All have sinned and greatly offended the holy God of the bible. The just punishment is death then hell. That's not Gods will. He suffered and died on the cross paying for the law you broke in His life's blood so He could legally dismiss your case. You must repent turn from your sin and trust alone in Jesus Christ for your salvation.
There is nothing just about eternal torment. You're fucked in the head for thinking that is "just." You're also fucked in the head for believing ridiculous stories in a book written by cave dwellers thousands of years ago.
@1ProudFemaleAtheist Let me ask you this, if you follow the atheist world view, how can you even say that he is "fucked in the head" because that would assert an absolute standard of goodness and "oughtness", which in a chaotic and random world with no meaning, cannot in anyway exist, considering if there is no God, then everyone's opinions must be equally valid, and since everyone has different values, that means there is no truth and no absolutes at all in an atheist world and there cannot be.
@RYUUSEIBOI2, Morality doesn't need to be followed from a deontological or normative point of view, which is mainly encouraged in religions. Atheists usually consider moral values from a consequentialist point of view. Given the fact that human progress is built upon continual change and evolving rules and laws, deontological moral values are the most primitive form of morality when broadly considering Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of morality. Atheists usually adhere to more developed mores.
@RYUUSEIBOI2, (Continued)... People don't need to believe in a deity in order to live decent lives. Morality is based upon common sense, not on counter intuitive and primitive rules in some primitive book.
Evolution and creation are mutually exclusive. If one is true the other can not be true. They can not be reconciled. Please read Romans 5: 12. ....death came into this world through sin...means: before sin there was no death. Evolution (natural selection) is based on survival of the fittest and therefore presupposes death of the weaker beings. Which would make death a condition preceding Adam.
Evolution could've been the way God created man.... just sayin.... if you research this stuff, don't just believe in what your peers tell you, decide for yourself.
"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men,… “ Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children
” Ezekiel 9:5-7
“Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses” 1 Samuel 15:2-3 “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” Psalms 137:9.
@max2right Nice job taking Psalms 137 completely out of context. As for 1 Samuel, again, context context context. God gave them 300 years to repent, the cananites. CHild sacrifice, murder, injustice, was rampant in Caanan. Apparently you don't understand justice. Let me guess, you are against the Death penalty as capital punishment.
Only complete and total moronic christians still use the "out of context" argument. Please explain in what context bashing a child to death, or slavery, or making a rape victim marry her rapist is appropraite? What context?
@1ProudFemaleAtheist Let's use our minds here. The Psalmist (David) is constantly talking about the enduring love of God, Honor, "he is our shepherd", all the good jazz, then suddenly there is a passage that states "Blessed is the man that bashes....". Did the Psalmist have a brain aneurism? Your name fits well, because you are obviously too proud to find out context behind it (Yes, I'm sure david loved killing babies). David is referencing to a future prophecy of Babylo
@1ProudFemaleAtheist "It was a different context and culture." In other words, omnipotent God changes his morals with time. After a while, he realizes that certain things like slavery and what you mentioned above just aren't socially acceptable anymore. Any moment now, he should be realizing that his views on homosexuality are outdated. We're waiting.
@gloinstrong It is obvious that atheists are rationalizing their belief in the non-existence of God through a Darwin atheistic evolutionary creation supported by the myth of natural selection. Blatant fallacies like that of Rev Dawkins preaching that species are designoids not intelligently designed are simply ridiculous.
@gloinstrong, Wait... Aren't treaties supposed to be made the law of the land according to Article six in the US constitution, which states that "all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land."? The treaty of Tripoli is constitutional because it was recognized as being a legitimate treaty. How can you refute the treaty of Tripoli without violating constitutional laws?
"Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind tyranny in religion is the worst.” Thomas Pain. “Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. I had hoped that liberal and enlightened thought would have reconciled the Christians so that their [not our?] religious fights would not endanger the peace of Society.? Letter to Sir Edward Newenham, June 22, 1792 G. Washington.
"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." -Treaty of Tripoli, article 11 signed by John Adams and ratified by congress.
”I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life, I absenteed myself from Christian assemblies." “to follow by faith alone is to follow blindly.” "Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." Ben Franklin
Leviticus 13: 35 to 57. God himself believes that a house or clothes can have leprosy and he details the remedy. Please look up the remedy. And this well-meaning yet ignorant gentlemen is trying to connect this god, a figment of his imagination as being the creator of DNA, lol. President James Madison said Religion Bondage Shackles and Debilitates the Mind and Unfits it for Every Nobel Enterprise"
Answer: DNA replicates itself frequently, and does so imperfectly every time. The result of these errors is a unique biological (physiological?) trait. Over time, errors which produce traits which are beneficial for survival in the local environment, are passed down to the next generation through sexual reproduction.
Also, DNA is not a "language"; it is simply a combination of four nucleotides which cause chemical reactions. It is not a "blueprint" except in our imaginations.
@ozowen I don't need to insult you. You are insulting yourself monkey boy by believing false prophet Darwin absurd pretense that you are an ape gone smart against God saying that he has created man at his own image. There is nothing illogical in believing in an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God if you are a Christian. There is nothing illogical in believing in an evolutionary creation if you are an atheist
@ozowen !) An omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God is not conjectural if you are a Christian and a believer.
2) How is it that the mythical Genesis preached by your prophet has become the main way for your atheist brothers in Darwin to rationalize their atheism?
3) Believing in the truth is essential for salvation. Do you believe that Darwin is a new Messiah? Carnegie was flooded with light when he found the truth of evolution but he saw it as a hope in the finality of death.
What? I would love to be a Christian apologist. Really. But to be with all this...I think the best of Jesus' teaching is being completely dissolved these days. And I say this as a non Christian. I wish I could identify.
@ozowen Seeing your great eagerness in joining with your atheist brothers in Darwin in blaspheming God, I understand that you don't believe in an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God. I am sorry, I will not be joining the cult of Darwin so as to create a big family of theist and atheist believers in the truth of evolution. I will keep pissing on the goddess of natural selection with whom I am certain a creator God is not sharing his glory.
@alexthasy If that was supposed to be insulting, or in some way poignant- don't mind me if I laugh. ROFLMAOAY!
I understand you would like to paint me as an unbeliever, it must irk to have a believer so vehemently opposed to your lying, deceitful and illogical crap. I guess you really want people to think all believers are like you- I want them to understand that not only is this not true- I would like them to appreciate that the distance between us is vast.
@ozowen Keep spewing your Darwinian vomit monkey boy. Again nothing illogical about Christians honoring an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God and for atheists for honoring a myth their prophet Darwin borrowed to Paganism and put in charge of an atheistic evolutionary creation
Zero evidence. You are just assuming things. If someone made an awesome cake, you can't automatically assume it was Buddy from Cake Boss. Justify your answers... without the fairy dust this time.
@Killer0fTheSun I would say the myth of natural selection evolutionists are crediting with the miracle of the creation is quite intemporal. As a matter of fact she was called the goddess of mother earth in Greek mythology. Taking land mammals through millions of years of evolution and turning them into whales was certainly a great feat of witchcraft magic. I am sure Darwinism inspired the author of Harry Potter
@alexthasy "As a matter of fact she was called the goddess of mother earth in Greek mythology." As a matter of FACT? Now that is a huge, bulging, festering, writhing barrel full of deceit-worms.
There is no fact you lying imbecile. Your idiotic claims, repeated a million times do not add one iota of credibility to a baseless conjecture, a fantasy you extracted from your rectum via your lying mouth!
You are a weasel, a liar and a knowing supporter of all that is untrue!
There you go, argumentational errors just keep flowing.. If you believe in the big bang theory, you will need to have as much faith in miracles as a creationist. I don't know about you but it's a LOGICAL FALLACY to imply that all you see came from NOTHING. Explosions need air, which didn't exist then. Explosions need a 'spark', which couldn't have existed and even if it did, there could have been nothing to blow up.
Holy shit we have a winner here for absolute christian retard of the year award!! My delusional fuck stick who said the universe "exploded from nothing"? Not i asshole. Maybe if you weren't so fucking delusional for your faith you would research(this means educating yourself) on how the universe expanded. The initial start is not known,but you cannot accept that fact,and you regurgitate the same christian banality that has been said for centuries thru ignorance.
@Killer0fTheSun To demean those not believing in the silly concept of a Darwinian evolutionary creation of the species supported by witchcraft is indeed your best argument. Absurd fairy tales of land mammals magically, orderly and atheistically altering organs and limbs while evolving into whales upon crossing millions of years and numerous species would not even make poor science fiction
Speaking of ignorance, do you know me? You don't, so there goes your credibility. As I said initially, your argumentational gifts are that of a rock. Great job.
Yes you would have to know me before making these assumptions. That is, in order to argue with credibility. Third attempt and you failed it. It's good that you know your science, but your debate skills are indeed that of a rock.
@Arthemesic "Explosions need air, which didn't exist then. Explosions need a 'spark', which couldn't have existed and even if it did, there could have been nothing to blow up." Er, have you ever read up on the Big Bang cos this post indicates a blithering ignorance.
Besides, asshole, I asked you WHERE DID ALL THAT COME FROM and you completely failed to deliver. I didn't even state my own beliefs and you drew these strange assumptions. Proves you as ignorant as suspected.
Where did all that come from? I will tell you where it didnt come from. It didnt come from inviisble gods or demons. That is believed by retards. Now fuck you....and fuck your mother.
@Killer0fTheSun A magical demon taking a simple life form through billions of years of evolution and turning it into a multitude of beautifully designed species is a wonderful fairy tale. Darwin truly gave atheist great opium to smoke
You're a pathethic child. Can't debate without cursing and attempting to miniscule your opposition, you just HAVE to wreck everything you say for yourself.
@Killer0fTheSun I would say that the myth of natural selection is very commendable for her ability to carry out miracles within an atheistic evolutionary concept. She is also invisible.
Read a science book, actually a few of them. Asking somebody to explain to you in a YouTube box? You are a fucking retard. The whole "came from nothing" concept is completely false scientifically - there is no such thing as nothing. Where did God come from? Oh of course - he needed no creator or no source, because he's GOD. Now, that makes perfect sense to you - but scientific answers do not. Bravo. The only moron and asshole here is you, hun.
I admire your pride of being an atheist.. But you shouldn't be proud of the immense foolishness you spout. These hilarious conclusions of all you hateful fanatics make (don't say you're not, I have seen NOT A SINGLE COMMENT by you two that hasn't destroyed itself by applying argumentational errors all over) have been most entertaining.
Guess what honey, ad-hominem attacks are fallacies/argumentation errors. Way to go ! Telling other people that is what they use, when that's clearly all you have? Please NAME ONE "argumentation error" I have made. See, that is how you "prove" that you are right here - not by stating that I've done so without any evidence, but by providing the exact nature of the error. You can't do so. Proving you're a moron who results on petty insults. Nice job! :-)
Evolutionist"Can you name one example of a mutation that has caused a true increase in genetic complexity? Evolution would require billions of them. Can you name just one?
@Andytheantiathiest What does "increase in genetic complexity" mean? How many chances have there been to add genetic complexity? Every time an organism reproduces there is such an opportunity.
I hate when religious lay men try to give a scientific lesson to even more ignorant laymen
Leave it to the scientists.
DNA also proves evolution as its shows an unbroken interconnection between species as can only be explained through evolution through mutations over billions of years.
@Donal277 I love when Darwinian atheist theologian Dawkins preaches utter bullshit and has all the flock of gullible sheep say AMEN. ''‘Designoid objects look designed, so much so that some people – probably, alas, most people – think that they are designed. These people are wrong. . . the true explanation – Darwinian natural selection – is very different.''
@alexthasy Dont know why you are going on about Dawkins? Yes im very much a sheep....i say baaa and all cos you know im not educated...oh wait im a post grad in one of the worlds leadings universities which so happens to give the small thing called a noble prize....yes a sheep with no brain obviously
and yes i agree with you we are designed. 100% .The atoms in our genes over 3 billions years have been competing for advantages. We are designed ..but by them.
@Donal277 WOW! 3 billion years would make atheistic miracles possible. I can see why God said that he would expose man wisdom as being foolishness. Being brainwashed is not being educated.
@alexthasy And please take home your nonsense arguments about evolution and religious lack of believe with the sheep of man Dr Collins head of genome foundation ...phd , md ...right fool of couse oh and 100% christian but you know big backer of evolution
in other words....you are a trolling moron (yes i saw your same comments over and over again on other videos)
@Donal277 I have been accused of being a troll over and over by believer in a Darwinian evolutionary creation. It could be your best argument defending your witchcraft scienceThey will never be able to add info to the genome of a cell in order to launch it on that elusive journey that could turn it into a species. Funny that there should be a theist sect of Darwinism that would be working hand in hand with its atheist counterpart.
@gregrutz Anyone not buying in Darwinian atheist theologian Rev Dawkins BS that species are designoids not intelligently designed but rather the work of the Darwinian myth of natural selection would be greatly disturbed and blaspheming Saint Lucy the mother ape of humanity.
I would have to say the cell is convincing. but it does not mean evolution is false. The evolution of dogs from wolves is one he overlooked. it you look at many breeds of dogs. they can interbreed but the offspring are sterile. Puggle is one example of this. Now dogs from wolves are just one example of evolutions over thousands of years. not million. so who knows what will happen to the future generations of dogs.
@yodudespence That's not anything different than what we do with fruits and vegetables and I doubt it has much to do with actual evolution. That's simply "sculpting the breed" so to speak. But the real question is how "protection of the species" seems to be programmed. IE: No dog I ever heard of ever procreated outside the dog family. Overall I see way too much biological order for it to have happened by accident and then there's that pesky 2nd law of thermal dynamics.
@amzuel420 "No dog I ever heard of ever procreated outside the dog family" Who says that they should? Also, what exactly does the 2nd law have to do with anything? You seem to be laboring under some pretty massive misconceptions regarding biology, and science in general.
@ArcanaKnight Evolution says they should. Otherwise they'll always be dogs. Do you know what the 2nd law of thermal dynamics says? And did you know that Einstein believed in intelligent creation partly because of that?
@amzuel420 The 2nd law doesn't apply because organisms (and the planet itself for that matter) aren't closed systems. Your claim about Einstein is entirely untrue (an infamous letter by him even dismissed religion as being "childish"). Your claim that evolution says that dogs should try to procreate outside the dog family is just plain ignorant; before you try arguing against evolution, you should try to learn what it actually says first.
@ArcanaKnight Maybe you should read up on Einstein, it's obvious you know less about him than you know about biology and physics. (And I'm the ones who's ignorant?) Do some research. Einstein believed in "a creator that didn't get involved in the affairs of man". He also believed that religion and belief in a creator were 2 different things. To me, believing that something as complex as DNA or a human body can create itself is far worse than any religion or cult that I know of.
@amzuel420 "To me, believing that something as complex as DNA or a human body can create itself" That's nothing more than an argument from ignorance; just because you don't understand how it could have happened naturally doesn't mean that its impossible. And considering that you don't even understand basic science like the fact that the 2nd law only applies to closed systems, you not understanding science shouldn't be that surprising.
CONT "Einstein believed in 'a creator that didn't get involved in the affairs of man'" Theists of one stripe or another have tried for decades to claim that Einstein believed in their god, or even just a god to try making some kind of argument from authority from it, failing to understand that his personal opinions about religion do not prove any were right or wrong because he had no more special insight on that area than anyone else.
@ArcanaKnight You don't understand the 2nd law of thermal dynamics and you know nothing about Einstein. Read his own words. I'm not gonna argue with somebody that not only doesn't know what they're talking about but refuses to even try to find out. You're a waste of time.
@amzuel420 "You don't understand the 2nd law of thermal dynamics" You say that, but you've never elaborated on exactly what I'm supposed to be wrong about. Are you trying to say that I'm wrong and that organisms are closed systems? Or that the Earth is?
@ArcanaKnight "you've never elaborated on exactly what I'm supposed to be wrong about"
I said you were wrong about Einstein, then I showed you. I said you were wrong about the 2nd law of thermal dynamics then I showed you. Order doesn't come out of chaos without intelligent intervention, and everything wears out...including you, me, and the universe. A pile of rusty metal doesn't turn into a car. A car turns into a pile of rusty metal. That's just the wisdom of the 2nd law.
@ArcanaKnight Just so you know....Quote from Einstein: "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."
Is that clear enough? Those are Einstein's own words. And it's well documented that his biggest mistake was concluding that the universe had no beginning.
@amzuel420 oh got me with the second law of thermo dynamics. let me throw in the towel. wait. isn't the 2nd law of thermo dynmic a law that has to do with a closed enviroment? the earth is not a closed enviroment. try again.
"I have been labeled as an Intelligent Design (ID) proponent. I am not." - James M. Tour. Although Dr. Tour is a christian, he remains neutral with creationism vs. evolution. You may verify on his personal website. Also, Strobel fails to mention that DNA was one not as complex as it is today (e.g. RNA). But anyway, this is what I did rather than study for finals...
Wrong, Lee. Nature produces information all the time through errors in DNA replication--additions, deletions, gene copies, inversions, even wholesale incorporation of DNA from viruses! The vast majority of these things lead to dead ends, but multiply it by billions of years and 5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (literally) organisms on the planet, and we (living organisms), add in replication of successful mutations, and you don't need a high success rate to create a lot of information.
"science when done right?" So when science concludes that the earth is 4.5 billion years old and not 6000, and when it concludes that noahs ark is BS, and when it concludes that a man cannot live inside a whale and all that. Then thats bad science?. Hmmm. Jeez why even bother to do Science when everything is already in the book, we are going to disregard anything that contradicts it anyway, so why even bother.
"Can you think of one example of a mutation that has caused a true increase in genetic complexity? Evolution would require billions of them. Can you name just one?" Polyploidy, very common in plants.
The DNA that codes for protein (genes) is only about 5% of our total DNA. The rest of the DNA is for repair, maintenance, service, spacing between coherent codes. Some is at the ends of chromosomes to make sure we don't age a 100 years in one day! It functions as a safe zone so genes don't fall away at replication. Think of this: How does a cell in your intestines know what to become? Or the skin cell? Or a cell of the eye? All these cells contain the same DNA, yet they know what to become.
In nature we have 20 amino acids, of which the proteins of our world consists. We eat them. our bodies use them as building blocks. All creatures use the same 20 amino acids, so of course the protein production DNA is similar between kinds! We live on the same earth, under the same conditions. It's obvious that a monkey has DNA to make hands, so of course our DNA match. But it doesn't have the code to make feet. A monkey is as stupid/smart as any other animal. It's not made in the image of God.
Comparing the 4 letters of the DNA code to our alphabet is like saying that the language of DNA is inferior to our alphabet. It's better to compare it to our linear 2-dimensional digital language that's made up of 2 letters, "on" and "off". DNA has a digital code with 4 letters and is 3-dimensional.
Fossils SHOW a progressive pattern combined with chromosome markers proving humans at one pint shared a common ancestor with apes matching retroviruses prove man and ape are in the same family and we SEE progressive patterns in DNA.
@TheMrgoku1985 The problem with those markers is that the scientists disregard the surrounding mutation markers that don't correspond between apes and humans.
Did they bother to check if the retrovruses between a human and a duck matched? A human and a bear? And aren't retroviruses separate entities? Are they part of the human genome? If our bodies host the same lifeforms, how does that prove evolution? How many % of the earth's crust have been studied to show this fossil progression? .0001 %?
3 foot chimps as in more than one from different ereas and divers builds with biped hips,knee joints and feet a child or a small family unit with the same form arthritis you are retarded.
Human chromosome 2, Matching endogenous retro-viral sequences between the grate apes and humans,
recessive genes, tail muscle in humans, Progressive patterns in comparative
genes, Junk DNA, Single strain DNA.+multiple dating methods that agree with each other with an extremely low % margin of error proving the earth is old enough for the time needed for macro change and
Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, Kenyanthropus platyops, Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus garhi, Australopithecus sediba, Australopithecus aethiopicus, Australopithecus robustus , Australopithecus boisei, Homo habilis, Homo georgicus, Homo erectus, Homo ergaster, Homo antecessor, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis, Homo sapiens
@alexthasy cult taught in school? hahah WOW well shit talk evolution all you want? but look at things this way evolution is a theory! backed by smart people whom don't waste there money on bullshit churches.
Everyone knows that god was a dull ordinary boy until the day that he touched that magic crashed meteorite. From that day forward he was known as our super-lord. He spent his days whipping up dna strands with his bare hands and performing speedy immaculate conceptions with unsuspecting virgins. Our Super-lord Faster than a light beam and able to leap tall supernovae with a single bound. Is it a bird. Is it a plane. No, it's a bearded dude. Next episode: Rise of the horned crusader. Dr Satan
@209vaughn No, its forming opinions based on religious beliefs and trying to get the evidence to fit, the exact opposite of how science actually works. ID makes no testable predictions, and most of the arguments used to support it boil down to "I don't understand how it could have occurred naturally, so it simply must have been designed".
There's really no point in responding to science denialists like alex; they're so far gone that no amount of evidence could ever convince them that they're wrong.
Lee Strobels science has already been proven wrong in court. Watch Judgement Day:Intelligent Design on Trial". His science is also in opposition to what I learned in college. There is really no need to debate anything he says.
@Information39 OJ Simpson was also found not-guilty of killing his wife in the same judiciary system. You seem to believe in the infallibility of the judicial. Silly fairy tales of land mammals magically adding organs and limbs and evolving into whales after crossing millions of years and several specials won't be made possible by a court decision
@alexthasy In any forum where there are rules of evidence and each side is given enough time to address the other side's arguments (such as a courtroom), ID loses out every time. Even proponents of ID have admitted under oath that ID is pseudoscience, that in order for it to be considered science, the definition would have to be broadened so much that other pseudosciences like astrology would also fit into the new definition. And that court case just confirmed what the scientific CONT
@ArcanaKnight Darwinism is an opium for atheist. Darwinian atheist theologian claims make it clear that the whole concept is a silly mythical farce. “Designoid objects look designed, so much so that some people – probably, alas, most people – think that they are designed. These people are wrong. . . the true explanation – Darwinian natural selection – is very different.”
@ArcanaKnight ID is just as much of a pseudo-science as the concept that a single cell could have been taken through billions of years of evolution and turned into a multitude of species and on a much smaller scales the concept that land mammals altered limbs and organs and magically evolved into whales after crossing millions of years and several species is also just a silly fairy tale. Darwinism is on the same line as astrology, Ufology or any other lunatic beliefs.
@Information39 So instead of listening to reason you decided to go with hearsay. If you do not understand the impossibility of this information occuring by chance random mutations it goes without saying that you have underrated your own intelligence and worship the idols of our time by blind faith. An atheist scientist can come to a million rational conclusions that support their presupposition of evolution, but ONE clear proof of the contrary falsifies their "theory" 100%.
@joroma77 Maybe you should be discovery institute's "spin doctor". Religion draws the target of God is real and twists data to support it. Science looks at the data and then draws conclusions. By saying scientists have a "presupposition of evolution", you dont understand that fact or science. Funny, I have heard that exact statement from 2 other people. Both using discovery institute information. You read that in their literature, right?
@joroma77 Let me help you. Science changes with new data. So if this evidence of Strobel's was "clear proof", they would adopt it. Unfortunately, scientists agree that DNA confirms our ancestrial paths of coming from an ape like creature, not creation. If Strobels science was correct, you would find it in the journal of science, journal of nature, etc.. So go find me a real science article saying what Strobel is saying. Oh they say the opposite. Let the excuses begin...
@joroma77 Strobel is reason? A man who says he is a journalist (unbiased, gets both sides) looking for the truth about religion. Then goes to his friends at the discovery institute to get his “religious scientists” and doesn’t tell the watchers of his dvd that they aren’t scientists is reason? A man whos bacteria flagellum argument was proven wrong in court and continues to sell that information to the unsuspecting public is reason? Reason huh? If by reason, you mean dishonest, then I agree.
@Information39 Interesting that the same justice system where OJ Simpson was acquitted of murdering his wife also legalized that a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation supported by the myth of natural selection is behind the creation of all the species and the ecosystem. I wonder if that judge authority was recognized before God and how the creator will react to have been thrown out of his role as the author of his creation and replaced by a myth borrowed to ancient paganism
@alexthasy Wrong, don't have to be an atheist to accept evolutionary theory. Wrong, evolution doesn't deal with creation nor with creation of the ecosystem.
@Boomboxpower Please explain, If you use the Bible to calculate the age of the earth like Bishop Usher, the earth calculates to a starting point of 4004BC. So according to the Bible, the earth is 6015 years old. Evolution shows animals, plants and landscapes evolved over millions (earth 4.54 billion years old) of years. Evolution of animals, landscapes and plants are impossible in 6015 years.
@Information39 Only a retard would use the bible to calculate the age of the earth, It can't even get pi right. Correct organisms have most likely evolved over billions of years, evolution of landscapes? That's Geography, not biology. Even if the world is 6k years old, the vast majority of evolutionary theory is still correct, this is something creationists don't understand- they think evolution is just common ancestry. It isn't, it's any variation in alleles.
@alexthasy Funny you speak of myths. I just watched "Mysteries of the Garden of Eden" which tells where the Israelites got their stories for the Garden of Eden and the Tower of Babel (Gilgamesh). "Apocalypse The Puzzle of Revelation" tells where the Israelites got the story for Revelations (Zoroaster). "Testament 1" where they got the stories for Genesis. All the Bible stories existed in other cultures before the Israelites even existed as a people. Bible stories are symbolic not literal.
@alexthasy You still havent defined the basic science word "theory". Afraid we are all going to see that you are scientifically illiterate and have no idea what evidence science has? Thought so.
@alexthasy Yes, OJ was a slam dunk case. They found the weapon, had video footage,eyewitnesses of him doing it and a confession. Oh wait, they didn't have any of that. I as well THINK he was guilty. Innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. I don’t think courts are perfect, but they get it right most of the time. And you forgot to mention that they did find him guilty in the civil trial where a lower standard of proof is required (no weapon, eyewitnesses, etc).
@alexthasy Your OJ argument is another known discovery institute tactic. You are trying to discredit anything that is educational (science, courts). So we shouldnt listen to courts who get it right most of the time and listen to Strobel whos science IS wrong most of the time. Well, this tactic has worked within your own ranks. Religious people’s IQ’s are 6 points lower on average. Good Job, you won’t rest until the whole country is completely science illiterate and ignorant.Define "theory"
@Information39 I find it ironic that you cannot see the religiosity in the belief that species could have been the creation of a Darwinian atheistic evolution supported by a myth borrowed to ancient paganism. I used OJ just to show that man judgement on anything could be partial or outright mistaken. The existence of a creator God and the mythical nature of natural selection won't be decided in an earthly courtroom.
@Boomboxpower I am still struggling with the challenge of proving that peacocks or honeybees are being intelligently designed, programmed and engineered. Only atheists need reason to support the validity of a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation. I am not an atheist.
@castelgandalf Of course Darwinian atheist theologian Rev Richard Dawkins preaching that species are designoids (a word the Darwinian priest coined himself) are not intelligently designed, programmed and engineered but would be the creation of a Darwinian natural selection (myth borrowed to Greek paganism where she is called the goddess of mother earth) makes so much sense. We should start swearing on the Darwinian scripture "The origin of the species" by pope and cult founder
@castelgandalf I would rather say that the occult version of a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation should not be preached in school. Darwinian atheist theologian Dawkins pretension that species are designoids not intelligently designed but owing their designing to the myth of natural selection is simply absurd religious hogwash
absurd religious hogwash it may be, but it is also the prevailing theory of the day which holds sway with the majority of scientists.
wishing that it ought not to be preached in schools isn't going to make it go away. ever. darwininan atheist theologian dawkins may be a pretentious prick, but that doesn't make the theory of evolution wrong.
@castelgandalf Dawkins candidly admits that species could not have ended intelligently designed upon going through a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary process and fills the gap with the myth of natural selection..
i don't follow any one particular person all that well, i've only ever heard dawkins speak a few times. if what you say is true, then that proves dawkins is wrong. Nothing to do with whether evolution is correct.
Kent Hovind crashed and burned. Nothing to do with whether creation is correct.
@castelgandalf Dawkins is simply trying to rationalize that a Darwinian atheistic evolution is feasible by denying that species are intelligently designed. Peacocks, honeybees and other fantastically designed, programmed and engineered species are what is convincing me of the existence an omniscient creator God
@alexthasy Just saying they're designed doesn't make them designed... Why is it that Intelligent Design was discredited as science? Explain why we have cancer? Doesn't seem like a particularly clever thing to have designed. But wait! We have cancer because of the fall of Adam right? So why would a god condemn humanity with such awful diseases, because of Adam and Eve who this god created knowing full well they'd 'sin' (you said above it's omniscient, not me)? It's infantile.
All have sinned and greatly offended the holy God of the bible. The just punishment is death then hell. That's not Gods will. He suffered and died on the cross paying for the law you broke in His life's blood so He could legally dismiss your case. You must repent turn from your sin and trust alone in Jesus Christ for your salvation.
mamainmancj 1 day ago
@mamainmancj
There is nothing just about eternal torment. You're fucked in the head for thinking that is "just." You're also fucked in the head for believing ridiculous stories in a book written by cave dwellers thousands of years ago.
1ProudFemaleAtheist 6 hours ago
@1ProudFemaleAtheist Let me ask you this, if you follow the atheist world view, how can you even say that he is "fucked in the head" because that would assert an absolute standard of goodness and "oughtness", which in a chaotic and random world with no meaning, cannot in anyway exist, considering if there is no God, then everyone's opinions must be equally valid, and since everyone has different values, that means there is no truth and no absolutes at all in an atheist world and there cannot be.
RYUUSEIBOI2 1 hour ago
@RYUUSEIBOI2, Morality doesn't need to be followed from a deontological or normative point of view, which is mainly encouraged in religions. Atheists usually consider moral values from a consequentialist point of view. Given the fact that human progress is built upon continual change and evolving rules and laws, deontological moral values are the most primitive form of morality when broadly considering Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of morality. Atheists usually adhere to more developed mores.
Nashhinton 1 hour ago
@RYUUSEIBOI2, (Continued)... People don't need to believe in a deity in order to live decent lives. Morality is based upon common sense, not on counter intuitive and primitive rules in some primitive book.
Nashhinton 1 hour ago
Good laughs outta few comments.. Keep the rage coming people, it's friggin' exhilarating! ^^
Arthemesic 5 days ago
I am going to start posting videos like this on my facebook. People need to start thinking twice about the real living God we serve!! How awesome :)
alx3610 1 week ago
@alx3610 Spreading false claims..
Vikramthewhite 6 days ago
To MobbBarley
Evolution and creation are mutually exclusive. If one is true the other can not be true. They can not be reconciled. Please read Romans 5: 12. ....death came into this world through sin...means: before sin there was no death. Evolution (natural selection) is based on survival of the fittest and therefore presupposes death of the weaker beings. Which would make death a condition preceding Adam.
250ford350 2 weeks ago
Evolution could've been the way God created man.... just sayin.... if you research this stuff, don't just believe in what your peers tell you, decide for yourself.
MobbBarley 2 weeks ago
All DNA managed to prove here is how much of a scientific illiterate this guy is.
Warkiam 3 weeks ago 2
3:28 Faceplam moment in 3..2..1..
layson3403 1 month ago
"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men,… “ Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children
” Ezekiel 9:5-7
“Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses” 1 Samuel 15:2-3 “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” Psalms 137:9.
God isn't love he is hate.
max2right 1 month ago
@max2right He killed all of the asses..
TioPhillippe 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
max2right 4 weeks ago
@TioPhillippe Yeah but he forgot Bush
max2right 4 weeks ago
@max2right and beiber
TioPhillippe 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TioPhillippe Yes I did. As i think about the list of asses he forgot to kill it's much longer than the asses he did .
max2right 4 weeks ago
@max2right Nice job taking Psalms 137 completely out of context. As for 1 Samuel, again, context context context. God gave them 300 years to repent, the cananites. CHild sacrifice, murder, injustice, was rampant in Caanan. Apparently you don't understand justice. Let me guess, you are against the Death penalty as capital punishment.
gloinstrong 3 weeks ago
@gloinstrong Out of context? Give me any context in which you think bashing little children to death in a moral act.
max2right 3 weeks ago
@gloinstrong
Only complete and total moronic christians still use the "out of context" argument. Please explain in what context bashing a child to death, or slavery, or making a rape victim marry her rapist is appropraite? What context?
1ProudFemaleAtheist 2 weeks ago
@1ProudFemaleAtheist Let's use our minds here. The Psalmist (David) is constantly talking about the enduring love of God, Honor, "he is our shepherd", all the good jazz, then suddenly there is a passage that states "Blessed is the man that bashes....". Did the Psalmist have a brain aneurism? Your name fits well, because you are obviously too proud to find out context behind it (Yes, I'm sure david loved killing babies). David is referencing to a future prophecy of Babylo
gloinstrong 1 week ago
@gloinstrong
Answer my question - .
In what "context" is making a rape victim marry the rapist an acceptable form of punishment FOR THE RAPIST?
I'm having a good laugh at your inability to form a single cogent reply.
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 week ago
@1ProudFemaleAtheist "It was a different context and culture." In other words, omnipotent God changes his morals with time. After a while, he realizes that certain things like slavery and what you mentioned above just aren't socially acceptable anymore. Any moment now, he should be realizing that his views on homosexuality are outdated. We're waiting.
navid500 2 days ago
@navid500
Exactly.
*sigh*
1ProudFemaleAtheist 2 days ago
@1ProudFemaleAtheist Just read your profile. Atheism is your religion.
I got a laugh from this one, "America was not founded by CHristianity". Gave me a good laugh. A really good laugh.
Don't even try giving me the Treaty of Tripoli, easily refuted. Again, context.
gloinstrong 1 week ago
@gloinstrong
You're a moron.
Atheism is NOT a religon.
The words "America was not founded by Christianity" do not appear on my profile.
I do use my mind, that's why I don't believe the supernatural stories that appear in a fucking BOOK, written by sheep herders..
Not easily refuted at all, the words in the Treaty of Tripoli - although removed later - stand for themselves.
No context makes abominable violence acceptable to a thinking person.
You're laughing at your own stupidity
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gloinstrong
You're a moron.
Atheism is NOT a religon.
The words "America was not founded by Christianity" do not appear on my profile.
I do use my mind, that's why I don't believe the supernatural stories that appear in a fucking BOOK, written by sheep herders..
Not easily refuted at all, the words in the Treaty of Tripoli - although removed later - stand for themselves.
No context makes abominable violence acceptable to a thinking person.
You're laughing at your own stupidity
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gloinstrong
You're a moron.
Atheism is NOT a religon.
The words "America was not founded by Christianity" do not appear on my profile.
I do use my mind, that's why I don't believe the supernatural stories that appear in a fucking BOOK, written by sheep herders..
Not easily refuted at all, the words in the Treaty of Tripoli - although removed later - stand for themselves.
No context makes abominable violence acceptable to a thinking person.
You're laughing at your own stupidity
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 week ago
@gloinstrong It is obvious that atheists are rationalizing their belief in the non-existence of God through a Darwin atheistic evolutionary creation supported by the myth of natural selection. Blatant fallacies like that of Rev Dawkins preaching that species are designoids not intelligently designed are simply ridiculous.
alexthasy 1 week ago
@gloinstrong, Wait... Aren't treaties supposed to be made the law of the land according to Article six in the US constitution, which states that "all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land."? The treaty of Tripoli is constitutional because it was recognized as being a legitimate treaty. How can you refute the treaty of Tripoli without violating constitutional laws?
Nashhinton 1 day ago
"Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind tyranny in religion is the worst.” Thomas Pain. “Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. I had hoped that liberal and enlightened thought would have reconciled the Christians so that their [not our?] religious fights would not endanger the peace of Society.? Letter to Sir Edward Newenham, June 22, 1792 G. Washington.
max2right 1 month ago
"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." -Treaty of Tripoli, article 11 signed by John Adams and ratified by congress.
”I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life, I absenteed myself from Christian assemblies." “to follow by faith alone is to follow blindly.” "Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." Ben Franklin
max2right 1 month ago
LMAO DNA is most efficient? One word... INTRONS!
MacHead31 1 month ago
Leviticus 13: 35 to 57. God himself believes that a house or clothes can have leprosy and he details the remedy. Please look up the remedy. And this well-meaning yet ignorant gentlemen is trying to connect this god, a figment of his imagination as being the creator of DNA, lol. President James Madison said Religion Bondage Shackles and Debilitates the Mind and Unfits it for Every Nobel Enterprise"
AtollSurfer 1 month ago
@AtollSurfer
Great quote, and it always cracks me up how people claim our "founding fathers" or "forefathers" wanted this to be a CHRISTIAN NATION
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 month ago
Tragic magic...
trhtpc 1 month ago
Answer: DNA replicates itself frequently, and does so imperfectly every time. The result of these errors is a unique biological (physiological?) trait. Over time, errors which produce traits which are beneficial for survival in the local environment, are passed down to the next generation through sexual reproduction.
Also, DNA is not a "language"; it is simply a combination of four nucleotides which cause chemical reactions. It is not a "blueprint" except in our imaginations.
HKOverlord117 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ozowen I don't need to insult you. You are insulting yourself monkey boy by believing false prophet Darwin absurd pretense that you are an ape gone smart against God saying that he has created man at his own image. There is nothing illogical in believing in an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God if you are a Christian. There is nothing illogical in believing in an evolutionary creation if you are an atheist
alexthasy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ozowen !) An omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God is not conjectural if you are a Christian and a believer.
2) How is it that the mythical Genesis preached by your prophet has become the main way for your atheist brothers in Darwin to rationalize their atheism?
3) Believing in the truth is essential for salvation. Do you believe that Darwin is a new Messiah? Carnegie was flooded with light when he found the truth of evolution but he saw it as a hope in the finality of death.
alexthasy 1 month ago
Comment removed
alexthasy 1 month ago
What? I would love to be a Christian apologist. Really. But to be with all this...I think the best of Jesus' teaching is being completely dissolved these days. And I say this as a non Christian. I wish I could identify.
Bc2ast 1 month ago
@Bc2ast Oh and the best real discussions I have heard are from theologians, monks, priests/ministers from the positions, all the religions.
Bc2ast 1 month ago
@Bc2ast You forgot Darwinists. It is the most represented cult in that discussion and they are very eloquent in preaching their mythological beliefs.
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy Argument from incredulity plus a strawman. Logical FAIL
ozowen 1 month ago
@ozowen Seeing your great eagerness in joining with your atheist brothers in Darwin in blaspheming God, I understand that you don't believe in an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God. I am sorry, I will not be joining the cult of Darwin so as to create a big family of theist and atheist believers in the truth of evolution. I will keep pissing on the goddess of natural selection with whom I am certain a creator God is not sharing his glory.
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy If that was supposed to be insulting, or in some way poignant- don't mind me if I laugh. ROFLMAOAY!
I understand you would like to paint me as an unbeliever, it must irk to have a believer so vehemently opposed to your lying, deceitful and illogical crap. I guess you really want people to think all believers are like you- I want them to understand that not only is this not true- I would like them to appreciate that the distance between us is vast.
You are a lying moron.
ozowen 1 month ago
Comment removed
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy LOL
You keep on making illogical claims and then announce there is "nothing illogical"...
Wrong. Your post is founded on a false dichotomy. You keep getting your logic all fractured don't you?
LOL
ozowen 1 month ago
@ozowen Keep spewing your Darwinian vomit monkey boy. Again nothing illogical about Christians honoring an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent creator God and for atheists for honoring a myth their prophet Darwin borrowed to Paganism and put in charge of an atheistic evolutionary creation
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy Hey monkey brains, that post is simply illogical. False dichotomies do not constitute a logical or truthful argument.
I'm Rolling On The Floor Laughing My Arse Off At You!
ozowen 1 month ago
@ozowen You are the one pretending that we were created at the image of apes. Keep laughing and scratching your ribs monkey boy.
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy Oooh, has your puir wee little feelings been hurt?
Here's a thing, try posting with at least some integrity. Otherwise, expect everyone to call you names- your posts are blithering idiocy.
Try thinking.
Try logic.
Try being honest
ozowen 1 month ago
Zero evidence. You are just assuming things. If someone made an awesome cake, you can't automatically assume it was Buddy from Cake Boss. Justify your answers... without the fairy dust this time.
jukebox1322 1 month ago
Lee Strobel is a fuckin retard.
Killer0fTheSun 1 month ago
@Killer0fTheSun
If so, you're no different based on your argument skills.
Arthemesic 1 month ago
@Arthemesic
I dont believe in invisible friends and enemies.....he does. He is retarded.
Killer0fTheSun 1 month ago
@Killer0fTheSun I would say the myth of natural selection evolutionists are crediting with the miracle of the creation is quite intemporal. As a matter of fact she was called the goddess of mother earth in Greek mythology. Taking land mammals through millions of years of evolution and turning them into whales was certainly a great feat of witchcraft magic. I am sure Darwinism inspired the author of Harry Potter
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy "As a matter of fact she was called the goddess of mother earth in Greek mythology." As a matter of FACT? Now that is a huge, bulging, festering, writhing barrel full of deceit-worms.
There is no fact you lying imbecile. Your idiotic claims, repeated a million times do not add one iota of credibility to a baseless conjecture, a fantasy you extracted from your rectum via your lying mouth!
You are a weasel, a liar and a knowing supporter of all that is untrue!
ozowen 1 month ago
@Killer0fTheSun
There you go, argumentational errors just keep flowing.. If you believe in the big bang theory, you will need to have as much faith in miracles as a creationist. I don't know about you but it's a LOGICAL FALLACY to imply that all you see came from NOTHING. Explosions need air, which didn't exist then. Explosions need a 'spark', which couldn't have existed and even if it did, there could have been nothing to blow up.
But if there was, WHERE DID IT COME FROM?
Arthemesic 1 month ago
@Arthemesic
Holy shit we have a winner here for absolute christian retard of the year award!! My delusional fuck stick who said the universe "exploded from nothing"? Not i asshole. Maybe if you weren't so fucking delusional for your faith you would research(this means educating yourself) on how the universe expanded. The initial start is not known,but you cannot accept that fact,and you regurgitate the same christian banality that has been said for centuries thru ignorance.
Killer0fTheSun 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Killer0fTheSun To demean those not believing in the silly concept of a Darwinian evolutionary creation of the species supported by witchcraft is indeed your best argument. Absurd fairy tales of land mammals magically, orderly and atheistically altering organs and limbs while evolving into whales upon crossing millions of years and numerous species would not even make poor science fiction
alexthasy 1 month ago
@Killer0fTheSun
Speaking of ignorance, do you know me? You don't, so there goes your credibility. As I said initially, your argumentational gifts are that of a rock. Great job.
Arthemesic 1 month ago
@Arthemesic
I dont need to know you...your a retard plain and simple.
Killer0fTheSun 1 month ago
@Killer0fTheSun
Yes you would have to know me before making these assumptions. That is, in order to argue with credibility. Third attempt and you failed it. It's good that you know your science, but your debate skills are indeed that of a rock.
Arthemesic 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Arthemesic "Explosions need air, which didn't exist then. Explosions need a 'spark', which couldn't have existed and even if it did, there could have been nothing to blow up." Er, have you ever read up on the Big Bang cos this post indicates a blithering ignorance.
ozowen 1 month ago
@Killer0fTheSun
Besides, asshole, I asked you WHERE DID ALL THAT COME FROM and you completely failed to deliver. I didn't even state my own beliefs and you drew these strange assumptions. Proves you as ignorant as suspected.
Arthemesic 1 month ago
@Arthemesic
Where did all that come from? I will tell you where it didnt come from. It didnt come from inviisble gods or demons. That is believed by retards. Now fuck you....and fuck your mother.
Killer0fTheSun 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Killer0fTheSun A magical demon taking a simple life form through billions of years of evolution and turning it into a multitude of beautifully designed species is a wonderful fairy tale. Darwin truly gave atheist great opium to smoke
alexthasy 1 month ago
@Killer0fTheSun
You're a pathethic child. Can't debate without cursing and attempting to miniscule your opposition, you just HAVE to wreck everything you say for yourself.
Arthemesic 1 month ago
@Arthemesic
Debate? With you whom believes in invisible friends and enemies? Go fuck yourself christian cocksucker.
Killer0fTheSun 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Killer0fTheSun I would say that the myth of natural selection is very commendable for her ability to carry out miracles within an atheistic evolutionary concept. She is also invisible.
alexthasy 1 month ago
@Arthemesic
Where did all come from?
Read a science book, actually a few of them. Asking somebody to explain to you in a YouTube box? You are a fucking retard. The whole "came from nothing" concept is completely false scientifically - there is no such thing as nothing. Where did God come from? Oh of course - he needed no creator or no source, because he's GOD. Now, that makes perfect sense to you - but scientific answers do not. Bravo. The only moron and asshole here is you, hun.
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 month ago
@1ProudFemaleAtheist
Another assumption-maker. Thank you people for making atheists look like hateful idiots. You cannot be taken seriously for this.
Arthemesic 1 month ago
@Arthemesic Poor manners or behaviour does not invalidate an argument.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@1ProudFemaleAtheist
I admire your pride of being an atheist.. But you shouldn't be proud of the immense foolishness you spout. These hilarious conclusions of all you hateful fanatics make (don't say you're not, I have seen NOT A SINGLE COMMENT by you two that hasn't destroyed itself by applying argumentational errors all over) have been most entertaining.
Arthemesic 1 month ago
@Arthemesic
Guess what honey, ad-hominem attacks are fallacies/argumentation errors. Way to go ! Telling other people that is what they use, when that's clearly all you have? Please NAME ONE "argumentation error" I have made. See, that is how you "prove" that you are right here - not by stating that I've done so without any evidence, but by providing the exact nature of the error. You can't do so. Proving you're a moron who results on petty insults. Nice job! :-)
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 month ago
@Arthemesic
Oh - and I admire you wonderful Christian behavior. Calling others morons and assholes, Jesus is very proud I'm sure!
1ProudFemaleAtheist 1 month ago
I know Who lives in my heart. JESUS IS ALIVE!
proflouis 1 month ago
Evolutionist"Can you name one example of a mutation that has caused a true increase in genetic complexity? Evolution would require billions of them. Can you name just one?
Andytheantiathiest 1 month ago
@Andytheantiathiest What does "increase in genetic complexity" mean? How many chances have there been to add genetic complexity? Every time an organism reproduces there is such an opportunity.
dragonfan1981 1 month ago
I hate when religious lay men try to give a scientific lesson to even more ignorant laymen
Leave it to the scientists.
DNA also proves evolution as its shows an unbroken interconnection between species as can only be explained through evolution through mutations over billions of years.
Donal277 1 month ago
@Donal277 I love when Darwinian atheist theologian Dawkins preaches utter bullshit and has all the flock of gullible sheep say AMEN. ''‘Designoid objects look designed, so much so that some people – probably, alas, most people – think that they are designed. These people are wrong. . . the true explanation – Darwinian natural selection – is very different.''
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy Dont know why you are going on about Dawkins? Yes im very much a sheep....i say baaa and all cos you know im not educated...oh wait im a post grad in one of the worlds leadings universities which so happens to give the small thing called a noble prize....yes a sheep with no brain obviously
and yes i agree with you we are designed. 100% .The atoms in our genes over 3 billions years have been competing for advantages. We are designed ..but by them.
Now please go troll elsewhere
Donal277 1 month ago
@Donal277 WOW! 3 billion years would make atheistic miracles possible. I can see why God said that he would expose man wisdom as being foolishness. Being brainwashed is not being educated.
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy Evolution has nothing to say on deity presence.
Being on troll on the internet is not being educated either...your work is what?
Donal277 1 month ago
@alexthasy And can you give me a reference for your God quote just now. Or are you merely saying he talks to you directly.
Your reference?
Donal277 1 month ago
@Donal277 I am sorry for disturbing your peace and the comfort that your atheist cult is giving you in confirming the finality of death.
alexthasy 1 month ago
@alexthasy And please take home your nonsense arguments about evolution and religious lack of believe with the sheep of man Dr Collins head of genome foundation ...phd , md ...right fool of couse oh and 100% christian but you know big backer of evolution
in other words....you are a trolling moron (yes i saw your same comments over and over again on other videos)
Great life you are living.
Donal277 1 month ago
@Donal277 I have been accused of being a troll over and over by believer in a Darwinian evolutionary creation. It could be your best argument defending your witchcraft scienceThey will never be able to add info to the genome of a cell in order to launch it on that elusive journey that could turn it into a species. Funny that there should be a theist sect of Darwinism that would be working hand in hand with its atheist counterpart.
alexthasy 1 month ago
this is simply and demonstrably wrong. the human genome can fit on the average CD.
musicislife561 1 month ago
Oh the denial! :) gotta love it, good standup comedy.
Anonymous247n 1 month ago
alex is crazy, don't talk to him.
gregrutz 1 month ago
@gregrutz Anyone not buying in Darwinian atheist theologian Rev Dawkins BS that species are designoids not intelligently designed but rather the work of the Darwinian myth of natural selection would be greatly disturbed and blaspheming Saint Lucy the mother ape of humanity.
alexthasy 1 month ago
I would have to say the cell is convincing. but it does not mean evolution is false. The evolution of dogs from wolves is one he overlooked. it you look at many breeds of dogs. they can interbreed but the offspring are sterile. Puggle is one example of this. Now dogs from wolves are just one example of evolutions over thousands of years. not million. so who knows what will happen to the future generations of dogs.
yodudespence 1 month ago
@yodudespence That's not anything different than what we do with fruits and vegetables and I doubt it has much to do with actual evolution. That's simply "sculpting the breed" so to speak. But the real question is how "protection of the species" seems to be programmed. IE: No dog I ever heard of ever procreated outside the dog family. Overall I see way too much biological order for it to have happened by accident and then there's that pesky 2nd law of thermal dynamics.
amzuel420 1 month ago
@amzuel420 "No dog I ever heard of ever procreated outside the dog family" Who says that they should? Also, what exactly does the 2nd law have to do with anything? You seem to be laboring under some pretty massive misconceptions regarding biology, and science in general.
ArcanaKnight 1 month ago
@ArcanaKnight Evolution says they should. Otherwise they'll always be dogs. Do you know what the 2nd law of thermal dynamics says? And did you know that Einstein believed in intelligent creation partly because of that?
amzuel420 1 month ago
@amzuel420 The 2nd law doesn't apply because organisms (and the planet itself for that matter) aren't closed systems. Your claim about Einstein is entirely untrue (an infamous letter by him even dismissed religion as being "childish"). Your claim that evolution says that dogs should try to procreate outside the dog family is just plain ignorant; before you try arguing against evolution, you should try to learn what it actually says first.
ArcanaKnight 1 month ago
@ArcanaKnight Maybe you should read up on Einstein, it's obvious you know less about him than you know about biology and physics. (And I'm the ones who's ignorant?) Do some research. Einstein believed in "a creator that didn't get involved in the affairs of man". He also believed that religion and belief in a creator were 2 different things. To me, believing that something as complex as DNA or a human body can create itself is far worse than any religion or cult that I know of.
amzuel420 1 month ago
@amzuel420 "To me, believing that something as complex as DNA or a human body can create itself" That's nothing more than an argument from ignorance; just because you don't understand how it could have happened naturally doesn't mean that its impossible. And considering that you don't even understand basic science like the fact that the 2nd law only applies to closed systems, you not understanding science shouldn't be that surprising.
ArcanaKnight 1 month ago
CONT "Einstein believed in 'a creator that didn't get involved in the affairs of man'" Theists of one stripe or another have tried for decades to claim that Einstein believed in their god, or even just a god to try making some kind of argument from authority from it, failing to understand that his personal opinions about religion do not prove any were right or wrong because he had no more special insight on that area than anyone else.
ArcanaKnight 1 month ago
@ArcanaKnight You don't understand the 2nd law of thermal dynamics and you know nothing about Einstein. Read his own words. I'm not gonna argue with somebody that not only doesn't know what they're talking about but refuses to even try to find out. You're a waste of time.
amzuel420 1 month ago
@amzuel420 "You don't understand the 2nd law of thermal dynamics" You say that, but you've never elaborated on exactly what I'm supposed to be wrong about. Are you trying to say that I'm wrong and that organisms are closed systems? Or that the Earth is?
ArcanaKnight 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ArcanaKnight "you've never elaborated on exactly what I'm supposed to be wrong about"
I said you were wrong about Einstein, then I showed you. I said you were wrong about the 2nd law of thermal dynamics then I showed you. Order doesn't come out of chaos without intelligent intervention, and everything wears out...including you, me, and the universe. A pile of rusty metal doesn't turn into a car. A car turns into a pile of rusty metal. That's just the wisdom of the 2nd law.
amzuel420 1 month ago
@ArcanaKnight Just so you know....Quote from Einstein: "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."
Is that clear enough? Those are Einstein's own words. And it's well documented that his biggest mistake was concluding that the universe had no beginning.
amzuel420 1 month ago
@amzuel420 oh got me with the second law of thermo dynamics. let me throw in the towel. wait. isn't the 2nd law of thermo dynmic a law that has to do with a closed enviroment? the earth is not a closed enviroment. try again.
yodudespence 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"I have been labeled as an Intelligent Design (ID) proponent. I am not." - James M. Tour. Although Dr. Tour is a christian, he remains neutral with creationism vs. evolution. You may verify on his personal website. Also, Strobel fails to mention that DNA was one not as complex as it is today (e.g. RNA). But anyway, this is what I did rather than study for finals...
demkomusic 1 month ago 2
Comment removed
demkomusic 1 month ago
Hmm...why are we listening to a guy who doesn't even hold a MSc in biology?
Casshyr 2 months ago
Wrong, Lee. Nature produces information all the time through errors in DNA replication--additions, deletions, gene copies, inversions, even wholesale incorporation of DNA from viruses! The vast majority of these things lead to dead ends, but multiply it by billions of years and 5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (literally) organisms on the planet, and we (living organisms), add in replication of successful mutations, and you don't need a high success rate to create a lot of information.
greenAbbot 2 months ago
"science when done right?" So when science concludes that the earth is 4.5 billion years old and not 6000, and when it concludes that noahs ark is BS, and when it concludes that a man cannot live inside a whale and all that. Then thats bad science?. Hmmm. Jeez why even bother to do Science when everything is already in the book, we are going to disregard anything that contradicts it anyway, so why even bother.
jlc012 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To read a couple of really good articles about biblical salvation, please check out the scribd site that is listed on my channel.
DreamsofMajesty 2 months ago
"Can you think of one example of a mutation that has caused a true increase in genetic complexity? Evolution would require billions of them. Can you name just one?" Polyploidy, very common in plants.
pontecanis 2 months ago
I have the evidence that most christians wish they had.
I could prove to any atheist or agnostic that there is a god.
all you have to do is recieve prophecy and that's it.
I used to be an atheist so I know how it feels, believe me.
here is the evidence, just go to this church that is almost everywhere in the world and receive prophecy.
CHURCH OF GOD MINISTRY OF JESUS CHRIST INTERNATIONAL
let me know what state you live in, and I will give you the address to the closest church.
lizardstyle101 2 months ago
The DNA that codes for protein (genes) is only about 5% of our total DNA. The rest of the DNA is for repair, maintenance, service, spacing between coherent codes. Some is at the ends of chromosomes to make sure we don't age a 100 years in one day! It functions as a safe zone so genes don't fall away at replication. Think of this: How does a cell in your intestines know what to become? Or the skin cell? Or a cell of the eye? All these cells contain the same DNA, yet they know what to become.
joroma77 2 months ago
In nature we have 20 amino acids, of which the proteins of our world consists. We eat them. our bodies use them as building blocks. All creatures use the same 20 amino acids, so of course the protein production DNA is similar between kinds! We live on the same earth, under the same conditions. It's obvious that a monkey has DNA to make hands, so of course our DNA match. But it doesn't have the code to make feet. A monkey is as stupid/smart as any other animal. It's not made in the image of God.
joroma77 2 months ago
Comparing the 4 letters of the DNA code to our alphabet is like saying that the language of DNA is inferior to our alphabet. It's better to compare it to our linear 2-dimensional digital language that's made up of 2 letters, "on" and "off". DNA has a digital code with 4 letters and is 3-dimensional.
joroma77 2 months ago
What causes the mutation of the influenza virus into new strains each flu season, and is this evidence of a living god?
How silly of me to have believed up till now that the virus somehow 'evolved'...
GodsTalkingSnake 2 months ago
@GodsTalkingSnake Do those mutations cause the virus to morph into another entity than a virus?
joroma77 2 months ago
Fossils SHOW a progressive pattern combined with chromosome markers proving humans at one pint shared a common ancestor with apes matching retroviruses prove man and ape are in the same family and we SEE progressive patterns in DNA.
TheMrgoku1985 2 months ago
@TheMrgoku1985 The problem with those markers is that the scientists disregard the surrounding mutation markers that don't correspond between apes and humans.
Did they bother to check if the retrovruses between a human and a duck matched? A human and a bear? And aren't retroviruses separate entities? Are they part of the human genome? If our bodies host the same lifeforms, how does that prove evolution? How many % of the earth's crust have been studied to show this fossil progression? .0001 %?
joroma77 2 months ago
@joroma 77
Source information?
watch?v=S9am3mfaE6U
and fossils
3 foot chimps as in more than one from different ereas and divers builds with biped hips,knee joints and feet a child or a small family unit with the same form arthritis you are retarded.
TheMrgoku1985 2 months ago
@joroma77
No peer reviwed sorce your argument is full of shit.
TheMrgoku1985 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Human chromosome 2, Matching endogenous retro-viral sequences between the grate apes and humans,
recessive genes, tail muscle in humans, Progressive patterns in comparative
genes, Junk DNA, Single strain DNA.+multiple dating methods that agree with each other with an extremely low % margin of error proving the earth is old enough for the time needed for macro change and
Ring species and nylon eating bactera
TheMrgoku1985 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Link debunking hoax claims
watch?v=S9am3mfaE6U
Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, Kenyanthropus platyops, Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus garhi, Australopithecus sediba, Australopithecus aethiopicus, Australopithecus robustus , Australopithecus boisei, Homo habilis, Homo georgicus, Homo erectus, Homo ergaster, Homo antecessor, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis, Homo sapiens
TheMrgoku1985 2 months ago
@alexthasy cult taught in school? hahah WOW well shit talk evolution all you want? but look at things this way evolution is a theory! backed by smart people whom don't waste there money on bullshit churches.
elskato89 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Everyone knows that god was a dull ordinary boy until the day that he touched that magic crashed meteorite. From that day forward he was known as our super-lord. He spent his days whipping up dna strands with his bare hands and performing speedy immaculate conceptions with unsuspecting virgins. Our Super-lord Faster than a light beam and able to leap tall supernovae with a single bound. Is it a bird. Is it a plane. No, it's a bearded dude. Next episode: Rise of the horned crusader. Dr Satan
13eyeofthebeholder 2 months ago
ID is a Philosophy of Science. It's forming opinions based on the wealth of scientific information we have today.
209vaughn 2 months ago
@209vaughn No, its forming opinions based on religious beliefs and trying to get the evidence to fit, the exact opposite of how science actually works. ID makes no testable predictions, and most of the arguments used to support it boil down to "I don't understand how it could have occurred naturally, so it simply must have been designed".
ArcanaKnight 2 months ago
A Wise man Says....SHUT THE FUCK UP
AlienNext100 2 months ago
There's really no point in responding to science denialists like alex; they're so far gone that no amount of evidence could ever convince them that they're wrong.
ArcanaKnight 2 months ago
i learned a lot from this vid. i learned that DNA is information with content, and...you know... stuff like that.
iliteritmonkey 3 months ago
Lee Strobels science has already been proven wrong in court. Watch Judgement Day:Intelligent Design on Trial". His science is also in opposition to what I learned in college. There is really no need to debate anything he says.
Information39 3 months ago
@Information39 OJ Simpson was also found not-guilty of killing his wife in the same judiciary system. You seem to believe in the infallibility of the judicial. Silly fairy tales of land mammals magically adding organs and limbs and evolving into whales after crossing millions of years and several specials won't be made possible by a court decision
alexthasy 3 months ago
@alexthasy In any forum where there are rules of evidence and each side is given enough time to address the other side's arguments (such as a courtroom), ID loses out every time. Even proponents of ID have admitted under oath that ID is pseudoscience, that in order for it to be considered science, the definition would have to be broadened so much that other pseudosciences like astrology would also fit into the new definition. And that court case just confirmed what the scientific CONT
ArcanaKnight 3 months ago
CONT community had already concluded: that ID isn't science, its just creationism put through a word-replace program.
ArcanaKnight 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ArcanaKnight Darwinism is an opium for atheist. Darwinian atheist theologian claims make it clear that the whole concept is a silly mythical farce. “Designoid objects look designed, so much so that some people – probably, alas, most people – think that they are designed. These people are wrong. . . the true explanation – Darwinian natural selection – is very different.”
alexthasy 2 months ago
@ArcanaKnight ID is just as much of a pseudo-science as the concept that a single cell could have been taken through billions of years of evolution and turned into a multitude of species and on a much smaller scales the concept that land mammals altered limbs and organs and magically evolved into whales after crossing millions of years and several species is also just a silly fairy tale. Darwinism is on the same line as astrology, Ufology or any other lunatic beliefs.
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy and its like christianity, sticks into snakes etc, blameless jesus drowning some poor guys pigs, fantasy crap... coh!
cattlexing 2 months ago
Comment removed
Information39 2 months ago
@Information39
I guess you view the Dred Scott and Scopes decisions with the same reverence which you give to the Dover trial DECIDED by a NON-SCIENTIST judge.
MrSandykramer 2 months ago
@Information39 So instead of listening to reason you decided to go with hearsay. If you do not understand the impossibility of this information occuring by chance random mutations it goes without saying that you have underrated your own intelligence and worship the idols of our time by blind faith. An atheist scientist can come to a million rational conclusions that support their presupposition of evolution, but ONE clear proof of the contrary falsifies their "theory" 100%.
joroma77 2 months ago
Comment removed
Information39 2 months ago
@joroma77 Maybe you should be discovery institute's "spin doctor". Religion draws the target of God is real and twists data to support it. Science looks at the data and then draws conclusions. By saying scientists have a "presupposition of evolution", you dont understand that fact or science. Funny, I have heard that exact statement from 2 other people. Both using discovery institute information. You read that in their literature, right?
Information39 2 months ago
@joroma77 Let me help you. Science changes with new data. So if this evidence of Strobel's was "clear proof", they would adopt it. Unfortunately, scientists agree that DNA confirms our ancestrial paths of coming from an ape like creature, not creation. If Strobels science was correct, you would find it in the journal of science, journal of nature, etc.. So go find me a real science article saying what Strobel is saying. Oh they say the opposite. Let the excuses begin...
Information39 2 months ago
@joroma77 Strobel is reason? A man who says he is a journalist (unbiased, gets both sides) looking for the truth about religion. Then goes to his friends at the discovery institute to get his “religious scientists” and doesn’t tell the watchers of his dvd that they aren’t scientists is reason? A man whos bacteria flagellum argument was proven wrong in court and continues to sell that information to the unsuspecting public is reason? Reason huh? If by reason, you mean dishonest, then I agree.
Information39 2 months ago
@Information39 Interesting that the same justice system where OJ Simpson was acquitted of murdering his wife also legalized that a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation supported by the myth of natural selection is behind the creation of all the species and the ecosystem. I wonder if that judge authority was recognized before God and how the creator will react to have been thrown out of his role as the author of his creation and replaced by a myth borrowed to ancient paganism
alexthasy 2 months ago 6
@alexthasy Wrong, don't have to be an atheist to accept evolutionary theory. Wrong, evolution doesn't deal with creation nor with creation of the ecosystem.
Try again.
Boomboxpower 2 months ago
@Boomboxpower Please explain, If you use the Bible to calculate the age of the earth like Bishop Usher, the earth calculates to a starting point of 4004BC. So according to the Bible, the earth is 6015 years old. Evolution shows animals, plants and landscapes evolved over millions (earth 4.54 billion years old) of years. Evolution of animals, landscapes and plants are impossible in 6015 years.
Information39 2 months ago
@Information39 Only a retard would use the bible to calculate the age of the earth, It can't even get pi right. Correct organisms have most likely evolved over billions of years, evolution of landscapes? That's Geography, not biology. Even if the world is 6k years old, the vast majority of evolutionary theory is still correct, this is something creationists don't understand- they think evolution is just common ancestry. It isn't, it's any variation in alleles.
Boomboxpower 2 months ago
Comment removed
Information39 2 months ago
@alexthasy Funny you speak of myths. I just watched "Mysteries of the Garden of Eden" which tells where the Israelites got their stories for the Garden of Eden and the Tower of Babel (Gilgamesh). "Apocalypse The Puzzle of Revelation" tells where the Israelites got the story for Revelations (Zoroaster). "Testament 1" where they got the stories for Genesis. All the Bible stories existed in other cultures before the Israelites even existed as a people. Bible stories are symbolic not literal.
Information39 2 months ago
@alexthasy You still havent defined the basic science word "theory". Afraid we are all going to see that you are scientifically illiterate and have no idea what evidence science has? Thought so.
Information39 2 months ago
@alexthasy Yes, OJ was a slam dunk case. They found the weapon, had video footage,eyewitnesses of him doing it and a confession. Oh wait, they didn't have any of that. I as well THINK he was guilty. Innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. I don’t think courts are perfect, but they get it right most of the time. And you forgot to mention that they did find him guilty in the civil trial where a lower standard of proof is required (no weapon, eyewitnesses, etc).
Information39 2 months ago
@alexthasy Your OJ argument is another known discovery institute tactic. You are trying to discredit anything that is educational (science, courts). So we shouldnt listen to courts who get it right most of the time and listen to Strobel whos science IS wrong most of the time. Well, this tactic has worked within your own ranks. Religious people’s IQ’s are 6 points lower on average. Good Job, you won’t rest until the whole country is completely science illiterate and ignorant.Define "theory"
Information39 2 months ago
@Information39 I find it ironic that you cannot see the religiosity in the belief that species could have been the creation of a Darwinian atheistic evolution supported by a myth borrowed to ancient paganism. I used OJ just to show that man judgement on anything could be partial or outright mistaken. The existence of a creator God and the mythical nature of natural selection won't be decided in an earthly courtroom.
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy Please explain how organisms have pseudogenes without using evolutionary theory.
Boomboxpower 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Boomboxpower I am still struggling with the challenge of proving that peacocks or honeybees are being intelligently designed, programmed and engineered. Only atheists need reason to support the validity of a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation. I am not an atheist.
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy "The existence of a creator God and the mythical nature of natural selection won't be decided in an earthly courtroom."
Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.
Intelligent design/creationism lost.
:D
castelgandalf 2 months ago
@castelgandalf Of course Darwinian atheist theologian Rev Richard Dawkins preaching that species are designoids (a word the Darwinian priest coined himself) are not intelligently designed, programmed and engineered but would be the creation of a Darwinian natural selection (myth borrowed to Greek paganism where she is called the goddess of mother earth) makes so much sense. We should start swearing on the Darwinian scripture "The origin of the species" by pope and cult founder
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy
or we could say "god done it, and you are forbidden from teaching evolution in classrooms" as was decided in the scopes monkey trial.
castelgandalf 2 months ago
@castelgandalf I would rather say that the occult version of a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary creation should not be preached in school. Darwinian atheist theologian Dawkins pretension that species are designoids not intelligently designed but owing their designing to the myth of natural selection is simply absurd religious hogwash
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy
absurd religious hogwash it may be, but it is also the prevailing theory of the day which holds sway with the majority of scientists.
wishing that it ought not to be preached in schools isn't going to make it go away. ever. darwininan atheist theologian dawkins may be a pretentious prick, but that doesn't make the theory of evolution wrong.
castelgandalf 2 months ago
@castelgandalf Dawkins candidly admits that species could not have ended intelligently designed upon going through a Darwinian atheistic evolutionary process and fills the gap with the myth of natural selection..
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy
i don't follow any one particular person all that well, i've only ever heard dawkins speak a few times. if what you say is true, then that proves dawkins is wrong. Nothing to do with whether evolution is correct.
Kent Hovind crashed and burned. Nothing to do with whether creation is correct.
castelgandalf 2 months ago
@castelgandalf Dawkins is simply trying to rationalize that a Darwinian atheistic evolution is feasible by denying that species are intelligently designed. Peacocks, honeybees and other fantastically designed, programmed and engineered species are what is convincing me of the existence an omniscient creator God
alexthasy 2 months ago
@alexthasy Just saying they're designed doesn't make them designed... Why is it that Intelligent Design was discredited as science? Explain why we have cancer? Doesn't seem like a particularly clever thing to have designed. But wait! We have cancer because of the fall of Adam right? So why would a god condemn humanity with such awful diseases, because of Adam and Eve who this god created knowing full well they'd 'sin' (you said above it's omniscient, not me)? It's infantile.
MrJustanatheist 2 months ago