@househouse117 Science without Religion is lame, Religion without Science is blind. What proof does Science hold that 'proves' everything there is can be proven to be? And when people start questioning Science and you start bashing on them it makes you no more different than those churches who attacked anyone who questioned them.
@Xveldin how is science without religion lame? science does not prove everything. science is there to try and understand and figure out things. to be skeptical and question things. not to be told one thing and believe it without questioning or reason. science is there to try and understand and fill the gaps, not to plug them with things that are even more complicated and bring up even more questions. i would never "bash" anyone that questions science, so long as their question has reason n logic
@househouse117 I believe what I said was a quote from one of the most intelligent men to ever live, Albert Einstein. If you look at it, if you have nothing to look for, in this case, God, than what good does Science do you? Science is something that must be applied to discovery and to discover, you must have at least some idea of what you are looking for. I see truth in both and in a lot of philosophies in this world from Buddhism to Science. Open minded I guess.
@Xveldin albert einstein also didnt believe in a big bang and believed in a steady state.... even the most intelligent people may get things wrong. why does science have to be trying to discover a deity? guess you'll have another quote to tell me instead of using your own words? (y)
@househouse117 See, this is the Internet, nothing but lies built upon lies and people like you start getting pissed off because someone has a different opinion... "guess you'll have another quote to tell me instead of using your own words?" that is the kind of shit that sparks fights on the Internet that lead to nowhere. So go ahead with one source of truth and I'll go my own ways with several and growing sources of truth. Danm.
Jesus takes him into outer space toward a distant city made of brilliant light of a similar description to the city in the Book of Revelation. He speculates this is the place where people go who have become Christ-like while on Earth. Here, love was the dominant focus of life. He realizes he is seeing heaven, but he is not allowed to go in. Jesus then shows him the future of the Earth. He then returns to his physical body.
He is then taken to a different dimension appearing like an enormous university. Here he observes people dressed as monks engaged in some form of artistic behavior or research. He is taken into an enormous library where all the important books of the universe are assembled. He asks Jesus if this is heaven. He replies that these are the people who grew beyond selfish desires while on Earth. George realizes these people cannot see Jesus, just as the others could not see him in hell.
The book of john revelation was sent to him by angel in a dream, about the incoming future. Conspiracy theorist try to use facts and data to arrive at the same conclusion. Does are the question people should ask themselves? Religion vs Science.
I personally feel for Galileo and I feel for Kerpernakus. They were only stating the truth, as perceived through their eyes and the church, during the time, was so fixed on their beliefs. Anytime one is fearful of a belief being proved wrong, it is a clear sign that it isn't a truth. One shouldn't need to fear their belief being proved wrong cause it is the truth. It is clear to us, through the church's faults, that we must give people a fair and equal chance to speak and reason with them.
What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.
Attention Christians and Muslims : A new book has come that must be of interest to you , its called " Worshiping god for dummies " please see your nearest bookstore .
Everytime science says one thing then another scientist says something else. So called science has said so many different pharmaceuticals are helpful and then they are always taken off the market in a couple years after making everyone sick. Tesla proved we could all have free electricity by tapping into gravitational pull yet new "science" says that isnt true. Science also says GMO food is safe yet it breaks down into alien amino acids and causes new weird cancers. Science haha
@hawklord2001 Since everyone is biased based on their own subjective view of reality then how can any method used by biased individuals be any good? I could point out hundreds of clearly obviously examples right now and based on your bias you will freak out and deny it. You people that put all your faith in "science" are so much easier to mess with your minds than "religious" people.
@mustaffa1611 The thing is, even though scientists argue and contradict each other, it is because they are proposing new theories and publishing new discoveries on subjects, leading to a refined form of truth. In religion, everyone thoughtlessly submits without ever thinking individually or contradicting other members of the community. We only find new things by disproving the old. Due to this, science advances whereas religion stays seemingly primitive in its thought processes.
@yungsurma People generalize the words "science" and "religion" to mix their definitions to what suits them. Mixing definitions is where differences and argument happen. I mentioned specifically GMO food and Tesla and pharmaceuticals. Then you reponded with a generalized word of "science" with floating definitions. Pick a specific topic and try not using words that only have emotion attached to them and no set definition.
@mustaffa1611 If you actually read over your introductory statement, you would see that you are the first one to generalize the topic of science. "Everytime science says one thing then another scientist says something else". You were the first one to attack science as a whole, and so I defended science as a whole. Secondly, I used the generalization of religion because that's what this video is about. Thirdly, your response didn't even have any intelligent comebacks against my comment. Good try.
@mustaffa1611 On another aspect of your reply, where exactly did I use a definition? Using words we don't quite know the meaning of now, aren't we? I stated two studies, and the social tendencies of each. It also doesn't seem very fair that of every single scientific feat in history, you mention three of your choice, and explain the negative aspects of each. It's biased to do so; There have been millions of scientific feats in the past, and 3 out of millions reduces to a very small number...
@yungsurma When using the word "science" it means nothing. Any meaning that you or anyone else applies to that word is purely personal and subjective. Why not take one aspect of 'science' vs.one aspect of 'religion' and be specific ... because it is retarded: Astrology vs. Calvanism. or algebra vs. judaism. Anyone who compares "science' to 'religion' is retarded. How about apple pie to freemasonry. Anyone who uses the word science or religion is only trying to evoke emotions.
@mustaffa1611 " Anyone who compares "science' to 'religion' is retarded.". When taking an opinion based statement, and stating it factually, one is using language full of emotion as well. So basically, in telling me that I'm using words full of emotion, you've done the same. Once again, I used generalized terms only because your original statement had generalized terms in it. Secondly, you still haven't told me where I used a definition. It seems like you're avoiding what you cannot answer.
@yungsurma You used the word 'religion' in numerous times in your posts. Are you saying that you were using this word and it had no meaning? You stated that "In religion, everyone thoughtlessly submits".... If you were using 'religion' and had no meaning why didnt you just type " _______?" Or why don't you define your terms and explain what your own subjective meaning of the word "religion" is? The funniest thing is when people try to define what "religion" or "science" means?
@mustaffa1611 If you paid attention to what I wrote, you would have seen that I already covered this: "Secondly, I used the generalization of religion because that's what this video is about.". Next, I have no obligation to be defining things, because you were the one telling me I was using definitions when I clearly wasn't. Also, it doesn't help the sway of your argument when you end declarative sentences with question marks or fail to conjugate verbs (means) to meet the demands of the subject.
@mustaffa1611 Those are the comments that I love the most, because they have no actual substance to them. To me, they are the ultimate proof that my adversary has nothing intelligent left to say.
@yungsurma You said you had no obligation to define the word when the topic of discussion was the definition of that word. So what would be the point to continue talking with you when once you realize how stupid someone is for using the word "religion" and instead you cherry pick someones grammer? Be honest and try to explain what you meant when you used the word "religion"
@mustaffa1611 Actually, the topic from your original comment was about scientists contradicting each other, and I contrasted that with religion. Once again it seems that you are distorting the facts of the conversation. And in general consensus, a religion is a community of faithful people who share a common belief. I don't think it could be much simpler than that... Also, if I'm stupid, you must be even lower than stupid, because I'm correcting you on simple linguistic errors.
@mustaffa1611 The fact of the matter is that it does not matter what intelligent things one may have to say, but if he or she cannot spell properly, pay attention to grammar, or communicate, the world will not take him or her seriously. I think you should acknowledge that before you try to argue with me. These are things we learn in highschool, so it really just seems like you struggled getting a highschool education. Or... have you not gone to highschool? Both seem feasible at this point.
RELIGION IS FAKE, IT WAS MEANT TO BE A JOKE WHEN SOMEBODY SAID " HEY, HEY GUYS, LETS SEE HOW FAR WE CAN TAKE THE WHOLE "GOD" THING", AND APPARENTLY SOMEONE TOOK IT A LITTLE TO SERIOUS!
Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence of anti-religious ideas and a phalanx of deniers of God, has been the false teachings, the inadequacies and the intellectual perversions of the followers of some religions. The peculiarities and separate characteristics of each religion must, therefore, be individually examined when studying the reasons that have led men to adhere to that religion.
Western intellectuals were aware only of the superstitious aspect of false religion and how the established dogmas of religion lacked all logical basis, so they had no hesitation in condemning religion as such to be baseless. Their judgment was based on their discouraging experiences with their own religion, and it could not fail, then, to be hasty, unrealistic, irrational and illogical.
Well I don't see religion making the world better.. science is part of the world and can get a education and major in the science field with it.. all religion does is make people obey feel comford,and it doesn't help a person out in college or a job..doesn't fix cars or educate nobody
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
Do scientific discoveries and knowledge cause such a scientist to conclude that matter, *unknowing and unperceiving *, is his creator and that of all beings?
No?
Then how can the atheists and some of the scientists delude themselve and *believe* that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.
Everytime science says one thing then another scientist says something else. So called science has said so many different pharmaceuticals are helpful and then they are always taken off the market in a couple years after making everyone sick. Tesla proved we could all have free electricity by tapping into gravitational pull yet new "science" says that isnt true. Science also says GMO food is safe yet it breaks down into alien amino acids and causes new weird cancers. Science haha
@hawklord2001 I dont get headaches. I dont eat corporate processed gmo food laced with chemicals and artificial hormones. I also only drink fresh clean spring water that isnt laced with toxic poisonous chemicals and the fluoride which is nuclear waste from military contractors which "science" tells you is good for you. Science is so great but have you noticed the cancer and autism rates recently?
i hate religion so much... and believers who don't want to see the real world and want to keep believing in fairy tails... science will always debunked their holy books
:D The start of this video brought back fond memories... I think I was 5 years old, when my mom explained to me that the Earth is round, and about gravity, and astronomic distances, and just how mind-bogglingly far away the Sun is, and stars even further than the Sun...
It completely blew my mind away. Been in love with knowledge ever since.
if the idea of a god was imbedded into your mind by your caregiver when you were a child, that doesn't mean you should try and do the same to someone who understands that belief in God is not an instinct, but an idea that has been passed on- originating in times when the earth was flat. it could very well be that historically educated people who, by modern standards were vastly undereducated, needed compfort. they were conscious of the fact they would someday die and feared the thought
I would just like to leave a question to all the religious ppl.... What about other religions, if we ar all children of god why do some contries pray to other gods? or is the catholic religion the only one that is right and everyone else is wrong? ... hmm maybe its because religion is man made thus changing within diferent cultures.
i can understand "some" Christians like my mom because my mom had a abusive mother lived in a roach infested trailer and had one of the worst lives ever so i can understand people having no one to turn to except god were they can put there faith in a supernatural being because some people wouldn't be able to survive if they believed in "miracles and reasons" so i understand some Christians but not the stuck up asshole ones who bash on atheist just because they don't believe what we believe
Astonishing how the church wasn't run out of town the day after Galileo proved how wrong they were. Yet, they're still around - just like a bad virus that just won't go away. Just this morning, I saw on an exterior billboard of a church I drive by daily: "Science goes only so far. Then comes God". What ridiculously delusional statements they're still making! I think I will change their sign to read: "Science goes only so far. Then out goes God".
History shows that religion gave birth to science. As with science, there is still much to learn about religion. Reading religious text in a literal way will leave anyone perplexed (bunch of fluffed up words), so too, if you read a science book literally your head may explode (bunch of numbers & letters). However, if one opens their mind to the "'meaning'" of the text (religious or science), then one is able to gain a clearer understanding.
I too trust science, but can science test 'trust'?
@syncatron "History shows that religion gave birth to science."
Wrong, human inquisitiveness gave rise to science our insatiable need to understand nature gave rise to the scientific method. It just happened that in the early days most scientists came from a theistic background.
@shilsyk - God Created Science. Science is God's world and a way for you to interrupt how things work and function. Religion and Science walk hand and hand. To interrupt the scriptures of any region literally, would be foolish. Rather use them as a metaphor, rather then the direct translation. The disconnect is the creation and death. This is where religion and atheists both trust in their own faith, because neither can prove that the big bang or heaven is truth.
@Jermie420 That's not true. There are some evidences supporting the Big Bang Theory. Nothing in science is 100% certain, sure, but still some evidences is better than none, which is the case of heaven. Furthermore, religion is prone to fundamentalism. If only people interpreted it as a metaphor, as you said, then there would be no problem with it. Unfortunately, we know that is not the case.
As a child I grew up believing in an all mighty god; as a young man I started questioning those believes; as an young adult I completely discarded the possibility of the existence of a god and started debating "believers"; finally, as a older man I realized that discussing god and religion is the biggest waste of time and energy. People will always believe in the craziest things. Not worth it, simply ignore those believers.
Galileo really pulled the rug out from under Mother Church, no wonder the Pope was miffed. Since then the Church has been forced to retreat, modify and fudge on its dogma. "Not meant to be taken literally: All a bit metaphysical." Darwin really put the boot in, but the irony was that nearly all these scientists were Christians. Immerse them in that Christian BS when they're young and you've got um for life. Wise up guys. Knowledge begins where religion ends, so get learning.
Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence of anti-religious ideas and a phalanx of deniers of God, has been the false teachings, the inadequacies and the intellectual perversions of the followers of some religions. The peculiarities and separate characteristics of each religion must, therefore, be individually examined when studying the reasons that have led men to adhere to that religion. ...
In his equation, Einstein says that energy is equal to the mass of muter times the velocity of light squared (E = mc2 where E is energy, m mass, and c velocity of light). The velocity of light is equal to 186,282 miles per second. Also, the mass is equal to the energy divided by the velocity of light squared (m= E/c2).
With this, it became established that the atom with its protons and electrons is nothing in reality but concentrated energy ....
that can be analyzed and reduced to its primordial state. Thus, according to the modern analysis, energy is the substratum of the world. It is manifested in various shapes and in numerous forms, whether sonic, magnetic, electrical, chemical or mechanical.
In light of this, the duality between matter and radiation, between particles and waves, and between the appearance of electrons sometimes as matter and some other times as light was no longer strange. Rather, ...
it became somewhat understood; since all these phenomena are [but] forms of one reality, namely, energy.
Then how can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
@1tabligh So what kind of energy is god? Kenetic? Chemical? Using the word energy as some loose definition of spirituality is BS, energy is a thing, and is quantifyable and understandable. There is nothing supernatural about energy.
The term law used in this was does not imply a lawgiver, if you think it does then you are deluded.
@phookadude Stop arguing with him, he is not interested in answers. He is copying and pasting from islamic websites, it is not even his own opinion. If you ask something, he will just paste the next thing. Click on his name in your answer to him and you will get a list of all the videos he is posting the same stuff again and again. Also, take a part of his answer and google it, it will bring you directly to the sites he is copying from. He is a waste of time.
Is it logical to say that belief in God is peculiar to those who know nothing about man's composition and creation, and that, by contrast, a scientist who is aware of the natural *laws* and factors responsible for man's growth and development, who knows that *law* and precise calculation preside over all stages of man's existence, is bound to believe that matter, lacking all perception and consciousness, is the source of the wondrous laws of nature?
@1tabligh The appearance of precision is due to the fact that we developed under the influence of said natural laws. If they were differnt then we too would simply be different. Give up your jewish god, try thor, he's allot more fun.
Mohammad or any other human being. But if you claim the divinity of anyone besides God, you need to prove your claim. If someone claims that you are an angel, he has to prove it. I do not need to prove that you are a man because you appear as a man and have all the attributes of a man.
The one who claims that you are an angel is supposed to prove what he claims, because his claim is contrary to the common sense and to what appears as the actual fact. ...
When a person says that Jesus or Mohammad is a man, and not a God, he agrees with the accepted definition. Jesus lived like a man, looked like a man, slept as a man, ate as a man, and was persecuted like one. None of these facts need proof. This is not the case with the one who claims his divinity. ...
His claim is opposed to the common knowledge. Therefore, he, and no one else, has to provide the evidence for his claim.
Although the Muslims are not supposed to provide any evidence for the denial of the divinity of " an *individual devised god*, "thor, zeus, apollo, Jesus, Budha blah blah etc" or Jesus, they can present more than one evidence. ...
If numerous gods ruled over the world and each of these gods acted and gave commands in accordance with his own will, the order of the universe would dissolve into anarchy.
If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both! but glory to Allah, the Lord of the Throne: (High is He) above what they attribute to Him!
@phookadude The appearance of precision is due to the fact that we developed under the influence of said natural laws. If they were differnt then we too would simply be different.
____
The atheist Delusion!
Your delusions that science has put out the notion of God is purely rhetorical and has nothing to do with logical method, because even thousands of scientific experiments could not possibly suffice to demonstrate that no non-material being or factor exists. ....
Your claim is nothing more than a *fanatical* illusion based on unproven theories. Views such as these derive directly from a system of thought centered on materialism; within it, everything is defined and delimited with reference to materialism.
To interpret materialism in such a sense is in the final analysis strictly meaningless; it would be a superstitious notion involving the perversion of truth, and to regard it as scientific would, in fact, be *treason* to science. ...
Even if the followers of a religious school of thought had no proofs for their claim, to conclude firmly and forcibly that non- being reigns beyond the sensory realm would be a non-scientific choice, based on imagination and speculation. ...
Some people try to propagate this fantasy in the garb of science and to present their choice as having been dictated by scientific thought. In the final analysis, however, the denial involved in such an assertion is unworthy of science and philosophy, and even *contradicts* empirical logic.
@jimmywrangles Then how can you delude yourself and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
@1tabligh real scientists don't delude themselves they take what is available and use it..evolutionists are the ones who believe in all crazy shit..but one thing they both have in common science in no way endorse an almighty God who gave wrong scientific information on the bible.. like sun stopping its orbit around earth during war battle or four angels standing on each corner of the earth (they believed earth was flat) you probably will delude your self and ignore all the flaws in your Godspell
@telectronicguy Then how could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
@1tabligh do you see your delude reasoning here? just because you dont know how something works does not meant God did it. people did not know how the sun worked so they believed it was a God.. remember the Greek mythology?people on those ages believe faithfully in those gods (Zeus, Athena, Hades. etc) they build temples for them BUT now trough science we know is all B.S... i see you believe in your Quraan and Alla all I can tell you is this and I close my case DIE PEDOPHILE TERRORIST
Materialism looks at the world with one eye *closed* and, as a result, is unable to answer numerous questions!
Deluded atheist looks at the world with BOTH eyes *closed* and, as a result, are unable to answer ALL the questions!
Do scientific discoveries and knowledge cause such a scientist to conclude that matter, *** unknowing and unperceiving ***, is his creator and that of all beings?
An how can the atheists and some of the scientists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
Scholars are agreed that religious beliefs have always been intertwined with human life. However, their opinions differ concerning the fundamental roots of religion and the factors that have played a primary role in its establishment and development. Their judgments, in this respect, are generally based on studies of superstitious religions and primitive beliefs, with the result that their conclusions are, in the final analysis, defective and illogical. ...
It is true that certain religions, lacking a connection with the principles of revelation, have been influenced in their appearance and growth by the social environment and similar factors. However, it is illogical to ascribe the foundation of all faiths and religious tendencies to material or economic circumstances and demands, to fear of the terrifying forces of nature, to ignorance or to considerations rejected by science.
@LO000L " do you know what is the meaning of God? " . It (god) is an human 'concept'. An idea. It purports to give an identity to the 'unknowable'. It personifies our concept of ' good ' . It (god) is a creation of our imagination, much like gnomes, wizards, dragons, demons, Eden, Heaven, Halls of Valhalla, unicorns, elves, Hell, 72 virgins( or 72 bunches of white grapes). All imanginary.
I don't know why the church is so afraid of the truth, yet claim to know the truth...then they turn out wrong time and again. Now, once again, they claim scientific data is wrong (evolution) but eventually they will see it's true.
Saying that science is the opposite to religion is like sayng cheescake is opposite to toilet cleaner. They're two completely different things. To say there is a war going on between them is just mental. Also, i would like someone to tell me what they think of the fact that scientific theory accepts that the probability of either religion or science being true is extremely small. Science isnt about truth, its about How. Religion is about Why. To say they are opposites shows ignorance.
@mrsinghm that was a very educated way of putting that couldn't agree with your point more. wish people who claim to be scientists or claim to be defending science but remain ignorant of this fact could wake up and realize being religious doesn't mean you disagree with science. i applaud you.
@LO000L Man created science to seek the truth. Not to prove jesus existed.Not to oppose god. To find what we can truly know and use to our benefit. To find out what works because, heaven knows, prayer doesn't work. I know. I pray every day for you xians to disappear but, every day I get up and there you are. Every day you pray but, here we atheists are. "Pretend" doesn't work and you know it. We point it out to you and that pisses you off because it ruins the illusion of your "allmighty".
@yeshuahfullofit i'm not xians.i am a God disciple. btw man did not create science,God created science.the most reason why God created science to prove Jesus existed.
hmmm...go take a look outside and tell me where it all came from. type a big long explanation full of facts and big words and when your done read it and tell me this: which seems more impossible, a higher power who had a plan made it, or that it all exploded into being in a big bang. what have you ever seen or heard of that was not made by something else? i guess proof aside it makes sense that someone made all of this rather than it made itself out of nothing. food for thought
you are like a kid who hasnt been told Santa is not real. Dont you see? you can tell a person anything. If you were taught from birth that the world is telepathically controlled by a three-headed creature called Borgwi, who lives on the north pole, you would believe that..
Its all doctrine, and you know maybe there is a reason, But god is an easy answer, In earlier times God was the answer to anything we didnt know, Earthquake = God, Lightning = God, Fucked up crops = God, Death = God
Religious people were wrong then, why should we believe you now.. God isnt in the clouds, we been there and beyond. Did he pack up and leave? Two perfect humans who started mankind? clearly wrong, we found the bones of early humans and traced our evolution. We are hairless apes. Seven day theory? totally bogus, the innercore of our planet proves the earth was once a burning sphere.
if the bible is the word of god, why is it wrong then on so many points?
religious people were wrong then...debatable. who said god was in the clouds? not me. two perfect humans started mankind...no god did. of course you found evidence of early humans...humans that god made. if we came from hairless apes does that mean god didn't make us? no it means god decided to make us from hairless apes. seven day theory; figure of speech. in seven "time periods" god made the earth. the bible isn't 'wrong on so many points' you just don't understand what it actually says
So now the bible is one big metaphor? Why didnt they make it factual? You either believe in evolution or you believe in the adam and eve story. which is it?
the bible is written with an 'old world view', God in the heavens, the earth in the center of the universe. Which makes the persons that contributed to the book suspect, were they really talking with god? God should know these things...
I think the bible is written without divine intervention, Im not atacking the idea of an 'architect'
see now that is a decent question. why can't i believe in adam and eve and evolution? evolution does not necessarily mean we came from apes. that is just theory. creatures on the earth do evlolve and have evolved from ancient species this is true. so it says god created adam from the dust of the earth. that means that using resources on th earth he made man. maybe he decided to use evolution to make adam and eve from what was already here, say a hairy ape or whatnot.
You can believe in god and in evolution but It does make the bible somewhat vague and more abstract, dont you think? Tell me this, why, if so many civilizations independently from each other created different gods with different stories, is your god the only truth? The maya's had many gods untill "your god" was forced upon them. The idea of a God is very subjective, if you were born in India you might be hindu and in Irak muslim. how can you be 100% sure that you are right?
that is a very good question. i wont presume to tell you what other people believe but i can tell you what i believe. i am lds, or mormon if you will. the "dark ages" was a time after christs death where there was a religious fall-out. lots of disagreement on god. but people knew there was a god and began to organize churches and such. my church believes in revelation. which basically means talking directly to god. i can't be 100% sure i'm right but i have faith.
one of the main reasons i debate on religion is because i want to learn more about what other people believe. and tell them about what i believe. i'm not blindly following i have faith in what i believe and am looking at other points of view like yours for example. the difference between my church and all others is that we believe in direct revelation from god. we have the priesthood. we have living prophets who have seen christ and testify of him. they are 100% sure and so far i believe them
Good for you, i must say i admire your way of living though its not my ambition to live the same.
If god does exist and he's all goodness I find it hard to believe he would send all the non-believers to the pits of hell. Good people is good people. I dont want to be part of a movement that proclaims we should join them or have a horrible faith. If there is a god he wouldnt have said that, Its more likely a threat designed to win souls......
@papichulobumber1 i don't believe god will send all non believers to hell. you gotta be a pretty bad guy to make it to hell lol. i believe that god knows each of us individually and understands our circumstances. i believe he will reward us all justly for our actions on earth. i know many people that do not believe in god that have done greater good in this world than some people of my own faith. i'm sure they will have their place in heaven.
Question, so you actually believe im right when i say that the threat, "non-believers will go to hell" Is designed to harvest more souls. And in some cases not only for the afterlife but also to reap more power here on earth. The church is now trying to uphold this peacefull facade but they used to be a war-oriented organisation that tortured heretics in damp dark basements. And once you confessed to your sins you would get burned at the stakes. Not very nice people......
@papichulobumber1 i don't presme to judge "them" i'm not clear on what church you are referring to but i do not belong to a faith of that history. perhaps some churches do follow the character you just described. i'm sure they will be judged fairly as individuals for whatever crimes they may have commit. you r right though not very nice people. my faith does not follow that tradition you mentioned. we are more about charity than anything else.
Im all for freedom of religion, dont get me wrong. But i think 'traditional' believers are caught in a hussle they cant possibly figure out. Untill they die and can't turn back to tell the others it was all a lie.
In fact, i think we do live forever, that is, our energy lives forever. We are constructed from the same building-blocks that created the first one cell organisms that crawled out of the lakes. Before we existed but scaterred, now we combine in one human being.
If you perceive yourself as a lump of energy (that got lucky) death is so overrated. Soul is overated, its a chemical interaction between the particles. When we 'die' the glue 'binding us' dissapears and we become scattered again. Religion that believes in reincarnation is much more close to the truth.
The world is one big recycling machine. Giving birth to other lifeforms, bacteria, worms at first, we go up the food chain, millions of years before we get to the top again.
@papichulobumber1 you have an interesting view on creation. interestingly enough its pretty close to what i believe just with a more worldy explanation than spiritual. i believe we were scattered energy, or intelligence as my faith refers to it, and that we were organized into souls, or humans. mine differs from yours only by saying that a god organized our energy and rather than it just dissipating on death it remains and will be organized again by god so we can live with him.
Death and creation are complex subjects. The force thats behind it all remains in the shadows. My selfknowledge stops me from trying to figure it out cause I dont have the time nor do i have the braincapacity. But at the same time im combined in a lifeform that carries the burden it can think about these things. My dog thinks he will live forever, he recognises loss, he can feel sad, he can feel happiness but never will he doubt his own fate.
@papichulobumber1 they are indeed. in a spiritual light they seem to be within our grasp but like you on a scientific level i could never begin to understand how it all works. but still there is that abstract something that you find in all individuals i guess what we call a conscience. so many interesting possibilities that motivate us to live a life of some sort of morals. i think we all envy a dogs life haha, but i could never be content in ignorance and must contemplate these harder questions
Its the complete peace with its self an animal has that is the source of my envy. I could imagine this is what zen budhists are trying to achieve. They try to reach the goals in life paradoxicaly without trying to achieve them. But its damn difficult to live life in the moments. We think ahead, we think abstract, we have expectations. Sometimes is wish there was a button with which we could turn this 'over capacity' of the brain off. Just sleep, breath, eat, socialize, multiply
It is even in the bible that Adam and Eve were the first humans, sure "God" created them but supposedly we all come from adam and eve right? WRONG, where did Asians come from? Africans? And plus if we all came from 2 people wouldn't we all be committing incest then? Wow soooo many flaws in the "Bible" that once I figured that out I saw it for what it was THE BIGGEST HOAX IN HUMAN HISTORY.
listen to your logic. with your theory that humans were made from cells organizing themselves together there would be the same kind of beginning. how does that work? finally after billions of years of evolution a human is made. and maybe in another billion another one evolved so they could mate. or did a bunch of humans evolve at the same time? also if evolution can make humans from single cells then is it so far fetched that evolution can make different races of humans? really dude...
Every living thing on this earth started from cells. Cells that evolved into organisms, which finally evolved into plants, animals, trees etc. then finally from apes came humans. And the way it works is that it is scientifically proven unlike who "Adam and Eve" were made from what? Clay? a bit of "God". Honestly Scientology makes more sense that Adam and Eve
yes you are right excuse my ignorance. men definately came from apes yet somehow managed to leave apes behind. and we definately evolved from single cell organisms that just decided they weren't happy with their lives as single cells. and the universe was definately made in a "big bang" where everything was made from nothing. doesn't that break some sort of law? like "in a system mass and energy cannot be created nor destroyed." hmmm yep everything made from nothing. makes way more sense
@chriscyrilcall "doens't that break some sort of law? like "in a system mass and energy cannot be created nor destroyed. hmmm yep .." . The Second Law of Thermodynamics you are referring to only applies to a "closed system". The universe is not a 'closed system'.
@yeshuahfullofit would you mind explaining that concept to me? to my understanding the universe is infinite and there is nothing outside of it. so how could it be affected by anything else then what is enclosed in its system? i guess i've always understood it to be a closed system. perhaps i could use some more education on that topic though if you wouldn't mind explaining.
@chriscyrilcall " to my understanding the universe is infinite and there is nothing outside of it. so how could it be affected by anything else then(sic) what is enclosed in its system? " . Science does not say that there is nothing 'outside' of our universe. String theory/Quantum theory posits different dimensions, multi-universes and other strange shit. Eneygy can be transmitted/transferred between the two. We hope to be able to prove it soon with the LHC. Keep reading! : )
@chriscyrilcall You only have so much energy tied up in a location, say a star. When that star explodes it tranmits that energy to new locations that it didn't exist in moments before. Gas impacted by the shock wave(new energy) is now able to contract under gravity and cause new effects( births of new suns, planets and sub-atomic particles) that it couldn't do if it was in a 'closed' system. The universe is in constant flux of energy. What is infinite? Who can say what is outside of our world?
@yeshuahfullofit very interesting information non of which contradicts the existence of god. what is outside of our world? i guess there is no way to know for now but i'm sure we will eventually find out. i would just like to propose that some higher knowledge such as god is beyond what we know. it may be easy for you to dismiss as folly by a bunch of fools but it would make as much sense as anything else in this crazy world. don't dismiss the idea of god so easily
@chriscyrilcall "... non of which contradicts the existence of god. " . I don't have to contradict the existence of god. I don't believe in god. If you are trying to convince me of the existence of god, you have to " convince " me. Show me what you have that I don't have to convince me that god is real. I have a bible. It may not say the same thing as your bible. There are so many different versions. What do you know that I don't? Enlighten me. Can you tell me about Melchizedek?
Our existence doesn't contradict the possibility that we're all artificial "life" forms inside a computer simulation, does that mean that it's an idea not to be dismissed so easily?
Possibility does not mean anything other than possibility, and since god can't be proven or disproved with our current knowledge and since there will always be another step in the infinite regress (yes, even before an intelligent creator or non intelligent creator) then there is no reason people should tell others not to dismiss the idea so lightly.
@chriscyrilcall you have no conception of what evolution is, you're mixing abiogenesis with evolution... abiogenesis deals with the origins of life, evolution with the diversity of life, plus go and read up on all the evidence, especially the genetic evidence.
@ninjatoothpaste if you don't mind you could tell me your distinction of those three terms you threw out there and explain your difference in thinking so i know what your argument is. i could read up on it but i would prefer to hear your own interpretation. and i wouldn't go so far as to say i don't have any conception of what evolution is although granted, your knowledge may be far greater than mine on the subject.
You'll find a lot more information on abiogenesis, evolution and the evidence that exists for both elsewhere, the most I could do is give you a rough outline and very contracted explanation, if you really wish to learn about it you'll go and read from numerous sources, all I can see in requesting my interpretation specifically is the intent to debate me, and unless you have your own understanding of the material then you can't make an informed argument anyway. :)
@ninjatoothpaste touche' well i will read up on it then but in the mean time maybe you could mull over my argument that whatever you want to name it, basically the accepted answer to where everything came from is that it was created in the bang. all i argue is that that is impossible. the more i hear about that concept the more i think its nonsense. i guess similar to how you must feel when hearing about religion.
@chriscyrilcall @chriscyrilcall I agree the big bang sounds nonsense even to the scientists who discovered it. The trouble is, the maths of the nonsense works out. The discovery that the universe is moving apart is proven, and it sounds like nonsense. Now we've gone and discovered the universe is moving away from its centre is unexpectedly speeding up. Sounds like even more total nonsense, yet the maths is still annoyingly telling us this.
@LouisPlume i have not seen specific math on these occurances and connot argue them true or false. however it is not proven that the universe was created rather than already was there. whether it is expanding or not does not prove anything about where it came from. i still argue that everything did not come from nothing. what was there before the universe in this case? nothing? then it is impossible that anything could be created if nothing was there.
@chriscyrilcall There is a lot more to be discovered, to plug the missing science with Krishna or God, is meaningless.
There are many scientific ideas being mulled around about what was there before the big bang, "nothing" as a scientific word in the context of the universe means not in our universe, or it has no data. When scientists do discover something, I'm sure the holy will move the goal posts yet again, like when it was proven that the earth was not the centre of the universe.
@Blackheart12345 If we all came from a small group of primates then we're fucking family still, I agree that religion is bullshit, but I won't have you saying I ain't fuckin family! ;P haha
don't believe in adam and eve. BUT if it ever existed. small scale Evolution can account for the fact that there are Africans, and asians etc. take two white person put him in a desert. have his family and their descendants live there for thousands and thousands of years...eventually they'll get black, in account of the sun.
idiot, okay. stay in a desert without your shirt on for hours. you'll get a tan. now STAY there, have your children do the same, do that for thousands of years, and eventually, your descendants bodies are going to adapt. they'll turn dark. darker. darker darker, depending on the weather, they'll turn black. The human body just adapts to where your at. its why you get goosebumps. its reacting.
@Blackheart12345 ...That's what I always think.. Adam and Eve had sex and then they had children.. and then the siblings had sex together?...what kind of a beleif is that... and it is proven that when two siblings have babies these babies will definitely not be healthy,,, but apparently some say that there was Adam and Eve and then God created other humans.. then that wont necceesserily mean that Adam and Eve are our parents.. hmmm
@ODSDMD SOme idiot told me that their son went off to a city of angels and banged an angel and that infact they didnt commit incest, so whatg he was basically saying that in stead of incest it was necrophilia that created us LOL.Try a pick the lesser of the two evils hahaha
@Blackheart12345 - Yeah....Wouldn't Adam and Eve's children all be brother's and sisters and having incestuous relationships? And their kids would be all retards? I guess it's those retards that believe in religion.
@gorfjorf2112112 wiat they did add more ppl like lilith and bob perkins... and some others ... not sure but we can all agree that religion is for fucking saps....
Religion is about faith
Science is abut theory
Both are stupid!
linkzellda 1 month ago
@linkzellda science is fact. look up theory in the dictionary, theory can also mean fact :)
househouse117 1 month ago
@househouse117 I really know that before so what you point?
linkzellda 1 month ago
@linkzellda so then how is fact stupid?
househouse117 1 month ago
@househouse117 Science without Religion is lame, Religion without Science is blind. What proof does Science hold that 'proves' everything there is can be proven to be? And when people start questioning Science and you start bashing on them it makes you no more different than those churches who attacked anyone who questioned them.
Xveldin 3 weeks ago
@Xveldin how is science without religion lame? science does not prove everything. science is there to try and understand and figure out things. to be skeptical and question things. not to be told one thing and believe it without questioning or reason. science is there to try and understand and fill the gaps, not to plug them with things that are even more complicated and bring up even more questions. i would never "bash" anyone that questions science, so long as their question has reason n logic
househouse117 3 weeks ago
@househouse117 I believe what I said was a quote from one of the most intelligent men to ever live, Albert Einstein. If you look at it, if you have nothing to look for, in this case, God, than what good does Science do you? Science is something that must be applied to discovery and to discover, you must have at least some idea of what you are looking for. I see truth in both and in a lot of philosophies in this world from Buddhism to Science. Open minded I guess.
Xveldin 3 weeks ago
@Xveldin albert einstein also didnt believe in a big bang and believed in a steady state.... even the most intelligent people may get things wrong. why does science have to be trying to discover a deity? guess you'll have another quote to tell me instead of using your own words? (y)
househouse117 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@househouse117 See, this is the Internet, nothing but lies built upon lies and people like you start getting pissed off because someone has a different opinion... "guess you'll have another quote to tell me instead of using your own words?" that is the kind of shit that sparks fights on the Internet that lead to nowhere. So go ahead with one source of truth and I'll go my own ways with several and growing sources of truth. Danm.
Xveldin 3 weeks ago
Jesus takes him into outer space toward a distant city made of brilliant light of a similar description to the city in the Book of Revelation. He speculates this is the place where people go who have become Christ-like while on Earth. Here, love was the dominant focus of life. He realizes he is seeing heaven, but he is not allowed to go in. Jesus then shows him the future of the Earth. He then returns to his physical body.
Noworries35 2 months ago
He is then taken to a different dimension appearing like an enormous university. Here he observes people dressed as monks engaged in some form of artistic behavior or research. He is taken into an enormous library where all the important books of the universe are assembled. He asks Jesus if this is heaven. He replies that these are the people who grew beyond selfish desires while on Earth. George realizes these people cannot see Jesus, just as the others could not see him in hell.
Noworries35 2 months ago
The book of john revelation was sent to him by angel in a dream, about the incoming future. Conspiracy theorist try to use facts and data to arrive at the same conclusion. Does are the question people should ask themselves? Religion vs Science.
Noworries35 2 months ago
Muhammad, Buddha, and Richard Dawkins didn't come back from the dead Jesus did. look up Dr. George Ritchie's from near death experience.
Noworries35 2 months ago
I personally feel for Galileo and I feel for Kerpernakus. They were only stating the truth, as perceived through their eyes and the church, during the time, was so fixed on their beliefs. Anytime one is fearful of a belief being proved wrong, it is a clear sign that it isn't a truth. One shouldn't need to fear their belief being proved wrong cause it is the truth. It is clear to us, through the church's faults, that we must give people a fair and equal chance to speak and reason with them.
JesusismyLord91 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.
1tabligh 2 months ago
Attention Christians and Muslims : A new book has come that must be of interest to you , its called " Worshiping god for dummies " please see your nearest bookstore .
AntiEverything00 3 months ago 4
Comment removed
MrMrmell222 4 months ago
Comment removed
MrMrmell222 4 months ago
Its AIPAC's fault!
Casey4765 4 months ago
Everytime science says one thing then another scientist says something else. So called science has said so many different pharmaceuticals are helpful and then they are always taken off the market in a couple years after making everyone sick. Tesla proved we could all have free electricity by tapping into gravitational pull yet new "science" says that isnt true. Science also says GMO food is safe yet it breaks down into alien amino acids and causes new weird cancers. Science haha
mustaffa1611 5 months ago
@mustaffa1611 "Everytime science says one thing then another scientist says something else"
Maybe but through the scientific method is absolutely the best process we have for getting to the tuth of nature.
hawklord2001 5 months ago
@hawklord2001 Since everyone is biased based on their own subjective view of reality then how can any method used by biased individuals be any good? I could point out hundreds of clearly obviously examples right now and based on your bias you will freak out and deny it. You people that put all your faith in "science" are so much easier to mess with your minds than "religious" people.
mustaffa1611 5 months ago
Comment removed
hawklord2001 4 months ago
@mustaffa1611 The thing is, even though scientists argue and contradict each other, it is because they are proposing new theories and publishing new discoveries on subjects, leading to a refined form of truth. In religion, everyone thoughtlessly submits without ever thinking individually or contradicting other members of the community. We only find new things by disproving the old. Due to this, science advances whereas religion stays seemingly primitive in its thought processes.
yungsurma 4 months ago
@yungsurma People generalize the words "science" and "religion" to mix their definitions to what suits them. Mixing definitions is where differences and argument happen. I mentioned specifically GMO food and Tesla and pharmaceuticals. Then you reponded with a generalized word of "science" with floating definitions. Pick a specific topic and try not using words that only have emotion attached to them and no set definition.
mustaffa1611 4 months ago
@mustaffa1611 If you actually read over your introductory statement, you would see that you are the first one to generalize the topic of science. "Everytime science says one thing then another scientist says something else". You were the first one to attack science as a whole, and so I defended science as a whole. Secondly, I used the generalization of religion because that's what this video is about. Thirdly, your response didn't even have any intelligent comebacks against my comment. Good try.
yungsurma 4 months ago
@mustaffa1611 On another aspect of your reply, where exactly did I use a definition? Using words we don't quite know the meaning of now, aren't we? I stated two studies, and the social tendencies of each. It also doesn't seem very fair that of every single scientific feat in history, you mention three of your choice, and explain the negative aspects of each. It's biased to do so; There have been millions of scientific feats in the past, and 3 out of millions reduces to a very small number...
yungsurma 4 months ago
@yungsurma When using the word "science" it means nothing. Any meaning that you or anyone else applies to that word is purely personal and subjective. Why not take one aspect of 'science' vs.one aspect of 'religion' and be specific ... because it is retarded: Astrology vs. Calvanism. or algebra vs. judaism. Anyone who compares "science' to 'religion' is retarded. How about apple pie to freemasonry. Anyone who uses the word science or religion is only trying to evoke emotions.
mustaffa1611 4 months ago
@mustaffa1611 " Anyone who compares "science' to 'religion' is retarded.". When taking an opinion based statement, and stating it factually, one is using language full of emotion as well. So basically, in telling me that I'm using words full of emotion, you've done the same. Once again, I used generalized terms only because your original statement had generalized terms in it. Secondly, you still haven't told me where I used a definition. It seems like you're avoiding what you cannot answer.
yungsurma 4 months ago
@yungsurma You used the word 'religion' in numerous times in your posts. Are you saying that you were using this word and it had no meaning? You stated that "In religion, everyone thoughtlessly submits".... If you were using 'religion' and had no meaning why didnt you just type " _______?" Or why don't you define your terms and explain what your own subjective meaning of the word "religion" is? The funniest thing is when people try to define what "religion" or "science" means?
mustaffa1611 4 months ago
@mustaffa1611 If you paid attention to what I wrote, you would have seen that I already covered this: "Secondly, I used the generalization of religion because that's what this video is about.". Next, I have no obligation to be defining things, because you were the one telling me I was using definitions when I clearly wasn't. Also, it doesn't help the sway of your argument when you end declarative sentences with question marks or fail to conjugate verbs (means) to meet the demands of the subject.
yungsurma 4 months ago
@yungsurma haha, keep cherry pickin
mustaffa1611 4 months ago
@mustaffa1611 Those are the comments that I love the most, because they have no actual substance to them. To me, they are the ultimate proof that my adversary has nothing intelligent left to say.
yungsurma 4 months ago
@yungsurma You said you had no obligation to define the word when the topic of discussion was the definition of that word. So what would be the point to continue talking with you when once you realize how stupid someone is for using the word "religion" and instead you cherry pick someones grammer? Be honest and try to explain what you meant when you used the word "religion"
mustaffa1611 4 months ago
@mustaffa1611 Actually, the topic from your original comment was about scientists contradicting each other, and I contrasted that with religion. Once again it seems that you are distorting the facts of the conversation. And in general consensus, a religion is a community of faithful people who share a common belief. I don't think it could be much simpler than that... Also, if I'm stupid, you must be even lower than stupid, because I'm correcting you on simple linguistic errors.
yungsurma 4 months ago
@mustaffa1611 The fact of the matter is that it does not matter what intelligent things one may have to say, but if he or she cannot spell properly, pay attention to grammar, or communicate, the world will not take him or her seriously. I think you should acknowledge that before you try to argue with me. These are things we learn in highschool, so it really just seems like you struggled getting a highschool education. Or... have you not gone to highschool? Both seem feasible at this point.
yungsurma 4 months ago
RELIGION IS FAKE, IT WAS MEANT TO BE A JOKE WHEN SOMEBODY SAID " HEY, HEY GUYS, LETS SEE HOW FAR WE CAN TAKE THE WHOLE "GOD" THING", AND APPARENTLY SOMEONE TOOK IT A LITTLE TO SERIOUS!
manro451 5 months ago
@manro451 RELIGION IS FAKE ...
____
Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence of anti-religious ideas and a phalanx of deniers of God, has been the false teachings, the inadequacies and the intellectual perversions of the followers of some religions. The peculiarities and separate characteristics of each religion must, therefore, be individually examined when studying the reasons that have led men to adhere to that religion.
1tabligh 5 months ago
Western intellectuals were aware only of the superstitious aspect of false religion and how the established dogmas of religion lacked all logical basis, so they had no hesitation in condemning religion as such to be baseless. Their judgment was based on their discouraging experiences with their own religion, and it could not fail, then, to be hasty, unrealistic, irrational and illogical.
1tabligh 5 months ago
Well I don't see religion making the world better.. science is part of the world and can get a education and major in the science field with it.. all religion does is make people obey feel comford,and it doesn't help a person out in college or a job..doesn't fix cars or educate nobody
rickygilbert21 5 months ago
@rickygilbert21 The atheist Delusion!
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
1tabligh 5 months ago
Do scientific discoveries and knowledge cause such a scientist to conclude that matter, *unknowing and unperceiving *, is his creator and that of all beings?
No?
Then how can the atheists and some of the scientists delude themselve and *believe* that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 5 months ago
What is called science by the *science-worshippers* of the present age and regarded by them as equivalent to the sum total of *reality*, is simply a collection of laws applicable to a single dimension of the world. The result of all human effort and experimentation is a body of knowledge concerning a minute bright dot comparable to the dim light of a candle-surrounded by a dark night enveloping a huge desert of indefinite extent.
All praise is due to ALLAH, the Lord of the Universe.
1tabligh 5 months ago
Everytime science says one thing then another scientist says something else. So called science has said so many different pharmaceuticals are helpful and then they are always taken off the market in a couple years after making everyone sick. Tesla proved we could all have free electricity by tapping into gravitational pull yet new "science" says that isnt true. Science also says GMO food is safe yet it breaks down into alien amino acids and causes new weird cancers. Science haha
mustaffa1611 6 months ago
@mustaffa1611 "Science haha'
All you need to do then is pray your headache away.
hawklord2001 5 months ago
@hawklord2001 I dont get headaches. I dont eat corporate processed gmo food laced with chemicals and artificial hormones. I also only drink fresh clean spring water that isnt laced with toxic poisonous chemicals and the fluoride which is nuclear waste from military contractors which "science" tells you is good for you. Science is so great but have you noticed the cancer and autism rates recently?
mustaffa1611 5 months ago
4:46 is wrong. His head should be up his ass.
MzBUZZKILINGTON 7 months ago
i hate religion so much... and believers who don't want to see the real world and want to keep believing in fairy tails... science will always debunked their holy books
telectronicguy 9 months ago
:D The start of this video brought back fond memories... I think I was 5 years old, when my mom explained to me that the Earth is round, and about gravity, and astronomic distances, and just how mind-bogglingly far away the Sun is, and stars even further than the Sun...
It completely blew my mind away. Been in love with knowledge ever since.
StrikaAmaru 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
if the idea of a god was imbedded into your mind by your caregiver when you were a child, that doesn't mean you should try and do the same to someone who understands that belief in God is not an instinct, but an idea that has been passed on- originating in times when the earth was flat. it could very well be that historically educated people who, by modern standards were vastly undereducated, needed compfort. they were conscious of the fact they would someday die and feared the thought
Prostack420 1 year ago
justin bieber is religous thats how bad it is to be religous
60s70s80s90smusic 1 year ago 2
I would just like to leave a question to all the religious ppl.... What about other religions, if we ar all children of god why do some contries pray to other gods? or is the catholic religion the only one that is right and everyone else is wrong? ... hmm maybe its because religion is man made thus changing within diferent cultures.
pedroalvesmkt 1 year ago
i can understand "some" Christians like my mom because my mom had a abusive mother lived in a roach infested trailer and had one of the worst lives ever so i can understand people having no one to turn to except god were they can put there faith in a supernatural being because some people wouldn't be able to survive if they believed in "miracles and reasons" so i understand some Christians but not the stuck up asshole ones who bash on atheist just because they don't believe what we believe
method190 1 year ago
Poor Galileo.
Fortunately his work was not in vain and people now realise the truth.
jimmywrangles 1 year ago
Astonishing how the church wasn't run out of town the day after Galileo proved how wrong they were. Yet, they're still around - just like a bad virus that just won't go away. Just this morning, I saw on an exterior billboard of a church I drive by daily: "Science goes only so far. Then comes God". What ridiculously delusional statements they're still making! I think I will change their sign to read: "Science goes only so far. Then out goes God".
WhiteLakeDan 1 year ago 18
@WhiteLakeDan Religion is like AIDS; u cannot cure it. All you can do is kill the host... and hope it all goes extinct.
george77772moons 9 months ago
History shows that religion gave birth to science. As with science, there is still much to learn about religion. Reading religious text in a literal way will leave anyone perplexed (bunch of fluffed up words), so too, if you read a science book literally your head may explode (bunch of numbers & letters). However, if one opens their mind to the "'meaning'" of the text (religious or science), then one is able to gain a clearer understanding.
I too trust science, but can science test 'trust'?
syncatron 6 months ago
@syncatron "History shows that religion gave birth to science."
Wrong, human inquisitiveness gave rise to science our insatiable need to understand nature gave rise to the scientific method. It just happened that in the early days most scientists came from a theistic background.
hawklord2001 5 months ago
religion is shit!!!
shilsyk 1 year ago 16
@shilsyk Dats da rite attitud man!!
S0nicSynth 9 months ago
@shilsyk - God Created Science. Science is God's world and a way for you to interrupt how things work and function. Religion and Science walk hand and hand. To interrupt the scriptures of any region literally, would be foolish. Rather use them as a metaphor, rather then the direct translation. The disconnect is the creation and death. This is where religion and atheists both trust in their own faith, because neither can prove that the big bang or heaven is truth.
Jermie420 4 months ago
@Jermie420
Sorry, science and religion goes hand in hand? Are we watching the same documentary? Darkages never happend?
The bible has and will always be the words of the suggested omnipotent God.
We're not supposed to interpret them, from the day the scriptures were written, God has been placed as the reason of things we don't understand.
The thing is, as we learn more and more about the world. that area has been reduced to something that may just as well be the talk of a crazy person.
Halick 4 months ago
@Jermie420 That's not true. There are some evidences supporting the Big Bang Theory. Nothing in science is 100% certain, sure, but still some evidences is better than none, which is the case of heaven. Furthermore, religion is prone to fundamentalism. If only people interpreted it as a metaphor, as you said, then there would be no problem with it. Unfortunately, we know that is not the case.
raviept 4 months ago 2
To everybody reading these comments:
1TABLIGH is a copypaster. Just ignore him. He's copypasting his nonsense everywhere and arguing with him only gets him wet in his panties.
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Top 5 List of 1tablighs answers:
1. "Dodging ALL the questions and quibbling in vain!
The argument of an IGNORANT!"
2. "I will make it easy for you to answer!
How could some of the scientists permit themselves..."
3. "So much science for this uncivilized brainless pseudo-Scientific Demagogue! "
4. "Materialism looks at the world with one eye *closed* and, as a result, is unable to answer numerous questions! "
5." Then how can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and ..."
Visualiser33 1 year ago
Evolution
As a child I grew up believing in an all mighty god; as a young man I started questioning those believes; as an young adult I completely discarded the possibility of the existence of a god and started debating "believers"; finally, as a older man I realized that discussing god and religion is the biggest waste of time and energy. People will always believe in the craziest things. Not worth it, simply ignore those believers.
mbravo4334 1 year ago
Galileo really pulled the rug out from under Mother Church, no wonder the Pope was miffed. Since then the Church has been forced to retreat, modify and fudge on its dogma. "Not meant to be taken literally: All a bit metaphysical." Darwin really put the boot in, but the irony was that nearly all these scientists were Christians. Immerse them in that Christian BS when they're young and you've got um for life. Wise up guys. Knowledge begins where religion ends, so get learning.
Jackthesmilingblack 1 year ago 3
@Jackthesmilingblack Even more ironic, the less religious their work became, the more true it became.
HybridD91 1 year ago
@Jackthesmilingblack Knowledge begins where religion ends
______
Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence of anti-religious ideas and a phalanx of deniers of God, has been the false teachings, the inadequacies and the intellectual perversions of the followers of some religions. The peculiarities and separate characteristics of each religion must, therefore, be individually examined when studying the reasons that have led men to adhere to that religion. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh Good idea, lets closely examine every religeon and reject those that don't comport with reality. I'm all for that.
phookadude 1 year ago
@phookadude The atheist Delusion!
In his equation, Einstein says that energy is equal to the mass of muter times the velocity of light squared (E = mc2 where E is energy, m mass, and c velocity of light). The velocity of light is equal to 186,282 miles per second. Also, the mass is equal to the energy divided by the velocity of light squared (m= E/c2).
With this, it became established that the atom with its protons and electrons is nothing in reality but concentrated energy ....
1tabligh 1 year ago
that can be analyzed and reduced to its primordial state. Thus, according to the modern analysis, energy is the substratum of the world. It is manifested in various shapes and in numerous forms, whether sonic, magnetic, electrical, chemical or mechanical.
In light of this, the duality between matter and radiation, between particles and waves, and between the appearance of electrons sometimes as matter and some other times as light was no longer strange. Rather, ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
it became somewhat understood; since all these phenomena are [but] forms of one reality, namely, energy.
Then how can the atheists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh So what kind of energy is god? Kenetic? Chemical? Using the word energy as some loose definition of spirituality is BS, energy is a thing, and is quantifyable and understandable. There is nothing supernatural about energy.
The term law used in this was does not imply a lawgiver, if you think it does then you are deluded.
phookadude 1 year ago
@phookadude Stop arguing with him, he is not interested in answers. He is copying and pasting from islamic websites, it is not even his own opinion. If you ask something, he will just paste the next thing. Click on his name in your answer to him and you will get a list of all the videos he is posting the same stuff again and again. Also, take a part of his answer and google it, it will bring you directly to the sites he is copying from. He is a waste of time.
Visualiser33 1 year ago
@phookadude The term law used ...
___
Is it logical to say that belief in God is peculiar to those who know nothing about man's composition and creation, and that, by contrast, a scientist who is aware of the natural *laws* and factors responsible for man's growth and development, who knows that *law* and precise calculation preside over all stages of man's existence, is bound to believe that matter, lacking all perception and consciousness, is the source of the wondrous laws of nature?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh The appearance of precision is due to the fact that we developed under the influence of said natural laws. If they were differnt then we too would simply be different. Give up your jewish god, try thor, he's allot more fun.
phookadude 1 year ago
@phookadude Give up your jewish god, try thor, he's allot more fun.
____
And where did you pull that from?
I am a Shiite Muslim!
I make a claim of ONE God ( Allah, Lord, Gud, Khuda, etc ) then I will produce the evidence to back it up!
Anyone who claims of "thor, zeus, apollo, Jesus, Budha blah blah " etc or anything for that matter has to back it up!
You do not need to disprove the divinity of "thor, zeus, apollo, Jesus, Budha blah blah etc" or Jesus or ....
1tabligh 1 year ago
Mohammad or any other human being. But if you claim the divinity of anyone besides God, you need to prove your claim. If someone claims that you are an angel, he has to prove it. I do not need to prove that you are a man because you appear as a man and have all the attributes of a man.
The one who claims that you are an angel is supposed to prove what he claims, because his claim is contrary to the common sense and to what appears as the actual fact. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
When a person says that Jesus or Mohammad is a man, and not a God, he agrees with the accepted definition. Jesus lived like a man, looked like a man, slept as a man, ate as a man, and was persecuted like one. None of these facts need proof. This is not the case with the one who claims his divinity. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
His claim is opposed to the common knowledge. Therefore, he, and no one else, has to provide the evidence for his claim.
Although the Muslims are not supposed to provide any evidence for the denial of the divinity of " an *individual devised god*, "thor, zeus, apollo, Jesus, Budha blah blah etc" or Jesus, they can present more than one evidence. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
If numerous gods ruled over the world and each of these gods acted and gave commands in accordance with his own will, the order of the universe would dissolve into anarchy.
If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both! but glory to Allah, the Lord of the Throne: (High is He) above what they attribute to Him!
Quran 21: 22
1tabligh 1 year ago
@phookadude The appearance of precision is due to the fact that we developed under the influence of said natural laws. If they were differnt then we too would simply be different.
____
The atheist Delusion!
Your delusions that science has put out the notion of God is purely rhetorical and has nothing to do with logical method, because even thousands of scientific experiments could not possibly suffice to demonstrate that no non-material being or factor exists. ....
1tabligh 1 year ago
Your claim is nothing more than a *fanatical* illusion based on unproven theories. Views such as these derive directly from a system of thought centered on materialism; within it, everything is defined and delimited with reference to materialism.
To interpret materialism in such a sense is in the final analysis strictly meaningless; it would be a superstitious notion involving the perversion of truth, and to regard it as scientific would, in fact, be *treason* to science. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
Even if the followers of a religious school of thought had no proofs for their claim, to conclude firmly and forcibly that non- being reigns beyond the sensory realm would be a non-scientific choice, based on imagination and speculation. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
Some people try to propagate this fantasy in the garb of science and to present their choice as having been dictated by scientific thought. In the final analysis, however, the denial involved in such an assertion is unworthy of science and philosophy, and even *contradicts* empirical logic.
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh 7 posts in a row doesn't make you right it just makes you look like a deluded wanker with a keyboard fetish.
jimmywrangles 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jimmywrangles Then how can you delude yourself and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 1 year ago
@1tabligh Hey 1tabligh, back again, found a new version to paste a little bit?
Visualiser33 1 year ago
@1tabligh real scientists don't delude themselves they take what is available and use it..evolutionists are the ones who believe in all crazy shit..but one thing they both have in common science in no way endorse an almighty God who gave wrong scientific information on the bible.. like sun stopping its orbit around earth during war battle or four angels standing on each corner of the earth (they believed earth was flat) you probably will delude your self and ignore all the flaws in your Godspell
telectronicguy 9 months ago
@telectronicguy Then how could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
1tabligh 9 months ago
@1tabligh do you see your delude reasoning here? just because you dont know how something works does not meant God did it. people did not know how the sun worked so they believed it was a God.. remember the Greek mythology?people on those ages believe faithfully in those gods (Zeus, Athena, Hades. etc) they build temples for them BUT now trough science we know is all B.S... i see you believe in your Quraan and Alla all I can tell you is this and I close my case DIE PEDOPHILE TERRORIST
telectronicguy 9 months ago
@telectronicguy
Dodging ALL the questions and quibbling in vain!
Materialism looks at the world with one eye *closed* and, as a result, is unable to answer numerous questions!
Deluded atheist looks at the world with BOTH eyes *closed* and, as a result, are unable to answer ALL the questions!
Do scientific discoveries and knowledge cause such a scientist to conclude that matter, *** unknowing and unperceiving ***, is his creator and that of all beings?
1tabligh 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
An how can the atheists and some of the scientists delude themselve and believe that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 9 months ago
Scholars are agreed that religious beliefs have always been intertwined with human life. However, their opinions differ concerning the fundamental roots of religion and the factors that have played a primary role in its establishment and development. Their judgments, in this respect, are generally based on studies of superstitious religions and primitive beliefs, with the result that their conclusions are, in the final analysis, defective and illogical. ...
1tabligh 1 year ago
"so get learning."
It is true that certain religions, lacking a connection with the principles of revelation, have been influenced in their appearance and growth by the social environment and similar factors. However, it is illogical to ascribe the foundation of all faiths and religious tendencies to material or economic circumstances and demands, to fear of the terrifying forces of nature, to ignorance or to considerations rejected by science.
How is that for YOUR "so get learning."?
1tabligh 1 year ago
we are a fluke of evolution, and a good one, let's just be pleased that there're no more flukes out there trying to take our power from us.
ClinicallyObeseMule 1 year ago
If God created the universe... who created God?
dwtheprof 1 year ago
@dwtheprof LOL??? do you know what is the meaning of God???
LO000L 1 year ago
@LO000L " do you know what is the meaning of God? " . It (god) is an human 'concept'. An idea. It purports to give an identity to the 'unknowable'. It personifies our concept of ' good ' . It (god) is a creation of our imagination, much like gnomes, wizards, dragons, demons, Eden, Heaven, Halls of Valhalla, unicorns, elves, Hell, 72 virgins( or 72 bunches of white grapes). All imanginary.
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
@dwtheprof EVERYTHING NEEDS A CREATOR................except god.
You seemed like you were expecting something similar so I thought I'd give it to you lolz.
vikeyev1 1 year ago
@dwtheprof Question: " If God created the universe... who created God? " . Answer: Humans. @:-{>
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
@yeshuahfullofit exactly :)
dwtheprof 1 year ago
@dwtheprof My compliments, sir. : )
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
I don't know why the church is so afraid of the truth, yet claim to know the truth...then they turn out wrong time and again. Now, once again, they claim scientific data is wrong (evolution) but eventually they will see it's true.
cvillekeith 1 year ago
Saying that science is the opposite to religion is like sayng cheescake is opposite to toilet cleaner. They're two completely different things. To say there is a war going on between them is just mental. Also, i would like someone to tell me what they think of the fact that scientific theory accepts that the probability of either religion or science being true is extremely small. Science isnt about truth, its about How. Religion is about Why. To say they are opposites shows ignorance.
mrsinghm 1 year ago
@mrsinghm that was a very educated way of putting that couldn't agree with your point more. wish people who claim to be scientists or claim to be defending science but remain ignorant of this fact could wake up and realize being religious doesn't mean you disagree with science. i applaud you.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
God created Science to prove that Jesus existed. not to oppose God
LO000L 1 year ago
@LO000L Man created science to seek the truth. Not to prove jesus existed.Not to oppose god. To find what we can truly know and use to our benefit. To find out what works because, heaven knows, prayer doesn't work. I know. I pray every day for you xians to disappear but, every day I get up and there you are. Every day you pray but, here we atheists are. "Pretend" doesn't work and you know it. We point it out to you and that pisses you off because it ruins the illusion of your "allmighty".
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago 21
Comment removed
LO000L 1 year ago
@yeshuahfullofit i'm not xians.i am a God disciple. btw man did not create science,God created science.the most reason why God created science to prove Jesus existed.
LO000L 1 year ago
@LO000L Man created all gods.
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
hmmm...go take a look outside and tell me where it all came from. type a big long explanation full of facts and big words and when your done read it and tell me this: which seems more impossible, a higher power who had a plan made it, or that it all exploded into being in a big bang. what have you ever seen or heard of that was not made by something else? i guess proof aside it makes sense that someone made all of this rather than it made itself out of nothing. food for thought
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
you are like a kid who hasnt been told Santa is not real. Dont you see? you can tell a person anything. If you were taught from birth that the world is telepathically controlled by a three-headed creature called Borgwi, who lives on the north pole, you would believe that..
Its all doctrine, and you know maybe there is a reason, But god is an easy answer, In earlier times God was the answer to anything we didnt know, Earthquake = God, Lightning = God, Fucked up crops = God, Death = God
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
Religious people were wrong then, why should we believe you now.. God isnt in the clouds, we been there and beyond. Did he pack up and leave? Two perfect humans who started mankind? clearly wrong, we found the bones of early humans and traced our evolution. We are hairless apes. Seven day theory? totally bogus, the innercore of our planet proves the earth was once a burning sphere.
if the bible is the word of god, why is it wrong then on so many points?
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
religious people were wrong then...debatable. who said god was in the clouds? not me. two perfect humans started mankind...no god did. of course you found evidence of early humans...humans that god made. if we came from hairless apes does that mean god didn't make us? no it means god decided to make us from hairless apes. seven day theory; figure of speech. in seven "time periods" god made the earth. the bible isn't 'wrong on so many points' you just don't understand what it actually says
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
So now the bible is one big metaphor? Why didnt they make it factual? You either believe in evolution or you believe in the adam and eve story. which is it?
the bible is written with an 'old world view', God in the heavens, the earth in the center of the universe. Which makes the persons that contributed to the book suspect, were they really talking with god? God should know these things...
I think the bible is written without divine intervention, Im not atacking the idea of an 'architect'
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
see now that is a decent question. why can't i believe in adam and eve and evolution? evolution does not necessarily mean we came from apes. that is just theory. creatures on the earth do evlolve and have evolved from ancient species this is true. so it says god created adam from the dust of the earth. that means that using resources on th earth he made man. maybe he decided to use evolution to make adam and eve from what was already here, say a hairy ape or whatnot.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
You can believe in god and in evolution but It does make the bible somewhat vague and more abstract, dont you think? Tell me this, why, if so many civilizations independently from each other created different gods with different stories, is your god the only truth? The maya's had many gods untill "your god" was forced upon them. The idea of a God is very subjective, if you were born in India you might be hindu and in Irak muslim. how can you be 100% sure that you are right?
papichulobumber1 1 year ago 2
that is a very good question. i wont presume to tell you what other people believe but i can tell you what i believe. i am lds, or mormon if you will. the "dark ages" was a time after christs death where there was a religious fall-out. lots of disagreement on god. but people knew there was a god and began to organize churches and such. my church believes in revelation. which basically means talking directly to god. i can't be 100% sure i'm right but i have faith.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
one of the main reasons i debate on religion is because i want to learn more about what other people believe. and tell them about what i believe. i'm not blindly following i have faith in what i believe and am looking at other points of view like yours for example. the difference between my church and all others is that we believe in direct revelation from god. we have the priesthood. we have living prophets who have seen christ and testify of him. they are 100% sure and so far i believe them
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
Good for you, i must say i admire your way of living though its not my ambition to live the same.
If god does exist and he's all goodness I find it hard to believe he would send all the non-believers to the pits of hell. Good people is good people. I dont want to be part of a movement that proclaims we should join them or have a horrible faith. If there is a god he wouldnt have said that, Its more likely a threat designed to win souls......
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
@papichulobumber1 i don't believe god will send all non believers to hell. you gotta be a pretty bad guy to make it to hell lol. i believe that god knows each of us individually and understands our circumstances. i believe he will reward us all justly for our actions on earth. i know many people that do not believe in god that have done greater good in this world than some people of my own faith. i'm sure they will have their place in heaven.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall
Question, so you actually believe im right when i say that the threat, "non-believers will go to hell" Is designed to harvest more souls. And in some cases not only for the afterlife but also to reap more power here on earth. The church is now trying to uphold this peacefull facade but they used to be a war-oriented organisation that tortured heretics in damp dark basements. And once you confessed to your sins you would get burned at the stakes. Not very nice people......
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
@papichulobumber1 i don't presme to judge "them" i'm not clear on what church you are referring to but i do not belong to a faith of that history. perhaps some churches do follow the character you just described. i'm sure they will be judged fairly as individuals for whatever crimes they may have commit. you r right though not very nice people. my faith does not follow that tradition you mentioned. we are more about charity than anything else.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall
Im all for freedom of religion, dont get me wrong. But i think 'traditional' believers are caught in a hussle they cant possibly figure out. Untill they die and can't turn back to tell the others it was all a lie.
In fact, i think we do live forever, that is, our energy lives forever. We are constructed from the same building-blocks that created the first one cell organisms that crawled out of the lakes. Before we existed but scaterred, now we combine in one human being.
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall
If you perceive yourself as a lump of energy (that got lucky) death is so overrated. Soul is overated, its a chemical interaction between the particles. When we 'die' the glue 'binding us' dissapears and we become scattered again. Religion that believes in reincarnation is much more close to the truth.
The world is one big recycling machine. Giving birth to other lifeforms, bacteria, worms at first, we go up the food chain, millions of years before we get to the top again.
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
@papichulobumber1 you have an interesting view on creation. interestingly enough its pretty close to what i believe just with a more worldy explanation than spiritual. i believe we were scattered energy, or intelligence as my faith refers to it, and that we were organized into souls, or humans. mine differs from yours only by saying that a god organized our energy and rather than it just dissipating on death it remains and will be organized again by god so we can live with him.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall
Death and creation are complex subjects. The force thats behind it all remains in the shadows. My selfknowledge stops me from trying to figure it out cause I dont have the time nor do i have the braincapacity. But at the same time im combined in a lifeform that carries the burden it can think about these things. My dog thinks he will live forever, he recognises loss, he can feel sad, he can feel happiness but never will he doubt his own fate.
The perfect life......
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
@papichulobumber1 they are indeed. in a spiritual light they seem to be within our grasp but like you on a scientific level i could never begin to understand how it all works. but still there is that abstract something that you find in all individuals i guess what we call a conscience. so many interesting possibilities that motivate us to live a life of some sort of morals. i think we all envy a dogs life haha, but i could never be content in ignorance and must contemplate these harder questions
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall
Its the complete peace with its self an animal has that is the source of my envy. I could imagine this is what zen budhists are trying to achieve. They try to reach the goals in life paradoxicaly without trying to achieve them. But its damn difficult to live life in the moments. We think ahead, we think abstract, we have expectations. Sometimes is wish there was a button with which we could turn this 'over capacity' of the brain off. Just sleep, breath, eat, socialize, multiply
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall
To conclude my lengthy post,
Have babies if you want a direct link to the afterlife.
papichulobumber1 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall
It is even in the bible that Adam and Eve were the first humans, sure "God" created them but supposedly we all come from adam and eve right? WRONG, where did Asians come from? Africans? And plus if we all came from 2 people wouldn't we all be committing incest then? Wow soooo many flaws in the "Bible" that once I figured that out I saw it for what it was THE BIGGEST HOAX IN HUMAN HISTORY.
Blackheart12345 1 year ago 24
listen to your logic. with your theory that humans were made from cells organizing themselves together there would be the same kind of beginning. how does that work? finally after billions of years of evolution a human is made. and maybe in another billion another one evolved so they could mate. or did a bunch of humans evolve at the same time? also if evolution can make humans from single cells then is it so far fetched that evolution can make different races of humans? really dude...
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
Every living thing on this earth started from cells. Cells that evolved into organisms, which finally evolved into plants, animals, trees etc. then finally from apes came humans. And the way it works is that it is scientifically proven unlike who "Adam and Eve" were made from what? Clay? a bit of "God". Honestly Scientology makes more sense that Adam and Eve
Blackheart12345 1 year ago
yes you are right excuse my ignorance. men definately came from apes yet somehow managed to leave apes behind. and we definately evolved from single cell organisms that just decided they weren't happy with their lives as single cells. and the universe was definately made in a "big bang" where everything was made from nothing. doesn't that break some sort of law? like "in a system mass and energy cannot be created nor destroyed." hmmm yep everything made from nothing. makes way more sense
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall "doens't that break some sort of law? like "in a system mass and energy cannot be created nor destroyed. hmmm yep .." . The Second Law of Thermodynamics you are referring to only applies to a "closed system". The universe is not a 'closed system'.
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
@yeshuahfullofit would you mind explaining that concept to me? to my understanding the universe is infinite and there is nothing outside of it. so how could it be affected by anything else then what is enclosed in its system? i guess i've always understood it to be a closed system. perhaps i could use some more education on that topic though if you wouldn't mind explaining.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall " to my understanding the universe is infinite and there is nothing outside of it. so how could it be affected by anything else then(sic) what is enclosed in its system? " . Science does not say that there is nothing 'outside' of our universe. String theory/Quantum theory posits different dimensions, multi-universes and other strange shit. Eneygy can be transmitted/transferred between the two. We hope to be able to prove it soon with the LHC. Keep reading! : )
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall You only have so much energy tied up in a location, say a star. When that star explodes it tranmits that energy to new locations that it didn't exist in moments before. Gas impacted by the shock wave(new energy) is now able to contract under gravity and cause new effects( births of new suns, planets and sub-atomic particles) that it couldn't do if it was in a 'closed' system. The universe is in constant flux of energy. What is infinite? Who can say what is outside of our world?
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
@yeshuahfullofit very interesting information non of which contradicts the existence of god. what is outside of our world? i guess there is no way to know for now but i'm sure we will eventually find out. i would just like to propose that some higher knowledge such as god is beyond what we know. it may be easy for you to dismiss as folly by a bunch of fools but it would make as much sense as anything else in this crazy world. don't dismiss the idea of god so easily
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall "... non of which contradicts the existence of god. " . I don't have to contradict the existence of god. I don't believe in god. If you are trying to convince me of the existence of god, you have to " convince " me. Show me what you have that I don't have to convince me that god is real. I have a bible. It may not say the same thing as your bible. There are so many different versions. What do you know that I don't? Enlighten me. Can you tell me about Melchizedek?
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall
1)
Our existence doesn't contradict the possibility that we're all artificial "life" forms inside a computer simulation, does that mean that it's an idea not to be dismissed so easily?
xxSilverPhinxx 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall
2)
Possibility does not mean anything other than possibility, and since god can't be proven or disproved with our current knowledge and since there will always be another step in the infinite regress (yes, even before an intelligent creator or non intelligent creator) then there is no reason people should tell others not to dismiss the idea so lightly.
xxSilverPhinxx 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall the universe is not infinite, it is expanding.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall you have no conception of what evolution is, you're mixing abiogenesis with evolution... abiogenesis deals with the origins of life, evolution with the diversity of life, plus go and read up on all the evidence, especially the genetic evidence.
ninjatoothpaste 1 year ago
@ninjatoothpaste if you don't mind you could tell me your distinction of those three terms you threw out there and explain your difference in thinking so i know what your argument is. i could read up on it but i would prefer to hear your own interpretation. and i wouldn't go so far as to say i don't have any conception of what evolution is although granted, your knowledge may be far greater than mine on the subject.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
You'll find a lot more information on abiogenesis, evolution and the evidence that exists for both elsewhere, the most I could do is give you a rough outline and very contracted explanation, if you really wish to learn about it you'll go and read from numerous sources, all I can see in requesting my interpretation specifically is the intent to debate me, and unless you have your own understanding of the material then you can't make an informed argument anyway. :)
ninjatoothpaste 1 year ago
@ninjatoothpaste touche' well i will read up on it then but in the mean time maybe you could mull over my argument that whatever you want to name it, basically the accepted answer to where everything came from is that it was created in the bang. all i argue is that that is impossible. the more i hear about that concept the more i think its nonsense. i guess similar to how you must feel when hearing about religion.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall @chriscyrilcall I agree the big bang sounds nonsense even to the scientists who discovered it. The trouble is, the maths of the nonsense works out. The discovery that the universe is moving apart is proven, and it sounds like nonsense. Now we've gone and discovered the universe is moving away from its centre is unexpectedly speeding up. Sounds like even more total nonsense, yet the maths is still annoyingly telling us this.
LouisPlume 1 year ago
@LouisPlume i have not seen specific math on these occurances and connot argue them true or false. however it is not proven that the universe was created rather than already was there. whether it is expanding or not does not prove anything about where it came from. i still argue that everything did not come from nothing. what was there before the universe in this case? nothing? then it is impossible that anything could be created if nothing was there.
chriscyrilcall 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall There is a lot more to be discovered, to plug the missing science with Krishna or God, is meaningless.
There are many scientific ideas being mulled around about what was there before the big bang, "nothing" as a scientific word in the context of the universe means not in our universe, or it has no data. When scientists do discover something, I'm sure the holy will move the goal posts yet again, like when it was proven that the earth was not the centre of the universe.
LouisPlume 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall then god must have always existed am I not right, so why can't the universe always exist.
peoplearemessedup 1 year ago
@peoplearemessedup why cant the universe exist forever comon ive been saying that for years true but
azmanabdula 1 year ago
@chriscyrilcall " I have not seen specific math on these occurances and connot argue them true or false. " . Then maybe you should. We'll wait.
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
@Blackheart12345 If we all came from a small group of primates then we're fucking family still, I agree that religion is bullshit, but I won't have you saying I ain't fuckin family! ;P haha
ninjatoothpaste 1 year ago
@Blackheart12345 : If we all came from 1 species as evolution, then it's the same fucking argument....DOH!
Your fucking mind is a hoax.
moJomittens 1 year ago
@Blackheart12345
don't believe in adam and eve. BUT if it ever existed. small scale Evolution can account for the fact that there are Africans, and asians etc. take two white person put him in a desert. have his family and their descendants live there for thousands and thousands of years...eventually they'll get black, in account of the sun.
Rac665 1 year ago
@Rac665 oh and the first people where in AFRICA so can not be white.
osemudiame123 1 year ago
@osemudiame123
idiot, okay. stay in a desert without your shirt on for hours. you'll get a tan. now STAY there, have your children do the same, do that for thousands of years, and eventually, your descendants bodies are going to adapt. they'll turn dark. darker. darker darker, depending on the weather, they'll turn black. The human body just adapts to where your at. its why you get goosebumps. its reacting.
Rac665 1 year ago
@Blackheart12345 ...That's what I always think.. Adam and Eve had sex and then they had children.. and then the siblings had sex together?...what kind of a beleif is that... and it is proven that when two siblings have babies these babies will definitely not be healthy,,, but apparently some say that there was Adam and Eve and then God created other humans.. then that wont necceesserily mean that Adam and Eve are our parents.. hmmm
ODSDMD 1 year ago
@ODSDMD SOme idiot told me that their son went off to a city of angels and banged an angel and that infact they didnt commit incest, so whatg he was basically saying that in stead of incest it was necrophilia that created us LOL.Try a pick the lesser of the two evils hahaha
Blackheart12345 1 year ago
@Blackheart12345 - Yeah....Wouldn't Adam and Eve's children all be brother's and sisters and having incestuous relationships? And their kids would be all retards? I guess it's those retards that believe in religion.
gorfjorf2112112 1 year ago
@gorfjorf2112112 wiat they did add more ppl like lilith and bob perkins... and some others ... not sure but we can all agree that religion is for fucking saps....
jammapcb 8 months ago
@Blackheart12345 all humans came from the same humans in africa according to science....you're contradicting yourself.
Evanvids321 1 year ago
@Blackheart12345 if we all came from 2 people wouldn't we all be committing incest then?
____
If God can create Eva for Father Adam then why can't He create Mini Evas for Cain and Abel?
For God to create millions of Evas is penut!
But who is going to breast feed millions of baby Evas, YOU???
No need for incest?
His command, when He intends anything, is only to say to it: Be, so it is.
The Quran 36 : 82
1tabligh 1 year ago