@dj2baduk i admit that i never read the article, just assumed that my astronomy professor at the University of Utah was a credible source. look it up.
PS also don't allow yourself to so foolishly believe that all scientists are atheists or non-theistic. that is not true. It seems that it is a more recent development, since most of the most influential scientists in history have been religious (for example Charles Darwin, or Georges Lemaître, who created the big bang theory, to name a few))
@Skater4life567 what people who happen to be scientists do or don't believe about metaphysical matters is irrelevant. What matters is whether metaphysical claims are true or not. I personally find nothing to convince me they are anything more than the ramblings of man trying to make sense of the world and the grand scheme of things in a time before science, but this video isn't about that and your extensive comments are entirely misdirected as well as misguided.
@dj2baduk i commented thus extensively because i read many of your previous comments in reply to other people who defended their belief in God. many of your responses included statements to the effect that there just isn't enough evidence supporting whether or not God exists. the problem is, your thinking that scientific evidence has anything to say on the subject at all. it doesn't. you have absolutely NO evidence that there is no God. how could you? you have no evidence, as the
@Skater4life567 I don't need evidence for the non-existence of something, the existence of which has no supporting evidence in the first place. That's just nonsense. Such a claim can be dismissed on precisely the same merits as it's presented. None. Please understand that scripture does nothing to help you here. If you can't make the case, some babbling tribal goatherd isn't going to get the job done for you so don't quote scripture at me. It's just noise.
@dj2baduk scriptures say "and now what evidence have ye that there is no God, or that Christ cometh not? i say unto you that ye have none, save it be your word only. But, behold, i have all things as a testimony that these things are true; and ye also have all things as a testimony unto you that they are true; and will ye deny them?" your absolutely right that what educated people say about the existence of God doesn't matter, because it is strictly their opinion. you don't need to
@Skater4life567 if some guy I don't know said "What evidence do you have that there's no god? Everything's my evidence that there is and it's your evidence too. How can you deny that?" I'd say - deny what? You haven't said anything of substance you babbling moron. What is it here that you think strengthens your point? Because it's in spooky medieval sounding language? Have you even thought about what the guy was saying? A lot of words to say nothing.
@dj2baduk rely on their opinions. you can experience it for yourself. if i were really making this all up, or if Christianity were really false, do you think it would ever challenge you to find out for yourself personally? that it would make a claim like: you can learn about these things, pray and receive revelation from God himself that these things are true. THAT is a huge claim. and i personally, along with millions of others, know that the promise is true.
@Skater4life567 ah I see - I can experience it for myself if I can just abandon my faculties of reason that are demonstrably a good thing and have held me in good stead thus far, convince myself that experience trumps science in terms of what is true or real when in reality it is precisely the reverse and believe what I cannot based on what I already know. Why didn't you just say so - where do I sign up?
to reveal to every single person who diligently seeks and asks to know the truth. And that truth comes by revelation to the individual, so that he knows it. just as science has answers to its theories, if you have questions like "why do we need a god?" "why is there suffering in the world?" etc. there are answers. Don't just assume you are the only person to have ever asked such a simple question. I promise you have never asked a question a religious person hasn't already found an answer to.
@Skater4life567 no truth comes from revelation. A personal, subjective experience comes from "revelation". These take many forms and happen in the minds of individuals throughout the world, even those who categorically reject the idea of Yahweh or Jesus christ. Contrary to what you say, this does nothing to support your claim that christianity is true. If christianity is true and all other faiths wrong, everyone would have the exact same "revelation".
But that is exactly what religion teaches too. Any man or woman, regardless of social or political status and position, can know for themselves of the existence of a loving Father in heaven. The promise of Christianity, made by Jesus Christ himself is "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: for every one that asketh recieveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened." (Matt. 7:7-8) God promises
@Skater4life567 yes - ask and it shall be given you as long as you're not too specific. Seek and ye shall find as long you're not too fussy. Knock and it shall be opened as long you're loose with your definitions. People can have numinous experiences and assume they are attributable to what they believe. That is not knowing. That is faith and we have a good understanding of what happens in the brain that explains this. Pesky old science again. Stop quoting scripture.
And I know he is lying because I've never seen those places.
I'm emphasizing this because I want you to see that there is no difference between a person who says that he has seen Ghana and that Ghana therefore exists and a prophet of God who has seen and communed with God and says that therefore God exists. There is absolutely no difference between these two people. You might say "well it's different because you can go to Ghana any time you want and see Ghana for yourself."
@Skater4life567 There is a world of difference. Someone claiming to have communed with god is making an extraordinary claim. People making exactly these claims today are assumed to be suffering from some form of mental illness, because it's so extraordinary and doesn't accord with reality. I can ACTUALLY go to Ghana. It's not some intangible place that I have to believe in before I can go there metaphysically. It's exactly the same for everyone - because it's objectively REAL, not subjective.
I haven't seen Iceland, and I haven't seen Ghana. Those countries DO NOT EXIST. I don't care that national geographic has created a whole subculture for these fictitious places. I know they don't exist because I HAVEN'T BEEN THERE. If I haven't been to Ghana it means it isn't there. I know there are thousands of people who claim to have been there but I know the truth-they are all a bunch of ignorant fools whose eyes deceive them. My good friend who says he is from Iceland? He is a liar.
@Skater4life567 There is nothing extraordinary about Ghana. As such, I'm less inclined to be sceptical when people tell me it exists as a country. That said, I can look at satellite images, read about people's travels there, access court and legal documents, see that it is an airport destination, read testimony from thousands of people who claim to live and/or work there. No doubt in 2-2.5 thousand years the evidence would be more scant, but it's not an extraordinary claim (Ghana exists) ...
@Skater4life567 ... so I'm unconcerned about how little evidence there is so long as it forms a consistent picture from multiple independent sources. Compare that with the claim that the god of the bible exists. This IS an extraordinary claim. He's said to be all knowing, all powerful, creator of the heavens and the earth etc. OK then - where's the extraordinary evidence? In fact where's the mediocre evidence? It turns out the most extraordinary claim ever made has the least supporting evidence.
@dj2baduk i must not have explained this point well enough. just like you said about Ghana, one can read the testimonies of thousands of people who have been there, and one can even go there if one so desires. that is exactly what Christianity offers every single person on the planet. we have the written accounts of dozens of prophets and witnesses that God is real. there are millions of people, living and dead, who claim to have experienced for themselves answers to prayer
@Skater4life567 your version of "explained well enough" seems to mean "used enough words". I can assure you you have. More than enough. There are dozens more prophets who believed in another messiah, another god etc. I put no more stock in their "testimony". There are a million different versions of what constitutes an answered prayer. The best are extraordinary coincidence, the worst so vague as to be laughable. Never once a limb grown back or anything tangible mind you.
@dj2baduk and the existence of God (myself included). but that isn't all. Christianity asks every single person to find out for THEMSELVES. to test it, so to speak. try it out. if it doesn't work, what have you got to lose? you CAN go experience it for yourself, just like you can go to Ghana if you want to. so don't do around saying Ghana (or God) doesn't exist just because you haven't experienced it for yourself. the existence of God and Ghana doesn't rest on the belief of anyone.
@Skater4life567 you say "try it for yourself". Try what exactly? I can't choose to believe what is self contradictory and unbelievable. We can't choose what we believe full stop. We expose ourselves to information and what we believe is formed by our weighing up of that information. There's no conscious decision to believe one proposition and reject another. Just try it. Try believing something you don't currently believe. You can profess it, but you cannot choose to believe it.
@dj2baduk if God exists, you can know that for yourself independent of others. you just have to ask. but if your not willing to try the experiment, then you can't really say one way or the other if God exists or not. where is the evidence? its all around you my friend; you have just chosen to see it differently. its just like those pictures that show different images depending on how you look at them. you look at science and say "see, there is no need for God." i look at science
@Skater4life567 you keep referring to this subjective faith experience as though it were a virtue or indicative of some truth not susceptible to scientific scrutiny. It is neither. It is your imperfect mammalian brain forming connections between a subjective personal experience and a belief in a particular notion, where no connection can actually be shown to exist. The fact that people of entirely different, contradictory faiths and of no faith at all have similar experiences attests to this.
@dj2baduk as a testimony that there is a God, and him as the ultimate scientist who knows it better than any being in existence. i agree with you that the existence of God is a huge claim. as such, it's not just showing you the evidence, Christianity challenges you, dj2babuk, to know God personally and not rely solely on evidence. that's what prayer is for.
@Skater4life567 ooh a challenge to me personally - that ought to swing it. Well the problem for you once again is I've already taken this challenge and your faith is as bogus and unfounded as any other. The books of the bible are self evidently the product of the people, time and culture at their source. There's no hint of advanced knowledge or wisdom of any kind. Read the bible in this light and the need for all the apologetics and logical gymnastics evaporates before your eyes. That simple.
@dj2baduk in the end of things, i know what i have experienced. you can try and frustratingly tell me all the reasons why science says i can't have those experiences, but your completely forgetting the reason i commented here in the first place-that science cant make those kinds of claims. i'm not trying to upset you when i've made any of these comments, so i'm sorry if they have. but my initial point is that you can't criticize the people commenting on here who believe in God by
@Skater4life567 you misunderstand. Your experiences are real. Subjective, but real. It's what you take them to mean that's clearly in question. People meditate for all kinds of reasons. Many find a kind of peace and have an epiphany. Some attribute this to the mystical claims of buddhism or some such but regardless of what they believe, they have very similar experiences. This says that the brain is altered, nothing more. We then layer meaning on top of that.
@dj2baduk saying they have in some way dismissed scientific evidence and gone against what we "know" to be true. you're pointing the finger like religious people are closed minded when in reality they have merely opened their minds. if you were only two dimensional, and had never seen a third dimension, i'm sure trying to wrap your brain around one would be a bit painful. it's not because it doesn't exist, it's just your lack of experience. and it would be difficult for me to describe
@Skater4life567 reaching a conclusion that affirms your religious beliefs based on some numinous experience is the fallacy here. For example, what form did your revelation take? What's an example of an answered prayer for you? Is it really that hard to explain or are you afraid that making it public will hold it up to scrutiny and shatter your perception of what these things mean? Remember, the truth is never ugly, but it is sometimes scary.
@dj2baduk it to you. you would need to do that for yourself. God either exists or he doesn't. I have experienced that he does. have you ever experienced that he does not? no. that is what is meant by that scripture i shared (FYI you have actually no idea the context of that story, so you actually can't say whether or not it makes sense. don't worry, it does :) anyway, if you don't wish you continue that is fine, this whole conversation started from your response to my comments which
@Skater4life567 well that's why I'm asking you what you've experienced. Have you really experienced that god exists - specifically the god of the bible? Or have you had a numinous experience that, if had by a muslim would mean allah exists and that Mohammed was his prophet? In other words, is your conclusion justified based solely on your experience or are you, if you ask yourself honestly, injecting a layer of meaning that's not self evident?
@dj2baduk were merely meant to remind you that you can't start saying that religious people are throwing out the evidence of science and choosing to put on a blind-fold and believe in God anyway. this is not the case. plenty of religious people understand science. it has nothing to do with science. don't forget what the scientific method is. oh and for a complete explanation as to why faith is a virtue and to get the other answers to the other objections you have posed read Mere
@Skater4life567 science isn't all about evidence and this isn't all about science. It's about a way of approaching truth claims. A way of thinking. Treating unjustified beliefs and conclusions as any kind of virtue is inherently dangerous to the betterment of our species. If you feel disrespected then consider this; I respect you enough to be honest with you, speak to you like an adult and not sugar coat my words. It would be disrespectful to lie to you by pretending to respect your beliefs.
@dj2baduk Christianity by CS Lewis. I know i quote him a lot, but it is merely because he was an atheist most of his life (he gives quite a bit of his logical reasoning for being an atheist in his literature--and then why he came to realize that those ideas were illogical). and don't degrade the spiritual experiences of others. if i were to call you a mindless fool who can't count to ten or tie his shoes i'm sure you would take offense. while i've taken no offense to the repeated
@Skater4life567 again - I'm not degrading the "spiritual" experiences of anyone. I'm pointing out the fallacy of linking these experiences to your religious beliefs as though they were one and the same. If I were behaving like a mindless fool, demonstrably unable to count to ten or tie my shoes, you'd show me the greatest respect by pointing this out like an adult. If that offends me, then too bad for me. The truth is the truth and lying is the worst form of disrespect.
@dj2baduk degrading labels you have put on me, that doesn't happen with everyone. i believe one day you and i will see eye to eye and understand the missing links between religion and science--probably not in this life though. i have only one more thought for this post and ill be done. i find it interesting that scriptures make you annoyed/angry. usually if i hear something i "know to be wrong" like a math mistake i don't get mad at the individual who made the error and i don't get
@Skater4life567 I am putting no labels on you, but neither am I required to fain respect for beliefs that I find frankly ridiculous. Scriptures themselves don't annoy me, it's the way their thrown around as if that in itself lent anything to the discussion. Some unknown author 2000+ years ago agreed with you - so fucking what!? It adds nothing to the discussion so why do it? "This bible verse said people would disbelieve!!". Wow - I wonder why.You'd get more respect by not doing it is all.
@dj2baduk mad at the math either. likewise when i hear something i don't believe in (for example if i read the bhagavad gita) i'm intrigued by it, not upset by it. the only reason i could reckon someone would get mad is if they want to be right so badly that it makes them mad when others disagree (you could say "its just because your so thick headed it makes me frustrated", but that doesn't stand create the sort of feelings were talking about here). if the scriptures interesting.
@Skater4life567 I've read the bible. It didn't make me at all mad, though it did occasionally amuse me. What makes me mad is the way people revere certain passages with awe, when, if you put them in plain English, they often say either the most obvious, plain, or absurd things. There are some passages truly worth quoting in the context of a particular discussion, but first think; "does this add any value to the discussion?". If not, leave it out. It's not an argument in itself.
@dj2baduk oops. i meant "the scriptures are interesting" because they have that effect on people. i hated listening to scriptures when i wasn't doing the right things. now i love them. well, take care.
the way one might study for a PhD (over an extended period of time, living the principles, and studying daily), ought not comment on something which they are ignorant to. A physician would feel offended (or probably just amused) if a child started telling him about medicine; so an experienced Christian when an ignorant individual tries explaining something which he so clearly doesn't understand.
just because you haven't seen something yourself doesn't mean no one else has.
just because you can't test something doesn't mean it isn't true, it only means you aren't very clever.
One of my favorite authors Christian authors, CS Lewis, wrote in his world famous work "Mere Christianity" than "if you cannot understand books written for grown ups, you should not talk about them." The maker of this video, while taunting Christians for an ostensible ignorance, showed a remarkable amount of his own ignorance to religion. Those who haven't actually studied religion
@Skater4life567 where exactly did this video author show "a remarkable amount of his own ignorance to religion"? He ridiculed the idiotic arguments made by people claiming to be "experienced christians" and those arguments weren't metaphysical or even scriptural in nature. I hate to break it to you, but there are a lot of idiots in the world and some of them also happen to be christian. I don't need a PhD in the unknowable to criticise patently dumb arguments or statements.
take for example the discovery of X-rays. a few centuries ago a group of scientists argued that a kind of light exist that could pass through walls, but that it could not be seen. at the time there was absolutely no way of testing this hypothesis. the X-rays are invisible and there was no way of detecting them. by definition, X-rays were not scientific. X-rays were not one iota more scientifically founded that the existence of God, because no experiment existed to prove one way or the other.
science, therefore, by DEFINITION is forced to be silent on the subject. science cant say one way or the other. and neither can a scientist. the opinion of a scientist as to the existence of god is no more or less valid than your local high school janitor! what more "evidence" could a scientist possibly possess as to the existence of deity than the janitor? none, according to the very definition of science.
it is worth noting that just because something isn't science doesn't mean it isn't true
religion falls under a category called metaphysics. that word means "above" physics or beyond it. it means that religion, by definition of the very word, cannot be described using science. because religion is metaphysical. science is limited to that which it can test. if a hypothesis is not testable, it is not science, and therefore science can say nothing as to its truthfulness. and it doesn't even attempt to. there is absolutely no hypothesis that can be tested for the existence of God.
been relatively convinced of the science of his/her time. my biology professor once laughed at the theories of scientists 500 years ago on their theories of the origins of life (that it spontaneously occurs), when in reality, scientists in 500 years will probably do the same thing with the scientists of our day. understand this about the nature of science: it is an explanation made by mortal man that hasn't been proven false yet.
Now i'd like to explain to you the nature of religion.
a hypothesis, by very definition, CANNOT be proven right. by DEFINITION. a hypothesis can ONLY be proven false. so any experiment is designed to prove that hypothesis false. if it takes a long time before anyone can prove it false it becomes what is known as a scientific theory, meaning that despite the efforts of many, it hasn't been proven false; yet. the reason for this is that humans are so often wrong, especially when they are convinced they are correct. every scientist of every age has
Here is your problem and the problem of the other people on here promoting these theories as an argument against the existence of God. you do not understand the nature of science or religion.
lets go back to the very basics of science; what you should have learned day one of any science class you have ever taken: the scientific method.
I wont discuss this in its entirety, even though many parts of it support the following point of view. lets just look at what a hypothesis means.
@Skater4life567 and here are your problems: First; this isn't an argument against god. It's an outline of various hypotheses covering the different stages of the development of life from non-living material. Secondly; a hypothesis can't be proven "right" that's true. What science deals with is probabilities and when the probability of a hypothesis being an accurate description of reality reaches a certain point through repeat testing etc. it is promoted to a theory. The theory can still be...
@Skater4life567 ... overturned with the discovery of new strong data, but generally they are modified or refined in light of new data, becoming every more likely to be an accurate description of reality. There is a point when a theory has so much supporting data and such strong predictive power that it is simply perverse to deny it. It may still be refined or have exceptions, but in a given framework, we can say, in practical terms, the theory is "right". This is not the case with abiogenesis...
@Skater4life567 - as of now, abiogenesis constitutes a weak theory. We can test the various stages for possibility and probability under a given set of circumstances, but we may never be able to say with high probability that it is "right". However, in the absence of more plausible explanations, even weak theories can constitute the best theory we have. Thirdly; science itself has evolved over time. The very nature of science now is such that weak theories/hypotheses are less likely to survive..
@Skater4life567 ... and strong theories less and less likely to be completely overturned. Not so with the "science" of 500 years ago. Fourthly; as you admit, metaphysics cannot be described or tested in scientific terms. Paraphrasing Kant;"Experience without reason is blind. Reason without experience is mere intellectual play." If science can't say anything meaningful about metaphysics, then neither can anyone else. The point is; you can make any metaphysical claim you like, without any ...
@Skater4life567 ... justification and you have to accept that it can therefore be dismissed out of hand with exactly the same justification. Metaphysics has zero predictive power and 100% assumption. It's as useful to human endeavors as a chocolate fire-guard. Fifthly; many of the claims of religion trespass directly into the realm of testable science. Take the creation myths or the efficacy of prayer for example. Both ideas have shriveled and died under the light of science. We now know with...
@Skater4life567 ... such a high degree of certainty that denial is simply perverse, that we are evolved creatures who share a common ancestor with other evolved creatures. We know due to experimentation (designed to prove that prayer DID work) that prayer is ineffective. Add these to the various other claims made by religion such as the source of earthquakes, the source of disease etc. all of which are long proven to be false - metaphysics is the last hiding place of religion. Sixthly; ...
@dj2baduk i laughed out loud when you said there is "scientific evidence" that prayer doesn't work. such an idea is hardly testable since prayer isn't as straight forward as giving God a "to-do" list and seeing if he does it or not. one of the former presidents of BYU told of inviting the president of the united states to come speak at the university but they had all these time restrictions and things they wanted him to speak on. they realized, however, that if your inviting the
@Skater4life567 so how exactly is prayer any different from just getting lucky some of the time? An answered prayer - that is the intervention, by god, in the real lives of people - would look different from pure chance how exactly? I'll make it easy for you: the reason prayer doesn't stand up to scrutiny is not "mysterious ways", or "in his own sweet time". It doesn't stand up to scrutiny because it's ineffective. No interpretation or logical gymnastics necessary.
@dj2baduk prayer is exactly different from getting lucky in so many ways its not even funny. of course, you have to actually try it in order to really understand what i'm talking about. it's extremely difficult for me to explain to you my own experiences with prayer because words fail to express the idea. that's not because i'm making it up, it's just that words really don't express it. for example, please explain to me what salt tastes like without using the word "salt.".....
@Skater4life567 I see so prayer is different from getting lucky in lots of ways, just none that are susceptible to any kind of scrutiny. Here's your problem: There are myriad faiths around the world that believe myriad things of myriad gods. The indescribable thing you're alluding to is a numinous experience. It's variously attributed to everything from Shiva to LSD. That should raise a flag. While the experience is real, it clearly says nothing of the reality of what it's attributed to.
@dj2baduk you could read a million books about what salt tastes like, but until you try it, you have no idea. it's the same with prayer. while prayer may be sometimes used to ask God to somehow alter something that is amiss in your life, that isn't the real core or purpose of prayer. the LDS bible dictionary says: "as soon as we learn the true relationship in which we stand toward God (namely, God is our Father, and we are his children) then at once prayer becomes natural and
@Skater4life567 the exact same thing is true of meditation, of certain brain altering chemicals and of prayer to other gods. So how does it help your case? If an answered prayer is just "it makes me feel good" or "it helped me look at things in a different light" then there's nothing to argue. The specific point of the prayer experiment was to show that prayer could positively affect the physical outcome for patients with heart problems - that it has a real world effect. Guess what - it doesn't.
@dj2baduk instinctive on our part (Matt. 7:7-11). many of the so-called difficulties about prayer arise from forgetting this relationship. prayer is the act by which the will of the Father and the will of the child are brought into correspondence with each other. the object of prayer is not to change the will of God, but to secure for ourselves and for others blessings that God is already willing to grant, but that are made conditional on our asking for them. blessings require some
@dj2baduk work or effort on our part before we can obtain them. prayer is a form of work, and is an appointed means for obtaining the highest of all blessings." this last sentence refers quite obviously to the christian idea that man can be forgiven of his sins. THAT is why you pray. it is to be uplifted. to grow and become the kinds of beings God is trying to make you into. it is counseling with God and receiving personal revelation from him for yourself, and those around you.
@dj2baduk the last part of this says "Christians are taught to pray in Christ's name. we pray in Christ's name when our mind is the mind of Christ, and our wishes the wishes of Christ--when his words abide in us. we then ask for things it is possible for God to grant. many prayers remain unanswered because they are not in Christ's name at all; they in no way represent his mind, but spring out of the selfishness of man's heart." so you can't start praying to win the lottery.
@dj2baduk highest power in the nation to come speak at your school you can't give him stipulations. you need to say, in effect "we will cater to your time and you can speak about whatever you wish." he then made the comment to the effect that if we are approaching the highest power and authority in the universe we would be fools to limit the way he is allowed to answer our petitions within our time frames. as for the creation "myths" as you put it, is not what you think it is either.
@dj2baduk your probably referring to the verses that God made the world in six days. just look up what the real translation of the Hebrew (the original language of the old testament) word "day" is in this context, and you will note that it isn't 24 hours long. or even 1,000 years long. it is simply a period of time. how long is not defined. why do you need to study religion? well, for one thing, too often people think they understand a topic when they have heard a thing or two on it
@Skater4life567 you can make a "day" mean as long as you want, it won't do anything to make the genesis accounts of creation more than an adaptation of earlier myths. The events, their causes, their chronological order etc. - all demonstrably, actually incorrect. Any attempt to mould these accounts into something more than myth has utterly failed. Why? Because they commit the grave error of trespassing into the realm of the real, the testable - science. They're defenseless in that light.
@dj2baduk from a friend perhaps (much like these "uninformed Christians" he is talking about in the videos). the problem arises, especially in regards to religion, that people hear a thing or two, and assume they must know everything on the subject there is to know. I served a full-time two year mission in Finland, and people would always ask me, as though the thought had never, ever occurred to me before: "if God exists, then why does he allow bad things happen to good people?"
@Skater4life567 basing your knowledge of something around "hearing a thing or two" is no worse that basing your knowledge around what you hear from a single biased source. I've no problem with people studying religion. It is however infinitely more honest and fulfilling to study it free from bias, including the presupposition that it's central tenets are true, as in a seminary. "Studying" the metaphysics of religion on the other hand is as fatuous an idea as I've ever come across.
@dj2baduk did i ask you to study it with baises? no. just study IT, not what people say about it. those are completely different things. and FYI, the following is a biased opinion: this stuff is hogwash and not true. you should study it with an open mind, being as magnanimous as possible. and just see what happens. i promise anyone who does that will know it is true. that's exactly what i did. i followed the council of thomas jefferson to "question with boldness". turn over every stone
@Skater4life567 it's amusing how invariably when people come off trying to sound all reasonable while proselytizing they end up guilty of the very thing they accuse others of doing. Here you are making ridiculous assumptions again. I'm 42 years old pal. You seriously think I haven't researched any of this stuff? Seriously!? I've done my research and I've done it without the impediment of presupposition. Try it some time - I mean - REALLY try it.
@dj2baduk and see what is there. if you don't understand something don't just give up. keep looking for answers. I've received answers to every single one of those kinds of questions.
@dj2baduk the problem is people start asking these kinds of questions and never look for the answers because they so foolishly assume there is none. that THEY, as the geniuses they are, came up with a question which no religious person has ever asked themselves before. why do you need to study religion? because you can't know something about a subject until you study it. and while that answer may be mockingly obvious it is, nonetheless, the truth. people who know nothing about religion
@Skater4life567 I don't have a problem with god "allowing" bad things to happen. Simply remove god from the equation and there's no explanation necessary. Of course it is a real problem from you if you're honest. That's not to say you can't use some words and pretend they mean you've answered the problem. If you're prepared to perform olympian feats of logical gymnastics then I'm sure it all makes perfect sense. That's not the same as god actually being logically consistent though.
@dj2baduk actually, the answer makes sound, perfectly logical sense without fallacy. you just did what i said you'd do. you assume there is no good answer because, of course, no one else that is religious has ever REALLY used their brain like you have. these ideas must not actually occur to these religious people, and once they do, oh boy, they will come right off that religious horse of theirs. just read "the problem of pain" by CS Lewis. its a perfect explanation. if you complain
@Skater4life567 actually you're making all the assumptions here. I've heard this question and about every conceivable attempt an an answer a thousand times. People, including Lewis, have clearly put a lot of thought into this - and they have to. In the end they all boil down to some version of "god is good therefore anything god does or allows to happen is good, or our own fault, or his mysterious ways". Yet if something good happens - "a prayer has been answered". That's having it both ways.
@dj2baduk actually, its not having it both ways. to put it very briefly, it is people who ask this question who want it both ways. they say "give me the freedom to choose to do whatever i want. give me free agency. free choice. but put me into a world where there is no starvation, no suffering, no pain." well, i' m sorry, but such a request is pure nonsense. if you really think about it, the plea could be reiterated like this: "God, please give me free agency,
@dj2baduk while simultaneously withholding it." we live in a world full of the choices of other people, and God wants everyone to have the freedom to choose what they will. just like a father of children he wants you and I to make the right decisions, but that doesn't mean he would force you to. as for whether or not you have done research, I didn't say you never had. but there is something very different between researching and doing. just like there is a difference between
@dj2baduk while simultaneously withholding it." we live in a world where everyone gets to make choices. you can't go about complaining that others are making bad decisions and God isn't doing anything about it when you are also allowed to do whatever you wish. there has to be opposition in everything. otherwise everything is a thing of naught. if there were no such thing as pain, there would be no such thing as pleasure. God, just like any good parent, wants his kids to make the
@dj2baduk right decisions, but he doesn't force anyone to it. God neither compels anyone to wickedness, or righteousness. we are "free to act, [and] not just be acted upon." when i say that you should try it, I don't mean it only involves doing research. that is all very good and well, but it will never produce the desired result. you can read books about swimming and even be well versed in the subject, but until you try it, what good is all your study? you can't swim until you get
@dj2baduk into the water. it's the same with Christianity. what good is reading about faith, prayer, repentance, good works, etc. until you actually apply what you are reading? ever met a priest of a church who didn't actually believe in God? I have. was it because there is a problem with the scriptures? absolutely not. the problem is with the individual. prayer really works. my prayers have been clearly answered more times than i can count. i don't need a science experiment to tell
@Skater4life567 I'll answer each of your points when I have more time but I don't want the entirety of the comments on this video populated by a theological discussion, since that's not the subject of the video. Neither do I want to provide you with a platform from which to preach your particular brand of nonsense. You can continue this particular "discussion" in private messages if you wish, but please stop posting your unnecessarily long winded proselytizing comments here.
@dj2baduk me if it works or not, and neither do you. you don't even need me to tell you if it works or not, you can try it yourself. I don't doubt that people who pray to God, whatever they may call him or religion they may be, receive answers to their prayers. I know of plenty of people who aren't Christians in this life and who never even get the chance to be. do you really think if God loves everyone, that he would ignore the prayers of those people just because they call upon him
@dj2baduk by the wrong name? i don't think so. the fact that so many people come into contact with deity is not a threat to my faith. it reinforces it. ha you think I've never been critical of what I believe in? ill ask you a rhetorical question: would you dedicate 2 full years of your life with not a single day off to teach people about God and Jesus Christ in a foreign nation and have to learn arguably the worlds most difficult language, only to be rejected 99% of the time...to do
@dj2baduk all of that and never really question my faith seriously? I can promise you I had no incentive to do so if I didn't actually know that what I was teaching is true (i paid out of pocket to go do that, and never got a penny in return). I know God exists because I know Him. and you can too. I saw tons of people experience the same things. even people who didn't believe in God at all before who could tell you themselves of their own personal experiences. I'm not trying to trick
@dj2baduk you (what on earth would be in that for me?) I'm only telling you the honest truth about what I've experienced. Again I go back to my Ghana analogy. you might say I've never been "there", but that doesn't change the fact that I have experienced what I have experienced; whether we like it or not. It is the same with all the prophets. many have seen and conversed with God face to face. If you disbelieve their testimony, it wouldn't change the reality of their experience.
@dj2baduk identify it as the "opiate of the people." just hearing statements like that tells me a great deal about the person making them (namely that they don't actually know what they are talking about. they're just like parrots, mimicking what they hear other people say about religion).
@Skater4life567 ... something being untestable may not make it untrue, but then you have to ask yourself what good reason you have to suppose that it is true. I'm slightly confused why something being untestable, in your opinion, makes people less clever? Seventhly; the video author ridiculed certain christian arguments because they exist in an information vacuum. Why is it necessary to "study" religion to point out the vacuousness of one's argument on scientific matters?
Believing in god is just a feel good. Thats why you see nothing but emotional responses to these kinds of videos. To any rational logical person, it would be clear that ''god'' has the lowest probability of being the correct answer. But of course, its just not nice to think that. Theists want their security blanket in one hand while they are sucking on their thumb in the other, making their rebuttals incoherent and intellectually lacking. CMON YOU KNOW ITS TRUE.
HOW DID NITROGEN HYDROGEN AND CARBON COME TO BE? Those elements have to come from somewhere? They cant just be formed. Its like this one joke i heard, ill post it on next post...
@TrollNumberOne hydrogen is the simplest of the elements and was formed by the coalelscences of the cooled plasma of the early universe. All other elements, including carbon, were created by stars which were formed by the coalecence of hydrogen. In other words, we know where these elements came from without a single doubt. Of course all you have to do now is say where did the plasma come from - big bang, where did that come from - unknown, but it didn't come from nothing so something always was.
@dj2baduk Ok lets say your right, you just taught me two things I didn't know. And yes i will ask where did the big bang come from? Where did plasma come from? You said "but it didn't come from nothing so something always was", so lets think of it this way, I believe God always was, you believe something always was, now, Isn't it easier to think that a higher being always was, rather than knowing that something unknown started the big bang?
@TrollNumberOne what are you calling god? By most definitions it has sentience, will, intelligence and ability to carry out its will = complexity. The universe we can observe, test and measure requires no intelligence. There is simple stuff and it interacts with other stuff in certain ways. Our entire experience of the universe is that this alone gives rise to complexity, from the ground up, not the other way around. We have no reason to assume complexity ex-nihilo. None.
@TrollNumberOne No. Before we knew there was a big bang, it was said that the universe was created by god. Now we know that the universe had a beginning (big bang), which is all scientific. You want to occupy the remaining gap with your god. Science has proven everything up until the question of before the big bang, and you desperately fit your god in there. Science, some day, AGAIN, will show there was no god involved in the process. Why continue to side with what has the lowest probability??
I guess what im trying to say, and not so well, is that we shouldn't consider anything that God would do would be super natural, when if he is the creator of all things, our perception of his works would be natural. There would be no expedience of his actions, because they would follow the rules we accept as natural.
I never understand why people always think of God as a super natural force, when if he created the universe, it would be built by his natural laws, and thus, would be the natural force at work. we can have both, its your choice as to weather or not to believe in a creator. I believe both in science and God, and claim no true understanding of either.
@cxaiver well at least you admit you don't know, but consider this - if a god created the laws of nature, then what did he use to do that? If he used pre-existing natural substances and laws, then in what way is he a god. That there is technology. A god, by definition, is not bound by natural laws and has no need of technology. Of course, even if one did use technology to create the universe, that poses the obvious question; "where did he and his technology come from?"
This was a very well made video, and I liked the other ones as well. What's good about a forum like Youtube is that it appeals to a bunch of people around the world -- so don't refer to Christians as the sole evolution deniers. In fact, a lot of the world (India and the middle east from my experience) are in denial of evolution: the scary thing is, they are not always the equivalent of rednecks -- even "educated" people will deny it altogether, because they despise anything western.
@9pt9 well genius, until you explain, or even manage to describe god in unambiguous terms, that's no explanation at all. It's a made up answer with no experiencial precedent or testable qualities. Combined with the fact that the known laws of physics and chemistry are enough to explain everything we see, the god hypothesis, as well as being asinine, is entirely unnecessary. Come up with some kind of coherent argument before you start throwing words like "moron" around. People in glasshouses etc.
@9pt9 the video is explaining, in easy to understand terms, the current prevailing theory of how life started. Theories about life origins are still very tentative, yet the video outlines steps which are scientifically plausible, requiring nothing more than the known laws of physics and chemistry. The fact that you think he is claiming he knows how life started shows you didn't even understand the video yet you still somehow feel qualified to call him a moron. Simply astounding. Must try harder
@MBC022 everything we know came to be from a void by virtue of the known and well tested laws of physics, all by itself, without any need for outside intervention. The Universe is causally self contained. It has all the exact same properties as a void. Zero net enrgy etc. We can't say there is NO god. We can say that one isn't necessary in order for there to be something rather than nothing. We can say the god of christianity and islam (and a few other religions) doesn't exist. We can say that.
U must see beyond,the human concepts! nothing about chemical elements is useless,maybe for u,.and i think life,begins,(anywhere in the universe)...when those useless chemicals.(under the right conditions and over time). bound together..or group,and find a way to replicate,that's my idea of the simplest form of life.,and it's very hard for that to happen,not only because of the conditions,but for the chance that those chemical elements, being all together in a place that meet's the conditions
our wonderful planet...our..home..not only was formed at the right place ., in space..it happened to be made of an abundance of essential chemical elements...to make life but also to protect it ( iron core that forms the magnetic field ) and help it evolve in greater complex life forms..that not only replicate ,but developed ways to move, instincts , memory..that led to self awareness... thoughts...etc
@RespectMyHate .. We are truly blessed , I'm certain that there many other places in the universe where we find life..similar..different...stranger.. based on other conditions and chemicals..but are not in our range .. who knows..
@RespectMyHateIt makes me appreciate how lucky we are.. .that our wonderful planet...our..home..not only was formed at the right place ., in space..it happened to be made of an abundance of essential chemical elements...to make life but also to protect it ( iron core that forms the magnetic field ) and help it evolve in greater complex life forms..that not only replicate ,but developed ways to move, instincts , memory..that led to self awareness... thoughts...etc... WoW..
@Vlader07 Yes there is Angelic life in the universe, there are other sinless creatures in the universe far more advance then us That were created by God.
There is a God, He created the universe. I'm currently reading a chemistry book, and I was looking at atoms there is design right down to the atom, from the galaxtic systems to the tiny systems of atoms organization and design. GOD.
@RespectMyHate We are blessed to be alive...conscious... to be the universe's observers...to experience emotions...and if that wasn't good enough...it made it possible for us to ask for what we want as long as we believe in it and think that we deserve it, we get it... ..knowing this doesn't help u apply it though.! it's very hard...because u have to make yourself believe that u will get what u want and the only way to do that is if u think u deserve it...this is only a theory of mine..
@Vlader07 isn't life a double edged sword though? We live and we die. We love and we suffer hurt and loss. We ask and we don't always receive. However deserving we believe we are. We have a consciousness that allows us to evaluate our place in the scheme of things, yet that is also the curse that makes us aware of how small and finite we are. The reality is the same, but I agree that, cursed though we are, hope and optimism are the only way to fully appreciate the time we have.
@dj2baduk we live and we die....of course...that's how it goes...even at a larger scale..but i like to think that....when we die..the energy of our soul.. unites with all the energy in the universe...adding your life experience..your ideas..your mentality to the universe...and about asking and getting it.. if you're asking absurd things or have a little doubt that u get it or don't deserve it...it doesn't...and i told u it's hard for us to apply this...yet
@Vlader07 "the energy of our soul" is exactly the same as any other energy. Without an organ that can organise and utilise it, it behaves exactly the same as any other energy. It has no memory, no experience, no mentality, no ideas. It simply is. Some of the energy powering your "soul" was once powering someone else's, or a star. You have gained nothing from this so there's no reason to assume you will somehow pass anything on. Energy, remember, is the potential for something to do work. S'all
@dj2baduk U see the Energy of the universe as a fuel...and only that...where did it came from...i ask u.. try to find an answer in your head..than ...then ask yourself, what really is the power of consciousness, how come that matter evolved in a state that can have thoughts...and ideas...and self awareness...than ask yourself again how did everything started...from what...
@Vlader07 energy is a much misused term. I only sought to present the basic scientific definition to dispense with the notion of a magical invisible field of some sort. The power of consciousness, as far as anyone has been able to prove, is to inform our attitude to and our interaction with our environment and, to a lesser extent, our own health. Mind over matter experiments have proved fruitless. The idea that everything "started" is a construct of our conscouiness and not necessarily so.
@Vlader07 I don't see how you conclude that the universe is predictable with no possibilities if we are not its "consciousness". What does that even mean? Why does it require a consciousness - isn't that a bit anthropomorphic? Also, the universe is so vast that it doesn't have much of a consciousness if we're it. Even if there are others out there, it's way WAAAY more empty than full. The ultimate outcome of the universe is predictable, we're only making tiny waves along the way.
@Vlader07 To say we are the product of chance and mutations is absurd. All life came from Gods life. And God always had life God isn't in the catagory of things that need creators He is God and He simply always existed, He transends everything and knows everything there is to ever know for all eternity past present and future, He is awesome.
@RespectMyHate I never said there is no God,should we call it that... and there is design...but even so...life still depends on conditions,and please do not personify God...I really don't think it's human, feels or thinks human,. thoughts,and so u don't misunderstand me...by..God...I'm referring to the absolute idea of existence,of the possibilities from witch everything came to a beginning from witch the energy was created...from witch the design of our present visible universe was created.
@RespectMyHate i know that being used to the concepts of the Fairytale story religion, as we grew up with it... u begin to a fear a god that can show revenge on humans for not believing, or for not obeying or because we broke one of the rules :)). but let me tell u something...A god that doesn't aspect us to make mistakes, and wants U to suffer all your life so u can be a good human.that sucks.. ))) and is not real
@Vlader07 you so clearly don't understand the doctrines of Christianity which you are so critical of. When you have heard only rumors about a subject, and perhaps read a page or two about it, doesn't qualify you as an expert. If you have a question like "why does God seem to be angry" or "does God get mad at people who don't believe and does he want revenge?" "does he expect me to never make a mistake and does he want me to suffer?" instead of assuming you know the answer why not
@Vlader07 study the source and get it that way? the answers to your questions are very simple but they take effort on your own part. just like anything in life worth while. and before you try and use the fact that the words "jealous" and "vengeance" appear in the bible, try looking at the real Hebrew definitions of those words and their intended meaning.
@RespectMyHate "To say we are the product of chance and mutations is absurd. All life came from Gods life."
Right there, you're stating that something that we have overwhelming evidence of is untrue, while something we have no evidence for even the existence of except in the minds of humans, is true. Your "god needs no beginning" get out of jail free card is inadequate. It has 0 explanatory power with 100% assumptions.
@suhana3479 you tell me. What if he did? How would we prove or disprove it? I accept the possibility of an intelligent creator of our universe - though it seems the most unlikely of explanations. I do not accept that he/she/it is supernatural. What if we someday create some of the things that can't be made by us (as we have already) - would we then be gods? Then why call him god?
we have to live in one of trillions of multiverses. Because why is our universe so perfect to be able to create something as advanced as the human eye over billions of years of evolution.
@CiniCraft It's certainly possible our universe is part of a multiverse, but it's by no means either certain or essential. You consider the existence of life and the evolution of complex organs and organisms to be significant. Ask yourself - why so? Any universe, whatever the constants that govern its makeup, will have some form of organised complexity, that's just the nature of physics. We tend to assume self awareness is somehow significant but I've yet to hear a good reason why.
because nanomachines capable of solar energy harvesting also with the ability to become better after every generation seems much more amazing to me than the build of the universe.
@CiniCraft I understand, but the key words here are "seems" and "to me". The observer here is a product of the observed process. A product of the Sun's energy first, a consumer thereof second. We view life as significant (and I'm no exception) because we view ourselves as significant, yet at it's most basic level, it is pure chemistry fuelled by a nearby energy source - also chemistry. The same chemistry, fuelled by the same energy source, that guarantees all organic life is mutable & finite.
@CiniCraft ...I can't give u a reason why self awareness is significant....I can give u something to think though , Matter has thoughts ....and self awareness...that is something...not significant u say?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Explain the SHROUD. THe problem with atheists are that they have never been loved. If you beleive in God and follow him, you will live a better moral life, and you should be happy. See when I die people will say i was loving caring, and when you die people will be like "ya hes a ass" I feel there is a good, where did the big bang come from, hell we dont even know if it was real. If thats possible then fiction is possible. Plus parralel dimmensions and worm holes extend this...
The SHROUD needs no further explanation. A tip for you; the minute you start a statement with "the problem with atheists" everyone knows the next sentence is going to be astoundingly dumb. Atheism describes ONLY a person's attitude toward the concept of god. Nothing else. There are all manner of atheists, as there are theists and deists. The rest is baseless speculation. Your assertion that theists are more moral is demonstrably wrong. Just look at crime statistics by population belief. [sigh]
Wow, you really are ignorant of what you are talking about. How can you speak for all atheist. I am married and have a daughter and a very good marriage. My marriage improved once I dumped christianity and we are very happy. Plus the big bang theory is a fact, the universe is expanding. Just because you do not understand something does not mean it is stupid.
well, kindly explain to me why the most dysfunctional societies are the most religious ones all throughout the world, and the healthiest societies with the highest educational standarts are without exception also those with the greatest numbers of non-believers... shouldn't it be the other way round if you were even remotely close to being right?
....it's because those societies have a very limited mentality...limited by their religious beliefs foolish fairytale... religion is fundamental to our lives and society...but we humans are evolving... and a limited religion is a tree in the middle of the road..for evolution.. people often use the term of non believers for those of us that do not accept the simpleminded and unreal-ism of all religions. we see the great divine as it is ..or it seems to be.We are the true believers!
So what answer did you get? E.g. Is bacteria alive? Is a virus alive?
Potholer's video is simply showing the current hypothesis for how very primitive life could arise under early earth conditions. Remember, evolution happens - that's proven beyond doubt. We only have to get non-living material to a stage where evolution can take over to have a workable hypothesis. Science can only prove this is possible, not that it happened of course.
@dj2baduk i admit that i never read the article, just assumed that my astronomy professor at the University of Utah was a credible source. look it up.
Skater4life567 3 days ago
Comment removed
Skater4life567 3 days ago
Comment removed
Skater4life567 3 days ago
PS also don't allow yourself to so foolishly believe that all scientists are atheists or non-theistic. that is not true. It seems that it is a more recent development, since most of the most influential scientists in history have been religious (for example Charles Darwin, or Georges Lemaître, who created the big bang theory, to name a few))
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 what people who happen to be scientists do or don't believe about metaphysical matters is irrelevant. What matters is whether metaphysical claims are true or not. I personally find nothing to convince me they are anything more than the ramblings of man trying to make sense of the world and the grand scheme of things in a time before science, but this video isn't about that and your extensive comments are entirely misdirected as well as misguided.
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
@dj2baduk i commented thus extensively because i read many of your previous comments in reply to other people who defended their belief in God. many of your responses included statements to the effect that there just isn't enough evidence supporting whether or not God exists. the problem is, your thinking that scientific evidence has anything to say on the subject at all. it doesn't. you have absolutely NO evidence that there is no God. how could you? you have no evidence, as the
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 I don't need evidence for the non-existence of something, the existence of which has no supporting evidence in the first place. That's just nonsense. Such a claim can be dismissed on precisely the same merits as it's presented. None. Please understand that scripture does nothing to help you here. If you can't make the case, some babbling tribal goatherd isn't going to get the job done for you so don't quote scripture at me. It's just noise.
dj2baduk 4 days ago
@dj2baduk scriptures say "and now what evidence have ye that there is no God, or that Christ cometh not? i say unto you that ye have none, save it be your word only. But, behold, i have all things as a testimony that these things are true; and ye also have all things as a testimony unto you that they are true; and will ye deny them?" your absolutely right that what educated people say about the existence of God doesn't matter, because it is strictly their opinion. you don't need to
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 if some guy I don't know said "What evidence do you have that there's no god? Everything's my evidence that there is and it's your evidence too. How can you deny that?" I'd say - deny what? You haven't said anything of substance you babbling moron. What is it here that you think strengthens your point? Because it's in spooky medieval sounding language? Have you even thought about what the guy was saying? A lot of words to say nothing.
dj2baduk 4 days ago
@dj2baduk rely on their opinions. you can experience it for yourself. if i were really making this all up, or if Christianity were really false, do you think it would ever challenge you to find out for yourself personally? that it would make a claim like: you can learn about these things, pray and receive revelation from God himself that these things are true. THAT is a huge claim. and i personally, along with millions of others, know that the promise is true.
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 ah I see - I can experience it for myself if I can just abandon my faculties of reason that are demonstrably a good thing and have held me in good stead thus far, convince myself that experience trumps science in terms of what is true or real when in reality it is precisely the reverse and believe what I cannot based on what I already know. Why didn't you just say so - where do I sign up?
dj2baduk 3 days ago
to reveal to every single person who diligently seeks and asks to know the truth. And that truth comes by revelation to the individual, so that he knows it. just as science has answers to its theories, if you have questions like "why do we need a god?" "why is there suffering in the world?" etc. there are answers. Don't just assume you are the only person to have ever asked such a simple question. I promise you have never asked a question a religious person hasn't already found an answer to.
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 no truth comes from revelation. A personal, subjective experience comes from "revelation". These take many forms and happen in the minds of individuals throughout the world, even those who categorically reject the idea of Yahweh or Jesus christ. Contrary to what you say, this does nothing to support your claim that christianity is true. If christianity is true and all other faiths wrong, everyone would have the exact same "revelation".
dj2baduk 3 days ago
But that is exactly what religion teaches too. Any man or woman, regardless of social or political status and position, can know for themselves of the existence of a loving Father in heaven. The promise of Christianity, made by Jesus Christ himself is "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: for every one that asketh recieveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened." (Matt. 7:7-8) God promises
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 yes - ask and it shall be given you as long as you're not too specific. Seek and ye shall find as long you're not too fussy. Knock and it shall be opened as long you're loose with your definitions. People can have numinous experiences and assume they are attributable to what they believe. That is not knowing. That is faith and we have a good understanding of what happens in the brain that explains this. Pesky old science again. Stop quoting scripture.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
And I know he is lying because I've never seen those places.
I'm emphasizing this because I want you to see that there is no difference between a person who says that he has seen Ghana and that Ghana therefore exists and a prophet of God who has seen and communed with God and says that therefore God exists. There is absolutely no difference between these two people. You might say "well it's different because you can go to Ghana any time you want and see Ghana for yourself."
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 There is a world of difference. Someone claiming to have communed with god is making an extraordinary claim. People making exactly these claims today are assumed to be suffering from some form of mental illness, because it's so extraordinary and doesn't accord with reality. I can ACTUALLY go to Ghana. It's not some intangible place that I have to believe in before I can go there metaphysically. It's exactly the same for everyone - because it's objectively REAL, not subjective.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
I haven't seen Iceland, and I haven't seen Ghana. Those countries DO NOT EXIST. I don't care that national geographic has created a whole subculture for these fictitious places. I know they don't exist because I HAVEN'T BEEN THERE. If I haven't been to Ghana it means it isn't there. I know there are thousands of people who claim to have been there but I know the truth-they are all a bunch of ignorant fools whose eyes deceive them. My good friend who says he is from Iceland? He is a liar.
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 There is nothing extraordinary about Ghana. As such, I'm less inclined to be sceptical when people tell me it exists as a country. That said, I can look at satellite images, read about people's travels there, access court and legal documents, see that it is an airport destination, read testimony from thousands of people who claim to live and/or work there. No doubt in 2-2.5 thousand years the evidence would be more scant, but it's not an extraordinary claim (Ghana exists) ...
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 ... so I'm unconcerned about how little evidence there is so long as it forms a consistent picture from multiple independent sources. Compare that with the claim that the god of the bible exists. This IS an extraordinary claim. He's said to be all knowing, all powerful, creator of the heavens and the earth etc. OK then - where's the extraordinary evidence? In fact where's the mediocre evidence? It turns out the most extraordinary claim ever made has the least supporting evidence.
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
@dj2baduk i must not have explained this point well enough. just like you said about Ghana, one can read the testimonies of thousands of people who have been there, and one can even go there if one so desires. that is exactly what Christianity offers every single person on the planet. we have the written accounts of dozens of prophets and witnesses that God is real. there are millions of people, living and dead, who claim to have experienced for themselves answers to prayer
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 your version of "explained well enough" seems to mean "used enough words". I can assure you you have. More than enough. There are dozens more prophets who believed in another messiah, another god etc. I put no more stock in their "testimony". There are a million different versions of what constitutes an answered prayer. The best are extraordinary coincidence, the worst so vague as to be laughable. Never once a limb grown back or anything tangible mind you.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk and the existence of God (myself included). but that isn't all. Christianity asks every single person to find out for THEMSELVES. to test it, so to speak. try it out. if it doesn't work, what have you got to lose? you CAN go experience it for yourself, just like you can go to Ghana if you want to. so don't do around saying Ghana (or God) doesn't exist just because you haven't experienced it for yourself. the existence of God and Ghana doesn't rest on the belief of anyone.
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 you say "try it for yourself". Try what exactly? I can't choose to believe what is self contradictory and unbelievable. We can't choose what we believe full stop. We expose ourselves to information and what we believe is formed by our weighing up of that information. There's no conscious decision to believe one proposition and reject another. Just try it. Try believing something you don't currently believe. You can profess it, but you cannot choose to believe it.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk if God exists, you can know that for yourself independent of others. you just have to ask. but if your not willing to try the experiment, then you can't really say one way or the other if God exists or not. where is the evidence? its all around you my friend; you have just chosen to see it differently. its just like those pictures that show different images depending on how you look at them. you look at science and say "see, there is no need for God." i look at science
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 you keep referring to this subjective faith experience as though it were a virtue or indicative of some truth not susceptible to scientific scrutiny. It is neither. It is your imperfect mammalian brain forming connections between a subjective personal experience and a belief in a particular notion, where no connection can actually be shown to exist. The fact that people of entirely different, contradictory faiths and of no faith at all have similar experiences attests to this.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk as a testimony that there is a God, and him as the ultimate scientist who knows it better than any being in existence. i agree with you that the existence of God is a huge claim. as such, it's not just showing you the evidence, Christianity challenges you, dj2babuk, to know God personally and not rely solely on evidence. that's what prayer is for.
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 ooh a challenge to me personally - that ought to swing it. Well the problem for you once again is I've already taken this challenge and your faith is as bogus and unfounded as any other. The books of the bible are self evidently the product of the people, time and culture at their source. There's no hint of advanced knowledge or wisdom of any kind. Read the bible in this light and the need for all the apologetics and logical gymnastics evaporates before your eyes. That simple.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk in the end of things, i know what i have experienced. you can try and frustratingly tell me all the reasons why science says i can't have those experiences, but your completely forgetting the reason i commented here in the first place-that science cant make those kinds of claims. i'm not trying to upset you when i've made any of these comments, so i'm sorry if they have. but my initial point is that you can't criticize the people commenting on here who believe in God by
Skater4life567 3 days ago
@Skater4life567 you misunderstand. Your experiences are real. Subjective, but real. It's what you take them to mean that's clearly in question. People meditate for all kinds of reasons. Many find a kind of peace and have an epiphany. Some attribute this to the mystical claims of buddhism or some such but regardless of what they believe, they have very similar experiences. This says that the brain is altered, nothing more. We then layer meaning on top of that.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk saying they have in some way dismissed scientific evidence and gone against what we "know" to be true. you're pointing the finger like religious people are closed minded when in reality they have merely opened their minds. if you were only two dimensional, and had never seen a third dimension, i'm sure trying to wrap your brain around one would be a bit painful. it's not because it doesn't exist, it's just your lack of experience. and it would be difficult for me to describe
Skater4life567 3 days ago
@Skater4life567 reaching a conclusion that affirms your religious beliefs based on some numinous experience is the fallacy here. For example, what form did your revelation take? What's an example of an answered prayer for you? Is it really that hard to explain or are you afraid that making it public will hold it up to scrutiny and shatter your perception of what these things mean? Remember, the truth is never ugly, but it is sometimes scary.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk it to you. you would need to do that for yourself. God either exists or he doesn't. I have experienced that he does. have you ever experienced that he does not? no. that is what is meant by that scripture i shared (FYI you have actually no idea the context of that story, so you actually can't say whether or not it makes sense. don't worry, it does :) anyway, if you don't wish you continue that is fine, this whole conversation started from your response to my comments which
Skater4life567 3 days ago
@Skater4life567 well that's why I'm asking you what you've experienced. Have you really experienced that god exists - specifically the god of the bible? Or have you had a numinous experience that, if had by a muslim would mean allah exists and that Mohammed was his prophet? In other words, is your conclusion justified based solely on your experience or are you, if you ask yourself honestly, injecting a layer of meaning that's not self evident?
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk were merely meant to remind you that you can't start saying that religious people are throwing out the evidence of science and choosing to put on a blind-fold and believe in God anyway. this is not the case. plenty of religious people understand science. it has nothing to do with science. don't forget what the scientific method is. oh and for a complete explanation as to why faith is a virtue and to get the other answers to the other objections you have posed read Mere
Skater4life567 3 days ago
@Skater4life567 science isn't all about evidence and this isn't all about science. It's about a way of approaching truth claims. A way of thinking. Treating unjustified beliefs and conclusions as any kind of virtue is inherently dangerous to the betterment of our species. If you feel disrespected then consider this; I respect you enough to be honest with you, speak to you like an adult and not sugar coat my words. It would be disrespectful to lie to you by pretending to respect your beliefs.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk Christianity by CS Lewis. I know i quote him a lot, but it is merely because he was an atheist most of his life (he gives quite a bit of his logical reasoning for being an atheist in his literature--and then why he came to realize that those ideas were illogical). and don't degrade the spiritual experiences of others. if i were to call you a mindless fool who can't count to ten or tie his shoes i'm sure you would take offense. while i've taken no offense to the repeated
Skater4life567 3 days ago
@Skater4life567 again - I'm not degrading the "spiritual" experiences of anyone. I'm pointing out the fallacy of linking these experiences to your religious beliefs as though they were one and the same. If I were behaving like a mindless fool, demonstrably unable to count to ten or tie my shoes, you'd show me the greatest respect by pointing this out like an adult. If that offends me, then too bad for me. The truth is the truth and lying is the worst form of disrespect.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk degrading labels you have put on me, that doesn't happen with everyone. i believe one day you and i will see eye to eye and understand the missing links between religion and science--probably not in this life though. i have only one more thought for this post and ill be done. i find it interesting that scriptures make you annoyed/angry. usually if i hear something i "know to be wrong" like a math mistake i don't get mad at the individual who made the error and i don't get
Skater4life567 3 days ago
@Skater4life567 I am putting no labels on you, but neither am I required to fain respect for beliefs that I find frankly ridiculous. Scriptures themselves don't annoy me, it's the way their thrown around as if that in itself lent anything to the discussion. Some unknown author 2000+ years ago agreed with you - so fucking what!? It adds nothing to the discussion so why do it? "This bible verse said people would disbelieve!!". Wow - I wonder why.You'd get more respect by not doing it is all.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
@dj2baduk mad at the math either. likewise when i hear something i don't believe in (for example if i read the bhagavad gita) i'm intrigued by it, not upset by it. the only reason i could reckon someone would get mad is if they want to be right so badly that it makes them mad when others disagree (you could say "its just because your so thick headed it makes me frustrated", but that doesn't stand create the sort of feelings were talking about here). if the scriptures interesting.
Skater4life567 3 days ago
@Skater4life567 I've read the bible. It didn't make me at all mad, though it did occasionally amuse me. What makes me mad is the way people revere certain passages with awe, when, if you put them in plain English, they often say either the most obvious, plain, or absurd things. There are some passages truly worth quoting in the context of a particular discussion, but first think; "does this add any value to the discussion?". If not, leave it out. It's not an argument in itself.
dj2baduk 3 days ago
Comment removed
Skater4life567 3 days ago
Comment removed
Skater4life567 3 days ago
Comment removed
Skater4life567 3 days ago
Comment removed
Skater4life567 3 days ago
Comment removed
Skater4life567 3 days ago
Comment removed
Skater4life567 3 days ago
@dj2baduk oops. i meant "the scriptures are interesting" because they have that effect on people. i hated listening to scriptures when i wasn't doing the right things. now i love them. well, take care.
Skater4life567 3 days ago
the way one might study for a PhD (over an extended period of time, living the principles, and studying daily), ought not comment on something which they are ignorant to. A physician would feel offended (or probably just amused) if a child started telling him about medicine; so an experienced Christian when an ignorant individual tries explaining something which he so clearly doesn't understand.
just because you haven't seen something yourself doesn't mean no one else has.
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
just because you can't test something doesn't mean it isn't true, it only means you aren't very clever.
One of my favorite authors Christian authors, CS Lewis, wrote in his world famous work "Mere Christianity" than "if you cannot understand books written for grown ups, you should not talk about them." The maker of this video, while taunting Christians for an ostensible ignorance, showed a remarkable amount of his own ignorance to religion. Those who haven't actually studied religion
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 where exactly did this video author show "a remarkable amount of his own ignorance to religion"? He ridiculed the idiotic arguments made by people claiming to be "experienced christians" and those arguments weren't metaphysical or even scriptural in nature. I hate to break it to you, but there are a lot of idiots in the world and some of them also happen to be christian. I don't need a PhD in the unknowable to criticise patently dumb arguments or statements.
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
take for example the discovery of X-rays. a few centuries ago a group of scientists argued that a kind of light exist that could pass through walls, but that it could not be seen. at the time there was absolutely no way of testing this hypothesis. the X-rays are invisible and there was no way of detecting them. by definition, X-rays were not scientific. X-rays were not one iota more scientifically founded that the existence of God, because no experiment existed to prove one way or the other.
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
science, therefore, by DEFINITION is forced to be silent on the subject. science cant say one way or the other. and neither can a scientist. the opinion of a scientist as to the existence of god is no more or less valid than your local high school janitor! what more "evidence" could a scientist possibly possess as to the existence of deity than the janitor? none, according to the very definition of science.
it is worth noting that just because something isn't science doesn't mean it isn't true
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
religion falls under a category called metaphysics. that word means "above" physics or beyond it. it means that religion, by definition of the very word, cannot be described using science. because religion is metaphysical. science is limited to that which it can test. if a hypothesis is not testable, it is not science, and therefore science can say nothing as to its truthfulness. and it doesn't even attempt to. there is absolutely no hypothesis that can be tested for the existence of God.
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
been relatively convinced of the science of his/her time. my biology professor once laughed at the theories of scientists 500 years ago on their theories of the origins of life (that it spontaneously occurs), when in reality, scientists in 500 years will probably do the same thing with the scientists of our day. understand this about the nature of science: it is an explanation made by mortal man that hasn't been proven false yet.
Now i'd like to explain to you the nature of religion.
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
a hypothesis, by very definition, CANNOT be proven right. by DEFINITION. a hypothesis can ONLY be proven false. so any experiment is designed to prove that hypothesis false. if it takes a long time before anyone can prove it false it becomes what is known as a scientific theory, meaning that despite the efforts of many, it hasn't been proven false; yet. the reason for this is that humans are so often wrong, especially when they are convinced they are correct. every scientist of every age has
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
Here is your problem and the problem of the other people on here promoting these theories as an argument against the existence of God. you do not understand the nature of science or religion.
lets go back to the very basics of science; what you should have learned day one of any science class you have ever taken: the scientific method.
I wont discuss this in its entirety, even though many parts of it support the following point of view. lets just look at what a hypothesis means.
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 and here are your problems: First; this isn't an argument against god. It's an outline of various hypotheses covering the different stages of the development of life from non-living material. Secondly; a hypothesis can't be proven "right" that's true. What science deals with is probabilities and when the probability of a hypothesis being an accurate description of reality reaches a certain point through repeat testing etc. it is promoted to a theory. The theory can still be...
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 ... overturned with the discovery of new strong data, but generally they are modified or refined in light of new data, becoming every more likely to be an accurate description of reality. There is a point when a theory has so much supporting data and such strong predictive power that it is simply perverse to deny it. It may still be refined or have exceptions, but in a given framework, we can say, in practical terms, the theory is "right". This is not the case with abiogenesis...
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 - as of now, abiogenesis constitutes a weak theory. We can test the various stages for possibility and probability under a given set of circumstances, but we may never be able to say with high probability that it is "right". However, in the absence of more plausible explanations, even weak theories can constitute the best theory we have. Thirdly; science itself has evolved over time. The very nature of science now is such that weak theories/hypotheses are less likely to survive..
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 ... and strong theories less and less likely to be completely overturned. Not so with the "science" of 500 years ago. Fourthly; as you admit, metaphysics cannot be described or tested in scientific terms. Paraphrasing Kant;"Experience without reason is blind. Reason without experience is mere intellectual play." If science can't say anything meaningful about metaphysics, then neither can anyone else. The point is; you can make any metaphysical claim you like, without any ...
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 ... justification and you have to accept that it can therefore be dismissed out of hand with exactly the same justification. Metaphysics has zero predictive power and 100% assumption. It's as useful to human endeavors as a chocolate fire-guard. Fifthly; many of the claims of religion trespass directly into the realm of testable science. Take the creation myths or the efficacy of prayer for example. Both ideas have shriveled and died under the light of science. We now know with...
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
@Skater4life567 ... such a high degree of certainty that denial is simply perverse, that we are evolved creatures who share a common ancestor with other evolved creatures. We know due to experimentation (designed to prove that prayer DID work) that prayer is ineffective. Add these to the various other claims made by religion such as the source of earthquakes, the source of disease etc. all of which are long proven to be false - metaphysics is the last hiding place of religion. Sixthly; ...
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
@dj2baduk i laughed out loud when you said there is "scientific evidence" that prayer doesn't work. such an idea is hardly testable since prayer isn't as straight forward as giving God a "to-do" list and seeing if he does it or not. one of the former presidents of BYU told of inviting the president of the united states to come speak at the university but they had all these time restrictions and things they wanted him to speak on. they realized, however, that if your inviting the
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 so how exactly is prayer any different from just getting lucky some of the time? An answered prayer - that is the intervention, by god, in the real lives of people - would look different from pure chance how exactly? I'll make it easy for you: the reason prayer doesn't stand up to scrutiny is not "mysterious ways", or "in his own sweet time". It doesn't stand up to scrutiny because it's ineffective. No interpretation or logical gymnastics necessary.
dj2baduk 6 days ago
@dj2baduk prayer is exactly different from getting lucky in so many ways its not even funny. of course, you have to actually try it in order to really understand what i'm talking about. it's extremely difficult for me to explain to you my own experiences with prayer because words fail to express the idea. that's not because i'm making it up, it's just that words really don't express it. for example, please explain to me what salt tastes like without using the word "salt.".....
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@Skater4life567 I see so prayer is different from getting lucky in lots of ways, just none that are susceptible to any kind of scrutiny. Here's your problem: There are myriad faiths around the world that believe myriad things of myriad gods. The indescribable thing you're alluding to is a numinous experience. It's variously attributed to everything from Shiva to LSD. That should raise a flag. While the experience is real, it clearly says nothing of the reality of what it's attributed to.
dj2baduk 5 days ago
@dj2baduk you could read a million books about what salt tastes like, but until you try it, you have no idea. it's the same with prayer. while prayer may be sometimes used to ask God to somehow alter something that is amiss in your life, that isn't the real core or purpose of prayer. the LDS bible dictionary says: "as soon as we learn the true relationship in which we stand toward God (namely, God is our Father, and we are his children) then at once prayer becomes natural and
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@Skater4life567 the exact same thing is true of meditation, of certain brain altering chemicals and of prayer to other gods. So how does it help your case? If an answered prayer is just "it makes me feel good" or "it helped me look at things in a different light" then there's nothing to argue. The specific point of the prayer experiment was to show that prayer could positively affect the physical outcome for patients with heart problems - that it has a real world effect. Guess what - it doesn't.
dj2baduk 5 days ago
@dj2baduk instinctive on our part (Matt. 7:7-11). many of the so-called difficulties about prayer arise from forgetting this relationship. prayer is the act by which the will of the Father and the will of the child are brought into correspondence with each other. the object of prayer is not to change the will of God, but to secure for ourselves and for others blessings that God is already willing to grant, but that are made conditional on our asking for them. blessings require some
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk work or effort on our part before we can obtain them. prayer is a form of work, and is an appointed means for obtaining the highest of all blessings." this last sentence refers quite obviously to the christian idea that man can be forgiven of his sins. THAT is why you pray. it is to be uplifted. to grow and become the kinds of beings God is trying to make you into. it is counseling with God and receiving personal revelation from him for yourself, and those around you.
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk the last part of this says "Christians are taught to pray in Christ's name. we pray in Christ's name when our mind is the mind of Christ, and our wishes the wishes of Christ--when his words abide in us. we then ask for things it is possible for God to grant. many prayers remain unanswered because they are not in Christ's name at all; they in no way represent his mind, but spring out of the selfishness of man's heart." so you can't start praying to win the lottery.
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk highest power in the nation to come speak at your school you can't give him stipulations. you need to say, in effect "we will cater to your time and you can speak about whatever you wish." he then made the comment to the effect that if we are approaching the highest power and authority in the universe we would be fools to limit the way he is allowed to answer our petitions within our time frames. as for the creation "myths" as you put it, is not what you think it is either.
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@dj2baduk your probably referring to the verses that God made the world in six days. just look up what the real translation of the Hebrew (the original language of the old testament) word "day" is in this context, and you will note that it isn't 24 hours long. or even 1,000 years long. it is simply a period of time. how long is not defined. why do you need to study religion? well, for one thing, too often people think they understand a topic when they have heard a thing or two on it
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 you can make a "day" mean as long as you want, it won't do anything to make the genesis accounts of creation more than an adaptation of earlier myths. The events, their causes, their chronological order etc. - all demonstrably, actually incorrect. Any attempt to mould these accounts into something more than myth has utterly failed. Why? Because they commit the grave error of trespassing into the realm of the real, the testable - science. They're defenseless in that light.
dj2baduk 6 days ago
@dj2baduk from a friend perhaps (much like these "uninformed Christians" he is talking about in the videos). the problem arises, especially in regards to religion, that people hear a thing or two, and assume they must know everything on the subject there is to know. I served a full-time two year mission in Finland, and people would always ask me, as though the thought had never, ever occurred to me before: "if God exists, then why does he allow bad things happen to good people?"
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 basing your knowledge of something around "hearing a thing or two" is no worse that basing your knowledge around what you hear from a single biased source. I've no problem with people studying religion. It is however infinitely more honest and fulfilling to study it free from bias, including the presupposition that it's central tenets are true, as in a seminary. "Studying" the metaphysics of religion on the other hand is as fatuous an idea as I've ever come across.
dj2baduk 6 days ago
@dj2baduk did i ask you to study it with baises? no. just study IT, not what people say about it. those are completely different things. and FYI, the following is a biased opinion: this stuff is hogwash and not true. you should study it with an open mind, being as magnanimous as possible. and just see what happens. i promise anyone who does that will know it is true. that's exactly what i did. i followed the council of thomas jefferson to "question with boldness". turn over every stone
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@Skater4life567 it's amusing how invariably when people come off trying to sound all reasonable while proselytizing they end up guilty of the very thing they accuse others of doing. Here you are making ridiculous assumptions again. I'm 42 years old pal. You seriously think I haven't researched any of this stuff? Seriously!? I've done my research and I've done it without the impediment of presupposition. Try it some time - I mean - REALLY try it.
dj2baduk 5 days ago
@dj2baduk and see what is there. if you don't understand something don't just give up. keep looking for answers. I've received answers to every single one of those kinds of questions.
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk the problem is people start asking these kinds of questions and never look for the answers because they so foolishly assume there is none. that THEY, as the geniuses they are, came up with a question which no religious person has ever asked themselves before. why do you need to study religion? because you can't know something about a subject until you study it. and while that answer may be mockingly obvious it is, nonetheless, the truth. people who know nothing about religion
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 I don't have a problem with god "allowing" bad things to happen. Simply remove god from the equation and there's no explanation necessary. Of course it is a real problem from you if you're honest. That's not to say you can't use some words and pretend they mean you've answered the problem. If you're prepared to perform olympian feats of logical gymnastics then I'm sure it all makes perfect sense. That's not the same as god actually being logically consistent though.
dj2baduk 6 days ago
@dj2baduk actually, the answer makes sound, perfectly logical sense without fallacy. you just did what i said you'd do. you assume there is no good answer because, of course, no one else that is religious has ever REALLY used their brain like you have. these ideas must not actually occur to these religious people, and once they do, oh boy, they will come right off that religious horse of theirs. just read "the problem of pain" by CS Lewis. its a perfect explanation. if you complain
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@Skater4life567 actually you're making all the assumptions here. I've heard this question and about every conceivable attempt an an answer a thousand times. People, including Lewis, have clearly put a lot of thought into this - and they have to. In the end they all boil down to some version of "god is good therefore anything god does or allows to happen is good, or our own fault, or his mysterious ways". Yet if something good happens - "a prayer has been answered". That's having it both ways.
dj2baduk 5 days ago
@dj2baduk actually, its not having it both ways. to put it very briefly, it is people who ask this question who want it both ways. they say "give me the freedom to choose to do whatever i want. give me free agency. free choice. but put me into a world where there is no starvation, no suffering, no pain." well, i' m sorry, but such a request is pure nonsense. if you really think about it, the plea could be reiterated like this: "God, please give me free agency,
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk while simultaneously withholding it." we live in a world full of the choices of other people, and God wants everyone to have the freedom to choose what they will. just like a father of children he wants you and I to make the right decisions, but that doesn't mean he would force you to. as for whether or not you have done research, I didn't say you never had. but there is something very different between researching and doing. just like there is a difference between
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk while simultaneously withholding it." we live in a world where everyone gets to make choices. you can't go about complaining that others are making bad decisions and God isn't doing anything about it when you are also allowed to do whatever you wish. there has to be opposition in everything. otherwise everything is a thing of naught. if there were no such thing as pain, there would be no such thing as pleasure. God, just like any good parent, wants his kids to make the
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk right decisions, but he doesn't force anyone to it. God neither compels anyone to wickedness, or righteousness. we are "free to act, [and] not just be acted upon." when i say that you should try it, I don't mean it only involves doing research. that is all very good and well, but it will never produce the desired result. you can read books about swimming and even be well versed in the subject, but until you try it, what good is all your study? you can't swim until you get
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk into the water. it's the same with Christianity. what good is reading about faith, prayer, repentance, good works, etc. until you actually apply what you are reading? ever met a priest of a church who didn't actually believe in God? I have. was it because there is a problem with the scriptures? absolutely not. the problem is with the individual. prayer really works. my prayers have been clearly answered more times than i can count. i don't need a science experiment to tell
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@Skater4life567 I'll answer each of your points when I have more time but I don't want the entirety of the comments on this video populated by a theological discussion, since that's not the subject of the video. Neither do I want to provide you with a platform from which to preach your particular brand of nonsense. You can continue this particular "discussion" in private messages if you wish, but please stop posting your unnecessarily long winded proselytizing comments here.
dj2baduk 4 days ago
@dj2baduk me if it works or not, and neither do you. you don't even need me to tell you if it works or not, you can try it yourself. I don't doubt that people who pray to God, whatever they may call him or religion they may be, receive answers to their prayers. I know of plenty of people who aren't Christians in this life and who never even get the chance to be. do you really think if God loves everyone, that he would ignore the prayers of those people just because they call upon him
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk by the wrong name? i don't think so. the fact that so many people come into contact with deity is not a threat to my faith. it reinforces it. ha you think I've never been critical of what I believe in? ill ask you a rhetorical question: would you dedicate 2 full years of your life with not a single day off to teach people about God and Jesus Christ in a foreign nation and have to learn arguably the worlds most difficult language, only to be rejected 99% of the time...to do
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk all of that and never really question my faith seriously? I can promise you I had no incentive to do so if I didn't actually know that what I was teaching is true (i paid out of pocket to go do that, and never got a penny in return). I know God exists because I know Him. and you can too. I saw tons of people experience the same things. even people who didn't believe in God at all before who could tell you themselves of their own personal experiences. I'm not trying to trick
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk you (what on earth would be in that for me?) I'm only telling you the honest truth about what I've experienced. Again I go back to my Ghana analogy. you might say I've never been "there", but that doesn't change the fact that I have experienced what I have experienced; whether we like it or not. It is the same with all the prophets. many have seen and conversed with God face to face. If you disbelieve their testimony, it wouldn't change the reality of their experience.
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk the answer is too complicated and don't feel like looking into it that sounds like a personal problem. anything worth while is complicated.
Skater4life567 5 days ago
@dj2baduk identify it as the "opiate of the people." just hearing statements like that tells me a great deal about the person making them (namely that they don't actually know what they are talking about. they're just like parrots, mimicking what they hear other people say about religion).
Skater4life567 6 days ago
@Skater4life567 ... something being untestable may not make it untrue, but then you have to ask yourself what good reason you have to suppose that it is true. I'm slightly confused why something being untestable, in your opinion, makes people less clever? Seventhly; the video author ridiculed certain christian arguments because they exist in an information vacuum. Why is it necessary to "study" religion to point out the vacuousness of one's argument on scientific matters?
dj2baduk 2 weeks ago
Hands down one of the best thesis I've seen on abiogenesis.
dt28469 1 month ago
Believing in god is just a feel good. Thats why you see nothing but emotional responses to these kinds of videos. To any rational logical person, it would be clear that ''god'' has the lowest probability of being the correct answer. But of course, its just not nice to think that. Theists want their security blanket in one hand while they are sucking on their thumb in the other, making their rebuttals incoherent and intellectually lacking. CMON YOU KNOW ITS TRUE.
Johnf85 2 months ago
.... doesnt fit :(
TrollNumberOne 11 months ago
HOW DID NITROGEN HYDROGEN AND CARBON COME TO BE? Those elements have to come from somewhere? They cant just be formed. Its like this one joke i heard, ill post it on next post...
TrollNumberOne 11 months ago
@TrollNumberOne hydrogen is the simplest of the elements and was formed by the coalelscences of the cooled plasma of the early universe. All other elements, including carbon, were created by stars which were formed by the coalecence of hydrogen. In other words, we know where these elements came from without a single doubt. Of course all you have to do now is say where did the plasma come from - big bang, where did that come from - unknown, but it didn't come from nothing so something always was.
dj2baduk 11 months ago
@dj2baduk Ok lets say your right, you just taught me two things I didn't know. And yes i will ask where did the big bang come from? Where did plasma come from? You said "but it didn't come from nothing so something always was", so lets think of it this way, I believe God always was, you believe something always was, now, Isn't it easier to think that a higher being always was, rather than knowing that something unknown started the big bang?
TrollNumberOne 11 months ago
@TrollNumberOne what are you calling god? By most definitions it has sentience, will, intelligence and ability to carry out its will = complexity. The universe we can observe, test and measure requires no intelligence. There is simple stuff and it interacts with other stuff in certain ways. Our entire experience of the universe is that this alone gives rise to complexity, from the ground up, not the other way around. We have no reason to assume complexity ex-nihilo. None.
dj2baduk 11 months ago
@TrollNumberOne No. Before we knew there was a big bang, it was said that the universe was created by god. Now we know that the universe had a beginning (big bang), which is all scientific. You want to occupy the remaining gap with your god. Science has proven everything up until the question of before the big bang, and you desperately fit your god in there. Science, some day, AGAIN, will show there was no god involved in the process. Why continue to side with what has the lowest probability??
Johnf85 2 months ago
I guess what im trying to say, and not so well, is that we shouldn't consider anything that God would do would be super natural, when if he is the creator of all things, our perception of his works would be natural. There would be no expedience of his actions, because they would follow the rules we accept as natural.
cxaiver 1 year ago
I never understand why people always think of God as a super natural force, when if he created the universe, it would be built by his natural laws, and thus, would be the natural force at work. we can have both, its your choice as to weather or not to believe in a creator. I believe both in science and God, and claim no true understanding of either.
cxaiver 1 year ago
@cxaiver well at least you admit you don't know, but consider this - if a god created the laws of nature, then what did he use to do that? If he used pre-existing natural substances and laws, then in what way is he a god. That there is technology. A god, by definition, is not bound by natural laws and has no need of technology. Of course, even if one did use technology to create the universe, that poses the obvious question; "where did he and his technology come from?"
dj2baduk 1 year ago
This was a very well made video, and I liked the other ones as well. What's good about a forum like Youtube is that it appeals to a bunch of people around the world -- so don't refer to Christians as the sole evolution deniers. In fact, a lot of the world (India and the middle east from my experience) are in denial of evolution: the scary thing is, they are not always the equivalent of rednecks -- even "educated" people will deny it altogether, because they despise anything western.
asciiguy1 1 year ago
You forgot about adenine. Where did that come from. Gods STILL the best explanation moron.
9pt9 1 year ago
@9pt9 well genius, until you explain, or even manage to describe god in unambiguous terms, that's no explanation at all. It's a made up answer with no experiencial precedent or testable qualities. Combined with the fact that the known laws of physics and chemistry are enough to explain everything we see, the god hypothesis, as well as being asinine, is entirely unnecessary. Come up with some kind of coherent argument before you start throwing words like "moron" around. People in glasshouses etc.
dj2baduk 1 year ago
@dj2baduk He IS a moron. Titling a video Origins made "easy"??? NOBODY knows how life originated and yet he knows it "easily"? Total moron. Get lost.
9pt9 1 year ago
@9pt9 the video is explaining, in easy to understand terms, the current prevailing theory of how life started. Theories about life origins are still very tentative, yet the video outlines steps which are scientifically plausible, requiring nothing more than the known laws of physics and chemistry. The fact that you think he is claiming he knows how life started shows you didn't even understand the video yet you still somehow feel qualified to call him a moron. Simply astounding. Must try harder
dj2baduk 1 year ago
forget about the origin of life.. how do you explain how everything came to be?? and i mean everything.. how did a particle came into existence??
how can u begin to disprove the existence of a god with such uncertainty behind your claims..
we think we know a lot, but we know jack shit.. and it pisses me off hearing people talk like they have all the answers while undermining others
anyone who completely believes or completely disagrees with the concept of a god *is the stupid ignorant in my book
MBC022 1 year ago
@MBC022 everything we know came to be from a void by virtue of the known and well tested laws of physics, all by itself, without any need for outside intervention. The Universe is causally self contained. It has all the exact same properties as a void. Zero net enrgy etc. We can't say there is NO god. We can say that one isn't necessary in order for there to be something rather than nothing. We can say the god of christianity and islam (and a few other religions) doesn't exist. We can say that.
dj2baduk 1 year ago 2
U must see beyond,the human concepts! nothing about chemical elements is useless,maybe for u,.and i think life,begins,(anywhere in the universe)...when those useless chemicals.(under the right conditions and over time). bound together..or group,and find a way to replicate,that's my idea of the simplest form of life.,and it's very hard for that to happen,not only because of the conditions,but for the chance that those chemical elements, being all together in a place that meet's the conditions
Vlader07 1 year ago
Comment removed
Vlader07 1 year ago
our wonderful planet...our..home..not only was formed at the right place ., in space..it happened to be made of an abundance of essential chemical elements...to make life but also to protect it ( iron core that forms the magnetic field ) and help it evolve in greater complex life forms..that not only replicate ,but developed ways to move, instincts , memory..that led to self awareness... thoughts...etc
Vlader07 1 year ago
@RespectMyHate .. We are truly blessed , I'm certain that there many other places in the universe where we find life..similar..different...stranger.. based on other conditions and chemicals..but are not in our range .. who knows..
Vlader07 1 year ago
Comment removed
Vlader07 1 year ago
@RespectMyHateIt makes me appreciate how lucky we are.. .that our wonderful planet...our..home..not only was formed at the right place ., in space..it happened to be made of an abundance of essential chemical elements...to make life but also to protect it ( iron core that forms the magnetic field ) and help it evolve in greater complex life forms..that not only replicate ,but developed ways to move, instincts , memory..that led to self awareness... thoughts...etc... WoW..
Vlader07 1 year ago
@Vlader07 Yes there is Angelic life in the universe, there are other sinless creatures in the universe far more advance then us That were created by God.
There is a God, He created the universe. I'm currently reading a chemistry book, and I was looking at atoms there is design right down to the atom, from the galaxtic systems to the tiny systems of atoms organization and design. GOD.
RespectMyHate 1 year ago
@RespectMyHate We are blessed to be alive...conscious... to be the universe's observers...to experience emotions...and if that wasn't good enough...it made it possible for us to ask for what we want as long as we believe in it and think that we deserve it, we get it... ..knowing this doesn't help u apply it though.! it's very hard...because u have to make yourself believe that u will get what u want and the only way to do that is if u think u deserve it...this is only a theory of mine..
Vlader07 1 year ago
@Vlader07 isn't life a double edged sword though? We live and we die. We love and we suffer hurt and loss. We ask and we don't always receive. However deserving we believe we are. We have a consciousness that allows us to evaluate our place in the scheme of things, yet that is also the curse that makes us aware of how small and finite we are. The reality is the same, but I agree that, cursed though we are, hope and optimism are the only way to fully appreciate the time we have.
dj2baduk 1 year ago
@dj2baduk we live and we die....of course...that's how it goes...even at a larger scale..but i like to think that....when we die..the energy of our soul.. unites with all the energy in the universe...adding your life experience..your ideas..your mentality to the universe...and about asking and getting it.. if you're asking absurd things or have a little doubt that u get it or don't deserve it...it doesn't...and i told u it's hard for us to apply this...yet
Vlader07 1 year ago
@Vlader07 "the energy of our soul" is exactly the same as any other energy. Without an organ that can organise and utilise it, it behaves exactly the same as any other energy. It has no memory, no experience, no mentality, no ideas. It simply is. Some of the energy powering your "soul" was once powering someone else's, or a star. You have gained nothing from this so there's no reason to assume you will somehow pass anything on. Energy, remember, is the potential for something to do work. S'all
dj2baduk 1 year ago
@dj2baduk U see the Energy of the universe as a fuel...and only that...where did it came from...i ask u.. try to find an answer in your head..than ...then ask yourself, what really is the power of consciousness, how come that matter evolved in a state that can have thoughts...and ideas...and self awareness...than ask yourself again how did everything started...from what...
Vlader07 1 year ago
@Vlader07 energy is a much misused term. I only sought to present the basic scientific definition to dispense with the notion of a magical invisible field of some sort. The power of consciousness, as far as anyone has been able to prove, is to inform our attitude to and our interaction with our environment and, to a lesser extent, our own health. Mind over matter experiments have proved fruitless. The idea that everything "started" is a construct of our conscouiness and not necessarily so.
dj2baduk 1 year ago
Comment removed
Vlader07 1 year ago
@Vlader07 I don't see how you conclude that the universe is predictable with no possibilities if we are not its "consciousness". What does that even mean? Why does it require a consciousness - isn't that a bit anthropomorphic? Also, the universe is so vast that it doesn't have much of a consciousness if we're it. Even if there are others out there, it's way WAAAY more empty than full. The ultimate outcome of the universe is predictable, we're only making tiny waves along the way.
dj2baduk 1 year ago
@Vlader07 To say we are the product of chance and mutations is absurd. All life came from Gods life. And God always had life God isn't in the catagory of things that need creators He is God and He simply always existed, He transends everything and knows everything there is to ever know for all eternity past present and future, He is awesome.
RespectMyHate 1 year ago
@RespectMyHate I never said there is no God,should we call it that... and there is design...but even so...life still depends on conditions,and please do not personify God...I really don't think it's human, feels or thinks human,. thoughts,and so u don't misunderstand me...by..God...I'm referring to the absolute idea of existence,of the possibilities from witch everything came to a beginning from witch the energy was created...from witch the design of our present visible universe was created.
Vlader07 1 year ago
@RespectMyHate i know that being used to the concepts of the Fairytale story religion, as we grew up with it... u begin to a fear a god that can show revenge on humans for not believing, or for not obeying or because we broke one of the rules :)). but let me tell u something...A god that doesn't aspect us to make mistakes, and wants U to suffer all your life so u can be a good human.that sucks.. ))) and is not real
Vlader07 1 year ago
@Vlader07 you so clearly don't understand the doctrines of Christianity which you are so critical of. When you have heard only rumors about a subject, and perhaps read a page or two about it, doesn't qualify you as an expert. If you have a question like "why does God seem to be angry" or "does God get mad at people who don't believe and does he want revenge?" "does he expect me to never make a mistake and does he want me to suffer?" instead of assuming you know the answer why not
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
@Vlader07 study the source and get it that way? the answers to your questions are very simple but they take effort on your own part. just like anything in life worth while. and before you try and use the fact that the words "jealous" and "vengeance" appear in the bible, try looking at the real Hebrew definitions of those words and their intended meaning.
Skater4life567 2 weeks ago
@RespectMyHate "To say we are the product of chance and mutations is absurd. All life came from Gods life."
Right there, you're stating that something that we have overwhelming evidence of is untrue, while something we have no evidence for even the existence of except in the minds of humans, is true. Your "god needs no beginning" get out of jail free card is inadequate. It has 0 explanatory power with 100% assumptions.
dj2baduk 1 year ago 6
what if god make all the thing that cant be made by us ..and it goes according to law of nature and logically
suhana3479 1 year ago
@suhana3479 you tell me. What if he did? How would we prove or disprove it? I accept the possibility of an intelligent creator of our universe - though it seems the most unlikely of explanations. I do not accept that he/she/it is supernatural. What if we someday create some of the things that can't be made by us (as we have already) - would we then be gods? Then why call him god?
dj2baduk 1 year ago
we have to live in one of trillions of multiverses. Because why is our universe so perfect to be able to create something as advanced as the human eye over billions of years of evolution.
CiniCraft 1 year ago
@CiniCraft It's certainly possible our universe is part of a multiverse, but it's by no means either certain or essential. You consider the existence of life and the evolution of complex organs and organisms to be significant. Ask yourself - why so? Any universe, whatever the constants that govern its makeup, will have some form of organised complexity, that's just the nature of physics. We tend to assume self awareness is somehow significant but I've yet to hear a good reason why.
dj2baduk 1 year ago
@dj2baduk
because nanomachines capable of solar energy harvesting also with the ability to become better after every generation seems much more amazing to me than the build of the universe.
CiniCraft 1 year ago
@CiniCraft I understand, but the key words here are "seems" and "to me". The observer here is a product of the observed process. A product of the Sun's energy first, a consumer thereof second. We view life as significant (and I'm no exception) because we view ourselves as significant, yet at it's most basic level, it is pure chemistry fuelled by a nearby energy source - also chemistry. The same chemistry, fuelled by the same energy source, that guarantees all organic life is mutable & finite.
dj2baduk 1 year ago
@CiniCraft ...I can't give u a reason why self awareness is significant....I can give u something to think though , Matter has thoughts ....and self awareness...that is something...not significant u say?
Vlader07 1 year ago
this video is awesome
ghostsnakedeadpool 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Explain the SHROUD. THe problem with atheists are that they have never been loved. If you beleive in God and follow him, you will live a better moral life, and you should be happy. See when I die people will say i was loving caring, and when you die people will be like "ya hes a ass" I feel there is a good, where did the big bang come from, hell we dont even know if it was real. If thats possible then fiction is possible. Plus parralel dimmensions and worm holes extend this...
Link3618andLiquid 2 years ago
The SHROUD needs no further explanation. A tip for you; the minute you start a statement with "the problem with atheists" everyone knows the next sentence is going to be astoundingly dumb. Atheism describes ONLY a person's attitude toward the concept of god. Nothing else. There are all manner of atheists, as there are theists and deists. The rest is baseless speculation. Your assertion that theists are more moral is demonstrably wrong. Just look at crime statistics by population belief. [sigh]
dj2baduk 2 years ago
Wow, you really are ignorant of what you are talking about. How can you speak for all atheist. I am married and have a daughter and a very good marriage. My marriage improved once I dumped christianity and we are very happy. Plus the big bang theory is a fact, the universe is expanding. Just because you do not understand something does not mean it is stupid.
tyrone9009 2 years ago
Link3618andLiquid
I do believe that your negative description of people who have a different opinion than you proves that you are indeed the ass.
Neil6000 2 years ago
"you will live a better moral life"
well, kindly explain to me why the most dysfunctional societies are the most religious ones all throughout the world, and the healthiest societies with the highest educational standarts are without exception also those with the greatest numbers of non-believers... shouldn't it be the other way round if you were even remotely close to being right?
DancingInChains 2 years ago
....it's because those societies have a very limited mentality...limited by their religious beliefs foolish fairytale... religion is fundamental to our lives and society...but we humans are evolving... and a limited religion is a tree in the middle of the road..for evolution.. people often use the term of non believers for those of us that do not accept the simpleminded and unreal-ism of all religions. we see the great divine as it is ..or it seems to be.We are the true believers!
Vlader07 1 year ago
Anyone who doubts evolution should look up the Lenski experiment. Absolute, indisputable proof!
psychodelicfungi 2 years ago
so this first primative cell isn't alive.
Thats not life.
what caused Life?
RespectMyHate 3 years ago
"so this first primative cell isn't alive"
Why do you think it's not alive? Have you asked yourself what life is?
dj2baduk 3 years ago
yes I have asked myself what life is.
and I know the difference between life and a group of useless chemicals with no function or purpose.
In this video I see absolutely no life.
I see a group of dead chemicals and the end result.
RespectMyHate 3 years ago
"yes I have asked myself what life is"
So what answer did you get? E.g. Is bacteria alive? Is a virus alive?
Potholer's video is simply showing the current hypothesis for how very primitive life could arise under early earth conditions. Remember, evolution happens - that's proven beyond doubt. We only have to get non-living material to a stage where evolution can take over to have a workable hypothesis. Science can only prove this is possible, not that it happened of course.
dj2baduk 3 years ago
Comment removed
Vlader07 1 year ago