YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

you are crazy

because he do not exists... get your house checked for mould

This has been flagged as spam show

ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that mere undirected natural laws can bring about either. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

Mogley52 5 months ago

This has been flagged as spam show

ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!

Mogley52 5 months ago

DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless.

Mogley52 5 months ago

Are you really upset or are you just fucking with us?

renoo27 8 months ago

Oh I get it, this is satire! No rational person can be this deluded.

evelsteev 9 months ago

Maybe it's an idea to start off with telling what definition of "God" you are using. Only when we have a description of the concept of gods people are using, we can start of with the discussion whether this being cán exist, whether we can see him exist in the Universe, and whether such a being is good/moral/ethical etc. Telling people what you mean with the multi-interpretable use of concepts of god(s) , will give some clarity before a debate can start, to see if the claims about "God" are real.

JumpDeluxe 11 months ago

i'm sure your intentions are honourable but we don't need converting thanks :) i'm a happy atheist and i have a good life. if you are concerned then it's misplaced concern! the time that you spend trying to convert atheists could be spent helping someone who really needs it, like a homeless person or sick child :) we don't need help but thanks for the offer.

bassetts1899 11 months ago

If you have a message then it can be presented here.

Moreover, that you need even struggle to present an acceptable reason for believing gods existence does naught but highlight that you hold such a belief for emotionally biased reasons instead of logic or reason. Your religion is based on belief without reason, which is why you will never convert an atheist unless that person is being irrational too.

Vire70 11 months ago

When you say you've tried all these things but "nothing works", do you mean nobody's listening to you whatever you do? Or do you just mean "nothing persuades atheists to instantly capitulate and accept your faith"?

If you want to try and offer a convincing reason why we should believe in God, many atheists will listen to what you have to say. But it might be a lot less convincing or original than you think.

skepticJames 11 months ago

Logic and evidence is a way to start ;)

iAMsoBEAST1 11 months ago 3

No offense, but you're talking out your arse.

Some of the greatest Theistic thinkers have long been trying to convert Atheists. I'm sorry, but that was a complete waste of time.

hEaDoNtHeBlOcK 11 months ago

@hEaDoNtHeBlOcK no, see, you are wrong. It was not a waste of time. Perhaps that is the problem: too many "great" thinkers trying to get others to see the light. I am not one of them. My mind is filled to the brim with cotton and agave nectar. You might like what I have to offer.

cheers!

1969yellowbird 11 months ago

Why are ya'll all so hung up on "proof"? Did I say I had proof? No, I said I had a "message". That can mean so many things. All it takes is listening. I never claimed to be able to convince anyone of anything, nor is that my job. My job is to share what I've been shown,what I've learned,and what I've seen. It's up to the listener to decide what he or she wants to do with that. You people will see that I'm different from most Christians.You will see,if you give me the chance, I'm worth your time.

1969yellowbird 11 months ago

@1969yellowbird i'm an atheist and i admire you, honestly. like you said, you're not like most christians i've seen here on youtube, you're very nice about it. i admire your intentions. however i don't think you'll get very far, just like i wouldn't if i wanted to convince you to convert from christianity. atheists are just as sure that god doesn't exist as you are that god DOES exist. but i think you're giving a good name to christianity nonetheless :)

bassetts1899 11 months ago

@1969yellowbird exactly. it is up to the listener to decide what to do with the information given them. So don't get yourself down if nobody decides to listen to what your telling them. your better than that.

woodtick71 11 months ago

If you actually knew God was real then you would have no problem presenting the evidence that your knowledge is based on and use it to convert atheists. The problem is you don't know God is real, you just need him to be real and for others to believe he is real to satisfy an emotional dependence that has been programmed into you. Sorry babe but wishing doesn't make it true, rather than try to convert me try to figure out how to overcome your emotions with rational thought and deal with reality.

crossoldman 11 months ago 2

I dont get why you care so much about trying to convert an atheist???

Really WHY DO YOU CARE? I just don't get it.

I'm an atheist 4LIFE.

Maybe if you offed me a good amount of money i'd say I was catholic or christian or whatever....

lol

catrynaaa 11 months ago

You could try "proof" and not just assertions.

wmralder 11 months ago

God can't be proven to exist. You've made him all powerful, invisible, and unwilling to be proven. So, by definition, God can't be proven. We're finite beings. Anything we can perceive could have been caused by a lesser being or natural cause. If you want to show that something is true, you can't make it so absurd that no demonstration will help. Remember that when you design your next god.

Chuck1863 11 months ago 4

Try cash.

TETSUno1 11 months ago

Link to this comment:

All Comments (35)