and given us."
He gave us more then any other Scientist could have ever done, the Mechanisms of the Universe unlocked to the world. its a feat few scientists can even dream of matching.
It proves my point he was only interested in Science because of God.
@gjsterp "Then why did he refuse to be ordained?"
I've studied Newton for a long time my friend.
he refused to be ordained because hated the Church. But church need not mean Christian, there were Christians long before there was a Church of Rome, or a Church of England.
He was obsessed with Alchemy, Codes in Nature (including the Bible) and the End Times.
guess when he predicted the End Times would happen.... 2016
@PineAppleEx420 Newton wrote on Judao-Christian prophecy - a lifelong study. Its message was Christianity went astray in the 4th century AD, when the first Council of Nicaea propounded erroneous doctrines of the nature of Christ. The extent of Newton's unorthodoxy was recognized only in the 20th century: but although a critic of accepted Trinitarian dogmas and the Council of Nicaea, he possessed a deep religious sense, venerated the Bible and accepted its account of creation. Not Christian.
newton's unorthodox? Its not like any christian today or through out history was ever completely 100% orthodox no matter what they say. I mean if what u say is true, "he possessed a deep religious sense, venerated the Bible and accepted its account of creation." <-- sounds more christian than most religious folks today.
i enjoyed this vid
jjclassjj 3 days ago
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
AlexandreLDeOliveira 2 weeks ago
pi = 3.1 .. =O ..were all circles !
MagneticGuitarist 3 weeks ago
Jesus never claimed to be God anywhere in the bible! sad to hear from this man an unconfirmed statement.
iltamian 1 month ago
@iltamian i am da vine you are the branches
tkennysj 3 weeks ago
@iltamian John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.” There are more examples ... please do a simple google search before making that claim.
gnolmahp 3 weeks ago
@gnolmahp do not you call a priest father? when the message is the same the goal is the same then the full teem is even one???i am sure you herd this from the sports even! i believe that if Jesus says" I am God "then there is discussion.Jesus dealt the evils directly and he fought with the most powerful enemies bravely you think he was scared to say it directly???? It was created for political reasons !
iltamian 3 weeks ago
@iltamian Jesus wasn't afraid to say it explicitly, otherwise why would the Jews accuse him for this very reason he was crucified? They claimed he was blasphemous to claim to be God. The reason why it wasn't explicit was the same for the "clever" responses he gave when people asked him "what is the greatest commandment", "should we pay taxes", etc. When God sent Moses, he said to refer to him as "I am". A spiritual leader isn't always expected to be explicit to achieve his goals.
gnolmahp 3 weeks ago
@gnolmahp Man i am getting tired to answer the atheists on richard dawkins vidios !that is what we need to attend the most as he is driving lazy people towards atheism and it is not as simple as it looks as they have a v strong political motive behind .they work like a team to answer and well organized.please go to these sites and break this ignorance ,u have to answer to your lord for this,you have an ability to express yrself and knowledge,
iltamian 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@iltamian Man can engineer molecules! It shows how it takes INTELLIGENCE in controlled laboratory conditions to mimic, manipulate, plagiarize a cell's Design! Scientists COPY genetic sequences!! They dont create anything!!
Its all Man made Synthetic chemistry! and it has nothing to do with the origin of life!!!! atheists are MORONS! Homochirality is a disaster for any sort of naturalistic origins!
5tonyvvvv 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gnolmahp Man can engineer molecules! It shows how it takes INTELLIGENCE in controlled laboratory conditions to mimic, manipulate, plagiarize a cell's Design! Scientists COPY genetic sequences!! They dont create anything!!
Its all Man made Synthetic chemistry! and it has nothing to do with the origin of life!!!! atheists are MORONS! Homochirality is a disaster for any sort of naturalistic origins!
5tonyvvvv 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gnolmahp do not you call a priest father? when the message is the same the goal is the same then the full teem is even one???i am sure you herd this from the sports even! i believe that if Jesus says" I am God "then there is no discussion.Jesus dealt the evils directly and he fought with the most powerful enemies bravely you think he was scared to say it directly???? It was created for political reasons !
iltamian 3 weeks ago
Nice video
GreenmeGo 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
go bears
potpie921 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
useful video! thanks for sharing this video
adelle0001 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Have u lied? Have u stolen? Jesus said if you look at a woman with lust you have committed adultery with her in your heart. have u done that?
If God judge’s u by the Ten Commandments will u be innocent or guilty? Heaven or Hell? Does this concern you?
Do u need a Savior from your sins?
Jesus (The Son of God)came, lived a sinless life, died on the cross (for our sins) and rose again on the third day.
needgod.com
if you are interested in abortion or thinking of having one watch 180 movie
standingontruth1 2 months ago in playlist Can science and religion coexist?
This has been flagged as spam show
Francis is my God!
Casshyr 2 months ago
Depends on how large you believe your group is. I've noticed most atheists think of all humans as their group. Theists do not.
dlbattle100 2 months ago
..in which God reveals himself. So we have the ever-receding God of the Gaps, rather than the saving God of the Exodus and of the Resurrection.
Sojourneer 3 months ago
Interesting when you go down the "nothing but" path of "if it works it must have evolved", leaving only things that don't "work", like radical altruism, as inexplicable. But this is in fact part of Jesus' challenge to us, to trust and have "hope in things unseen". So there is no getting away from supernaturalism and rewards after death. Collins barely touches on this aspect. I think it reflects the dislike of scientists for history - the record of agency, which is the primary arena in which God
Sojourneer 3 months ago
What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.
1tabligh 3 months ago
It is impossible to manage this world without "GOD". Inside and Outside. Think carefully and open your eyes. How possibly could the earth been created without Creator? Simple Example: Look at the face of Tiger. See how beautifully the face is designed with black lines and it is the exact type if you cut the face in half. Now you know if it was by humans hand, we knew someone has done that... ... Look for other examples...
ghoreyshi 5 months ago
Hi, You have to read G. K. Chesterton.
Bye, good video.
avendanojuanma 6 months ago
Collins commits a "God of the Gaps" argument himself when he says the Big Bang is suggestive of God. If science is able to explain why the BB occurred or what happened before, as it already is, this argument will be in trouble.
ClamCrunchy 6 months ago
@ClamCrunchy Even the Big Bang concept is more suggestive of the Cambrian explosion...which is more suggestive of a God.
roxtar55 5 months ago
BioLogos ftw! :)
thetraceur123 7 months ago 2
gay
lagemegnorsk 8 months ago
He's sadly inept in reasoning his arguments for faith. He makes some wildly inaccurate assertions about what the scientific options are in physics and cosmology.
He claims the BB was the beginning of our universe and that it needed a deliberate creator. How did he arrive at that point? It may be the earliest point we currently know about but it doesn't have to be the beginning. He continues this type of reasoning solely designed to arrive at the conclusions he needs to make his point.
lardcarcass 8 months ago
@lardcarcass You sure about that?
teahouse100 8 months ago
I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general atheistic social perspectives
shieldsff 8 months ago
@lardcarcass He actually said most scientists believe that the BB was the beginning. If the beginning was earlier then his arguments would extend to that earlier time I suspect.
robmanyou 8 months ago
@lardcarcass I agree to some extent. I'm also afraid that he's falling into a God of the Gaps argument himself by arguing that an intelligent designer is a more plausible explanation for the origin of the universe than the mutliverse hypothesis.
ClamCrunchy 6 months ago
@ClamCrunchy
mutliverse?
by definition there is only a universe.
ivlfounder 6 months ago
@ivlfounder Not when you take into account the experiments and observations we've done. We do not have observable evidence for the multiverse yet. The multiverse approaches us with mathematics and experimental observations. It is perfectly logical to presume there is one. And it is actually accepted among many physicists.
treasuredroperX 5 months ago
@treasuredroperX
"We do not have observable evidence for the multiverse yet."
But you believe in it?
ivlfounder 5 months ago
@ivlfounder Nope, I don't. However I think because of the experiments, and observations, it is highly plausible almost to the point of "confirmed".
treasuredroperX 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@treasuredroperX
So you believe it's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt then?
ivlfounder 5 months ago
Comment removed
roxtar55 5 months ago
Excellent speaker
the future of "bio-logos" is sure to be interesting and full of headaches.
tbell622 9 months ago
You cannot have faith in God from the bible. The bible is the old law and history about other peoples faith. You must get your faith from Jesus through the Holy Ghost.
If you are still trying to obey the bible then you are under the curse of the law. Jesus died to remove the curse and send the Holy Ghost to lead us with. To get rid of the curse, get rid of your law book and ask Jesus to fill you with the Holy Ghost.
THE BIBLE IS THE MARK OF THE BEAST!
BIBLEisMARKofBEAST 9 months ago
Comment removed
gjsterp 9 months ago
Mitochondria and cell nuclei are believed to have cooperated in a symbiotic relationship to form eukayrotic cells, for example.
ClamCrunchy 10 months ago
God writes the Gospel not in the Bible alone, but also on trees, and in the flowers and clouds and stars.
Martin Luther
woweixiaomiandui 10 months ago 2
@woweixiaomiandui Earthquakes, eclipses, floods, lighnning and such were once believed to be manifestations of the god(s). Science has demonstrated Natural causes negating these old beliefs..
ID is just an educated attempt to replace the old beliefs with new "manifestations", since no gods can be detected or produced. Collin's argument fails for ID and his "type" of Christianity is in question.
gjsterp 9 months ago
@gjsterp well if you'd read the book you'll know that he is not for ID, he thinks that it harms theology, kinda in the same way that creationism harms science...
And why do you question his christianity?
woweixiaomiandui 9 months ago
@woweixiaomiandui I haven't read his book, but it is on my list.
I listened to his type of theology and it did not sound like Christianity, any more than that of Isaac Newton.
I'll have to listen again. He is a good speaker.
gjsterp 9 months ago
@gjsterp yes, he is interesting to listen to, but i think his thoughts are better discussed in the book. It's not a long book, so it doesn't take long to read.
Well, he isn't deist either, and his thoughts do go along with the christian "credos", so in that way i can very well see him as a christian..
woweixiaomiandui 9 months ago
@woweixiaomiandui Amen
teahouse100 8 months ago
Radical altruism can be explained by a misfiring of mirror neurons in the brain.
Mirror neurons allow us to empathize with others; these neurons allow us to feel what others feel, and experience what they experience. If these neurons misfire, they might allow us to feel overwhelming sympathy for those in pain; we might even be willing to risk our lives to help others.
ClamCrunchy 10 months ago
@ClamCrunchy Why would we evolve that? And can you really call something which brings us to donate money to starving children in third world countries a misfiring? It seems to be the rule; not the exception.
owchywawa 10 months ago
@owchywawa Well, for example, a mother will be more likely to care for her offspring if she has mirror neurons. When her offspring are in pain, hungry, scared, etc. the mother's mirror neurons allow her to experience what her offspring must be experiencing, which can motivate her to take action.
Altruism is perfectly explainable by evolution. And cooperation, rather than ruthless competition, does play some role in evolution.
ClamCrunchy 10 months ago
Anyone figured out how Francis Collins could combine the idea that there was death before sin. How can this be the work of God? How can it be the way he shapes his creations? I think there is some major problems with theistic evolution. If you look in Genesis it seems like that animals and humans were created complete and complex.
LarsSoenderby12 10 months ago
@LarsSoenderby12
Collins agrees with Augustine of Hippo.
i.e. don't take Genesis literally.
ivlfounder 10 months ago
@ivlfounder I don't take it literally since man cannot express how God created the univers etc. But nothing biblical supports the fact that we gradually evolved. And why should God limit himself by the method evolution? Why not just create the same way (hopefully) He created light - not gradually.
LarsSoenderby12 10 months ago
@LarsSoenderby12
I have some good theories but they are theories and likely pale compare to the truth of God.
ivlfounder 10 months ago
@ivlfounder Well I think that's cool. Let me hear it.
LarsSoenderby12 10 months ago
@LarsSoenderby12
Be warned they are no doubt pathetic when compared to the truth and not fully formed either.
Are you still interested?
ivlfounder 10 months ago
@ivlfounder Yeah, sure! Hit me
LarsSoenderby12 10 months ago
2 hours?? yikes.. cliff notes?
megotvtec 10 months ago
KUDOS To DR. FRANCIS S. COLLINS:-) In 3 yr college, in deep thought to some physics, something scared me, the idea of heat as life source...,But I do not fear it anymore, a few days after that thought came to me, for a Reconciliation of such idea & truth with Faith was cogent. But the details and bigger pictures are Still out there to be Found and fully explained by Science, that's why I LOVE Studying and Learning Science, in GLORY TO GOD! :-D .".....PEACE and LOVE to All Mankind!!! :-D:-D:-D
engezbentmh86 10 months ago
Comment removed
engezbentmh86 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Since Grade 3 I knew of evolution, quite independently...but since 2nd yr HS "I Don't Take its proponents' views as for it to be an explanation of Life. Indeed! What Dr. Francis M. Collins did is what I have Hoped to do in my journey through Science, which is my great Love (and wife). But Really, "There is NO Conflict in Evolution and Faith. That's why Dr. Albert Einstein said, "Religion Needs Science, and Science Needs Religion, religion w/o Science is maimed, and science w/o Religion is blind'
engezbentmh86 10 months ago
Since Grade 3 I knew of evolution, quite independently...but since 2nd yr HS "I Don't Take its proponents' views as for it to be an explanation of Life. Indeed! What Dr. Francis M. Collins did is what I have Hoped to do in my journey through Science, which is my great Love (and wife). But Really, "There is NO Conflict in Evolution and Faith. That's why Dr. Albert Einstein said, "Religion Needs Science, and Science Needs Religion, religion w/o Science is maimed, and science w/o Religion is blind"
engezbentmh86 10 months ago
I can't help but notice, that he uses a bridge of wishful thinking, uniting some mysteries in life (as he regards it) and his christian faith.
Dianatomia 11 months ago
There is N O T H I N G "Veritas" about religion. Religion and the "god claim" is a FRAUD - the geatest FRAUD in all history.
The 300+ "god claims" throughout history have failed to provide anything as credible evidence to support their supernatural, physics-defying stories of miracles.
WAKE UP WORLD.
Is it true that Collins is on the payrole of a certain Christian group?
goldstead 1 year ago
@goldstead He may be, but he is doing more to discredit Christianity than anything. The way he equivocates when he comes to the contradictions in his belief system is really proof that he is just involved in wishful thinking.
MrTruthAddict 1 year ago
@MrTruthAddict
Give examples to support your claim, so that perhaps those reading your comment can examine the particular instances you speak of, so that they can decide for themselves.
v01741r31 10 months ago
@v01741r31 When confronted with the question of Adam and Eve, since he KNOWS the story is not true, he decides to avoid dealing with the question and just says "it makes him uncomfortable." That discomfort he is dealing with is called cognitive dissonance. As a pastor's son, I dealt with it for many years as a Christian. When I let go of god and religion I freed my mind from its eternal slavery and all the exhausting effort it took to maintain faith in a belief system that was nonsensical.
MrTruthAddict 10 months ago
@MrTruth
Contrary to what you may think, throughout the history of the church, there have been a myriad of opinions on Genesis, long before Darwin or modern geology or whatever else. Some say the genre of language used in Genesis would fall under theology, mysticism, or poetry. Regardless of if its true at face value or not, it gets the point across. Collins holds to the allegorical side. Perhaps he was speaking to an asshole who didn't want his answer, like Bill Maher.
v01741r31 10 months ago
@v01741r31 That's because it is just a fable. Like the rest of the bible. "Gets the point across"?? What exactly is the point? A fake story about two people who never existed is supposed to convince us that we are born evil and thus need a blood sacrifice so we can live forever in a place with streets of gold? This is just nonsense, childish nonsense. Barbaric, bronze age thinking which is no longer necessary. Also, I am referring to Collins answer in this video in the Q&A portion.
MrTruthAddict 10 months ago
I also don't see why a literal interpretation is an absolute must, even though I generally try to hold it at face value. I mean it could have been written as a polemic against other pagan stories. Or maybe the author was trying to pander to a common audience by using easier to understand metaphors and analogies, like depicting the Devil as a snake. Most would get the point. Do I believe that there was a snake with a moving jaw who talked? No. It is very likely an analogy. Doesn't discredit it...
v01741r31 10 months ago
@MrTruthAddict you do realize that top christians like Augustine in 300's knew that genesis was probably allegorical and not literal? this was obviously before the theory of evolution came about and scientific skepticism.
Consp1racyTheorist 10 months ago
@goldstead
considering that Collins is shunned by every Christian group with any money, I would say he's not on the payrole of a religious organization. This is clearly a man who thinks for himself, and the conclusion he has made about God were clearly not the ones he was looking for originally. First he was forced, by 'scientific fact', into believing in God, now he serves him willingly.
Sophsir 11 months ago
@goldstead Theophobie !!! It's a real and pure Theophobie !!!
daremil 11 months ago
there are limits to this kind of argument, leaps of faith. In his book he often uses the word concept in relation to God as in "... you are right to hold fast to the concept of God as Creator". Well, in my book, if it is a concept, it is not the ultimate truth. All concepts are limited and the God he claims to talk about is unlimited and therefore undescribable and certainly not reducible to a concept.
claudelebel55 1 year ago
Coolins may be fantastic at DNA and the human genome BUT completely stupid when he claims that he believs there is proof for a "god". Collins must be 50% brilliant and 50% dumb stupid - to consider the graetest FRAUD in all history (religion) to be anything close to reality.
goldstead 1 year ago
@goldstead, Does Colins claim there is proof? I thought he was presenting what he saw as reasonable and then presents it to the viewer to make their own decision.
trevaugdawg 1 year ago
@goldstead There are financial reasons behind his "50% dumbness" from a well-financed religious lobby.
FranciscoPadilla 1 year ago
@FranciscoPadilla
The same smear could be applied to Dawkins.
ivlfounder 1 year ago
@FranciscoPadilla
The same smear could be applied to Dawkins.
ivlfounder 1 year ago
@goldstead
When calling someone else stupid, dumb, and a fraud you might want to consider spelling greatest right.
ivlfounder 1 year ago
@goldstead
Perhaps smart people can hold a rational belief in God? Oh, that's right, you're a blind fanatic.
v01741r31 10 months ago
@goldstead
wow^ @ this man.....
PineAppleEx420 9 months ago
I think the estimeed professor makes a bit of a hash of his argument about mathemathics pointing towards their being a god. He said that the universe was created by a mathematical mind, as everything can be explained in mathematics, but then talks about constants that can't be derived from equations. Firstly, sure that is a direct contradiction, secondly sure maths was developed to describe the universe rather than the other way around. We observe the universe to decide which equations are true.
Brascofarian 1 year ago
Many philosophers had examined the idea of the Moral Law. For example , Karl Popper had made in his book“Open society and its enemies” a reasonable distinction between the Natural Law and the Moral Law. Anyway, I believe the Moral Law exists only as a result of there being people reflecting on their own behavior,without the need of postulating of anything supernatural.
kokorosindeyiru 1 year ago
@kokorosindeyiru Then how can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh I suggest that you read something about I remember someone have said that science's strength consists in its limitations.A theory is true because it is in accordance with what we are able to obsersve or experience. Science never claims final victory in the enterprise of human knowledge.
kokorosindeyiru 1 year ago
@kokorosindeyiru Before he enters the realm of science and knowledge with all its concerns, man is able to perceive certain truths by means of these innate perceptions. But after entering the sphere of science and philosophy and filling his *brain* with various proofs and deductions, he may forget his natural and innate perceptions or begin to doubt them. It is for this reason that when man moves beyond his innate nature to delineate a belief, differences begin to appear.
1tabligh 1 year ago
Respond to this video... It is open to rational discussion, and the conclusions from this kind of discussion have a strength that any religion didn't ,do not and possibly never will have in the sense that it's humble to any attack as long as it is supported by evidence. On the contrary, from the first day religion began, it have been claiming to be omnipotent and omniscient.
kokorosindeyiru 1 year ago
God and Empirical Logic.
One of the most destructive and misleading factors in thoughts concerning God is to restrict one's thought to the "logic" of the empirical sciences and to *fail* to recognize the *limits* and boundaries of that "logic".
Is that which is necessary in essence and which is considered the first source of existence matter itself or something else beyond the limits of matter?
1tabligh 1 year ago
Physical world is the world we can not change solely by our "will". In the physical world, I see nothing beyond the empirical realm. If today I claim this morning God speaks to me and says he will never do that again, can you identify it is a fact or not?
kokorosindeyiru 1 year ago
@kokorosindeyiru
No dodging the questions and quibbling in vain!
Is that which is necessary in essence and which is considered the first source of existence matter itself or something else beyond the limits of matter?
1tabligh 1 year ago
If you believe the truth of innate perceptions, please give us the evidence.I cannot just believe something just because anyone else believe it, I am a person of reason(though not only of reason)
kokorosindeyiru 1 year ago
What an incredible man.
GuitarGuy22221 1 year ago
Comment removed
grrwood 1 year ago
Father, I ask that You fill gjsterp with the knowledge of Your will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding. I ask you father to bring gjsterp to a saving grace, and to believe in the lord jesus and have everlasting life. In Jesus' name I pray, Amen.
grrwood 1 year ago
Comment removed
gjsterp 1 year ago
@grrwood
One MUST put one's FAITH in the authors of the Gospels before one can accept Jesus as anything other than a man. The authors names are NOT even known.
So, what evidence is there - 4 books of hearsay by unknown authors?
It is more likely that Jesus was a man, and the authors gave him divinity.
Why? Why does anyone create a new religion?
Ask Joseph Smith, Moses, Gautama, Zarathustra or Mohamed.
Religion unifies groups of people, but it also excludes people, which is its downfall.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "Religion unifies groups of people, but it also excludes people, which is its downfall."
truth by definition is exclusive. every single world view is exclusionary at some point, even Atheism exclude religious.
and just so you know we know exactly who wrote the gospels.
Why? Why does anyone create a new religion?
just remember that the apostles of Christ were hiding after for days after he died, in fear of being arrested and executed.
ask the real question, not your silly evasions
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121
I suggest that you read some scholarly books or articles about the origins of your religion. There is a notable scholar that has several very informative videos on YT.
There is a link to him to the right on this page.
Bart D Ehrman.
He is JUST ONE of many scholars who have spent their LIVES researching Biblical origins and have similar findings.
Who are you going to believe a scholar or you pa$tor or prie$t?
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp as for the issue of Scholars, there a lot of Christian scholars that address the claims of men like Bart D. Ehrman.
men that are not pastors or priests
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
Comment removed
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121
I never excluded religion from my life. I researched it to see if I could find the truth about it.
The "truths" I found lead me to believe that there is no true religion, and some are down right deceptions.
If I ever find that a religion has some "truth" to it, I will subscribe to it.
I have not excluded that option.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "I never excluded religion from my life. I researched it to see if I could find the truth about it."
"If I ever find that a religion has some "truth" to it, I will subscribe to it."
So what is the name of your world view?
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "So what is the name of your world view?"
My world view is and will remain Open-minded."
When a topic interests me, and many do, which because of time restraints limits my investigation, I try to research it as much as I can.
I compare different points of view, check their sources, consider motives and then weigh the "facts" presented.
From that I draw my own conclusions, but remain open minded that further evidence may alter my conclusions.
My world view is Open-minded.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "My world view is Open-minded."
I you really are open-minded, try relearning your beliefs about Christianity.
really try to understand how the Christian understands the world.
in other words think like a Christian before you condemn the Christians.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121
Dearest, I have held many of Jesus' teaching to my heart.
But, Jesus is only one of many who impressed me with "morals" to live by.
"Great acts are made up of small deeds."
"How could man rejoice in victory and delight in the slaughter of men?" Lao Tzu
"An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind. " M. Gandhi
There is much wisdom in the world, if one dares to look beyond one source.
Seek and Your Truth becomes more clear.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "In other words think like a Christian before you condemn the Christians."
I think I addressed clearly how I think.
I do not "condemn the Christian" values, only the beliefs that are used to support them.
If one claims one is a good person because one chooses to be, it is different from claiming "I am a good person because I believe in Jesus."
Jesus did not address all the issues that modern society must address, so we must look elsewhere for guiding wisdom.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "just remember that the apostles of Christ were hiding after for days after he died, in fear of being arrested and executed."
Just hearsay, my friend. A story to reinforce one to believe.
It's ALL just a very good story, but you will find it has very big holes in it, if you look closely.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "It's ALL just a very good story, but you will find it has very big holes in it, if you look closely."
point them out to me I beg you.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121
You can't expect me to post them ALL here. That would fill a volume as big as the Bible.
I sent you an email with about 20 Biblical Errors.
Just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak.
You can do a search and see how Fundis answer these errors.
There have been apologetics almost as long as the Bible has been around, but especially after it was translated into English, after people actually began to read it.
if you haven't found errors you haven't read it.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp I read your email, I answered them, and it was fun.
and you expect me to take most of what your saying seriously?
I've seen a lot of interesting things in the Bible.
long before I spoke with you, I expected you to use many of those reference points.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "ask the real question, not your silly evasions"
It would appear that YOU are the one who refuses to accept the answers to your "real question" "Will I live forever and ever?"
NO. No one will. Enjoy the time you have.
Drop the self delusions, or those that others try to sell you.
gjsterp 1 year ago
Comment removed
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@gjsterp Of course I'm going to die, I've already accepted that.
your the one who can't seem to accept deaths offerings.
you complained about a young woman dying of cancer, was so terrible and unjust. Even though should eventually die anyway.
Well... everyone dies my friend.
Get over it.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121
Did you watch ANY of Bart Erhman's History of the Bible on the same site as this video is located?
There IS a LINK to the RIGHT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp Did you watch ANY of Bart Erhman's History of the Bible on the same site as this video is located?
interesting, but it proves my point.
in spite of the differentiation, the details of what Christ did are not lost.
if you really wanted to take what Bart is saying seriously, consider what Historians say about Alexander the Great and his Biographies, each of them written hundreds of years after he died. They are considered to be supremely accurate by Historians today.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@gjsterp If you study Philosophy of Science, you'd ask the question how did Science begin.
Science first got started because Man concluded that their must be law in nature. They concluded such because they believed in a law giver.
The story of Science vs. Religion is a myth
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "Science first got started..."
I dispute this.
Cycles in nature were originally attributed to God.
The moral laws man advanced were also attributed to God.
"Laws" infer a law giver.
Science took the term "Laws" and incorporated it into science jargon.
Thus science inadvertently inferred a "Law" giver - nature?
But, nature does not consciously "command" anything, it is what it is.
I consider the "laws" of science a misnomer, unless the person who discovered the law is the giver.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp You assume nature is the source of Law in this world.
but laws govern nature, long before there was nature there was Law
the laws of physics which ultimately produced our universe (and nature) came first.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 The "Laws" of physics you believe in do not hold up under extreme conditions - like black holes.
The laws of physics that we see presently may not have always been.
The universe in the beginning was a very different place.
The universe is evolving, and the present laws may not be valid in the future.
Our observation is limited in time. A few thousand years?
ALL of our knowledge amounts to just a "snap shot" of the universe.
We have no idea, and for some that is disquieting.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "The "Laws" of physics you believe in do not hold up under extreme conditions - like black holes."
your speaking nonsense.
I'm talking about gravity, the strong and weak nuclear constants, and so on.
those are the laws that produced our universe, take any one of them away, our universe disappears
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "those are the laws that produced our universe, take any one of them away, our universe disappears."
You are obviously relying on science for some of your statements.
How can we be sure that if one of those forces did not exist as they do, or if they were modified that the universe would not be just a different place?
We can't know. It is speculation, using what we think we know.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "We can't know. It is speculation, using what we think we know."
thats not true we know very much what it takes to make a complex universe capable of producing and supporting concuss observers.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 I pointed out black holes because our science and math fails to explain what is happening there.
It is obviously a bizarre "place."
The universe was most likely just as bizarre before it took the shape it has, so to THINK that we can explain everything after only 450 years of men studying, is a giant leap of faith.
It is unfair to science to demand that it should have ALL the answers after ONLY 450 years.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121
Something on the comic side of things:
Did God create Adam with a penis and the ability to reproduce, or did it grow after Eve was created?
God must have known he was going to create Eve.
gjsterp 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gjsterp "God must have known he was going to create Eve."
there are two creation stories in genesis.
and some of the Bible was written in poetic language
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "really try to understand how the Christian understands the world."
I have. I also have tried to understand the Mormon, Muslim, and Indian worlds. I have had contact with each.
I find their reasons (religious dogma) for doing things delusions.
Why not accept the world for what it is - a one time gift - and then try to make it enjoyable for everyone? Greed, selfishness, hatred...?
Yes, they are with us, but how we address these says more about us then of the "sinners."
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "Why not accept the world for what it is - a one time gift - and then try to make it enjoyable for everyone?"
the world is falling apart, the world is not a an enjoyable place to be.
whatever good we have is on the verge of collapse. but you tell me all is well, when thats not true.
you tell me people are good, when they constantly affirm the opposite, countless at here at home live with broken lives.
those are the real delusions
Christianity broke though that, made me aware.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "the world is falling apart, the world is not a an enjoyable place to be."
I am sorry you feel that way. Are you having any hardships?
I never said "ALL is Well." The world has problems. Most of them we have caused.
But, praying is not going to help.
It will take hard work, knowledge and a commitment of people to make the changes we need. It will take people focusing on the problems, rather than wasting time on their knees.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "I am sorry you feel that way. Are you having any hardships?"
I am speaking on what I have studied about World Economics, International Politics, and World Events. Something I think you should examine more thoughtfully.
"It will take hard work, knowledge and a commitment of people to make the changes we need."
Thats what Christian Missionaries are doing, and they put themselves in far greater danger to change the world and make it a better place.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "The story of Science vs. Religion is a myth."
I addressed this already, but....
You should argue your point with someone like Galileo or Giordano Bruno who was burnt at the stake (for religious hearsay). Bruno's cosmological theories went beyond the Copernican model ( earth revolves around the sun ) in identifying the Sun as just one of an infinite number of independently moving heavenly bodies.
Sounds like Religion vs Science to me.
And the "Evolution" debate?
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "Sounds like Religion vs Science to me."
like I said before the Church sided itself with the popular philosophical view of Aristotle. Which most "secular" Philosophers and Scientists held.
Giordano Bruno was a Dominican Friar, Galileo was a Christian , so was Copernicas
the evolution debate, as far as I know Sam Wilberforce used a Scientific argument against Evolution. in which Darwin himself considered an excellent argument
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 Before I go.
The church held up Aristotle as proof of church dogma, because his view of the universe fit its model - earth centered.
The church did not discourage learning, in fact the clergy were the most educated for a long time, and did most of the teaching.
It was not until men found evidence that church dogma was in err that learning became more restrictive, and those who voiced their opinions were silenced one way or the other.
I will have to research Sam Wilberforce. Bye
gjsterp 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gjsterp "The church held up Aristotle as proof of church dogma"
like I said before...
secular philosophers of the day held the same view.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121
As I said, "Galileo is not known as the Father of Science for nothing."
Most philosophers of his day accepted Aristotle's teachings without proof.
For a quick synopsis of Galileo see wiki.
Galileo, was forced to recant his findings and was placed under house arrest BY THE CHURCH for the rest of his life and not allowed to write.
THE CHURCH SILENCED HIM.
But, his book was in circulation, and science was born.
Francis Bacon also challenged men to question the status quo.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "Francis Bacon also challenged men to question the status quo"
countless God believing Scientists in the modern day are being fired for, denied tenure, and ridiculed for believing in creation.
It looks like status quo is only what an age of men will make it
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "countless God believing Scientists in the modern day are being fired for, denied tenure, and ridiculed for believing in creation."
Countless?
I found one in Israel that was fired recently.
You have a list I can refer to?
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp countless is an expression, I'm referring to Ben Stein's Expelled
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "If you study Philosophy of Science, you'd ask the question how did Science begin."
The study of science began when people, such as the ancient Greeks, began looking for explanations for natural phenomenon while discounting religious claims.
Scientific thinking diverged from the general view that the "Gods did it."
"Science vs. Religion is a myth."
The way you stated this IS a myth.
It should read: Religion vs Science, which was true then as it is now.
Religion vs Evolution.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "Scientific thinking diverged from the general view that the "Gods did it.""
not when you listen to Plato or Aristotle.
"One must note that these men adjust(ed) their religious beliefs to fit their findings."
Newton like I said before was practically fundamentalist, his belief in God was magnified by his exploration of Science. Same could be said of many others.
"Their faith became closer to the truth, than anything in the Bible.."
the Bible teaches us about life not science
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 I think that most men that study a field of science come to a point where they feel in awe of it, and usually they can only study ONE field.
Newton realized that there was so much to know, and felt awed.
It's not uncommon. Look through a large telescope or a microscope, and tell me you don't feel in awe of what you see.
The Bible has some original stories from a literary point of view. But as far as it teaching about life, except for a dozen of Jesus' saying, it holds little.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "Newton realized that there was so much to know, and felt awed."
you know truly very little about who Newton was then.
"But as far as it teaching about life, except for a dozen of Jesus' saying, it holds little."
that is not true almost all of what he says applies to life.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "that is not true almost all of what he (Jesus) says applies to life. "
Please give an example of what he says about family...
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "Please give an example of what he says about family..."
He taught us to love those we do not want to, to give without thought of reward, he taught us how to love our neighbor, he taught us how to forgive others.
He taught us to be like himself, constantly understanding, always forgiving, helping others, and the rest follows.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "He taught us to love..."
Jesus did not teach you anything. He commanded you to do these things, if you want to be with God.
He didn't show you how. Not unless you think his human sacrifice was suppose to be a "good" example.
If Jesus knew he was going to die, he committed suicide.
NOT a good example for anyone to follow.
Only extremists still believe death brings martyrdom.
I believe there are more good people than not.
You did not give an example of Jesus' family values.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp Jesus set the Example, with his own actions.
I should think you'd be willing to die, if you could save the life one that you love.
family values, like I said everything else follows once you have a heart like Christ
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "Jesus set the Example, with his own actions."
Which is why I believe it is better to think of him as just a man.
His actions speak louder as a man then they would as a God.
If he was a god, his actions would not take any effort at all.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "If he was a god, his actions would not take any effort at all."
only he can do it effortlessly because only he can do it perfectly.
the perfect forgiveness, the perfect love, the perfect death.
God humbled himself to death, to pay our debt which is death
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "everything else follows once you have a heart like Christ."
I assume you believe Jesus was God incarnate, correct?
Then he was the same God of the OT, and that God was an SOB.
gjsterp 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gjsterp "Then he was the same God of the OT, and that God was an SOB."
I don't think so, as the Judge of man and the Creator of man, there is no fault in his action.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "you know truly very little about who Newton was then."
There is no way for any of us to "truly" know Newton. We must rely on historians.
"A manuscript he (Newton) sent to John Locke in which he disputed the existence of the Trinity was never published." wiki
Newton wrote more on religion that anything else.
If Newton had not been distracted by religion, who knows what else he might have discovered and given us.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "If Newton had not been distracted by religion, who knows what else he might have discovered and given us."
He gave us more then any other Scientist could have ever done, the Mechanisms of the Universe unlocked to the world. its a feat few scientists can even dream of matching.
It proves my point he was only interested in Science because of God.
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "It proves my point he (Newton) was only interested in Science because of God."
Then why did he refuse to be ordained?
He may have been a deist, but he did not subscribe to the Christian trinity dogma.
see his "An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "Then why did he refuse to be ordained?"
I've studied Newton for a long time my friend.
he refused to be ordained because hated the Church. But church need not mean Christian, there were Christians long before there was a Church of Rome, or a Church of England.
He was obsessed with Alchemy, Codes in Nature (including the Bible) and the End Times.
guess when he predicted the End Times would happen.... 2016
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 Newton did not believe in the "Trinity" which infers that he did not believe Jesus to be God incarnate.
Though I have not been able to find that stated anywhere.
It might be in one of his personal notes or letters?
Alchemy was one of the avenues men took that lead to a dead end.
Newton was fallible too.
Like I said, there have been many men who have said profound things, why limit oneself to the wisdom of one man?
gjsterp 1 year ago
@agreatflood2121 "he (Newton) refused to be ordained because hated the Church.
Now why would he do that? Maybe he knew something all church going people should consider?
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp "Now why would he do that? Maybe he knew something all church going people should consider?"
he thought the church of England was heretical
and he really did not like the Catholics either
agreatflood2121 1 year ago
@gjsterp
idk what the fuck you are talking about, Newton was christian.
PineAppleEx420 9 months ago
@PineAppleEx420 Newton wrote on Judao-Christian prophecy - a lifelong study. Its message was Christianity went astray in the 4th century AD, when the first Council of Nicaea propounded erroneous doctrines of the nature of Christ. The extent of Newton's unorthodoxy was recognized only in the 20th century: but although a critic of accepted Trinitarian dogmas and the Council of Nicaea, he possessed a deep religious sense, venerated the Bible and accepted its account of creation. Not Christian.
gjsterp 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gjsterp
newton's unorthodox? Its not like any christian today or through out history was ever completely 100% orthodox no matter what they say. I mean if what u say is true, "he possessed a deep religious sense, venerated the Bible and accepted its account of creation." <-- sounds more christian than most religious folks today.
PineAppleEx420 9 months ago
@gjsterp Newton was a devout Christian.
teahouse100 8 months ago
@teahouse100 he was also an antitrinitarian. he denied that jesus was ever the son of god.
Drgamedood 8 months ago
@Drgamedood Interesting. And so were the early Christians before they Nicene Creed.
teahouse100 8 months ago
you serious, who is going to read 2 pages of youtube rants.
wait a min who refers to youtube comments for there information.
grrwood 1 year ago
@grrwood
There are many good comments on YT that can lead one to do more research, if you hadn't noticed.
gjsterp 1 year ago
@gjsterp ok
grrwood 1 year ago
is there any good "new" commentary books like Wesley's Notes on the Bible
grrwood 1 year ago
Comment removed
55bknight 1 year ago