The bible or whatever books you believe in were written by men. Stand back and you will notice the greed, manipulation, and man's every weakness in all of the text. Most of the bible's stories are about the worst of early mankind. What has this caused for centuries? War between idiots that think they know what is going to happen to others after they die.
Science has none of this and is the acid that will burn away all aspects of religion. (Thank mankind for waking up)
Ray, i admire your hard work and dedication and i discern that you probably have a pure heart; it's just that you are deceived brother and it's not your fault as you were most likely "saved" through someone who also is not aware of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God which His messenger Jesus Christ came to reveal. "like begets like"; that's a natural and a spiritual law. What saddens me is that you are reproducing many many clones in "your" image. Come quickly Lord Jesus!
Your product is a reflection of you Ray. You sell cowhide leather that appears to be alligator hide. You have a vest which looks like one thing on the outside and is something else entirely. This reveals you and your non-Kingdom like ministry. On the outside it looks like an honest caring movement that loves the lost and goes all out in propagating the gospel, albeit a false gospel; on the inside you are a ravening wolf and false teacher who looks nothing like Jesus. You will have your reward.
@64ways2die no one can buy salvation it was purchased with the blood of Christ the innocent for the guilty. That includes you, but you cannot receive it until you repent, turn from your sin, trust Jesus payment, He did it all even for you who mock him.
Here At Now You See TV We do Christian Video Testimonies of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and how people have come to find him as real in their life. If you could checkout our videos, leave us some feedback, and subscribe to our channel we would greatly appreciate it, or at least stop by and say hi. Also if you have a testimony of How the Lord has changed your life personally we would love to hear it.
Why are you letting that woman speak Ray? Don't you know the Bible forbids women to speak in church? Corinthians 14:35-36 (New International Version)
35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. 36Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached?
@4smartypants if you are living like jawhe is the god, then you'ld better hope that it's not allah, poseidon, zeus, thor, apophis, or any of the thousands of other ones.
@64Ways2Die DID YOU NOT HEAR WHAT RAY SAID. HE SAID THAT THE MONEY MADE OFF THE SALE OF THE VEST WILL GO TO PAY FOR STUDENTS --- TO HELP THEM BE ABLE TO PAY FOR THE CLASS. HOW IS HE " ABOUT THE MONEY-- 64???? HE LOST MONEY BY THE PURCHASE OF THE MATERIAL AND HE GAVE ALL THE MONEY BACK TO THE STUDENTS... STUDENTS X 10 !!!!!
@killerbandit continued from previous post..Another example if you didn't understand the concept of medical practices like putting an needle into some ones veins or sometimes jamming sharp objects into some. You would think that person was a psychopath, but if you understand that he was putting the need in to give him nutrients and cutting the person open to take out a tumor, then it would not look like psychopath, but some one very compassionate.
@bondservant4jesus Yeah you're evil... you bad sinner!...but not to worry, I have great news for you!! You can be absolved from your sins easier now!! Jesus is now accepting all major credit cards!! Hooray! Salvation!!
@killerbandit So if there was a God you don't want to know Him. You don't think it's right for him to do any justice? A judge sending some one to jail or to death, can look like a psycho path if the person doesn't understand the system. You don't understand that God is just, holy, kind in that he doesn't just annilate us now where we stand for the sins we just did today, but has wrath toward sin and evil. He is just, but made a way to escape what we deserve.
i may not agree with what he believes but the man make awsome jackits i have to say and if i live in america ied love to get one also if a have mony lol that would help lol
@Eric0873 - the christian god? Well because he seems to have the attributes of a dark aged sociopath ripe with anger and vengance and hatred. I am a little more open to the concept of a deistic god, one that humans make no claim to understanding in such detail as claimed in any one of the desert dogmas.
@killerbandit Suppose that God did have the attributes that you described; would it do any good for you to be "more open" to some other form of god? Suppose there were a psychopathic axe murderer coming for you right now to chop you into tiny pieces. Would it do you any good to be "more open" to a kinder more peaceful axe murder who wouldn't harm anyone? Being more open to some other possibility wouldn't change your circumstance.
@tzephon - I can see touch and communicate with an 'axe murder' in this world. God, not so much. I know you talk to god and well all I can say is good luck with that, I am not buying it.
@killerbandit it don't matter what you buy. YOUR NOT all that. YOUR NOT important. Who said you was even note worthy of even read ing your words??? And even if you do say... Yea, God is God....Jesus is Lord... just cause YOU say it don't make Him God. HE IS GOD if you agree with it or not. But, when your life is done then you will step inside of HIS world and YOU will give account for this world.
@pastorATLove - Yes and IF that happens 1, I will be very shocked, and 2, I will say that you did not provide enough evidence for me to surrender my faculties and abandon reason.
@pastorATLove are we supposed to be scared now? Newsflash: threats about things a person doesn't even believe in won't have any threatening effect. The equivalent would be to tell you that "you'ld better not write in capital letters, because santa won't give you a gift next year and cut you open!!!". Would such a fear-card have ANY effect on your use of capital letters?
@pastorATLove - concerned with?.... Your imaginary god? Again, sorry I don't believe and if I did, it would have absolutely NOTHING to do with religions and the institutions of man.
@tzephon Likewise, the other way around wouldn't change reality one bit. We humans have a system on how to determine if something is real: it needs to have a measurable manifestation. You don't slam your breaks on an open highway because there could be an invisible car in front of you... it has no manifestation, so we assume that there is not car to slam into. the same goes for any god. there is no manifestation, so we can assume it's not there.
@dxrocker69 You said that for something to be real it must have a measurable manifestation. Numbers, for example, do not have a measurable manifestation. Numerals do, but numbers do not. There are several things that have abstract existence which do not have a measurable manifestation.
@tzephon That's a complete bullshit argument dude. Numbers (like one, two, three, etc) have the same existential basis as words: nothing more or less then agreement among humans. Numeral sequences have manifestation (2 apples). The numerical system is a system WE have deviced to communicate numeral sequences. In fact, the manifestation of numbers and words is found in COMMUNICATION. Claiming the existance of an entity with effects needs measurable manifestation to be taken seriously, sorry.
@dxrocker69 Numerals exist as a convention, not numbers. That is why you have different numerals in different cultures which represent some given number: One, Uno, Eins, Une, etc. They represent the same number, but the numerals are different. Numbers however are uniform and universal in their characteristics, and are not a human convention as human conventions are not uniform nor universal. One doesn't equal one in the USA but .92 in Brittan. One is one.
@tzephon Ow, so you are arguing about languages? Is that it?
Could you please just state your point instead of ranting like a morron about irrelevant things please?
What does the existance of the number "2" have to do with the inexistance of god-like magical ghosts in the sky I wonder...
FYI: numbers are ALSO conceptual agreements among humans. What you are arguing about here is the decimal system in different languages. We can also express math in binary, octagonal, hexadecimal systems
@dxrocker69 "so you are arguing about languages" No, only illustrating that there is a difference between the conventions of men and abstract objects. There is a difference between a numeral and a number. There is no convention of men that is uniform and universal. Number are uniform and universal; numerals are not.
@tzephon Ow, ok, I see now where you are going with this. Your argument still fails miserable - even more so then how I understood it the first time.
When's the last time you saw a number create something or have any kind of measurable effect on the world or the universe? Does a number have intelligence? Does it have power? Can it "do" something?
Your god - by defention - CAN NOT be such an abstract. Since your god is assumed to DO things resulting in EFFECTS.
@tzephon No, you're just pointing out that you have nothing relevant to say and that you don't have a single rational and sound argument for your faith.
By comparing your god to a number, you basicly said that your god has no power, no intelligence and no effect on the world whatsoever.
@tzephon You used the analogy of numbers existing without being able to "see" a number. And what you are ultimately trying to prove is that god, while unmeasurable, can exist. So you are comparing numbers to god in terms of existance. This simply doesn't work. Because both are not comparable. One is an abstract concept and the other is claimed to create EVERYTHING and claimed to "enter" this realm as well in traditional religions (which would mean he's measurable btw)
The number "2" is a CONCEPT used to express an amount of something.
Just like the verbe "to work". In french it's "travailler". In german it is "arbeiten". All the same CONCEPT of expressing an action in different languages. it's about COMMUNICATION which is DIFFERENT from actual measureable existance.
@dxrocker69 Even if there were no people to do the counting, there could still be only one or two of something; even if there were no material something for there to be.
@kb: Well, yes. He is vengeful, angry and promotes hatred...towards sin! Sin is why Jesus had to die on the cross! We failed to rightly represent our Creator while bearing His image and likeness. The problem with Atheism is that it is missing alot of information. It rips Bible verses completely out of context and fails to harmonize anything with the power of God. If Hell does exist, as the Bible says it does, wouldn't you want to know how not to end up there? Don't wait 2 long. 10 out of10 die.
@Eric0873 - god is everything, and if god is angry about sin god needs to look no further than itself.
Atheism makes no claims about the nature of the universe but simply points out that an old book and first hand claims by a few men in ancient times are hardly to be trusted. Isn't it funny how most claims about god were made prior to the age of reason and science, any claims made now about a god are not taken seriously by 99% of people.
@bakamesuinu WELL, HIS STORY HAS BEEN AROUND FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS... YOUR GREAT X 10 GRAND DAD HEARD OF HIM. LOL. SO, YOU HAVE HEARD BUT HAVE NOT GOTTEN PAST YOUR PRIDE TO BELIEVE IN HIM. HE CAN'T MAKE YOU DO IT BUT HE AT LEAST PAID THE PRICE FOR YOUR SINS. ITS KIND OF LIKE THE GUYS WHO I GAVE FOOD TO-- BUT I'M NOT GOING TO FEED IT TO HIM..LOL HE GOT TO FEED HIMSELF
@pastorATLove actually, it's only been around for 3000 years. Egyptian mythology alone was present on this planet for much much longer. Hinduism is also far older then christianity.
And just because people believe something - that doesn't make it true.
Believing is completely useless. If it can't be demonstrated, then there is no real point in going along with it.
@kb: Your attempt at a pragmatic view of God doesn't fly. It doesn't matter how many people don't believe. Again, His existence isn't contingent upon our belief. Isn't if funny that science keeps changing its mind about it conclusions regarding the beginning?
No, you get to stand in judgment over God. He created you. He is the standard of right and wrong. And we are the sinners of whom He is angry with. This is why Christians desperately want atheists to repent and trust in Jesus! We love you.
@Eric0873 "Again, His existence isn't contingent upon our belief" True. The existance of ANYTHING is dependent upon an actualy measureable manifestation. That is how we determine if something is existant or not.
Science changes because it learns new things and CORRECTS itself instead of staying in the same dogmatic position for thousands of years - no matter how many data of the contrary pops up. Why do you think people say that religions have their heads stuck in the sand?
@Eric0873 He is the standard of right and wrong? Ok... then I'll assume you think it's ok to hold slaves and stone your son to death if he is disobedient?
@dxrocker69 Two words for you: Progressive Revelation! Atheist can't seem to get past the OT without considering what the NT (new covenant) has changed thankfully due to the righteousness of Christ fulfilling those OT laws. We are not under OT law anymore. We are under God's grace. This doesn't mean His law is null and void, it means it applies differently now b/c of the work of Christ.
@Eric0873 I think you should re-read your new testament. And fyi: "progressive revelation", is nothing more or less then just another pathetic excuse to downplay the absolute attrocities (genocide, gang rape, murder, etc) mentioned in the bibles as a "good" thing. Holy even.
@dxrocker69 You hold God in such contempt b/c He doesn't measure up to your standards. What you don't understand about those "atrocities" lies within the fact that you don't understand God and how perfectly holy He is. You can't even get past the OT why should you be worried about the NT? There are certain OT rules that apply to those people, in that time, for a specific purpose! Jesus changes all that through His death and resurrection. We are now under God's grace!
@Eric0873 Yes, you are exactly right. The god described in the bible (or any other scripture I've read for that matter), does NOT measure up to my standards of morals and ethics. He doesn't measure up to YOUR standards either, nore to the constitutional laws of the very country you live in, nore to the standards upheld through the Universal Human Rights. The sooner you realise that, the better.
@dxrocker69 We have no 'human rights' when it comes to the authority of God other than the right to chose who we put our faith and trust in. God has granted everyone with that gift. Yet, yours and my standards do not usurp His authority or His holiness. You venerate man as if we have done great thing, yet man is who is personally responsible for sin. Sin separates us from God and sin will lead us into hell if we fail to repent and trust in Jesus for salvation! I beg of you to humble yourself.
@Eric0873 Geneva convention disagrees with you. The law does as well. So do all people who aren't christian but who believe in another god (since their gods have different standards then yours).
Your god means as much to me (and all who aren't christian) as the easter bunny and santa claus. Just like what Visjnoe means to you. Stop this childish behavior and mentality please. Stop living in fear. Stop whorshipping an ancient mythic magical fairy tale. It's the 21st century damnit
@dxrocker69 How does being in the 21st century qualify for not believing in God? God is the most advanced being in the entire universe (since He did make the place and all). And you're getting all upset over it? He's your God too, not b/c you acknowledge that, but b/c He created you in His image and likeness. You are His creation whether you like it or not and are, by your own admission, in willful denial of Him. Your denial doesn't make Him less existent btw.
@Eric0873 "How does being in the 21st century qualify for not believing in God" Because today people can actually get a decent education. Well, unless you live in one of the theocracies still out there off course...
" Your denial doesn't make Him less existent btw. " True. Just like my denial of santa, apophis, thor etc doesn't make them any more or less existant or inexistant. This is the point. Wheter you assume gods exist or not... it actually doesn't change ANYTHING at all.
@Eric0873 You don't suddenly understand something more about the world if you assume a god or gods exist. In fact, the god of the bible makes the world, the entire universe actually, pretty much impossible as we observe it.
Genesis rapes physics, genetics, archeology, geology, cosmology... Noah rapes biology, bio-chemistry, genetics, geology, archeology, climatology,... It's completely insane. When's the last time you saw a violation of a natural law? lol!
@pastorATLove - Atheism makes one claim... count it one. That your god does not exist because there is no evidence. And no, I do not take the word of men who lived 2000 years ago.
@killerbandit yes I know you do not take the word of men--- lol
EVERYTHING you have learned you GOT from A MAN.... show me what you believe athiest, without what YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD from all those science books written by men... YOU are led around by the nose-all you know is what someone else has told you.-I mean things YOU have not proven.. you just take their word and say... YEA... thats how it is.. Its kind of like the white man calling the white man white. lol You guys make me laugh.
@pastorATLove - I don't need to take science on faith, it is observable and repeatable. The tests they did 100 years ago are repeatable today. Can you say the same about your resurrection myth or your burning bush? Nope.
The word science is backed up by REALITY.
I don't need to rely on faith to know science works, me typing this to you from accross the country or the world is PROOF.
@pretoshohmoofc - The 'it's just a theory argument', easily countered with the fact that gravity is 'just a theory', etc.
a. our mind is the only tool we have to work with
b. science relies on many senses beyond our very limited 5. The elctromagnetic spectrum for example is many thousand times broader than our limited eyes are able to perceive.
c. it is called peer review and it works quite well thank you very much.
@killerbandit Sorry my son, but it is called the "Law of gravity". In order for it to be called a Law or a fact, you must be able to observe it or reproduce it in a lab. Evolutionists have done either with how life came from non-life. The Law of Biogenesis on the other hand shows that only life creates life. But the real reason why you are an atheist is because you have had a bad relationship with your Father. They write books on this.
@pretoshohmoofc - Evolution is NOT about the process by which life came from non life. That is the theory of abiogenisis to which I would point out is a far far less developed science than evolution. Don't mix the two up.
Evolution is backed up by literally millions of scientists around the world with a embarrassingly large body of evidence that you can trace it back to Darwin's Finches.
@killerbandit "Evolution is NOT about the process by which life came from non life."
Ohhh, Yes it is sony boy! It is the alternative to divine thinking. Evolution tries to explain how life came to be without a god.
Not "abiogenisis" I am referring to the "Law of biogenisis". Only life creates life. Since I we have only observed or reproduced life from life. The burden of proof is not on me, but on YOU my friend. An embarrassingly large body of evidence is stacked up against you.
@pretoshohmoofc - EVOLUTION DOES NOT EXPLAIN HOW LIFE BEGAN! End of story. Conflating the two concepts is ignorant.
Second, there is not a proven theory or working model on how life came from non-life. Scientists have some ideas but we just don't know and science does not claim to KNOW.
You are the one that claims to know how life began.
@killerbandit No it is totally relative. All you are doing is playing the two story two step on me. You claim that evolution explains away God; but when I show you how you need a first cause, you flip flop on me, and try to separate the two. You hold two official positions, and you bounce your mind back and forth between the two when each doesn't line up with the other explanation.
@pretoshohmoofc Evolution doesn't say a word about god. NOTHING in science says a word about god. For the simple reason that science studies the NATURAL world. Gods, fairies, flying spaghetti monsters are part of the supernatural world. Science works just fine without god anyway lol.
You are really engaging in intellectually dishonest arguments here.
@pretoshohmoofc Secondly... the earliest "cause" science discovered is explained in big bang theory. What set it off? Why did it happen? We don't know. You don't know either. You just claim to know, but honestly, that's just talking out of your ass.
It's ok to not know something. It's not ok to just slap some god on it and call it a day (and threaten those that don't agree with eternal torment I might add).
@pretoshohmoofc Evolution only starts once life is there. Evolution doesn't care how life came into existance. Wheter it was through magic, alien engineering, god or abiogenesis... It doesn't matter ONE BIT to evolutionary theory. Theory explains the change LIFE goes through over time. Why do you argue against thing you know nothing about?
@pretoshohmoofc Again you exhibit your ignorance of how science works. A law is, in physics at least, an infallible property of nature. Law of gravity goes something like "matter will be attracted to other matter". A fact of gravity would be "drop an apple and it falls down". Neither of those EXPLAIN what gravity is and how it works. THAT's where Theory of Gravity comes in.
@pretoshohmoofc The theory EXPLAINS the laws and the facts. A theory is DIFFERENT from laws and facts. A "really good theory" DOES NOT grow up to be a fact. A theory EXPLAINS facts.Both are DIFFERENT things.
A) So proves my point. The only way that you believe that those scientists are correct, is because they TOLD YOU THEY WERE.
b) And with what set of sences do they observe these elctromagnetic spectrum?
c) So let me get this straight, One evolutionist tells another evolutionist that he is right? The problem with this is, the evolutionist begins with excluding the possibility of a divine power before the research begins. THEN, does his research.
a - they don't need to tell me anything, their research does so. Now if you don't believe in the proccess of science I suggest you look to your computer which is a direct result of the proccess of science.
b - If you really want to get into the argument of whether or not 2 + 2 = 4 is up for speculation then I will tell you I am not interested in that discussion.
c - No one says that evolution excludes the concept of a god. The theory just doesn't need god to work.
@killerbandit a - they don't need to tell me anything, their research does so.
a)So what you are tring to tell me is, you haven't seen it yourself, you're just taking their word for it? Isn't that like placing your faith in something other than yourself?
b)I am not questioning mathmatics. This has been proven. We can observe it.
c) You just contradicted yourself. This is my point. Only life creates life. You are pinning my "Laws of..." against your so called theory.
@pre - You are right, I don't go out and test every scientific theory that exists. That is a ridiculous standard. Peer review allows theories to be challenged & in fact encourages it. If you do not believe the theory of evolution is correct you are welcome to scientifically debunk it.
You can also observe evolution.
Life had to come from somewhere & your answer that god did it does not answer anything it just substitutes ignorance with an absurd assumption. Science would be, how did god do it?
@killerbandit No, you are not correct. Micro-evolution. Varations within kind. this one is the only one whichy has been observed. example: different kinds of dogs, produce different kinds of breeds of dogs.
Macro-evolution on the other hand, Changing from one kind of plant or animal into another. Has never been observed. This is why we are still looking for the "missing link". The link that ties them together.
@pretoshohmoofc - Macro evolution is simply the accumulation of a large ammount of micro changes. These occur over geological times spans and as such are not directly observeable. I can admit it is a hard concept to grasp for someone who may think the planet is only 6000 years old.
There is no single 'missing link' and infact many have been discovered. Common ancestors of us and other primates have been found.
@killerbandit I don't believe that the planet is 6000 years old. Within christianity there are two position. Old creationists (like myself) and young earth creationists. You said, "These occur over geological times spans and as such are not directly observeable." If you can't and have not been able to observe it, then how in God's name can you still insist that this is true?
@pretoshohmoofc Did investigators of a crime scene observe the crime itself? NO? Then how on earth can they ever find out who the culprit is? You're basicly argumenting that we humans are unable to determine cause when all we can see is effect.
That's off course completely ridiculous, and it's even a little insulting
@pretoshohmoofc - Perhaps you have misunderstood what I said, there is no one missing link. As in there isn't some singular species that we don't know of. There are many different species between the common ancestor we share with chimpanzees and because of the way fossils form, it is unlikely that we will ever find them all.
The 'missing link' is as much a misnomer as is 'global warming'. A better description would be 'common ancestor'.
@killerbandit There is no such thing as a "missing link." That's the point. That is why they call this "the missing link". This link is missing. They are still in search of the fossil that links man to beast. The connection between them is missing. And just because we share some of the same DNA only tells me that we share the same designer.
@pretoshohmoofc - Well you clearly know more than the thousands of evolutionary scientists who have dedicated their lives to studying this topic. Congrats, and I bet you got all of your knowledge from a book that was written before the scientific method was developed. Congrats. I just wonder how you are communicating with me, it must be through god, I am on one of those devil machines known as a computer.
@killerbandit That was a good point that you made.. I must admit, I am communicating with you through a computer. And behind this computer was an intelligent mind who created it. The Same is for the DNA.
@killerbandit It's like walking along the beach and you see in the sand, "Mike loves Michelle." You know the waves rolling up on the beach didn't form that--a person wrote that. It is a precise message. It is clear communication. In the same way, the DNA structure is a complex, three-billion-lettered script, informing and directing the cell's process.
@killerbandit And here is the paradox. In order for there to have been the first cell split, The DNA inside of this first cell must have been up and running. You could not have had your first cell split without it. Even the DNA molecule for the single-celled bacterium, E.coli, contains enought information to fill all the books in any of the world's largest libraries."
@pretoshohmoofc Again exhibiting your ignorance. What you don't seem to realise is that the term "missing link" is being tossed around by creationist morrons to sow confusion.
@pretoshohmoofc No self-respecting scientist with actual credentials will agree that there is such a thing is "missing link". EVERY fossil is a link. Also, maybe it's time for you to actually LOOK at the tree of the hominid species. The transition is quite clear. All the way from australopethicus into the homo subspecies to finally end up with homo sapiens.
@pretoshohmoofc Let's try this another way. What would you accept as a fossil of a so-called "missing link"? What would that fossil need to look like? What properties would it have?
Since you are so full of it, you should be able to answer this question. If you are so sure that the "missing link" is not found, then surely you should be able to tell me what that "missing link" should look like... otherwise, you're just (again) being deceitfull and dishonest.
@pretoshohmoofc Ever been to a museum of natural history? Are you familiar with hominid species? Australopethicus Afaransis, Africanus? Home erectus, ergaster, neaderthaler etc?
@pretoshohmoofc Ever been to a museum of natural history? Are you familiar with hominid species? Australopethicus Afaransis, Africanus? Home erectus, ergaster, neaderthaler etc?
@pretoshohmoofc the term "kind" is unkown to taxonomy, just so you know. Creationists always ramble on about that, but not one ever explain what a "kind" really is in terms of taxonomy.
And macro = lots of micro.
If you say that only micro is possible it is the equivalent of saying that if I walk taking one step at a time, I will NEVER EVER EVER be possible to walk a mile. Which is obviously painfully morronic.
@pretoshohmoofc You see, that is also why all this mumbo jumbo about "missing links" is complete horse poo... EVERY SINGLE FOSSIL or even living organism is a "link" between its parents and its off spring. The average mutation rate in humans is about 175 mutations per generation.
@pretoshohmoofc This means that I have DNA, which I will pass on to my kids that is unique to me... DNA that I DID NOT get from either of my parents. All those mutations add up quickly after hundreds of generations, let alone thousands. Add in some selection parameters, et viola.
@killerbandit It is funny to me on how you came to the conclusion regarding that god did it does not answer anything it just substitutes ignorance with an absurd assumption. When it is YOU not me, who cannot show any example of nonlife creating life. I can show that with every cause, there is a first cause. You are insisting that you are right, without a shread of evidence. TO me, your conclusions are an ignorant and absurd assumption.
@pretoshohmoofc - uggg... again evolution is a theory to explain the diversity of life and in no way makes any assertions what so ever about the origin of life.
Your answer to that question that god did it does not answer how it was done.
@killerbandit uggg...again, at the end of your evolutionary word game is a theory that life came from nonlife. I'm not into ficticous science fiction. I don't know how God would have created life from nonlife but who cares? Comparing my mind to that of a divine being would be like my cat understanding the second laws of thermodynamics. Now you are assuming that if we can't understand it, therefore nothing can? You really are scraping the bottom on this one me son.
@pretoshohmoofc " Now you are assuming that if we can't understand it, therefore nothing can? " Actually, it sounds more like you are saying that "if we can't understand it, god must have done it".
@pretoshohmoofc Cause and effect is a constant in our universe. So logically, you'll end up with a "first cause" if you wind everything back, that's true.
However, "logic" as we know it seriously breaks down at the moment of the big bang itself.
@pretoshohmoofc The natural laws themselves break down - which actually puts a question mark on the whole "cause/effect" rule at that point either. But assuming that it is still in effect then... there's NO REASON WHATSOEVER to assume that that first cause was some eternal god. Let alone the god you happen to worship.
@pretoshohmoofc a) no. it's because the light goes on when we push the switch. or because my message pops up after clicking "post". Because the bridges stay up, because satelites orbit the earth, because robots drive around on mars and because atom bombs explode. THAT is why you can trust science as a non-scientist. Because it obviously works. I don't need faith to switch my tv channel...
b) math, computers and big teams of the most educated men on the planet.
@pretoshohmoofc c) actually... no. a scientist earns money by proving his peers to be WRONG. we don't make progress by conducting experiments that confirm existing knowledge. scientist don't get fame, glory and nobel prizes by re-demonstrating that 1+1 indeed equals 2. The scientists that go down in history are those who discover things that turn our knowledge upside down and CORRECT current understandings.
@pretoshohmoofc People like copernicus, newton, darwin, mendel, curie, einstein, hawking... If evolution would indeed be so wrong, a scientist would have collected a BUNCH of nobel prizes LONG ago - you may be sure of that. 200.000+ peer review papers were published about evolution.
@pretoshohmoofc Not one of them got challenged. Not ONE paper trying to falsify evolution has EVER even been send in for publication - let alone that it past the scientific scrutiny every other scientific idea has to go through. NOT ONE.
@pretoshohmoofc here we go with the "it's just a theory"... damn, you're dumb.
A scientific theory is the best possible explanation for a set of facts. It's a testable construct that explains certain natural phenomena. When the theory is solid, you can build technology upon it.
@pretoshohmoofc Atomic theory is such a theory. Just like evolution is such a theory. Atomic theory in practice: atom bombs, nuclear energy. Evolution in practice: a butt load of medication and in depth understanding on the workings of dna. Not to mention the DAILY applciation of evolutionary principles in agriculture.
@pastorATLove The thing is... what we read in science books.. we are NOT required to take it on face value. What is written in science books can be VERIFIED. The experiments can be REPEATED. Science works very result based. We for example know atomic theory is correct because atom bombs explode. With the bible, we DO need to take it on face value.
@killerbandit And just like I said... YOU guys make ALL kinds of FALSE claims. YOU can't back anything you say up. YOU can not prove anything you say. NONE of you atheist can. You guys need to grow up. PROVE to me HE DOES NOT EXSIST. PROVE IT!!!!
@pastorATLove - You are the one asserting that a god exists and the burden of proof rests with you. I will prove to you god doesn't exist the day you can prove to me that unicorns are the spawn of the FSM.
@pastorATLove the burden of proof is on the side of the proposer.
I'm not the one claiming that god exists. That would be you. YOU need to provide evidence for your positive claim. As an atheist, I am saying that I see no reason to believe you before you can present me with some compelling verifiable evidence.
@pretoshohmoofc And yes, I did feel better. When I see people like writing (and even believing) such stupidities, I feel compelled to educate your ass.
Now that I did my part, it's out of my hands. I introduced you to the bullshit of your believes. What you do with that is upto you. I did my part.
@pretoshohmoofc I don't see how it would need further explanation. You believe stupidities, so I make note of that so that you may start using your brain.
@pretoshohmoofc How many ways are there to understand that sentence I wonder...
What do you think I mean with it?? I mean with it that you believe stupidities... There is very little difference between your faith and believing in santa clause or mayan "prophecies".
@pretoshohmoofc Come on man, don't be such a child. This really is a pathetic excuse to not address the points I am raising.
What I mean is that your religious views are stupid, dumb, childish, morronic, pseudo-scientific, ignorant of the real world, psychotic-ish. You understand english right?
@pastorATLove You clearly don't understand what atheism is. Atheism LITERALLY means "not theism". There's no 'atheistic doctrine' or 'study'. Atheism is the REJECTION of theistic claims. Atheism is by defenition, the result of the STUDY of THEISM followed by the REJECTION thereof on the grounds that there is no evidence whatsoever and even evidence that most claims are simply completely and utterly wrong.
@killerbandit - Most modern religions, following the age of reason. IE Mormonism, scientology etc. are literally a laughing stock for most people, even those within your own religion.
@killerbandit More then that actually... if today people make similar claims as back then, they end up in a shrink's coach popping dopamine-blockers (anti-psychotic meds).
@killerbandit The only reason why you don't believe in God is because you had a bad relationship with your Father. i always ask them first, and I am always 100% right with their answers. Again, they write books on this. If you don't understand the love from your own father, you cannot understand the concept of a heavenly one.
@MeanHacker - Actually my opinion is quite real, there is evidence that I have an opinion and you can see it for yourself. It is observable and testable and repeatable.
I think what you meant to say is that my opinion is not correct, but that is not something you have any way of proving. Any more than my ability to prove that there is a mystical tea set orbiting on the dark side of pluto... I guess you will just have to surrender reason and have faith.
@MeanHacker By that logic, we are unable to determine what is real and what isn't. So by this logic, you are basicly argumenting that existance and non-existance is the same thing.
@TheMetalHead102 P.S. you added the word JUST. And I was just commenting on this particular video! So I did not exclude the rest of the world by commenting on a few that are also in the world but not of it. Read my comment again. And you will see I did not say: A lot of talent JUST in the household of faith.
Use the tools for Christ the king. He rules omnipotent.
TheChaseair 1 month ago
The bible or whatever books you believe in were written by men. Stand back and you will notice the greed, manipulation, and man's every weakness in all of the text. Most of the bible's stories are about the worst of early mankind. What has this caused for centuries? War between idiots that think they know what is going to happen to others after they die.
Science has none of this and is the acid that will burn away all aspects of religion. (Thank mankind for waking up)
ADDSCO 1 year ago
Ray, i admire your hard work and dedication and i discern that you probably have a pure heart; it's just that you are deceived brother and it's not your fault as you were most likely "saved" through someone who also is not aware of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God which His messenger Jesus Christ came to reveal. "like begets like"; that's a natural and a spiritual law. What saddens me is that you are reproducing many many clones in "your" image. Come quickly Lord Jesus!
KingdomUploader 1 year ago
Your product is a reflection of you Ray. You sell cowhide leather that appears to be alligator hide. You have a vest which looks like one thing on the outside and is something else entirely. This reveals you and your non-Kingdom like ministry. On the outside it looks like an honest caring movement that loves the lost and goes all out in propagating the gospel, albeit a false gospel; on the inside you are a ravening wolf and false teacher who looks nothing like Jesus. You will have your reward.
KingdomUploader 1 year ago
@64ways2die no one can buy salvation it was purchased with the blood of Christ the innocent for the guilty. That includes you, but you cannot receive it until you repent, turn from your sin, trust Jesus payment, He did it all even for you who mock him.
bondservant4jesus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice Video!!!
We Love what you guys are about.
Here At Now You See TV We do Christian Video Testimonies of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and how people have come to find him as real in their life. If you could checkout our videos, leave us some feedback, and subscribe to our channel we would greatly appreciate it, or at least stop by and say hi. Also if you have a testimony of How the Lord has changed your life personally we would love to hear it.
Thanks and God Bless
NowYouSeeTV 1 year ago
Why are you letting that woman speak Ray? Don't you know the Bible forbids women to speak in church? Corinthians 14:35-36 (New International Version)
35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. 36Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached?
mritalyboy2000 1 year ago
Thank you for your invitation
Nice 2 meet u
^____^
MyArtSchool 1 year ago
If you are living like there is NO GOD....well you'd better be right....
4smartypants 1 year ago 2
@4smartypants if you are living like jawhe is the god, then you'ld better hope that it's not allah, poseidon, zeus, thor, apophis, or any of the thousands of other ones.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
Imitation Alligator vests for auction... Always about the dollars 'eh Ray? try selling snake oil, you'd be good at that!
64Ways2Die 1 year ago
@64Ways2Die DID YOU NOT HEAR WHAT RAY SAID. HE SAID THAT THE MONEY MADE OFF THE SALE OF THE VEST WILL GO TO PAY FOR STUDENTS --- TO HELP THEM BE ABLE TO PAY FOR THE CLASS. HOW IS HE " ABOUT THE MONEY-- 64???? HE LOST MONEY BY THE PURCHASE OF THE MATERIAL AND HE GAVE ALL THE MONEY BACK TO THE STUDENTS... STUDENTS X 10 !!!!!
pastorATLove 1 year ago
@pastorATLove if you really believe that he is not making millions of dollars with all his bullshit schemes, then you're even more stupid then he is.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit continued from previous post..Another example if you didn't understand the concept of medical practices like putting an needle into some ones veins or sometimes jamming sharp objects into some. You would think that person was a psychopath, but if you understand that he was putting the need in to give him nutrients and cutting the person open to take out a tumor, then it would not look like psychopath, but some one very compassionate.
bondservant4jesus 1 year ago
@bondservant4jesus Yeah you're evil... you bad sinner!...but not to worry, I have great news for you!! You can be absolved from your sins easier now!! Jesus is now accepting all major credit cards!! Hooray! Salvation!!
64Ways2Die 1 year ago
@64Ways2Die RAY WILL NOT RESPOND TO STUPID. I SHOULDN'T EITHER-- BUT HERE GOES----WELL, OK... I HAVE NOTHING TO SAY EXCEPT -- THAT WAS STUPID...!!!!!
pastorATLove 1 year ago
@killerbandit So if there was a God you don't want to know Him. You don't think it's right for him to do any justice? A judge sending some one to jail or to death, can look like a psycho path if the person doesn't understand the system. You don't understand that God is just, holy, kind in that he doesn't just annilate us now where we stand for the sins we just did today, but has wrath toward sin and evil. He is just, but made a way to escape what we deserve.
bondservant4jesus 1 year ago
did Richard Dawkins accept your vest?
MeanHacker 1 year ago
Wow Dale...that morphing is really cool!
I noticed that Mark was not caught with forbidden food this week. hehe.
shutterkat 1 year ago
: )
ilove2draw1 1 year ago
Thanks again, Ray & Team!
SterlingUliso 1 year ago
Its so cool to see ya going back to making leather vests Just like in your books and stuff :D
OfficialRobbieMason 1 year ago
i may not agree with what he believes but the man make awsome jackits i have to say and if i live in america ied love to get one also if a have mony lol that would help lol
MeiOckKaKaiToi 1 year ago
god isn't real.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit: Sure He is. Why would you say such a thing? Honestly, what would be so bad about God being real??
Eric0873 1 year ago
@Eric0873 - the christian god? Well because he seems to have the attributes of a dark aged sociopath ripe with anger and vengance and hatred. I am a little more open to the concept of a deistic god, one that humans make no claim to understanding in such detail as claimed in any one of the desert dogmas.
killerbandit 1 year ago 2
@killerbandit Suppose that God did have the attributes that you described; would it do any good for you to be "more open" to some other form of god? Suppose there were a psychopathic axe murderer coming for you right now to chop you into tiny pieces. Would it do you any good to be "more open" to a kinder more peaceful axe murder who wouldn't harm anyone? Being more open to some other possibility wouldn't change your circumstance.
tzephon 1 year ago
@tzephon - I can see touch and communicate with an 'axe murder' in this world. God, not so much. I know you talk to god and well all I can say is good luck with that, I am not buying it.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit it don't matter what you buy. YOUR NOT all that. YOUR NOT important. Who said you was even note worthy of even read ing your words??? And even if you do say... Yea, God is God....Jesus is Lord... just cause YOU say it don't make Him God. HE IS GOD if you agree with it or not. But, when your life is done then you will step inside of HIS world and YOU will give account for this world.
pastorATLove 1 year ago
@pastorATLove - Yes and IF that happens 1, I will be very shocked, and 2, I will say that you did not provide enough evidence for me to surrender my faculties and abandon reason.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@pastorATLove are we supposed to be scared now? Newsflash: threats about things a person doesn't even believe in won't have any threatening effect. The equivalent would be to tell you that "you'ld better not write in capital letters, because santa won't give you a gift next year and cut you open!!!". Would such a fear-card have ANY effect on your use of capital letters?
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit you better be VERY concerned... VERY!!!
pastorATLove 1 year ago
@pastorATLove - concerned with?.... Your imaginary god? Again, sorry I don't believe and if I did, it would have absolutely NOTHING to do with religions and the institutions of man.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@pastorATLove hahaha. you too!!! you're still using capital letters!!!! santa will cut you open!! repent!!!!!!! hahaha
dxrocker69 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pastorATLove hahaha. you too!!! you're still using capital letters!!!! santa will cut you open!! repent!!!!!!! hahaha
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@tzephon Likewise, the other way around wouldn't change reality one bit. We humans have a system on how to determine if something is real: it needs to have a measurable manifestation. You don't slam your breaks on an open highway because there could be an invisible car in front of you... it has no manifestation, so we assume that there is not car to slam into. the same goes for any god. there is no manifestation, so we can assume it's not there.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 So you don't believe in the law of logic or in numbers then.
tzephon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tzephon I have no idea what you are talking about. Explain.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 You said that for something to be real it must have a measurable manifestation. Numbers, for example, do not have a measurable manifestation. Numerals do, but numbers do not. There are several things that have abstract existence which do not have a measurable manifestation.
tzephon 1 year ago
@tzephon That's a complete bullshit argument dude. Numbers (like one, two, three, etc) have the same existential basis as words: nothing more or less then agreement among humans. Numeral sequences have manifestation (2 apples). The numerical system is a system WE have deviced to communicate numeral sequences. In fact, the manifestation of numbers and words is found in COMMUNICATION. Claiming the existance of an entity with effects needs measurable manifestation to be taken seriously, sorry.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 Numerals exist as a convention, not numbers. That is why you have different numerals in different cultures which represent some given number: One, Uno, Eins, Une, etc. They represent the same number, but the numerals are different. Numbers however are uniform and universal in their characteristics, and are not a human convention as human conventions are not uniform nor universal. One doesn't equal one in the USA but .92 in Brittan. One is one.
tzephon 1 year ago
@tzephon Ow, so you are arguing about languages? Is that it?
Could you please just state your point instead of ranting like a morron about irrelevant things please?
What does the existance of the number "2" have to do with the inexistance of god-like magical ghosts in the sky I wonder...
FYI: numbers are ALSO conceptual agreements among humans. What you are arguing about here is the decimal system in different languages. We can also express math in binary, octagonal, hexadecimal systems
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 "so you are arguing about languages" No, only illustrating that there is a difference between the conventions of men and abstract objects. There is a difference between a numeral and a number. There is no convention of men that is uniform and universal. Number are uniform and universal; numerals are not.
tzephon 1 year ago
@tzephon Ow, ok, I see now where you are going with this. Your argument still fails miserable - even more so then how I understood it the first time.
When's the last time you saw a number create something or have any kind of measurable effect on the world or the universe? Does a number have intelligence? Does it have power? Can it "do" something?
Your god - by defention - CAN NOT be such an abstract. Since your god is assumed to DO things resulting in EFFECTS.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 "I see now where you are going with this" I'm actually pointing out that what appears to be a philosophy of empiricism does not work.
tzephon 1 year ago
@tzephon No, you're just pointing out that you have nothing relevant to say and that you don't have a single rational and sound argument for your faith.
By comparing your god to a number, you basicly said that your god has no power, no intelligence and no effect on the world whatsoever.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 Show me where I've compared God to numbers.
tzephon 1 year ago
@tzephon You used the analogy of numbers existing without being able to "see" a number. And what you are ultimately trying to prove is that god, while unmeasurable, can exist. So you are comparing numbers to god in terms of existance. This simply doesn't work. Because both are not comparable. One is an abstract concept and the other is claimed to create EVERYTHING and claimed to "enter" this realm as well in traditional religions (which would mean he's measurable btw)
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@tzephon Come to think of it... you can observe numbers. All you have to do is look at something and count.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 This is using a number but not actually seeing it. If you could see the number you would be able to tell me what color it was.
tzephon 1 year ago
@tzephon Man, you're dumb. What color do hydrogen atoms have?
Since when is observation the same as "seeing" with your eyes?
Furthermore, tell me how to "use" the supernatural. Give it up, your analogy is ridiculous.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@tzephon The keyword here is to EXPRESS.
The number "2" is a CONCEPT used to express an amount of something.
Just like the verbe "to work". In french it's "travailler". In german it is "arbeiten". All the same CONCEPT of expressing an action in different languages. it's about COMMUNICATION which is DIFFERENT from actual measureable existance.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 Even if there were no people to do the counting, there could still be only one or two of something; even if there were no material something for there to be.
tzephon 1 year ago
@tzephon Yes. And if nobody is around to hear a tree fall down, it still produces a noise. Bullshit arguments that are completely void to be honest.
Numbers don't create universes.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@kb: Well, yes. He is vengeful, angry and promotes hatred...towards sin! Sin is why Jesus had to die on the cross! We failed to rightly represent our Creator while bearing His image and likeness. The problem with Atheism is that it is missing alot of information. It rips Bible verses completely out of context and fails to harmonize anything with the power of God. If Hell does exist, as the Bible says it does, wouldn't you want to know how not to end up there? Don't wait 2 long. 10 out of10 die.
Eric0873 1 year ago 2
@Eric0873 - god is everything, and if god is angry about sin god needs to look no further than itself.
Atheism makes no claims about the nature of the universe but simply points out that an old book and first hand claims by a few men in ancient times are hardly to be trusted. Isn't it funny how most claims about god were made prior to the age of reason and science, any claims made now about a god are not taken seriously by 99% of people.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit your god must be pretty weak if he cant at least get some people to believe he exists.
bakamesuinu 1 year ago
@bakamesuinu WELL, HIS STORY HAS BEEN AROUND FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS... YOUR GREAT X 10 GRAND DAD HEARD OF HIM. LOL. SO, YOU HAVE HEARD BUT HAVE NOT GOTTEN PAST YOUR PRIDE TO BELIEVE IN HIM. HE CAN'T MAKE YOU DO IT BUT HE AT LEAST PAID THE PRICE FOR YOUR SINS. ITS KIND OF LIKE THE GUYS WHO I GAVE FOOD TO-- BUT I'M NOT GOING TO FEED IT TO HIM..LOL HE GOT TO FEED HIMSELF
pastorATLove 1 year ago
@pastorATLove actually, it's only been around for 3000 years. Egyptian mythology alone was present on this planet for much much longer. Hinduism is also far older then christianity.
And just because people believe something - that doesn't make it true.
Believing is completely useless. If it can't be demonstrated, then there is no real point in going along with it.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@bakamesuinu - I have NO god. Zero, zip, zilch.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit Not true, that would be pantheism.
ytuseruber 1 year ago
@kb: Your attempt at a pragmatic view of God doesn't fly. It doesn't matter how many people don't believe. Again, His existence isn't contingent upon our belief. Isn't if funny that science keeps changing its mind about it conclusions regarding the beginning?
No, you get to stand in judgment over God. He created you. He is the standard of right and wrong. And we are the sinners of whom He is angry with. This is why Christians desperately want atheists to repent and trust in Jesus! We love you.
Eric0873 1 year ago
@Eric0873 "Again, His existence isn't contingent upon our belief" True. The existance of ANYTHING is dependent upon an actualy measureable manifestation. That is how we determine if something is existant or not.
Science changes because it learns new things and CORRECTS itself instead of staying in the same dogmatic position for thousands of years - no matter how many data of the contrary pops up. Why do you think people say that religions have their heads stuck in the sand?
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@Eric0873 He is the standard of right and wrong? Ok... then I'll assume you think it's ok to hold slaves and stone your son to death if he is disobedient?
How morally superior of you.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 Two words for you: Progressive Revelation! Atheist can't seem to get past the OT without considering what the NT (new covenant) has changed thankfully due to the righteousness of Christ fulfilling those OT laws. We are not under OT law anymore. We are under God's grace. This doesn't mean His law is null and void, it means it applies differently now b/c of the work of Christ.
Eric0873 1 year ago
@Eric0873 I think you should re-read your new testament. And fyi: "progressive revelation", is nothing more or less then just another pathetic excuse to downplay the absolute attrocities (genocide, gang rape, murder, etc) mentioned in the bibles as a "good" thing. Holy even.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 You hold God in such contempt b/c He doesn't measure up to your standards. What you don't understand about those "atrocities" lies within the fact that you don't understand God and how perfectly holy He is. You can't even get past the OT why should you be worried about the NT? There are certain OT rules that apply to those people, in that time, for a specific purpose! Jesus changes all that through His death and resurrection. We are now under God's grace!
Eric0873 1 year ago
@Eric0873 Yes, you are exactly right. The god described in the bible (or any other scripture I've read for that matter), does NOT measure up to my standards of morals and ethics. He doesn't measure up to YOUR standards either, nore to the constitutional laws of the very country you live in, nore to the standards upheld through the Universal Human Rights. The sooner you realise that, the better.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 We have no 'human rights' when it comes to the authority of God other than the right to chose who we put our faith and trust in. God has granted everyone with that gift. Yet, yours and my standards do not usurp His authority or His holiness. You venerate man as if we have done great thing, yet man is who is personally responsible for sin. Sin separates us from God and sin will lead us into hell if we fail to repent and trust in Jesus for salvation! I beg of you to humble yourself.
Eric0873 1 year ago
@Eric0873 Geneva convention disagrees with you. The law does as well. So do all people who aren't christian but who believe in another god (since their gods have different standards then yours).
Your god means as much to me (and all who aren't christian) as the easter bunny and santa claus. Just like what Visjnoe means to you. Stop this childish behavior and mentality please. Stop living in fear. Stop whorshipping an ancient mythic magical fairy tale. It's the 21st century damnit
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 How does being in the 21st century qualify for not believing in God? God is the most advanced being in the entire universe (since He did make the place and all). And you're getting all upset over it? He's your God too, not b/c you acknowledge that, but b/c He created you in His image and likeness. You are His creation whether you like it or not and are, by your own admission, in willful denial of Him. Your denial doesn't make Him less existent btw.
Eric0873 1 year ago
@Eric0873 "How does being in the 21st century qualify for not believing in God" Because today people can actually get a decent education. Well, unless you live in one of the theocracies still out there off course...
" Your denial doesn't make Him less existent btw. " True. Just like my denial of santa, apophis, thor etc doesn't make them any more or less existant or inexistant. This is the point. Wheter you assume gods exist or not... it actually doesn't change ANYTHING at all.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@Eric0873 You don't suddenly understand something more about the world if you assume a god or gods exist. In fact, the god of the bible makes the world, the entire universe actually, pretty much impossible as we observe it.
Genesis rapes physics, genetics, archeology, geology, cosmology... Noah rapes biology, bio-chemistry, genetics, geology, archeology, climatology,... It's completely insane. When's the last time you saw a violation of a natural law? lol!
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit ATHEISM MAKES ALL KINDS OF "FALSE" CLAIMS. ATHEIST REALLY HAVE STUDIED THE WRONG INFO AND HAVE FOLLOWED THE WRONG PEOPLE.
pastorATLove 1 year ago
@pastorATLove - Atheism makes one claim... count it one. That your god does not exist because there is no evidence. And no, I do not take the word of men who lived 2000 years ago.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit yes I know you do not take the word of men--- lol
EVERYTHING you have learned you GOT from A MAN.... show me what you believe athiest, without what YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD from all those science books written by men... YOU are led around by the nose-all you know is what someone else has told you.-I mean things YOU have not proven.. you just take their word and say... YEA... thats how it is.. Its kind of like the white man calling the white man white. lol You guys make me laugh.
pastorATLove 1 year ago
@pastorATLove - I don't need to take science on faith, it is observable and repeatable. The tests they did 100 years ago are repeatable today. Can you say the same about your resurrection myth or your burning bush? Nope.
The word science is backed up by REALITY.
I don't need to rely on faith to know science works, me typing this to you from accross the country or the world is PROOF.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit You said, "I don't need to take science on faith"
Yes you do, Evolution is a faith as well. Since it is a theory you must take it based on faith. Scientists have faith in at least three things...
a)Their mind's ability to be reasonable.
b)Their sence's ability to be accurate.
c)Their fellow scientists ability to do credible research.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc - The 'it's just a theory argument', easily countered with the fact that gravity is 'just a theory', etc.
a. our mind is the only tool we have to work with
b. science relies on many senses beyond our very limited 5. The elctromagnetic spectrum for example is many thousand times broader than our limited eyes are able to perceive.
c. it is called peer review and it works quite well thank you very much.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit Sorry my son, but it is called the "Law of gravity". In order for it to be called a Law or a fact, you must be able to observe it or reproduce it in a lab. Evolutionists have done either with how life came from non-life. The Law of Biogenesis on the other hand shows that only life creates life. But the real reason why you are an atheist is because you have had a bad relationship with your Father. They write books on this.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc - Evolution is NOT about the process by which life came from non life. That is the theory of abiogenisis to which I would point out is a far far less developed science than evolution. Don't mix the two up.
Evolution is backed up by literally millions of scientists around the world with a embarrassingly large body of evidence that you can trace it back to Darwin's Finches.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit "Evolution is NOT about the process by which life came from non life."
Ohhh, Yes it is sony boy! It is the alternative to divine thinking. Evolution tries to explain how life came to be without a god.
Not "abiogenisis" I am referring to the "Law of biogenisis". Only life creates life. Since I we have only observed or reproduced life from life. The burden of proof is not on me, but on YOU my friend. An embarrassingly large body of evidence is stacked up against you.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc - EVOLUTION DOES NOT EXPLAIN HOW LIFE BEGAN! End of story. Conflating the two concepts is ignorant.
Second, there is not a proven theory or working model on how life came from non-life. Scientists have some ideas but we just don't know and science does not claim to KNOW.
You are the one that claims to know how life began.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit No it is totally relative. All you are doing is playing the two story two step on me. You claim that evolution explains away God; but when I show you how you need a first cause, you flip flop on me, and try to separate the two. You hold two official positions, and you bounce your mind back and forth between the two when each doesn't line up with the other explanation.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Evolution doesn't say a word about god. NOTHING in science says a word about god. For the simple reason that science studies the NATURAL world. Gods, fairies, flying spaghetti monsters are part of the supernatural world. Science works just fine without god anyway lol.
You are really engaging in intellectually dishonest arguments here.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Secondly... the earliest "cause" science discovered is explained in big bang theory. What set it off? Why did it happen? We don't know. You don't know either. You just claim to know, but honestly, that's just talking out of your ass.
It's ok to not know something. It's not ok to just slap some god on it and call it a day (and threaten those that don't agree with eternal torment I might add).
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc E-vo-lu-tion. To evolve. How can something "evolve" if it still needs to form I wonder....
Evolution explains the DIVERSITY of life. Not life itself.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Evolution only starts once life is there. Evolution doesn't care how life came into existance. Wheter it was through magic, alien engineering, god or abiogenesis... It doesn't matter ONE BIT to evolutionary theory. Theory explains the change LIFE goes through over time. Why do you argue against thing you know nothing about?
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Again you exhibit your ignorance of how science works. A law is, in physics at least, an infallible property of nature. Law of gravity goes something like "matter will be attracted to other matter". A fact of gravity would be "drop an apple and it falls down". Neither of those EXPLAIN what gravity is and how it works. THAT's where Theory of Gravity comes in.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc The theory EXPLAINS the laws and the facts. A theory is DIFFERENT from laws and facts. A "really good theory" DOES NOT grow up to be a fact. A theory EXPLAINS facts.Both are DIFFERENT things.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc and there is no "law of biogenesis".
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit
A) So proves my point. The only way that you believe that those scientists are correct, is because they TOLD YOU THEY WERE.
b) And with what set of sences do they observe these elctromagnetic spectrum?
c) So let me get this straight, One evolutionist tells another evolutionist that he is right? The problem with this is, the evolutionist begins with excluding the possibility of a divine power before the research begins. THEN, does his research.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc
a - they don't need to tell me anything, their research does so. Now if you don't believe in the proccess of science I suggest you look to your computer which is a direct result of the proccess of science.
b - If you really want to get into the argument of whether or not 2 + 2 = 4 is up for speculation then I will tell you I am not interested in that discussion.
c - No one says that evolution excludes the concept of a god. The theory just doesn't need god to work.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit a - they don't need to tell me anything, their research does so.
a)So what you are tring to tell me is, you haven't seen it yourself, you're just taking their word for it? Isn't that like placing your faith in something other than yourself?
b)I am not questioning mathmatics. This has been proven. We can observe it.
c) You just contradicted yourself. This is my point. Only life creates life. You are pinning my "Laws of..." against your so called theory.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pre - You are right, I don't go out and test every scientific theory that exists. That is a ridiculous standard. Peer review allows theories to be challenged & in fact encourages it. If you do not believe the theory of evolution is correct you are welcome to scientifically debunk it.
You can also observe evolution.
Life had to come from somewhere & your answer that god did it does not answer anything it just substitutes ignorance with an absurd assumption. Science would be, how did god do it?
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit No, you are not correct. Micro-evolution. Varations within kind. this one is the only one whichy has been observed. example: different kinds of dogs, produce different kinds of breeds of dogs.
Macro-evolution on the other hand, Changing from one kind of plant or animal into another. Has never been observed. This is why we are still looking for the "missing link". The link that ties them together.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc - Macro evolution is simply the accumulation of a large ammount of micro changes. These occur over geological times spans and as such are not directly observeable. I can admit it is a hard concept to grasp for someone who may think the planet is only 6000 years old.
There is no single 'missing link' and infact many have been discovered. Common ancestors of us and other primates have been found.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit I don't believe that the planet is 6000 years old. Within christianity there are two position. Old creationists (like myself) and young earth creationists. You said, "These occur over geological times spans and as such are not directly observeable." If you can't and have not been able to observe it, then how in God's name can you still insist that this is true?
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Did investigators of a crime scene observe the crime itself? NO? Then how on earth can they ever find out who the culprit is? You're basicly argumenting that we humans are unable to determine cause when all we can see is effect.
That's off course completely ridiculous, and it's even a little insulting
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit Did you just listin to yourself? you just contradicted yourself.
First you said, "There is no single 'missing link' "
Then you said, "many have been discovered."
There are no missing links. period.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc - Perhaps you have misunderstood what I said, there is no one missing link. As in there isn't some singular species that we don't know of. There are many different species between the common ancestor we share with chimpanzees and because of the way fossils form, it is unlikely that we will ever find them all.
The 'missing link' is as much a misnomer as is 'global warming'. A better description would be 'common ancestor'.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit There is no such thing as a "missing link." That's the point. That is why they call this "the missing link". This link is missing. They are still in search of the fossil that links man to beast. The connection between them is missing. And just because we share some of the same DNA only tells me that we share the same designer.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc - Well you clearly know more than the thousands of evolutionary scientists who have dedicated their lives to studying this topic. Congrats, and I bet you got all of your knowledge from a book that was written before the scientific method was developed. Congrats. I just wonder how you are communicating with me, it must be through god, I am on one of those devil machines known as a computer.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit That was a good point that you made.. I must admit, I am communicating with you through a computer. And behind this computer was an intelligent mind who created it. The Same is for the DNA.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Again wrong. Computers aren't organisms that mutate and reproduce. It's not even oranges and apples. It's oranges and plastic.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit It's like walking along the beach and you see in the sand, "Mike loves Michelle." You know the waves rolling up on the beach didn't form that--a person wrote that. It is a precise message. It is clear communication. In the same way, the DNA structure is a complex, three-billion-lettered script, informing and directing the cell's process.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@killerbandit And here is the paradox. In order for there to have been the first cell split, The DNA inside of this first cell must have been up and running. You could not have had your first cell split without it. Even the DNA molecule for the single-celled bacterium, E.coli, contains enought information to fill all the books in any of the world's largest libraries."
-God
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc what you say is completely false. RNA can provide you with the exact same function.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Again exhibiting your ignorance. What you don't seem to realise is that the term "missing link" is being tossed around by creationist morrons to sow confusion.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc No self-respecting scientist with actual credentials will agree that there is such a thing is "missing link". EVERY fossil is a link. Also, maybe it's time for you to actually LOOK at the tree of the hominid species. The transition is quite clear. All the way from australopethicus into the homo subspecies to finally end up with homo sapiens.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Let's try this another way. What would you accept as a fossil of a so-called "missing link"? What would that fossil need to look like? What properties would it have?
Since you are so full of it, you should be able to answer this question. If you are so sure that the "missing link" is not found, then surely you should be able to tell me what that "missing link" should look like... otherwise, you're just (again) being deceitfull and dishonest.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Ever been to a museum of natural history? Are you familiar with hominid species? Australopethicus Afaransis, Africanus? Home erectus, ergaster, neaderthaler etc?
dxrocker69 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pretoshohmoofc Ever been to a museum of natural history? Are you familiar with hominid species? Australopethicus Afaransis, Africanus? Home erectus, ergaster, neaderthaler etc?
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc the term "kind" is unkown to taxonomy, just so you know. Creationists always ramble on about that, but not one ever explain what a "kind" really is in terms of taxonomy.
And macro = lots of micro.
If you say that only micro is possible it is the equivalent of saying that if I walk taking one step at a time, I will NEVER EVER EVER be possible to walk a mile. Which is obviously painfully morronic.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc You see, that is also why all this mumbo jumbo about "missing links" is complete horse poo... EVERY SINGLE FOSSIL or even living organism is a "link" between its parents and its off spring. The average mutation rate in humans is about 175 mutations per generation.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc This means that I have DNA, which I will pass on to my kids that is unique to me... DNA that I DID NOT get from either of my parents. All those mutations add up quickly after hundreds of generations, let alone thousands. Add in some selection parameters, et viola.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit It is funny to me on how you came to the conclusion regarding that god did it does not answer anything it just substitutes ignorance with an absurd assumption. When it is YOU not me, who cannot show any example of nonlife creating life. I can show that with every cause, there is a first cause. You are insisting that you are right, without a shread of evidence. TO me, your conclusions are an ignorant and absurd assumption.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc - uggg... again evolution is a theory to explain the diversity of life and in no way makes any assertions what so ever about the origin of life.
Your answer to that question that god did it does not answer how it was done.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit uggg...again, at the end of your evolutionary word game is a theory that life came from nonlife. I'm not into ficticous science fiction. I don't know how God would have created life from nonlife but who cares? Comparing my mind to that of a divine being would be like my cat understanding the second laws of thermodynamics. Now you are assuming that if we can't understand it, therefore nothing can? You really are scraping the bottom on this one me son.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc "at the end of your evolutionary word game is a theory that life came from nonlife" no, there is not.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc " Now you are assuming that if we can't understand it, therefore nothing can? " Actually, it sounds more like you are saying that "if we can't understand it, god must have done it".
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Cause and effect is a constant in our universe. So logically, you'll end up with a "first cause" if you wind everything back, that's true.
However, "logic" as we know it seriously breaks down at the moment of the big bang itself.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc The natural laws themselves break down - which actually puts a question mark on the whole "cause/effect" rule at that point either. But assuming that it is still in effect then... there's NO REASON WHATSOEVER to assume that that first cause was some eternal god. Let alone the god you happen to worship.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc a) no. it's because the light goes on when we push the switch. or because my message pops up after clicking "post". Because the bridges stay up, because satelites orbit the earth, because robots drive around on mars and because atom bombs explode. THAT is why you can trust science as a non-scientist. Because it obviously works. I don't need faith to switch my tv channel...
b) math, computers and big teams of the most educated men on the planet.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc c) actually... no. a scientist earns money by proving his peers to be WRONG. we don't make progress by conducting experiments that confirm existing knowledge. scientist don't get fame, glory and nobel prizes by re-demonstrating that 1+1 indeed equals 2. The scientists that go down in history are those who discover things that turn our knowledge upside down and CORRECT current understandings.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc People like copernicus, newton, darwin, mendel, curie, einstein, hawking... If evolution would indeed be so wrong, a scientist would have collected a BUNCH of nobel prizes LONG ago - you may be sure of that. 200.000+ peer review papers were published about evolution.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Not one of them got challenged. Not ONE paper trying to falsify evolution has EVER even been send in for publication - let alone that it past the scientific scrutiny every other scientific idea has to go through. NOT ONE.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc here we go with the "it's just a theory"... damn, you're dumb.
A scientific theory is the best possible explanation for a set of facts. It's a testable construct that explains certain natural phenomena. When the theory is solid, you can build technology upon it.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Atomic theory is such a theory. Just like evolution is such a theory. Atomic theory in practice: atom bombs, nuclear energy. Evolution in practice: a butt load of medication and in depth understanding on the workings of dna. Not to mention the DAILY applciation of evolutionary principles in agriculture.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pastorATLove The thing is... what we read in science books.. we are NOT required to take it on face value. What is written in science books can be VERIFIED. The experiments can be REPEATED. Science works very result based. We for example know atomic theory is correct because atom bombs explode. With the bible, we DO need to take it on face value.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit And just like I said... YOU guys make ALL kinds of FALSE claims. YOU can't back anything you say up. YOU can not prove anything you say. NONE of you atheist can. You guys need to grow up. PROVE to me HE DOES NOT EXSIST. PROVE IT!!!!
pastorATLove 1 year ago
@pastorATLove - You are the one asserting that a god exists and the burden of proof rests with you. I will prove to you god doesn't exist the day you can prove to me that unicorns are the spawn of the FSM.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@pastorATLove the burden of proof is on the side of the proposer.
I'm not the one claiming that god exists. That would be you. YOU need to provide evidence for your positive claim. As an atheist, I am saying that I see no reason to believe you before you can present me with some compelling verifiable evidence.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 Oh my goodness, do you feel better? I didn't even read them.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc I know you didn't read them. I expected nothing else.
God forbid you might actually realise that you have been living a mythical lie and fairy tale.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc And yes, I did feel better. When I see people like writing (and even believing) such stupidities, I feel compelled to educate your ass.
Now that I did my part, it's out of my hands. I introduced you to the bullshit of your believes. What you do with that is upto you. I did my part.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 Oh really? What did you mean by that?
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc I don't see how it would need further explanation. You believe stupidities, so I make note of that so that you may start using your brain.
But I can't use your brain for you.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 "You believe stupidities" What did you mean by that?
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc How many ways are there to understand that sentence I wonder...
What do you think I mean with it?? I mean with it that you believe stupidities... There is very little difference between your faith and believing in santa clause or mayan "prophecies".
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 "I mean with it that you believe stupidities... "
What did you mean by that?
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pretoshohmoofc Come on man, don't be such a child. This really is a pathetic excuse to not address the points I am raising.
What I mean is that your religious views are stupid, dumb, childish, morronic, pseudo-scientific, ignorant of the real world, psychotic-ish. You understand english right?
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 What do you mean by that?
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@dxrocker69 "your religious views are stupid, dumb, childish, morronic, pseudo-scientific, ignorant of the real world, psychotic-ish."
What did you mean by that?
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
@pastorATLove You clearly don't understand what atheism is. Atheism LITERALLY means "not theism". There's no 'atheistic doctrine' or 'study'. Atheism is the REJECTION of theistic claims. Atheism is by defenition, the result of the STUDY of THEISM followed by the REJECTION thereof on the grounds that there is no evidence whatsoever and even evidence that most claims are simply completely and utterly wrong.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit i love how you throw up high percentage numbers like that. It is rather hilarious.
Siscast 1 year ago
@killerbandit - Most modern religions, following the age of reason. IE Mormonism, scientology etc. are literally a laughing stock for most people, even those within your own religion.
Would you deny this?
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit More then that actually... if today people make similar claims as back then, they end up in a shrink's coach popping dopamine-blockers (anti-psychotic meds).
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@Eric0873 then wouldn't you also want to know how NOT to end up in islamic hell? hindu hell? maya hell? egyptian hell? roman hell? etc etc etc???
logical fail on an epic scale my friend.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit The only reason why you don't believe in God is because you had a bad relationship with your Father. i always ask them first, and I am always 100% right with their answers. Again, they write books on this. If you don't understand the love from your own father, you cannot understand the concept of a heavenly one.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
God Bless you Comfort!
TruthfulChristian 1 year ago
@Eric0873 what would be so bad about santa being real? why do you think asking such a question is relevant?
dxrocker69 1 year ago
@killerbandit neither is your opinion.
MeanHacker 1 year ago
@MeanHacker - Actually my opinion is quite real, there is evidence that I have an opinion and you can see it for yourself. It is observable and testable and repeatable.
I think what you meant to say is that my opinion is not correct, but that is not something you have any way of proving. Any more than my ability to prove that there is a mystical tea set orbiting on the dark side of pluto... I guess you will just have to surrender reason and have faith.
killerbandit 1 year ago
@killerbandit just because you don't know something or don't see something doesn't mean "it's not there" or "it doesn't exist"
MeanHacker 1 year ago
@MeanHacker By that logic, we are unable to determine what is real and what isn't. So by this logic, you are basicly argumenting that existance and non-existance is the same thing.
dxrocker69 1 year ago
The images morphing was freaking me out! lol.
geisler78 1 year ago
Let There Be Light !
Peace, Love & White !
& a Lot of SUN & Rainbows !
Upon You, to All & Be Forever !
( : - )
coman4ero 1 year ago
A lot of talent in the household of faith! All for the Glory of God!
Laughtime 1 year ago
@Laughtime There is a lot of talent in the WORLD! Not just in the household if faith...
TheMetalHead102 1 year ago
@TheMetalHead102 Amen to that! And God uses it all (because He supplies it all) according to Romans 8:28! Soli Deo Gloria!!!!
Laughtime 1 year ago
@TheMetalHead102 P.S. you added the word JUST. And I was just commenting on this particular video! So I did not exclude the rest of the world by commenting on a few that are also in the world but not of it. Read my comment again. And you will see I did not say: A lot of talent JUST in the household of faith.
Love you!
Laughtime 1 year ago