someone correct me if im wrong, but the video seems to make the fallacy of denying the antecedent. the argument seems to be this:
if the first man/woman bring in original sin, then there is a need for a savior.
there was no first man/woman to bring in original sin.
therefore, there is no need for a savior.
im not trying to troll, rather this kept me up last night trying to understand a way around this. I suppose another possibility could be that adam/eve werent the original sinners...im stuck
Paul repeatedly references Adam (a fictional character) in the SAME BREATH as Jesus! This is the author of nearly half the NT and the founder of early Christianity..yet he doesn't seem to make any distinction between a myth and Jesus. Personally I found this troubling as a Christian. It is obvious they are inextricably tied together. The death/sin gained by Adam is corrected by the 2nd Adam. No original sin = Jesus is unnecessary.
@bdwilson1000 yes, this is exactly what I mean. Adam & original sin are explicitly talked about in the NT. And, it makes sense when the connection is made based on these specific details. Therefore, I would obviously conclude that "no original sin=no need for savior." But when I put it into a conditional statement, it seems logically invalid. the original premise being made is "if original sin, then a need for a savior. no original sin, therefore no need for a savior." am I forming this wrong?
If the need for a savior is based on the original sin/fallen world idea, then the argument that Jesus died for no reason is valid. If you want to assert that humans still need to be "saved" despite the fact that there is no hereditary sin that we got from Adam which condemns us, I suppose you can do so, but I don't think you can support this idea with the bible.
@bdwilson1000 i completely understand that. but, you do see how when I put into a conditional statement, it becomes logically invalid? If the premises are correct, then why does it makes sense outside it's logical form, but not as a logical conditional statement. this is what Im trying to get at. Why does it make sense one way and not the other.
it is a fact that Charles Drawin only spent a few weeks in the galpogos Islands were he wrote the atheist "bible"names ecapes me know..oh origin of the speechies.probaly chasing island babes out there
if adam and eve are the first 2 humans, then we are all related (however distant) and committing sin as we are all shagging our brothers and sisters - so as christians or whatever faith is followed by you, fact is according to your faith, we are all doomed!!
when i asked people of faith this, they said oh at some point god said its ok to shah each other lol even tho we are meant to be related lol
Heavenly Father forgive them for they know not what they say or do. if we came from apes why isnt the ape half humans? you would think by now that they would have advance, and why are there still apes? shouldnt they have evolve into humans by now...people please wake up and stop believing everything you hear...
@holyspirit303 Evolutionary theory does not state that all animals will "advance." Nor does it say that apes evolved into humans. You are thoroughly ignorant of the actual details of the theory of evolution by natural selection. Read something besides the bible and your pastor's pamphlets.
There would have been no religion, no churches, no priests or ministers, if it hadn't been for the disappearing act of a man called Jesus. According to the ministers and those who choose to be deceived, Jesus is the first man in space. If Jesus hadn't ascended into a heaven, he would have been just another martyr. This disappearing act prepared the way for religions to have a tax-free foundation.
@caccycacman "Opinion". The biblee is just the "opinion" of late iron-age/early bronze-age nomadic tribes. It has been demonstrably refuted at every turn. There is nothing of note in the biblee that has not been shown to be false. Don't you ever tire of being wrong and foolish?
“The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one out of 10 to the power of 40,000…It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” (Sir Fredrick Hoyle, professor of astronomy, Cambridge University).
“…I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science….It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] & holes as sound parts.” Charles Darwin
"The number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on earth must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory." - Charles Darwin
@kriss299 “The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one out of 10 to the power of 40,000…It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” (Sir Fredrick Hoyle, professor of astronomy, Cambridge University).
Secular societies are so much more refreshing. I'm glad to see CHILDREN thinking for themselves when a majority of adults in the U.S. continue to persist in delusion.
Religions equal intolerance, paranoia, xenophobia, misogyny, hypocrisy, barbarism, cruelty and mass hysteria. Just listen to the Christian conservatives in the USA.They sound a lot like the Taliban.
The 'god created man hypothesis', with its conjoined 'jeebus theory', has been conclusively demonstrated as false. Jerkus claims to have set you free from sin and its punishment, death, but science has set you free from the concept of 'sin' and the fear of death. Death is just as much a natural occurance as birth. Enjoy your freedom. ; )
@yeshuahfullofit Evolutionists think that we have evolved from apes. It is interesting to note that pig heart valves have been used as replacements for human heart valves. Pigskin has even been grafted in humans to deal with severe burns. In fact, pig tissues are the nearest in chemical composition to those of humans. Perhaps evolutionists should spend more time studying pigs than apes.
@jeremy22b Don't even start with me. If you truly understood what the Theory of Evolution says, you wouldn't be having this problem. For starters you should view 'Facts of Evolution' by @casseopeiaproject at watch?v=rajouw6zFDY&feature=channel_video_title. When you finish with that, take a gander at Ken Miller's 'How to shut up pesky creationists', 'DNA-The Search for Adam 1 of 5', and 'The Real Eve 1 of 9'. After viewing those, and 'digesting' them, you should be able to alter your beliefs.
@jeremy22b "Evolutionists think that we have evolved from apes". That statement alone demonstrates that you know absolutely nothing about evolution. No one makes that claim except creatards. The Theory of Evolution states that man AND apes have descended from a common ancestor that was neither man nor ape. Evolution is fact. There is no doubt. Every branch of science attests to and upholds evolution. Each new discovery fits neatly into its allotted spot, without fail. Religion explains nothing.
@caccycacman You haven't viewed the videos I suggested or you wouldn't be making such a foolish statement. The 'proof' is in the material presented. I'll go you one better than 'man and apes evolved from common ancestor', ALL four legged animals evolved from fish. The bones in a fish's fin are the exact same bones that exist in all four legged animals. Evolution doesn't have to evolve everything from scratch. It modifies what is already there to perform new functions. Evolution is a fact.
@caccycacman To understand the mechanism of genetic change, I suggest you watch "4. Molecular Genetics 1" with Prof. Robert Sapolsky, uploaded by @StanfordUniversity. Just type the title into the search bar. I really do not expect you to, you did not view the others. You do not wish to test your beliefs, but rather defend them against all that would shatter them. If you have to delude yourself to hold on to your god, of what use is it?
Hooray for smelling the roses, especially the roses that have been artificially evolved into having such wonderful aromas by years and years of selective breeding.
wtf no first humans!? then we wouldnt be here! u cant just have a species pop out of nowhere WITHOUT the first ones!(and yes i mean pop out of nowhere, we didnt evolve from goddamn monkeys thats fur DAMN sure, we may have similar characteristics, but theres no way we EVOLVED from them) that right there practically proves the entire thing wrong
@5secondguy I hope you are trolling and not really this ignorant. I hope you don't really believe that the vast majority of scientists, Archeologists, Biologists, and Anthropologists can all be proven wrong by one stupid little statement that. No evolutionist believes that things just popped out of nowhere. Thats what Creationists believe -That the invisible wizard god just waved his invisible wand and 'popped' the entire universe into existence. give me a break.
@tneighbors i never said evolutionists believe that. and its not like i ONLY believe gods way, i just feel like evolutions just the answer to how, but not the answer to why
@5secondguy Does there always have to be an answer to why? Sometimes things just happen. Why do 9 million babies have to die every year during birth? Furthermore, if there is a god, why would he allow this to happen. And why would he make viruses that hurt or kill us -even those who 'worship him'? Why did he bother to make us? Why does he require us to worship him constantly? If he loves us, and he wants us to go to heaven,why doesn't he make it easier and stop being so invisible?
@5secondguy I'm a little confused. Before you said "we didn't evolve from goddam monkeys, thats fur sure". Now it sounds like you believe it. There is solid DNA evidence and an ever-growing fossil record that supports that we have common ancestors with apes. Like it or not, thats what the evidence points to. Question is: do you want to believe what the evidence suggests, or do you want to believe whatever you want to believe, even if it has been proven false.
@tneighbors i am SO SICK of people asking that same question, why would he allow things like that to happen? because he is testing our faith towards him, that no matter what, we will stick by him, you should read a story about a man named jobe, if you dont already know. and if bad(even horrible) things never happen to the world, then theres no happiness either, were like freikin robots. and why would he make it so easy to go to heaven? that would mean you wouldnt even have to really try
@5secondguy He's supposed to be a fair and loving god (according to the bible). If you don't think allowing babies to die is not a little unfair, I'm not sure what to tell you. Is he also "testing our faith" by planting an entire fossil record in the ground that contradicts what the bible says happened? I do agree about the 'no bad, then no happiness' statement. But then how can heaven be a happy place? Just a bunch of robots up there?
@tneighbors i also choose to only believe in certain parts of evolution, as in, everything BUT human evolution, i can certainly agree on animal evolution(and yes im fully aware that were mammals, you know what i mean) and by "answer to how not why" i mean that it is how(ALMOST!) everything was created, but that god might have let it happen, u cant prove THAT wrong, u could almost pretty much say that i believe in both, but only certain parts of each. problem?
@5secondguy If you believe in evolution for the rest, then you can't believe in the bible because the fossil record can be traced back billions of years for some animals. So god created us and all the animals...then the animals started evolving...but we didn't? We have 98.8% the same DNA as the Bonobo Chimp. Why would they evolve and not us? Furthermore, Adam & Eve is genetically impossible because inbreeding cannot sustain a species -it results in stillbirth after a few generations.
@tneighbors true,he is,but even god has his exceptions, again,no bad,no happiness, im pretty sure god would rather the world have bad things happen to it then have a bunch of robots walkin around,that would mean his creation is useless, and ive never really considered heaven as a mega happy place(i know u didnt say that,im just stating).and exactly,he created US and the animals,AKA,there are US,and then there are the ANIMALS,who started evolving,while we stay pure. i still believe first humans..
@tneighbors overall, in the end, were both equally matched, because YOU cant prove him wrong, but I cant prove him right. again back to the "he cauld have LET everything that did happen, happen". but also, even I cant think of ways to express so called "proof" that he exist's. this so called "proof" of evolution......only proves evolution, not that god doesnt exist, you can NEVER prove that.(again)overall, im not questioning why u believe what you believe, so please dont think i am....
@5secondguy well, you can't prove that Thor doesn't exist...or anything for that matter. If you claim that a deity exists, the burden of proof is on you. If somebody told you that a different god exists, wouldn't you ask for some proof...or at least a bit of evidence? But for some reason you bought into the judeo-christian god without requiring even one shred of evidence. If you ever want to know truth, you have to be willing to put all theories to the same scrutiny -with no exeption
@tneighbors actually no i wouldnt, because then i'd be a hypocrite, i dont feel like i require proof for my own, so why would i require it of somebody else's?and why did you mention a specific religion towards "without requiring even one shred of evidence"? NO religion can prove theirs is right, nor can u prove they ARENT right. and also, who knows, maybe your right about the "truth" thing, but thats just how choose to live my life.
@tneighbors Evolutionists think that we have evolved from apes. It is interesting to note that pig heart valves have been used as replacements for human heart valves. Pigskin has even been grafted in humans to deal with severe burns. In fact, pig tissues are the nearest in chemical composition to those of humans. Perhaps evolutionists should spend more time studying pigs than apes.
Darwin is wrong there is no proof that evolution is real its funny how it can be shut down all the time. I mean coming from rocks sounds like bullshit to me id rather come from a creator how the hell did rocks get brains and why are there no rocks turning into something now talk about fairy tales its alright to believe we came from rocks but not a creator thats funny. Thats like saying a roach evolved from a pile of shit. Hey my greatest grand father is mr limestone and my greatest grandmother
@cjguitarist100 Where did you ever hear about life coming from rocks? Evolution never claims life evolved from rock , it doesn't say anything about rocks at all. It's funny all you people who disagree with evolution never seem to know even the first thing about it. The first humans were not farmers and Shepherds as the bible suggests. They lived as hunter gathers for 10's of thousands of years before farming. The first farmers where in China and that's why there are 1.4 billion of them.
@cjguitarist100 Actually evolution exists all around us all of the time. We don't always evolve for the better either. If evolution doesn't exist, then why did the large dinosaurs go extinct and small mammals survive to what they are today? Nobody said that we evolved from rocks. It's obvious you have no understanding of chemistry or biology.
@CaptainZETTA Me thinks that you are too generous, Captain!
"5secondguy" - or whatever he calls himself - is clearly a person of very limited intelligence and capacity for rational thought.
What is more, it would appear that the poor, sad, pathetic bastard is SEXUALLY inadequate (as well as intellectually deficient) - if his 'You Tube' pseudonym is anything to go by, that is!!! LOL. (Sorry; but I just couldn't resist that!)
BS! Muhammad violent SINFUL dead Murderer! Islam/Quran is corrupt! Jesus/Healed/Blessed/Peace/Salvation/GOD! All MUSLIMS who converted to Christianity ARE HAPPY & FREE OF ABUSE & MISERY Islam leaders are killing you! Christians LOVE YOU! PLEASE accept JESUS CHRIST as your SAVIOR John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! REBEL & ACCEPT JESUS! Be FREE of ISLAM LIES Visit cbn.com /radio
The historical Adam and Eve to may not be necessary to some interpretations of Christianity. There is actually a controversy brewing among Evangelical Christians with respect to Adam and Eve's historicity. Some Christians across the denominational spectrum have offered alternative, science-friendly positions (evolutionary theology) that eschew Adam and Eve's historicity:
@zarkoff45 Ya. Most religions change their tune when science proves their superstition is bullshit. Some insist on keeping it. Like the krishnas who insist the moon is further away than the sun.
I've shared this video with everyone I can think of. I absolutely love it. I've been preaching this sermon for months, but this video answers the question, "Why won't creationists listen to facts?" more beautifully than I could ever do.
Darwin is my hero! Thanks to his genius I know I am an animal just like other animals. Which makes me very happy, because I'd much rather be descending from any paleozoic sea-slug than be created by a sociopathic supernatural entity and by means of a handful of clay, a rib, some magic and a lot of sadistic, power-hungry, mysogynistic goat-herders with their submissive wives and/or concubines to do the real work in propagating the species.
@62netty Yes indeed, what separates us from nature has been through any and all technological evolution which straps us to the ball and chain of the material structure, Marshal McLuhan was great too, The Medium is the message, physical mediums of human extension for human vanity, clothing is a physical extension of the skin which is the largest human organ, it causes physical stress and is also an addiction, which is what this is all largely all about, as we useup andwaste the earths resources.
If you are soooooooooo convinced that the depressing and morally repulsive (Christian) doctrines of Original Sin and The Fall Of Man are true, why don't you adduce EVIDENCE and logical arguments to attempt to persuade people who don't believe in these doctrines, to change their minds.
I don't mean to be rude, but there is absolutely NO WAY that an comment like "...this is just soo wrong" is going to put the fear of Christ into anyone who doesn't
Thanks for this video. I was not indoctrinated into religion as a child and am a firm anti-theist, so I never saw the implications of Darwin's ideas in this way. Richard Dawkins suggests a good way to think of evolution, as a series of photos of each generation. At no point is can we say "this is the first human". Incremental change. No first man, no first woman, no original sin.
One objection - 5:16, "There may be a god..." Whatever do you mean? There is nothing to make us think that there is 'somebody' (because a 'god' is a person!) whom we are too limited to detect with our senses! Such a supposition is superfluous to requirements.
@dewinthemorning It means there may or may not be, we don't know. That is a fact. The only objection I have is that originally the churches actually encouraged the spreading of the theory.
@Muzlalilulelogreyfox It was, and still is, in the churches' interest, that means in the interest of some people in or out of the church, to spread such a belief in a suspiciously anthropomorphic god, requiring obedience...
@dewinthemorning yes, but just the nature of god means that we will never be able to truly know weather or not there is a god. Yes, there is no evidence of there being one, but there isn't any evidence of there not being one either. With that said, it doesn't really matter, because the religions themselves are absolutely false anyways. So go and smell roses and whatever.
@Awesomecraft99 Sorry, there is no 'nature of god'. There is an abstraction, a concept, thought up by ancient humans, who were looking for explanations for the world they saw around them. For them, god was a real man, only more powerful. With time, because they made the 'nature of god' to be more and more elusive and mysterious, this belief caught on. But there is no shred of evidence that anything like described in the religions, is happening.
@dewinthemorning You summed up what I was trying to say pretty well. What I meant by the "nature of god" is just by what the religions made up for him.
@dewinthemorning Wouldnt it be nice to have any argument over God eliminated so we might get down to business and get persons to stop having so many children, especially in poverty, and eliminate federal income taxes which only divides persons, because we are all just pulling the dead weight of this edifice of any and all human vanity? Hoe about God being all about consciousness, which I think the good book was all about, well some of it, the rest is just any allegoric story written by a Poet,
@dewinthemorning So it would seem that certain things should be unargumentive, and we surely might have as much faith within any science of discovery, as any philosopher will tell us that any world view that all would agree with and not be able to argue over has been so very evasive, we might consider any fact that there is no scientific proof for any existence of any deity, so there is no basis within any supreme court ruling to take the ideology of God completely out of government, cont'
@DrFruedienslip Oops "there is a basis to take God out of Gov" Because there is no moral basis for any law, "unless being defined" and even jurisprudence should state that any jury has any right to question any and all laws as well as any fact within any case, what we want is change, this is any voice of any "true government" but how can we have change without some real action, which surely should not require any vote based upon anyones opinion.
@dewinthemorning Actually, the existence of God is an unfalsifiable claim, thus leaving the possibility for a deity wandering about in some hidden dimension similar to the deist God. However, there's just as much evidence for God as there is evidence supporting the concept that reality as you know it doesn't exist and you're plugged into the matrix...
@dewinthemorning I meant that there may be a god but it is not the one of Adam & Eve and today that is the one that counts. Now 'go out and smell the roses'
@Euphobia2 We have absolutely no objective reason to suspect that any kind of god exists, either the one of Adam & Eve or any otner. Actually, I made a video about the replies to my comments here...
evidence that they didnt exist?
JamesWilliams1990 2 weeks ago
@JamesWilliams1990
Check the top three links in the description bar.
bdwilson1000 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JamesWilliams1990 Evidence that they exist?
kriss299 1 week ago
Comment removed
kriss299 1 week ago
@JamesWilliams1990 Do you believe in talking snakes. If you think that you're crazy. Seek help in a psychiatric hospital.
kriss299 1 week ago
@fallingskyz
In other words, lets dispense with the placeholders like "Original sin" and rephrase the argument to include the real theological meaning..
We live in a condemnable state that we need to be saved from, therefore we need someone to save us.
We do not live in a condemnable state that we need to be saved from, therefore we don't need someone to save us.
Once the hidden assumptions Christians have about original sin are included in the argument, the fallacy disappears.
bdwilson1000 2 weeks ago
someone correct me if im wrong, but the video seems to make the fallacy of denying the antecedent. the argument seems to be this:
if the first man/woman bring in original sin, then there is a need for a savior.
there was no first man/woman to bring in original sin.
therefore, there is no need for a savior.
im not trying to troll, rather this kept me up last night trying to understand a way around this. I suppose another possibility could be that adam/eve werent the original sinners...im stuck
fallingskyz 2 weeks ago
@fallingskyz
I suggest you look up Romans 5:12-21
Paul repeatedly references Adam (a fictional character) in the SAME BREATH as Jesus! This is the author of nearly half the NT and the founder of early Christianity..yet he doesn't seem to make any distinction between a myth and Jesus. Personally I found this troubling as a Christian. It is obvious they are inextricably tied together. The death/sin gained by Adam is corrected by the 2nd Adam. No original sin = Jesus is unnecessary.
bdwilson1000 2 weeks ago
@bdwilson1000 yes, this is exactly what I mean. Adam & original sin are explicitly talked about in the NT. And, it makes sense when the connection is made based on these specific details. Therefore, I would obviously conclude that "no original sin=no need for savior." But when I put it into a conditional statement, it seems logically invalid. the original premise being made is "if original sin, then a need for a savior. no original sin, therefore no need for a savior." am I forming this wrong?
fallingskyz 2 weeks ago
@fallingskyz
If the need for a savior is based on the original sin/fallen world idea, then the argument that Jesus died for no reason is valid. If you want to assert that humans still need to be "saved" despite the fact that there is no hereditary sin that we got from Adam which condemns us, I suppose you can do so, but I don't think you can support this idea with the bible.
bdwilson1000 2 weeks ago
@bdwilson1000 i completely understand that. but, you do see how when I put into a conditional statement, it becomes logically invalid? If the premises are correct, then why does it makes sense outside it's logical form, but not as a logical conditional statement. this is what Im trying to get at. Why does it make sense one way and not the other.
fallingskyz 2 weeks ago
it is a fact that Charles Drawin only spent a few weeks in the galpogos Islands were he wrote the atheist "bible"names ecapes me know..oh origin of the speechies.probaly chasing island babes out there
flyinv1967 2 weeks ago
if adam and eve are the first 2 humans, then we are all related (however distant) and committing sin as we are all shagging our brothers and sisters - so as christians or whatever faith is followed by you, fact is according to your faith, we are all doomed!!
when i asked people of faith this, they said oh at some point god said its ok to shah each other lol even tho we are meant to be related lol
jaymeeface 2 weeks ago
Heavenly Father forgive them for they know not what they say or do. if we came from apes why isnt the ape half humans? you would think by now that they would have advance, and why are there still apes? shouldnt they have evolve into humans by now...people please wake up and stop believing everything you hear...
holyspirit303 2 weeks ago
@holyspirit303 Evolutionary theory does not state that all animals will "advance." Nor does it say that apes evolved into humans. You are thoroughly ignorant of the actual details of the theory of evolution by natural selection. Read something besides the bible and your pastor's pamphlets.
Xenophile665 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@holyspirit303 Too stupid for science? Try religion.
kriss299 2 weeks ago
Cannot like this enough, Wonderful video, Thank you!
KiraNirvanna 1 month ago 3
There would have been no religion, no churches, no priests or ministers, if it hadn't been for the disappearing act of a man called Jesus. According to the ministers and those who choose to be deceived, Jesus is the first man in space. If Jesus hadn't ascended into a heaven, he would have been just another martyr. This disappearing act prepared the way for religions to have a tax-free foundation.
TheCobalt100 1 month ago
Opinion
caccycacman 2 months ago
@caccycacman "Opinion". The biblee is just the "opinion" of late iron-age/early bronze-age nomadic tribes. It has been demonstrably refuted at every turn. There is nothing of note in the biblee that has not been shown to be false. Don't you ever tire of being wrong and foolish?
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago
Theory!!
caccycacman 2 months ago
Religious belief is a mental illness. A contagious one
kriss299 2 months ago 2
Reality is religion's greatest enemy.
kriss299 2 months ago 2
@kriss299 Of the comments you made, sounds like you are trying to convince yourself.
caccycacman 2 months ago
Too stupid for science? Try religion.
kriss299 2 months ago 2
@kriss299 The fool has said in his heart their is no god. Psalms 14
caccycacman 2 months ago
@caccycacman "The fool has said in his heart there is no god, but the wise man shouts it from the rooftops!". -- Yesh 14:1
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago
“The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one out of 10 to the power of 40,000…It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” (Sir Fredrick Hoyle, professor of astronomy, Cambridge University).
jeremy22b 2 months ago
“…I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science….It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] & holes as sound parts.” Charles Darwin
jeremy22b 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"The number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on earth must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory." - Charles Darwin
jeremy22b 2 months ago
Stop talking and show us the proof that Darwin was right? Anybody could talk a good game. Where the proof?
caccycacman 2 months ago
@caccycacman In DNA. Wake up.
kriss299 2 months ago 15
@kriss299 Oh, that explains it all. Keep your day job!!
caccycacman 2 months ago
Too stupid for science? Try religion.
kriss299 2 months ago 21
@kriss299 “The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one out of 10 to the power of 40,000…It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” (Sir Fredrick Hoyle, professor of astronomy, Cambridge University).
jeremy22b 2 months ago
@kriss299
you need to learn some manners!!
aaf9999 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Secular societies are so much more refreshing. I'm glad to see CHILDREN thinking for themselves when a majority of adults in the U.S. continue to persist in delusion.
Religions equal intolerance, paranoia, xenophobia, misogyny, hypocrisy, barbarism, cruelty and mass hysteria. Just listen to the Christian conservatives in the USA.They sound a lot like the Taliban.
kriss299 2 months ago
The 'god created man hypothesis', with its conjoined 'jeebus theory', has been conclusively demonstrated as false. Jerkus claims to have set you free from sin and its punishment, death, but science has set you free from the concept of 'sin' and the fear of death. Death is just as much a natural occurance as birth. Enjoy your freedom. ; )
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago
@yeshuahfullofit Evolutionists think that we have evolved from apes. It is interesting to note that pig heart valves have been used as replacements for human heart valves. Pigskin has even been grafted in humans to deal with severe burns. In fact, pig tissues are the nearest in chemical composition to those of humans. Perhaps evolutionists should spend more time studying pigs than apes.
jeremy22b 2 months ago
@jeremy22b Don't even start with me. If you truly understood what the Theory of Evolution says, you wouldn't be having this problem. For starters you should view 'Facts of Evolution' by @casseopeiaproject at watch?v=rajouw6zFDY&feature=channel_video_title. When you finish with that, take a gander at Ken Miller's 'How to shut up pesky creationists', 'DNA-The Search for Adam 1 of 5', and 'The Real Eve 1 of 9'. After viewing those, and 'digesting' them, you should be able to alter your beliefs.
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago
@jeremy22b "Evolutionists think that we have evolved from apes". That statement alone demonstrates that you know absolutely nothing about evolution. No one makes that claim except creatards. The Theory of Evolution states that man AND apes have descended from a common ancestor that was neither man nor ape. Evolution is fact. There is no doubt. Every branch of science attests to and upholds evolution. Each new discovery fits neatly into its allotted spot, without fail. Religion explains nothing.
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago 3
@yeshuahfullofit Everything you said was an opinion. You said it. Where is the proof? There is none!!
caccycacman 2 months ago
@caccycacman You haven't viewed the videos I suggested or you wouldn't be making such a foolish statement. The 'proof' is in the material presented. I'll go you one better than 'man and apes evolved from common ancestor', ALL four legged animals evolved from fish. The bones in a fish's fin are the exact same bones that exist in all four legged animals. Evolution doesn't have to evolve everything from scratch. It modifies what is already there to perform new functions. Evolution is a fact.
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago
@caccycacman To understand the mechanism of genetic change, I suggest you watch "4. Molecular Genetics 1" with Prof. Robert Sapolsky, uploaded by @StanfordUniversity. Just type the title into the search bar. I really do not expect you to, you did not view the others. You do not wish to test your beliefs, but rather defend them against all that would shatter them. If you have to delude yourself to hold on to your god, of what use is it?
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago
@caccycacman To save you from breaking a nail, I pm'd them to you. Easy! XDD
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago
@caccycacman Before your god was, I AM.
yeshuahfullofit 2 months ago
@jerem
caccycacman 2 months ago
Hooray for smelling the roses, especially the roses that have been artificially evolved into having such wonderful aromas by years and years of selective breeding.
Cheers!
youtubuzr 2 months ago
f they would have exist, humanity would be the biggest incest story in the universe
webgier 2 months ago
wtf no first humans!? then we wouldnt be here! u cant just have a species pop out of nowhere WITHOUT the first ones!(and yes i mean pop out of nowhere, we didnt evolve from goddamn monkeys thats fur DAMN sure, we may have similar characteristics, but theres no way we EVOLVED from them) that right there practically proves the entire thing wrong
NO FIRST HUMANS=NO HUMANS AT ALL
i rest my case....
no firs
5secondguy 3 months ago
@5secondguy forget the "no firs" part, my bad
5secondguy 3 months ago
@5secondguy I hope you are trolling and not really this ignorant. I hope you don't really believe that the vast majority of scientists, Archeologists, Biologists, and Anthropologists can all be proven wrong by one stupid little statement that. No evolutionist believes that things just popped out of nowhere. Thats what Creationists believe -That the invisible wizard god just waved his invisible wand and 'popped' the entire universe into existence. give me a break.
tneighbors 2 months ago
@tneighbors i never said evolutionists believe that. and its not like i ONLY believe gods way, i just feel like evolutions just the answer to how, but not the answer to why
5secondguy 2 months ago
@5secondguy Does there always have to be an answer to why? Sometimes things just happen. Why do 9 million babies have to die every year during birth? Furthermore, if there is a god, why would he allow this to happen. And why would he make viruses that hurt or kill us -even those who 'worship him'? Why did he bother to make us? Why does he require us to worship him constantly? If he loves us, and he wants us to go to heaven,why doesn't he make it easier and stop being so invisible?
tneighbors 2 months ago
@5secondguy I'm a little confused. Before you said "we didn't evolve from goddam monkeys, thats fur sure". Now it sounds like you believe it. There is solid DNA evidence and an ever-growing fossil record that supports that we have common ancestors with apes. Like it or not, thats what the evidence points to. Question is: do you want to believe what the evidence suggests, or do you want to believe whatever you want to believe, even if it has been proven false.
tneighbors 2 months ago
@tneighbors i am SO SICK of people asking that same question, why would he allow things like that to happen? because he is testing our faith towards him, that no matter what, we will stick by him, you should read a story about a man named jobe, if you dont already know. and if bad(even horrible) things never happen to the world, then theres no happiness either, were like freikin robots. and why would he make it so easy to go to heaven? that would mean you wouldnt even have to really try
5secondguy 2 months ago
@5secondguy He's supposed to be a fair and loving god (according to the bible). If you don't think allowing babies to die is not a little unfair, I'm not sure what to tell you. Is he also "testing our faith" by planting an entire fossil record in the ground that contradicts what the bible says happened? I do agree about the 'no bad, then no happiness' statement. But then how can heaven be a happy place? Just a bunch of robots up there?
tneighbors 2 months ago
@tneighbors i also choose to only believe in certain parts of evolution, as in, everything BUT human evolution, i can certainly agree on animal evolution(and yes im fully aware that were mammals, you know what i mean) and by "answer to how not why" i mean that it is how(ALMOST!) everything was created, but that god might have let it happen, u cant prove THAT wrong, u could almost pretty much say that i believe in both, but only certain parts of each. problem?
5secondguy 2 months ago
@5secondguy If you believe in evolution for the rest, then you can't believe in the bible because the fossil record can be traced back billions of years for some animals. So god created us and all the animals...then the animals started evolving...but we didn't? We have 98.8% the same DNA as the Bonobo Chimp. Why would they evolve and not us? Furthermore, Adam & Eve is genetically impossible because inbreeding cannot sustain a species -it results in stillbirth after a few generations.
tneighbors 2 months ago
@tneighbors true,he is,but even god has his exceptions, again,no bad,no happiness, im pretty sure god would rather the world have bad things happen to it then have a bunch of robots walkin around,that would mean his creation is useless, and ive never really considered heaven as a mega happy place(i know u didnt say that,im just stating).and exactly,he created US and the animals,AKA,there are US,and then there are the ANIMALS,who started evolving,while we stay pure. i still believe first humans..
5secondguy 2 months ago
@tneighbors overall, in the end, were both equally matched, because YOU cant prove him wrong, but I cant prove him right. again back to the "he cauld have LET everything that did happen, happen". but also, even I cant think of ways to express so called "proof" that he exist's. this so called "proof" of evolution......only proves evolution, not that god doesnt exist, you can NEVER prove that.(again)overall, im not questioning why u believe what you believe, so please dont think i am....
5secondguy 2 months ago
@5secondguy well, you can't prove that Thor doesn't exist...or anything for that matter. If you claim that a deity exists, the burden of proof is on you. If somebody told you that a different god exists, wouldn't you ask for some proof...or at least a bit of evidence? But for some reason you bought into the judeo-christian god without requiring even one shred of evidence. If you ever want to know truth, you have to be willing to put all theories to the same scrutiny -with no exeption
tneighbors 2 months ago
@tneighbors actually no i wouldnt, because then i'd be a hypocrite, i dont feel like i require proof for my own, so why would i require it of somebody else's?and why did you mention a specific religion towards "without requiring even one shred of evidence"? NO religion can prove theirs is right, nor can u prove they ARENT right. and also, who knows, maybe your right about the "truth" thing, but thats just how choose to live my life.
5secondguy 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tneighbors Evolutionists think that we have evolved from apes. It is interesting to note that pig heart valves have been used as replacements for human heart valves. Pigskin has even been grafted in humans to deal with severe burns. In fact, pig tissues are the nearest in chemical composition to those of humans. Perhaps evolutionists should spend more time studying pigs than apes.
jeremy22b 2 months ago
and everything we know today is created not evolved
cjguitarist100 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cjguitarist100 "and everything we know today is created not evolved"
In your delusions. Educated ppl know better.
sybite 3 months ago
@cjguitarist100 Created by what though?
PomonaPunkRock 3 months ago
is mrs shale. What a joke
cjguitarist100 3 months ago
Darwin is wrong there is no proof that evolution is real its funny how it can be shut down all the time. I mean coming from rocks sounds like bullshit to me id rather come from a creator how the hell did rocks get brains and why are there no rocks turning into something now talk about fairy tales its alright to believe we came from rocks but not a creator thats funny. Thats like saying a roach evolved from a pile of shit. Hey my greatest grand father is mr limestone and my greatest grandmother
cjguitarist100 3 months ago
@cjguitarist100 Where did you ever hear about life coming from rocks? Evolution never claims life evolved from rock , it doesn't say anything about rocks at all. It's funny all you people who disagree with evolution never seem to know even the first thing about it. The first humans were not farmers and Shepherds as the bible suggests. They lived as hunter gathers for 10's of thousands of years before farming. The first farmers where in China and that's why there are 1.4 billion of them.
shawn199500 3 months ago
@cjguitarist100 " there is no proof that evolution is real "
Actually the evidence is overwhelming. Have you ever heard of a fossil? You're home-schooled aren't you?
sybite 3 months ago
@sybite or mississippi schooled
payasoinfeliz 3 months ago
@cjguitarist100 Actually evolution exists all around us all of the time. We don't always evolve for the better either. If evolution doesn't exist, then why did the large dinosaurs go extinct and small mammals survive to what they are today? Nobody said that we evolved from rocks. It's obvious you have no understanding of chemistry or biology.
PomonaPunkRock 3 months ago
@cjguitarist100 I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're trolling, and not clinically retarded.
CaptainZETTA 3 months ago
@CaptainZETTA Me thinks that you are too generous, Captain!
"5secondguy" - or whatever he calls himself - is clearly a person of very limited intelligence and capacity for rational thought.
What is more, it would appear that the poor, sad, pathetic bastard is SEXUALLY inadequate (as well as intellectually deficient) - if his 'You Tube' pseudonym is anything to go by, that is!!! LOL. (Sorry; but I just couldn't resist that!)
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BS! Muhammad violent SINFUL dead Murderer! Islam/Quran is corrupt! Jesus/Healed/Blessed/Peace/Salvation/GOD! All MUSLIMS who converted to Christianity ARE HAPPY & FREE OF ABUSE & MISERY Islam leaders are killing you! Christians LOVE YOU! PLEASE accept JESUS CHRIST as your SAVIOR John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! REBEL & ACCEPT JESUS! Be FREE of ISLAM LIES Visit cbn.com /radio
tigersforchrist 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you can find your soul set it free.
45BDA 3 months ago
If you can find your soul set it free.
45BDA 3 months ago
The historical Adam and Eve to may not be necessary to some interpretations of Christianity. There is actually a controversy brewing among Evangelical Christians with respect to Adam and Eve's historicity. Some Christians across the denominational spectrum have offered alternative, science-friendly positions (evolutionary theology) that eschew Adam and Eve's historicity:
watch?v=XXOvYn1OAL0
zarkoff45 3 months ago
@zarkoff45 Ya. Most religions change their tune when science proves their superstition is bullshit. Some insist on keeping it. Like the krishnas who insist the moon is further away than the sun.
sybite 3 months ago 2
This is simply brilliant in its concise and powerful message.
joefunsmith 3 months ago
I've shared this video with everyone I can think of. I absolutely love it. I've been preaching this sermon for months, but this video answers the question, "Why won't creationists listen to facts?" more beautifully than I could ever do.
Piddeaux 3 months ago
i wonder what happened before the big bang?
jasonmarden 3 months ago
Darwin is my hero! Thanks to his genius I know I am an animal just like other animals. Which makes me very happy, because I'd much rather be descending from any paleozoic sea-slug than be created by a sociopathic supernatural entity and by means of a handful of clay, a rib, some magic and a lot of sadistic, power-hungry, mysogynistic goat-herders with their submissive wives and/or concubines to do the real work in propagating the species.
Praise Darwin for opening our eyes!
62netty 3 months ago 32
@62netty Yes indeed, what separates us from nature has been through any and all technological evolution which straps us to the ball and chain of the material structure, Marshal McLuhan was great too, The Medium is the message, physical mediums of human extension for human vanity, clothing is a physical extension of the skin which is the largest human organ, it causes physical stress and is also an addiction, which is what this is all largely all about, as we useup andwaste the earths resources.
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@62netty false lies
TFKLOV3R 3 months ago
Respond to this video... this is just soo wrong
TFKLOV3R 3 months ago
@TFKLOV3R ... in your humble opinion.
If you are soooooooooo convinced that the depressing and morally repulsive (Christian) doctrines of Original Sin and The Fall Of Man are true, why don't you adduce EVIDENCE and logical arguments to attempt to persuade people who don't believe in these doctrines, to change their minds.
I don't mean to be rude, but there is absolutely NO WAY that an comment like "...this is just soo wrong" is going to put the fear of Christ into anyone who doesn't
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@TheEctomorph [Continuing on from my previous 'post' about the Christian doctrines of Original Sin and The Fall of Man]
believe in the religion to which you adhere.
TheEctomorph 2 months ago
@62netty
Truth doesn't care what you "want" to be true. Truth is truth. Sorry if you can't handle it.
steviej321 2 months ago
Thanks for this video. I was not indoctrinated into religion as a child and am a firm anti-theist, so I never saw the implications of Darwin's ideas in this way. Richard Dawkins suggests a good way to think of evolution, as a series of photos of each generation. At no point is can we say "this is the first human". Incremental change. No first man, no first woman, no original sin.
LsBaba 3 months ago
A video smelling of roses! :)
One objection - 5:16, "There may be a god..." Whatever do you mean? There is nothing to make us think that there is 'somebody' (because a 'god' is a person!) whom we are too limited to detect with our senses! Such a supposition is superfluous to requirements.
dewinthemorning 3 months ago 5
@dewinthemorning It means there may or may not be, we don't know. That is a fact. The only objection I have is that originally the churches actually encouraged the spreading of the theory.
Muzlalilulelogreyfox 3 months ago
@Muzlalilulelogreyfox It was, and still is, in the churches' interest, that means in the interest of some people in or out of the church, to spread such a belief in a suspiciously anthropomorphic god, requiring obedience...
dewinthemorning 3 months ago 4
@dewinthemorning yes, but just the nature of god means that we will never be able to truly know weather or not there is a god. Yes, there is no evidence of there being one, but there isn't any evidence of there not being one either. With that said, it doesn't really matter, because the religions themselves are absolutely false anyways. So go and smell roses and whatever.
Awesomecraft99 3 months ago
@Awesomecraft99 Sorry, there is no 'nature of god'. There is an abstraction, a concept, thought up by ancient humans, who were looking for explanations for the world they saw around them. For them, god was a real man, only more powerful. With time, because they made the 'nature of god' to be more and more elusive and mysterious, this belief caught on. But there is no shred of evidence that anything like described in the religions, is happening.
dewinthemorning 3 months ago 14
@dewinthemorning You summed up what I was trying to say pretty well. What I meant by the "nature of god" is just by what the religions made up for him.
Awesomecraft99 3 months ago
@dewinthemorning Wouldnt it be nice to have any argument over God eliminated so we might get down to business and get persons to stop having so many children, especially in poverty, and eliminate federal income taxes which only divides persons, because we are all just pulling the dead weight of this edifice of any and all human vanity? Hoe about God being all about consciousness, which I think the good book was all about, well some of it, the rest is just any allegoric story written by a Poet,
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@DrFruedienslip It would! And I like the wording of your reply to my comment. :)
dewinthemorning 3 months ago
@dewinthemorning So it would seem that certain things should be unargumentive, and we surely might have as much faith within any science of discovery, as any philosopher will tell us that any world view that all would agree with and not be able to argue over has been so very evasive, we might consider any fact that there is no scientific proof for any existence of any deity, so there is no basis within any supreme court ruling to take the ideology of God completely out of government, cont'
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@DrFruedienslip Oops "there is a basis to take God out of Gov" Because there is no moral basis for any law, "unless being defined" and even jurisprudence should state that any jury has any right to question any and all laws as well as any fact within any case, what we want is change, this is any voice of any "true government" but how can we have change without some real action, which surely should not require any vote based upon anyones opinion.
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@dewinthemorning Actually, the existence of God is an unfalsifiable claim, thus leaving the possibility for a deity wandering about in some hidden dimension similar to the deist God. However, there's just as much evidence for God as there is evidence supporting the concept that reality as you know it doesn't exist and you're plugged into the matrix...
ApatheticOmniscience 3 months ago
@dewinthemorning I meant that there may be a god but it is not the one of Adam & Eve and today that is the one that counts. Now 'go out and smell the roses'
Euphobia2 3 months ago
@Euphobia2 We have absolutely no objective reason to suspect that any kind of god exists, either the one of Adam & Eve or any otner. Actually, I made a video about the replies to my comments here...
If you want to smell the roses, you do it. :)
dewinthemorning 3 months ago
My first, "FIIIIIIRST!" Seriously, well said.
BigIdeaSeeker 3 months ago
@BigIdeaSeeker Thank you!
Euphobia2 3 months ago