absolutely YES, all creation stories from every culture in the world. Bumba the african vomit god would be a real favorite in grade schools. Unless the creation story has a solid scientific foundation though it doesnt belong in science classes.
@leflipmo You have been taught 100% fiction. Christianity was directly responsible for building most of the foundations, processes &pioneering most of the fields of science. Almost never has it hindered science. Atheism has done that an astronomical amount more than any religion ever has. In the rare cases Christianity did hinder science, it was usually because it had wrongly accepted pagan concepts or because it was concerned about the harmful use of science to human life (ex: chemical weapons)
@TruthIsLife7 Atheism hasn't done anything in science, not good not bad. Scientists have done much in science, whether they were christians, jews, muslims or atheists matters not. If you by making up "facts" of your own try to prove something or think this is going somewhere I shall step away.
@leflipmo Sorry, but leading atheists and Darwinists in the past and present have gotten influence in science and banned scientific research that conflicts with their a priori assertions and fired, demoted and harrassed scientists who rationally think the evidence of science points to God. Some of the 1000s of cases of this hindering of science is documented in the book "Slaughter of the dissidents" by a former atheist with several Ph.D. degrees. An interview is here: watch?v=YlUEYHOwP4E
@leflipmo Finland, Denmark, etc. have some very good points, but many stem from Judeo-Christian values, esp. in economics(they are better here than the USA). Hitler was not an atheist (although he despised Christianity and he and the Nazis planned to destroy it long before they came to power. Here's the research on the 22 officially atheist countries that killed 1-200 million.
wwwDOThawaiiDOTedu/powerkills/MEGADOTHTM or easier format here:
and on the below..it is an irrefutable fact that whether it's the French Revolution or the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the atheist states all considered religion their worst enemy, largely because of atheism. There are even Christian communists, so that wasn't the major driving force. Communism itself isn't necessarily anti-Christian....however it would possibly be an enemy of pseudo religion, the same type that Jesus criticized that was more concerned with comfort than service and justice.
@Stevoukos 1) NONE of the founders of modern science advocated naturalism or excluded God from science. Most built directly on creation science philosophy& specific concepts& secular historians of science recognize that. There are most definitely testable claims about God. Indisputably so. This shows that naturalism is an a priori bias against facts and nothing else.
3) Why do people never mention anything about the muslims invading and conquering the land the Crusaders went to RETAKE???
@TruthIsLife7 Who you think are the "founders of modern science" and what do you think about the methods they used to seek the truth? The most important factor in modern science is the method it uses. Modern science uses the opposite method to religions because in science there are theories you can falsify but never prove to be absolute truth. In religion there are theory you can prove but never falsify. Religion and modern sicence are opposite worldviews to each other.
@dafjkldfa The founders of modern science were those who invented the modern scientific method, the peer review process, the 1st scientific societies, the 1st scientific journals, falsification, etc. (all of these were Christians) and the branches of science (most of these were Christian as well).
You have been lied to about science and religion. They have never been opposite worldviews. Christianity built modern science and is its best partner EVER. You also CAN falsify religious ideas.
@dafjkldfa This link by Dr. Hannam,(Ph.D in the history of science from Cambridge) is a presentation at the Royal Society showing how Christianity built the foundations of modern science. We'd be at least centuries delayed without Christians.
watch?v=I-k24Q01vck (&see the notes)
There's much more at his site and much he doesn't even talk about. See also this article on the myth of science &religion being enemies)
wwwDOTjameshannamDOTcom/articlesDOThtm (esp. article #2, but all are good)
@TruthIsLife7 Does being a christian and coming up with an invention mean that the invention becomes christian as well?
Do you even know why the people who are behind the most important inventions and scientific theories after ancient times were christians?
Because there was no established FREEDOM OF RELIGION back then. Everybody were christians/jews/muslims/hindus etc. If you didn't label yourself back then as such you paid the prize and your inventor career was cut short as was your life.
@leflipmo 1) Many advances of Christians derived directly from biblical philosophy. See notes in my main channel video for an intro)
2) If you look in history and even the present, when a state is officially atheist or atheism has academic power, there you find the greatest intolerance in history. Atheism/secularism bans people from learning the facts about the Bible about as much as reading the Bible was banned in the middle ages
3) freedom of religion was given to you by protestants :).
@TruthIsLife7 Please if you throw that around give me some examples. Please try to come up with something not so easy to rebut as Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.
I'm just saying there is a world view that has worked pretty darn well and that doesn't include religion. It is called secular humanism.
I think that most not-crimes and crimes that have been SET IN STONE in a time will be crimes and more terrible crimes in the future. That's just how the moral standards rise in a humanist world.--->
@leflipmo Part two: My view of the "ideal country" (I currently live in Finland, not too bad) would be secular. But the main goal in everything is putting people ahead of ideas. Never value an idea more than people.
In some rare cases you just have to fight for ideas as freedom of speech and liberty that do put people ahead of ideas.
Ideologies should be kept out of school had they good moral standards or not. Science, ethics, moral philosophy, literature and launguages should be taught
The humanist worldview hasn't contributed hardly anything to the benefit of the world. It was Christianity that built modern science, public education, universities, most modern ethics and human rights values and led the campaigns that helped most people in the world realize they are important.
No ideas should be kept out of school if they are beneficial to life. But, the record of history shows that it is WAY more important do separate atheism from the state than religion.
@TruthIsLife7 Like I said before, religion is not the reason for the improvements in science. Most of the time religion has been hindering the progress of science.
I have to say that mostly our values and moral philosophy is based and has developed from religion, BUT it is very well known that the main religions have borrowed their values from earlier polytheitic religions.
So it's a logical fallacy to assume that because some of the values and morals of a religion are good for human kind...-->
@TruthIsLife7 ...that would somehow mean we should cling on to them and not consider any other, probably a better way to find out what's good, and more than that, what's better for us.
Secular humanism is a world view. A pursuit of well being for everybody and going away from the worse.
You don't see any major changes with humanism, more like steady small improvement, but mainly what you DON'T see secular humanism "do" is making things worse for people. Hardly you can claim that not to be true.
No, Christianity didn't borrow from other earlier religions very much if at all. No ancient culture is within light years of the morals of of the Bible. However God did speak to people in many different cultures in ancient times as well as the present. It's another fallacy that God only speaks to Christians and Jews. Even in the Bible, probably the most famous prophecy/vision was given to a Babylonian king.
Humanism may have improvements, but also 100% certain has made things worse for people.
4) Galileo...the textbook cherry picked nonsense trotted out by every deceitful atheist site in the world. Galileo was challenging Aristotle that the church had unthinkinglyy swallowed and treated as infallible…science made leaps forward when Christians finally got rid of some of the shackles Aristotle had put on it. Please read some facts on this by Dr. Hannam, Ph.D. in the history of science from Cambridge: wwwDOTjameshannamDOTcom/articlesDOThtm (esp. article #2, but all are good)
2) Here is some data on officially atheist states killing 30 times more people in only ~200 years than ALL religions in the world, even the most false and evil ones, COMBINED.
@Stevoukos 1) No, science deals with whatever the weight of evidence points to, whether natural, supernatural or whatever. It does not make a priori assumptions like methodological naturalism, PERIOD.
2) There are 22 cases of officially atheist states in history. In every single one Christians and religious people were tortured and millions upon millions were killed because atheism thought religion was a hindrance to society & used the same epithets and falsehoods against religion then & now.
@TruthIsLife7 1) Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.Notice the ABOUT THE UNIVERSE part.God (at least Yahweh)is considered outside our universe.PERIOD.
2)Still no examples.
3)Nno response to crusades etc.
I'm not saying that Christianity is responsible for every evil in the world.But it IS hypocritical to say that Christianity supported science when Galileo was prosecuted by the Catholics.
You are believing atheist lies about history. Read here about the destruction of the libraries/books in Alexandria:
enDOTwikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria
It was Caesar who caused one of the libraries there to be burned. Under Theodius, pagan temples were burned, yes, but even enemies of Christians make no mention of burning of books.
We can prove the theory of evolution. Just take the over 50% of Britons who believe creationism should be taught in schools to a useless island somewhere (like Ireland) and then drop a really big nuclear device. Next, wait about a million years and test British intelligence. I predict that the improvements to the gene pool will result in much higher IQ scores. It really won't take a million years, but might as well be sure.
@BereanBeacon1 I love responses that make no sense. "You people in charge"? Since you have no clue as to what "people" I am, I'm mystified. I'm a member of the National Geographic Society. Is it those people?
@79barkingspider The Bible says we are headed to a one world government and leader, which all who have rejected the God of the Bible are aiding to bring it about.
So, if you are alive during the Great Tribulation, don't worship or take the mark of the beast.
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 2Peter 3:16
We need creation science in schools. I want to know how a snake talks. And how did people live 900 years. And why Noah took the dinosaurs on the Ark and then let most of them go extinct 65 million years ago.
outside of the catholics which religious schools would allow or give the scientific view equal ground? the answer is none.
its not that they want religion in the science room, they want religion to control the entire school, a theocracy
these debates remind me of butter vs margerine debates. margerine (religion) is always saying it taste just like butter (science) but you never hear butter saying it taste like margerine.
@thesageofohio The theory of evolution is a religion and is passed off as real science. Besides, Rome says God used evolution in the beginning. The God of the bible is out and the schools are a mess. True Christians don't want to take over the schools, we just want the students to be able to question evolution using real science.
That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2:10,11
@BereanBeacon1 "we just want the students to be able to question evolution using real science."
Evolution *IS* real science! Its not from some bronze age book of myths. Wow. Let me guess... you are from the United States. Talk like yours is the very reason that the rest of the civilized world laughs their asses off at the childish, uneducated people in this country who are determined to make sure their kids are just as dumb. Its downright embarrassing.
@JabberCT The kids are already dumb because of your failed American schools. Leave the Bible out of it if you can.
All evolutionists have is hot air on the mostly anonymous Internet. We have the real science backed up by the $10,000 Life Science Prize. You can evolve from a chicken and win the prize or make cowardly remarks on websites until you ultimately die and become a creationists after it's too late. My last remark to you is something that everyone understands: CLUCK, CLUCK
@BereanBeacon1 That $10,000 has been won a million times over already and no one has gotten paid because just like religion, its bullshit. Here is the latest transitional fossil finding.
watch?v=fCspVOv31iY
And of course, no one received 10 grand because no one went back in time with a video camera to record it for your dumb asses. I can evolve from a chicken? Are you THAT stupid? We were talking about evolution, not Greek Mythology. See? This is what i mean. Pure stupidity.
@JabberCT And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. Jude 1:14-15
@BereanBeacon1 You should check out the following things: Ring Species, Human Chromosome 2, The fossil record as it correlates to sedimentary layers (organisms go from simple to complex until a mass extinction, then go from simple to complex again), the Human Genome Project.
I think you'll find there is an overwhelming amount of evidence supporting evolution. I think you'll find evolution is the cornerstone of biology.
This so called "debate" was over a long time ago (regarding our schools in the USA). The Supreme Court has ruled more than once that creationism science(?) is not science at all and has no place in the science class-room.Jeez, give up already. Teach it in humanities class in a religious school of your choice, don't dumb-down our kids because science doesn't comport with your belief-system.
@orangemod Students are already "dumb-down" as shown by stats and the NEA should be sued under product liability law which states, "releasing a flawed product on society". Home and private schools produce a vastly superior student in grades, thinking and manners. You really don't have real science, but peddle science fiction because you control academic "freedom" and won't allow criticism (leave God out of the discussion) of your "science" in a class room.
@BereanBeacon1 Science is debated at the university level, High School students are not smart enough and need to be told the facts. And there is no 'other side' or 'debate' anyway.
@BereanBeacon1 Just because you didn't learn anything is school, doesn't mean some people didn't learn some science. Were you home schooled or just never opened a science book.
A "theory" in Science is a model which is tested and makes accurate predictions. Creationists confuse "theory" with "hypothesis" and throw in multiple arguments from ignorance.
they sure do, I think creationism has a place just like evolution. neither have been proven is a faith. atheism has become much more militant and fundamentalist than any religion. it's disgusting.
Creationism, if required to be taught in school, should be taught in a philosophy class, or History class. Not saying that Creationism did happen in history, it's just what people believe. Just like how when we learned about the Ancient Greeks, we learned how the Greeks believed in many gods. Science is all about theories and solutions backed by evidence, so creationism wouldn't fit in the science category
if the fairytale of evolution can be taught why cant something that make absolute sense be as well? oh wait lets see then there would be a God and we would be accountable to him so lets just keep that swept under the rug .....
@clavin2007 nah, i'll let you actually do something and pull out a dictionary, have fun looking up and thinking about what something actually means :D
@clavin2007 Evolution is a scientific fact, the debate is over. A magic space man, a jewish zombie, dragons, giants, witches and talking animals, THOSE are fairytales! And you know what? You can find all those things in the bible.
@Reasonwillwin scientific fact ? since when... your facts are mest up pal ..but considering your age i can understand how brain washed your are....any time you want to debate anything from the bible or your miss guided science ..hit me back ...i know you wont ...cuz you have no argument and i know that... you are easy prey
@clavin2007 Sorry pal but if you don't know that evolution has been proven thanks to hundreds of years of research then the fucking education system failed you. No argument? I gave you some already! Go back to your dragons, unicorns and magicians you freaking fool.
This is a GREAT debate. I wish I could find more debates like these on youtube. Evolution is what it is. I know that some people are emotionally against it; but teaching CHILDREN! that something that we KNOW occurred should be critically attacked is wrong. Science automatically ensures that evolution is criticized effectively.
I must say that I'm bored by the same old arguments by creationists though. It seems that no matter the evidence, emotion prevails in some minds. Evolution IS.
Alright, let's teach creationist theory in schools. But here's the provisio : we teach ALL of it. Not just Christianity, heck no! We're going with Wicca, Greco-Roman, Nordic, Hindu, Bhuddist, Scientologist, African, Egyptian, Lakota, Maori, Jewish Aztec, Hopi, Comanche, Lokut, Navajo, Indian, Russian, Scandinavian, Canadian Folklore, Taiwanese, and all the other religious creationist stories.
Because children should hear all sides of the same story!
@MarshalJimRaynor lol fuck yeah! who's to say any which one of the religions are correct? thats why i don't have a religion, would rather not commit to a single one if there does happen to end up being a "higher being"
Creationism taught is schools?-- what would one teach apart from "god did it"? There is zero science, zero understanding and what if the student disagreed and instead answered "evolution" on the tests?
To state definitions A theory in science is a tested hypothesis which best explains the observations and evidence and makes predictions. It remains until a better theory comes along which explains MORE or better or makes more accurate predictions. Science is methodological naturalism, a method of finding explanations for the natural world, supernatural events are not in the scope of science.
WE MUST tech CREATIONISM !!! Bumba the vomit God of africa puked up the world , people , animals and plants at the beginning. He felt much better and went back to heaven. The end . This wont take long in class . Then on with science.
If we teach creationism, which one shall we teach? That the world was formed when the Sea god and the land god fornicated?, that the Flying Spaghetti Monster made the Universe out of Itself? That God spoke it into existence?
That man is made of clay, just always was or was brought forth from the gods?
That life began by God creating them, that they sprouted from a fountain, other?
Teach world religions (history) but not creationism (not science, history..).
The A Cartesian B , The source of everything we call GOD. God is the universe but the universe is not God, this is the mathematics of the Matrix universe, absolute hierarchy of VECTOR in opposite directions.
Before there was the universe eternal life and absolute existed, existed prior knowledge of the universe, mathematics existed before the universe because the logic of science is based on planning, organization and calculations for something to work correctly The Cartesian B , The source of everything we call GOD
I think thats the point. Science is based on asking questions upon questions to find truth. There are still holes in evolution, thats why its still just a theory. That beings evolve is fact, what they originally evolved from is the bigger question that leads into creationism.
@mystikalhavok Woooah... "There are still holes in evolution, thats why its still just a theory" This couldn't be more false.. There is a book called "Just a Theory" because people make the statement you just did. Well.. gravity is also "just a theory".. and atoms, and math, and english, and music, oh.. and EVERYTHING that we know and can prove.. You see, knowledge doesn't graduate from theory to fact. There is a huge difference between a SCIENTIFIC Theory and a common theory... look it up!
@mystikalhavok Please look up "Ken Miller".. I'm not trying to insult you, I'm simply stating what I know is correct. Scientific Theories are not guesses... or conjecture, they explain facts. No matter how many fossils are found, creationists will always claim there are "in-betweens".. this is way to make the debate never-ending, like most creationist lines. The fact is evolution has been observed, and is APPLIED every day. Regardless of whether you accept evolution or not, it is still true.
when people think of the word theory they think that it means belief from there own imagination but that is not what theory is in the sceintific world it means conclusions based on repeated tests scientists have so much evidence for the theory from the fossels that are still being unearthed and the comon fact that dna mutates makes the whole creation "theory" more of an imposed myth to suite the same establishment that went after people who said the earth revolve around the sun
Even if biological evolution were as tentative or implausible as bible people claim, creationism still shouldn't be taught. It isn't just biological evolution they attack. They try to rewrite ALL of cosmic history. They desperately struggle to reject everything from the formation of planets, stars, and chemical elements, to the constancy of the speed of light, which is fundamental in physics. They even try to explain all geology in terms of 'noah's flood'. Lol, we can't teach this baloney!
agreed. religion is faith based. thats what makes it religion. but in questions like what was before the big bang or what caused the big bang, we dont have conclusive answers (btw, teaching big bangs are caused by cosmic collisions is pure speculation and no more science then creationism if we stick to your standard). and its not a question of religion, its; could there have been an intellegent being that initiated a singularity to explode. discussing what intellegent being it was, is religion
agreed. since creationism and evolution both adress "origins", then, how much more is teaching one "origins" theory (ie just evolution) narrow and arrogant. never before in history have generations of scientists been so convinced of something as do our secular scientists. what convinces you that your "truth" is as absolute as you suppose? what if in 1000 years you find out your wrong? 1000 years ago you were......hmmmm
Creationism wants to be science? Really? That's amazing. Let's have them start sending in bible passages for peer review, and we will teach whatever passes.
Unfortunately science is NOT lying, cheating, misleading, willful dishonesty, ignorance, quote mining, or backstabbing.
Honestly, if Creationism wants to pose as science, their religion will be exposed for the lies it is.
If those idiots actually apply the same standards of evidence for their belief, IT WOULD'NT EVEN BE CONSIDERED.
creationism doesnt not want to pose as science. it cannot b proven as it is faith. however, creationism does hold hugely significant arguments in philosophy classes even in secular universities, arguments that cannot be brushed of or (as you put it) "not be considered". logically (not scientifically; though that can be discussed) christianity has much support. in fact im reading a book on just such a topic. we all need to be a little more open minded i think.
Creationism does try to pose as science, go check out the creation museum. Go check out what they are trying to put in classrooms. Until we actually start seeing some empirical peer reviewed evidence of God, there shouldn't be anything about it in the classroom, end of story.
When Christianity can explain how their God is the one true God, then it can be considered. So no, it has no more support than any other belief with a deity.
I am open minded, but not so open minded my brain falls out.
well... theres evidence there might be a flood. they found chariots in the middle of the red sea. historically the bible is accurate. logically creationism can make much sense as well (as reason is embraced by secular society with such verve). point is, there is such cencorship among scientists upon anything not "darwin" people dont know about it. you dont find it rational because God didnt scrape a giant "God was here" in the earths crust. what proof are you waiting for exactly? im curious.
@Ruben0918 A world wide flood is simply not possible. Maybe there were big floods, but not one in which the bible claims. Historic accuracy doesn't not permit accuracy to extraordinary claims. These kind of claims need extraordinary evidence to match. Especially given that we don't see these kind of things happening today.
God is the answer to everything, but explains nothing. So why bother putting him to the picture? What aspect of the universe actually requires a God? None that I can see.
why is it not possible? you logically reason out the possibillity of it happening because we dont see it happen now, even if there is scientific evidence that supports a possible flood. this is unscientific. and to a certain degree historic accuracy does permit accuracy, im not saying its the end all and be all. but for the things we can observe, looking back now, it does give it a sense of reliabillity that other religions don't have.
@Ruben0918 No, to assume there WAS a flood is not scientific. There is no empirical evidence of a flood like that, the water doesn't have enough water for it, and they can date ice, and found ice that was wayyyy older than the biblical flood, and if there WAS a flood, we wouldn't find ice...
Historical accuracy can be accurate sometimes. Once you start talking about supernatural things though, things indicate some form of inaccuracy of people who could not know better, and didn't know anything.
also we dont see macro evolution occur today (ie. jumps from species to species), we dont see big bangs happening today (sure the universe is expanding now, but that does not make the theory reasonably justifiable at all). the fact that we dont see it happening today does not take away from the possibillity of it having happened. thats a logical fallacy.
@Ruben0918 Yes, we have 'seen' macro Evolution. And if micro evolution exists, which it does, macro evolution would have to exist by default. Smaller changes over smaller amounts of time equals bigger changes over bigger amounts of time.
I don't understand what Evolution, or the big bang has to do with anything. You're jumping all over the place. Evolution is the only explanation for biodiversity, and the big bang is the best explanation for the expansion of time and space available.
keep in mind that God wouldnt be a "something" as we understand "something". God is no more "something" than my left foot and my envy constitute a pair of objects. rid yourself of the idea that God is a grandpa in the sky.
@Ruben0918 How exactly do you define God? Like the Christian God?
Does the bible explain exactly what God is? From what I've read the Christian God has emotions just like humans, and thinks, and judges, unlike what you stated earlier.
And what would the purpose of God be? The more we learn about the universe the less God seems to do. We used to think lightning was God's punishment, opps.
i agree with you that God thinks and judges and has emotions. i never said anything contradicting that. on the contrary, man was made in the image of God and so we harbour the same emotions as we have a God who can simpathize with us. im talking about Gods physical being. I define God as being above space, time, and matter and therefore he is not anything at any particular point in time. as for his purpose; he upholds the universe, acts most often consistently in doing so (ie; scientific laws)
Creationism does try to pose as science, go check out the creation museum. Go check out what they are trying to put in classrooms. Until we actually start seeing some empirical peer reviewed evidence of God, there shouldn't be anything about it in the classroom, end of story.
When Christianity can explain how their God is the one true God, then it can be considered. So no, it has no more support than any other belief with a deity.
I am open minded, but not so open minded my brain falls out.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
2. neither can be fully prooved(we werent there) or disprooved(again.....we werent there)....to me it looks like all that has happend is the (modern) world has accociated creation with faith because its in the bible, not as a teachable theory....but.....based upon my previous comments i dont see any reason why they should be unequal....chew on it :)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
from what i am seeing in the comments the point of the debate....or at least the title has been completely disregaurded.....the question is whether or not creation should be taught in schools.....here are my reasons why it SHOULD(btw these comments are COMPLETELY unbiased....).1.Both evolution and creation(assuming these are the only ones possibly taugt) are "theories" of our origins....
In English Lit and in Sociology, right beside the Oddessy, Mein Kampf, and Dante's Inferno, as a historical work of fiction that is responsible for shaping our culture and cultures across the world. Specific note should be paid to which were considered merely fictions, and which became a force of ignorance that held civilization back for a thousand years in the Dark Ages.
Look up Membrane theory for why we have such a huge number of universes.
In short, there are many thousands of membranes in the 11th dimension, and when they collide, big bangs go off.
Space is the one thing that can expand faster than the speed of light, as it has no mass to speak of, or such a negligible mass that it can be propelled to superluminal (faster than speed of light) speeds.
And again, the argument from the man from the suit is a false dichotomy; a fallacy.
types uv became so worldly cleaver that you have darkened your mind you DO belive in cold but u chose not to acknowlodge him the foolsays in thy heart. there is no god. courpt are they, and aboninable iniquity; there is none that doeth good. psalm 53;1
Creationism should obviously not be taught in schools.
We don't teach that the holocaust never happened in history, we don't teach that 2 plus 2 is 5 in mathematics and for the same reasons we should not teach creationism.
Whenever I hear arguments for creationism to be taught, its usually by the Christians. To be fair, we should teach the creationist arguments of Thor, Zeus, Vishnu, JuJu, and all the other gods. After all, they could all have been right!
do it... spend 20 minutes in a philosophy class supporting thor, zeus, vishnu, and juju. now spend 20 minutes to bring about christian arguments and compare as to which are more compelling to your audience..... dont compare christianity to all other religions. because its not the same, its just not. of all religions, it is the only one that will hold its own, simply because it is so sound.
@wild112233 Wild, you make an excellent point. The only way it would be fair is to offer equal time to all the religions/ belief systems. Anything short of that would be wrong/unfair. Now think about all the time that it would take to give equal time !!!!!! Truthfully, there would be NO TIME left to teach science !!! Even just the common/ well-known belief systems would make it impossible. I know that "X-amount" of Christians want theirs exclusively, but that is unfair. So ???
@RationalConclusion Oreally that is why over 700 scientist and proffessors don't believe that there is evidence. There is no fossil recored and the cambrian explosion was darwins delema because it proved a burst of life and not a slow progression over millions of years
@RationalConclusion Lol It takes more faith to believe that life came from nothing then to believe in god. Also a cell can't live without oxygen so it would have died in the dirt
@ada2step You are clearly ignorant. Evolution does not mean that life came from nothing. Go and read some books on abiogenesis. Educate youself. You'll be a better person for it.
@ada2step RationalConclusion is partly right and partly wrong. Darwinian evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. There are actually about 6 kinds of evolution. The one that scientists often call chemical evolution can deal with nucleosynthesis, abiogenesis or molecular evolution.
Check my channel, esp. the creation science playlists for quite a volume of videos with hard evidence for creation science, which in most areas, beats the pants off of universal common descent.
@TruthIsLife7 You should go on the atheist experience channel I got blocked for mentioning Dr William Lance Craig. Thanks for your channel god bless you
@ada2step Can you show that you got blocked there and your last comment. If you could send me a screenshot of that, it would be great.
The only way that atheism survives is by intolerance and repression of facts in science and history. I'm not aware of any view that is more of an enemy to the weight of evidence in science and history. I'm actually in a debate right now at a major atheist website right now, but VERY busy, so it's a bit slow.
@TruthIsLife7 It will take a while but I will show you and the nasty messages that they gave me. I think that they might have deleted it but I will check
@ada2step Thanks for doing this...it will help show how time after time after time after time, atheism is not interested in free speech free thought or tolerance at all and neither is evolution. These videos summarize a new book out, Slaughter of the dissidents, by former atheist Dr. Jerry Bergman, about how this is constantly done:
watch?v=YlUEYHOwP4E
watch?v=63UbZ1cpS4g
watch?v=8H-IQeiUhog
Atheism survives almost totally by repression of free thought, esp. at state and academic levels.
@RationalConclusion Your comment is absolute nonsense&a non-sequitur.ALL scientists believe in about 1/2 of the major pillars of creation science already&many are coming to adopt many smaller aspects. They have also abandoned many claims of evolution, both minor&major.
There are so many vindications of creation science. See my recent uploads&truthislife7.Start with this:
watch?v=L-BaMAt4dnE (seminar is at 36:00 & catastrophic plate tectonics part is ~54:00)
@RationalConclusion The law of biogenesis was BS too to those who just followed the establishment like sheep without actually checking the evidence for themselves. You are actually already a creationist in some parts, and in most aspects you should be a creationist if you care about science at all, esp. the weight of evidence since in most areas, creation science beats the pants off of universal common descent...and atheism? It's a tragic joke that has only done harm to people and science.
Isn't atheism supposed to be a free thinking ideology? Well then why:
1) In EVERY country where atheism was the official view of the state was free thinking persecuted more than almost anywhere else.
2) do atheists assert against the evidence that no kind of science can ever point to the supernatural, violating the foundation of science that we should follow the evidence wherever it leads.
I could assert things like atheists do&say science can never point to evolution or atheism. Done. I win.
@TruthIsLife7 To answer your questions: 1)Provide examples..If you point to the Soviet Union I'll respond that you have no proof to justify the claim that people were prosecuted for not being atheists.Finally I will point to the Burning of the Library of Alexandria(one of the most hideous acts done by Christians-It basically destroyed the knowledge of mankind),the Middle Ages,the destruction of the ancient greek civilization by Christians and the Crusades.2)Science deals with the NATURAL.
In fact, Christians protected libraries and translated many foreign works into Latin so European scholars could use their knowledge. See:
watch?v=I-k24Q01vck (¬es)
This link also shows a tiny bit of how it was Christianity that built the foundations of modern science without which modern civilization wouldn't exist, or would be centuries delayed. It's by Dr. Hannam, Ph.D in the history of science from Cambridge. There's much more at his site and much he doesn't even talk about.
@RationalConclusion It's easy to think creation is false when it is banned a priori for political ideological reasons and then its rival is ingrained in people's minds with no one ever informing most people of the many ways it has been falsified numerous times in the past. or of the fact that creation has been vindicated numerous times. Your attitude would cause you to be a hardcore communist if you had lived under Stalin or Kim Jung Il now, ridiculing democracy as false.
@RationalConclusion It's easy to think creation is false when it is banned a priori for political ideological reasons and then its rival is ingrained in people's minds with no one ever informing most people of the many ways it has been falsified numerous times in the past. or of the fact that creation has been vindicated numerous times. Your attitude would cause you to be a hardcore communist if you had lived under Stalin or Kim Jung Il now, ridiculing democracy as false.
@RationalConclusion It's easy to think creation is false when it is banned a priori for political ideological reasons and then its rival is ingrained in people's minds with no one ever informing most people of the many ways it has been falsified numerous times in the past. or of the fact that creation has been vindicated numerous times. Your attitude would cause you to be a hardcore communist if you had lived under Stalin or Kim Jung Il now, ridiculing democracy as false.
@RationalConclusion Evolution and atheism have harmed science by banning or hindering scientists from investigating areas that evolution had labeled junk and useless. Vestigial organs and junkDNA were both labeled junk due to evolution ideology. Creation predicted most of them would be found to have important function. Evolution's claims were falsified conclusively and creation's vindicated. WORSE, many people had their "vestigial organs" like tonsils removed, making them sick and killing some.
@TruthIsLife7 You're talking nonsense. Neither atheism nor evolution has banned or hindered science from investigating vestigial organs. As with many other species there are various things that we have within our bodies which once served a purpose but which now do not. Science does not have any restrictions or hinderances from atheists or evolutionists on investigating this at all. Science goes where the evidence goes not where people want it to go. You're talking utter nonsense.
@RationalConclusion Sorry, but Darwinians explicitly discouraged people from investigating vestigial organs, "junkDNA" and other things. Not only that, Darwinian philosophy encouraged doctors to think organs were useless and to surgically remove many of them.
The foundation of science is that it is SUPPOSED to go wherever the evidence leads. But, methodological naturalism that both atheism and Darwinism advocate is diametrically opposed to this concept and can NEVER be reconciled with it.
From this debate it is obvious that creationism should not be taught in schools - at least not in the science class. Teach it in mythology, philosophy class or somewhere if you want, but it obviously does not belong in science class.
It was mentioned many times that there is no evidence for a creator - therefore it is not science! We do not know what happened before the big bang - therefore god must exist is not science!
"Sadly, I had rejected the Bible by focusing on a little list of 'alleged Bible contradictions'. Yet, when presented with the miracle of the Bible's structure, survival, integration, historical veracity, archaeological evidence, scientific insights, outside corroborating records, and hundreds of fulfilled prophecies, I stubbornly looked the other way. Now, the double standard I was living started to reveal itself to me!" From an individual who WAS critical of the Bible.
what should have put you off the bible was the complete lack of evidence for all of it's absurd claims, not to mention the fact that the christian God is a narcissist with split personalities and has the tenancy of killing everyone on earth.
types10001, have you ever taken the time to research the prophesies of the Bible which were made in one century and fulfilled in other centuries. You just spew the common BS criticisms without doing your own personal research. You sound like a bitter unbelieving Catholic....I think most Catholic are actually unbelievers going through the religious motions of church.
yes i have done the research which is how i know that the prophecies are bullshit.
there is a basic benchmark the prophecies would have to meet.
1). proven not to be postdiction (ie written after the event occurred)
2). be precise not vague (ie. names and dates).
there is not a single prophecy in existence that meets these simple criteria. if you have one point it out otherwise what your saying is complete bullshit.
In Isaiah 53:4-6, prophet described a servant as being punished for the sins of others, and that others would be healed by the wounds of this person. As explained in the New Testament - such as in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - Jesus was crucified for our sins, and he was sinless.
you still dont get it do you, the jews were looking for a savior that would die for their sins and so forth AND THEY GOT ONE. you think this is prophecy? you are an idiot.
again, very very vague, could refer to anyone in the christian tradition who was persecuted whilst attempting to help others
Read the whole Isaiah chapter 53...this is clearly talking about Christ...and what do you mean "the jews got the savior they were looking for" -- interesting that the Jews completely reject this "savior they were looking for." Having to call me an idiot to strength your very weak argument is a typical example of atheistic behavior. Our arguments are very weak, so let's call them idiots and imply a low level of education and considerable naiveté...typical rejector of God the creator of all.
the jews were expecting a savior so one popped up and started following the script set by the old testament...this is assuming he existed.
you fail to understand basic logic, if that doesn't warrant the use of the term idiot i dont know what does.
you made the affirmative claim that there were undeniable fullfilled prophecies in the bible and then try to support it with vague statements and possible postdiction. your evidence doesnt hold up
types10001, you've got some info mix up...you said, "a servant being punished for the sins of others" -- Christ out of his great love for us offered Himself....He laid His life down for us...no one made Him do it. He was the only sinless one who could pay our debt! If you know anything about Old Testament types, you know that the Lamb offerings had to be spotless...Christ was the "spotless Lamb of God" which takes away the sin of the world.
you missed the point didn't you? the verse i was responding to could have been reference any christian throughout history who was subject to those conditions.
'Christ was the "spotless Lamb of God" ' - the verse mentioned did not say anything about that.
it would appear that at the making of this video abiognesis the origin of life from non-life had not been demonstrated in the lab...or that the creationist speaker had simply not bothered to look it up
types10001, you must be a bitter catholic or former catholic to have so many misconceptions about the Bible. The RC church is so full of lies and misconceptions about the content of scripture...I can't say I blame you.
"you must be a bitter catholic or former catholic" - no, i just dont like people like you spreading misinformation to the public. you have presented no evidence at all and your statements are crushed under even minor logical scrutiny.
whilst you might not blame me, i do blame you. you are ignorant about your own texts and cling
Both sides in this debate were pathetic. Some of the creationist comments would have been torn apart by any competent debater.
NevilleRhysBarnes 1 week ago
absolutely YES, all creation stories from every culture in the world. Bumba the african vomit god would be a real favorite in grade schools. Unless the creation story has a solid scientific foundation though it doesnt belong in science classes.
SqueakerAlpha 1 month ago
@leflipmo You have been taught 100% fiction. Christianity was directly responsible for building most of the foundations, processes &pioneering most of the fields of science. Almost never has it hindered science. Atheism has done that an astronomical amount more than any religion ever has. In the rare cases Christianity did hinder science, it was usually because it had wrongly accepted pagan concepts or because it was concerned about the harmful use of science to human life (ex: chemical weapons)
TruthIsLife7 2 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Atheism hasn't done anything in science, not good not bad. Scientists have done much in science, whether they were christians, jews, muslims or atheists matters not. If you by making up "facts" of your own try to prove something or think this is going somewhere I shall step away.
leflipmo 2 months ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 2 months ago
@leflipmo Sorry, but leading atheists and Darwinists in the past and present have gotten influence in science and banned scientific research that conflicts with their a priori assertions and fired, demoted and harrassed scientists who rationally think the evidence of science points to God. Some of the 1000s of cases of this hindering of science is documented in the book "Slaughter of the dissidents" by a former atheist with several Ph.D. degrees. An interview is here: watch?v=YlUEYHOwP4E
TruthIsLife7 2 months ago
@leflipmo Finland, Denmark, etc. have some very good points, but many stem from Judeo-Christian values, esp. in economics(they are better here than the USA). Hitler was not an atheist (although he despised Christianity and he and the Nazis planned to destroy it long before they came to power. Here's the research on the 22 officially atheist countries that killed 1-200 million.
wwwDOThawaiiDOTedu/powerkills/MEGADOTHTM or easier format here:
wwwDOTgodandscienceDOTorg/apologetics/atrocitiesDOThtml
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
and on the below..it is an irrefutable fact that whether it's the French Revolution or the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the atheist states all considered religion their worst enemy, largely because of atheism. There are even Christian communists, so that wasn't the major driving force. Communism itself isn't necessarily anti-Christian....however it would possibly be an enemy of pseudo religion, the same type that Jesus criticized that was more concerned with comfort than service and justice.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheists believe that objects made them what they are.
Evolution is an absolute disgrace to science.
Objects never order anything, mutations never order anything and natural selection will only select what has already been ordered.
Evolution is so irrational that it should be removed from all classrooms.
watch?v=HoKVVYJ8KJM
JungleJargon 3 months ago
@Stevoukos 1) NONE of the founders of modern science advocated naturalism or excluded God from science. Most built directly on creation science philosophy& specific concepts& secular historians of science recognize that. There are most definitely testable claims about God. Indisputably so. This shows that naturalism is an a priori bias against facts and nothing else.
3) Why do people never mention anything about the muslims invading and conquering the land the Crusaders went to RETAKE???
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Who you think are the "founders of modern science" and what do you think about the methods they used to seek the truth? The most important factor in modern science is the method it uses. Modern science uses the opposite method to religions because in science there are theories you can falsify but never prove to be absolute truth. In religion there are theory you can prove but never falsify. Religion and modern sicence are opposite worldviews to each other.
dafjkldfa 3 months ago
@dafjkldfa The founders of modern science were those who invented the modern scientific method, the peer review process, the 1st scientific societies, the 1st scientific journals, falsification, etc. (all of these were Christians) and the branches of science (most of these were Christian as well).
You have been lied to about science and religion. They have never been opposite worldviews. Christianity built modern science and is its best partner EVER. You also CAN falsify religious ideas.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dafjkldfa This link by Dr. Hannam,(Ph.D in the history of science from Cambridge) is a presentation at the Royal Society showing how Christianity built the foundations of modern science. We'd be at least centuries delayed without Christians.
watch?v=I-k24Q01vck (&see the notes)
There's much more at his site and much he doesn't even talk about. See also this article on the myth of science &religion being enemies)
wwwDOTjameshannamDOTcom/articlesDOThtm (esp. article #2, but all are good)
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Does being a christian and coming up with an invention mean that the invention becomes christian as well?
Do you even know why the people who are behind the most important inventions and scientific theories after ancient times were christians?
Because there was no established FREEDOM OF RELIGION back then. Everybody were christians/jews/muslims/hindus etc. If you didn't label yourself back then as such you paid the prize and your inventor career was cut short as was your life.
leflipmo 3 months ago
@leflipmo 1) Many advances of Christians derived directly from biblical philosophy. See notes in my main channel video for an intro)
2) If you look in history and even the present, when a state is officially atheist or atheism has academic power, there you find the greatest intolerance in history. Atheism/secularism bans people from learning the facts about the Bible about as much as reading the Bible was banned in the middle ages
3) freedom of religion was given to you by protestants :).
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Please if you throw that around give me some examples. Please try to come up with something not so easy to rebut as Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.
I'm just saying there is a world view that has worked pretty darn well and that doesn't include religion. It is called secular humanism.
I think that most not-crimes and crimes that have been SET IN STONE in a time will be crimes and more terrible crimes in the future. That's just how the moral standards rise in a humanist world.--->
leflipmo 3 months ago
@leflipmo Part two: My view of the "ideal country" (I currently live in Finland, not too bad) would be secular. But the main goal in everything is putting people ahead of ideas. Never value an idea more than people.
In some rare cases you just have to fight for ideas as freedom of speech and liberty that do put people ahead of ideas.
Ideologies should be kept out of school had they good moral standards or not. Science, ethics, moral philosophy, literature and launguages should be taught
leflipmo 3 months ago
The humanist worldview hasn't contributed hardly anything to the benefit of the world. It was Christianity that built modern science, public education, universities, most modern ethics and human rights values and led the campaigns that helped most people in the world realize they are important.
No ideas should be kept out of school if they are beneficial to life. But, the record of history shows that it is WAY more important do separate atheism from the state than religion.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Like I said before, religion is not the reason for the improvements in science. Most of the time religion has been hindering the progress of science.
I have to say that mostly our values and moral philosophy is based and has developed from religion, BUT it is very well known that the main religions have borrowed their values from earlier polytheitic religions.
So it's a logical fallacy to assume that because some of the values and morals of a religion are good for human kind...-->
leflipmo 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 ...that would somehow mean we should cling on to them and not consider any other, probably a better way to find out what's good, and more than that, what's better for us.
Secular humanism is a world view. A pursuit of well being for everybody and going away from the worse.
You don't see any major changes with humanism, more like steady small improvement, but mainly what you DON'T see secular humanism "do" is making things worse for people. Hardly you can claim that not to be true.
leflipmo 3 months ago
No, Christianity didn't borrow from other earlier religions very much if at all. No ancient culture is within light years of the morals of of the Bible. However God did speak to people in many different cultures in ancient times as well as the present. It's another fallacy that God only speaks to Christians and Jews. Even in the Bible, probably the most famous prophecy/vision was given to a Babylonian king.
Humanism may have improvements, but also 100% certain has made things worse for people.
TruthIsLife7 2 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 code of Hammurabi .
SqueakerAlpha 1 month ago
4) Galileo...the textbook cherry picked nonsense trotted out by every deceitful atheist site in the world. Galileo was challenging Aristotle that the church had unthinkinglyy swallowed and treated as infallible…science made leaps forward when Christians finally got rid of some of the shackles Aristotle had put on it. Please read some facts on this by Dr. Hannam, Ph.D. in the history of science from Cambridge: wwwDOTjameshannamDOTcom/articlesDOThtm (esp. article #2, but all are good)
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
2) Here is some data on officially atheist states killing 30 times more people in only ~200 years than ALL religions in the world, even the most false and evil ones, COMBINED.
see: wwwDOThawaiiDOTedu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
wwwDOThawaiiDOTedu/powerkills/MEGA.HTM wwwDOTgodandscienceDOTorg/apologetics/atrocitiesDOThtml
creationDOTcom/christian-vs-evolutionary-atrocities
(change DOT to .)
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@Stevoukos 1) No, science deals with whatever the weight of evidence points to, whether natural, supernatural or whatever. It does not make a priori assumptions like methodological naturalism, PERIOD.
2) There are 22 cases of officially atheist states in history. In every single one Christians and religious people were tortured and millions upon millions were killed because atheism thought religion was a hindrance to society & used the same epithets and falsehoods against religion then & now.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 1) Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.Notice the ABOUT THE UNIVERSE part.God (at least Yahweh)is considered outside our universe.PERIOD.
2)Still no examples.
3)Nno response to crusades etc.
I'm not saying that Christianity is responsible for every evil in the world.But it IS hypocritical to say that Christianity supported science when Galileo was prosecuted by the Catholics.
Stevoukos 3 months ago
You are believing atheist lies about history. Read here about the destruction of the libraries/books in Alexandria:
enDOTwikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria
It was Caesar who caused one of the libraries there to be burned. Under Theodius, pagan temples were burned, yes, but even enemies of Christians make no mention of burning of books.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
Should we teach Geology in bible study?
gregrutz 3 months ago
I'll save everyone an hour and a half. The answer is no.
BigLundi 4 months ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 4 months ago
We can prove the theory of evolution. Just take the over 50% of Britons who believe creationism should be taught in schools to a useless island somewhere (like Ireland) and then drop a really big nuclear device. Next, wait about a million years and test British intelligence. I predict that the improvements to the gene pool will result in much higher IQ scores. It really won't take a million years, but might as well be sure.
79barkingspider 5 months ago
@79barkingspider "higher IQ scores", not in America. How is the world doing today with you people in charge?
Go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge. Proverbs 14:7
BereanBeacon1 5 months ago
@BereanBeacon1 I love responses that make no sense. "You people in charge"? Since you have no clue as to what "people" I am, I'm mystified. I'm a member of the National Geographic Society. Is it those people?
79barkingspider 5 months ago
@79barkingspider The Bible says we are headed to a one world government and leader, which all who have rejected the God of the Bible are aiding to bring it about.
So, if you are alive during the Great Tribulation, don't worship or take the mark of the beast.
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 2Peter 3:16
BereanBeacon1 5 months ago
@BereanBeacon1 It must be cool to be so bat-shit crazy that anything you say seems to you to be a response to something. 69BigBubba 7:11
79barkingspider 5 months ago
Creation and Science are to different subject, Let us teach evolution in Sunday school.
no1saphead 5 months ago
@no1saphead Great idea and also include real science as well.
BereanBeacon1 5 months ago
We need creation science in schools. I want to know how a snake talks. And how did people live 900 years. And why Noah took the dinosaurs on the Ark and then let most of them go extinct 65 million years ago.
gregrutz 5 months ago
outside of the catholics which religious schools would allow or give the scientific view equal ground? the answer is none.
its not that they want religion in the science room, they want religion to control the entire school, a theocracy
these debates remind me of butter vs margerine debates. margerine (religion) is always saying it taste just like butter (science) but you never hear butter saying it taste like margerine.
thesageofohio 8 months ago
@thesageofohio The theory of evolution is a religion and is passed off as real science. Besides, Rome says God used evolution in the beginning. The God of the bible is out and the schools are a mess. True Christians don't want to take over the schools, we just want the students to be able to question evolution using real science.
BereanBeacon1 8 months ago
@BereanBeacon1 ... "The theory of evolution is a religion and is passed off as real science" you're more retarded than that thing they call religion.
And who care what Rome said on anything?
thesageofohio 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thesageofohio Your time is near.
That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2:10,11
BereanBeacon1 7 months ago
@BereanBeacon1 "we just want the students to be able to question evolution using real science."
Evolution *IS* real science! Its not from some bronze age book of myths. Wow. Let me guess... you are from the United States. Talk like yours is the very reason that the rest of the civilized world laughs their asses off at the childish, uneducated people in this country who are determined to make sure their kids are just as dumb. Its downright embarrassing.
JabberCT 7 months ago 2
@JabberCT The kids are already dumb because of your failed American schools. Leave the Bible out of it if you can.
All evolutionists have is hot air on the mostly anonymous Internet. We have the real science backed up by the $10,000 Life Science Prize. You can evolve from a chicken and win the prize or make cowardly remarks on websites until you ultimately die and become a creationists after it's too late. My last remark to you is something that everyone understands: CLUCK, CLUCK
BereanBeacon1 7 months ago
@BereanBeacon1 That $10,000 has been won a million times over already and no one has gotten paid because just like religion, its bullshit. Here is the latest transitional fossil finding.
watch?v=fCspVOv31iY
And of course, no one received 10 grand because no one went back in time with a video camera to record it for your dumb asses. I can evolve from a chicken? Are you THAT stupid? We were talking about evolution, not Greek Mythology. See? This is what i mean. Pure stupidity.
JabberCT 7 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@JabberCT And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. Jude 1:14-15
BereanBeacon1 7 months ago
@BereanBeacon1 You should check out the following things: Ring Species, Human Chromosome 2, The fossil record as it correlates to sedimentary layers (organisms go from simple to complex until a mass extinction, then go from simple to complex again), the Human Genome Project.
I think you'll find there is an overwhelming amount of evidence supporting evolution. I think you'll find evolution is the cornerstone of biology.
logsdonj 7 months ago
This so called "debate" was over a long time ago (regarding our schools in the USA). The Supreme Court has ruled more than once that creationism science(?) is not science at all and has no place in the science class-room.Jeez, give up already. Teach it in humanities class in a religious school of your choice, don't dumb-down our kids because science doesn't comport with your belief-system.
orangemod 9 months ago
@orangemod Students are already "dumb-down" as shown by stats and the NEA should be sued under product liability law which states, "releasing a flawed product on society". Home and private schools produce a vastly superior student in grades, thinking and manners. You really don't have real science, but peddle science fiction because you control academic "freedom" and won't allow criticism (leave God out of the discussion) of your "science" in a class room.
BereanBeacon1 9 months ago
@BereanBeacon1 Science is debated at the university level, High School students are not smart enough and need to be told the facts. And there is no 'other side' or 'debate' anyway.
gregrutz 8 months ago
@gregrutz Yes, comrade, students in HS were made dumb by you people.
BereanBeacon1 8 months ago
@BereanBeacon1 Just because you didn't learn anything is school, doesn't mean some people didn't learn some science. Were you home schooled or just never opened a science book.
gregrutz 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gregrutz LOL, A merry heart maketh a cheerful countenance: but by sorrow of the heart the spirit is broken. Proverbs 15:13
A merry heart doeth good like a medicine: but a broken spirit drieth the bones. Proverbs 17:22
BereanBeacon1 8 months ago
A "theory" in Science is a model which is tested and makes accurate predictions. Creationists confuse "theory" with "hypothesis" and throw in multiple arguments from ignorance.
haycockjeff 10 months ago
they sure do, I think creationism has a place just like evolution. neither have been proven is a faith. atheism has become much more militant and fundamentalist than any religion. it's disgusting.
glower125 10 months ago
@glower125 Yeah it's totally disgusting to promote rationality and science.
Reasonwillwin 10 months ago
Creationism, if required to be taught in school, should be taught in a philosophy class, or History class. Not saying that Creationism did happen in history, it's just what people believe. Just like how when we learned about the Ancient Greeks, we learned how the Greeks believed in many gods. Science is all about theories and solutions backed by evidence, so creationism wouldn't fit in the science category
dclaver2 10 months ago
Comment removed
djlazlow1 11 months ago
if the fairytale of evolution can be taught why cant something that make absolute sense be as well? oh wait lets see then there would be a God and we would be accountable to him so lets just keep that swept under the rug .....
clavin2007 11 months ago
@clavin2007 its ignorant people like you that make my week :D
WolfenGamer69 11 months ago
@WolfenGamer69 really? why dont you tell me in your own words what the word ignorant means?
clavin2007 11 months ago
@clavin2007 nah, i'll let you actually do something and pull out a dictionary, have fun looking up and thinking about what something actually means :D
WolfenGamer69 11 months ago
@clavin2007 Evolution is a scientific fact, the debate is over. A magic space man, a jewish zombie, dragons, giants, witches and talking animals, THOSE are fairytales! And you know what? You can find all those things in the bible.
Reasonwillwin 10 months ago
@Reasonwillwin scientific fact ? since when... your facts are mest up pal ..but considering your age i can understand how brain washed your are....any time you want to debate anything from the bible or your miss guided science ..hit me back ...i know you wont ...cuz you have no argument and i know that... you are easy prey
clavin2007 10 months ago
@clavin2007 Sorry pal but if you don't know that evolution has been proven thanks to hundreds of years of research then the fucking education system failed you. No argument? I gave you some already! Go back to your dragons, unicorns and magicians you freaking fool.
Reasonwillwin 10 months ago
This is a GREAT debate. I wish I could find more debates like these on youtube. Evolution is what it is. I know that some people are emotionally against it; but teaching CHILDREN! that something that we KNOW occurred should be critically attacked is wrong. Science automatically ensures that evolution is criticized effectively.
I must say that I'm bored by the same old arguments by creationists though. It seems that no matter the evidence, emotion prevails in some minds. Evolution IS.
ScholarlyGentleman81 1 year ago
Alright, let's teach creationist theory in schools. But here's the provisio : we teach ALL of it. Not just Christianity, heck no! We're going with Wicca, Greco-Roman, Nordic, Hindu, Bhuddist, Scientologist, African, Egyptian, Lakota, Maori, Jewish Aztec, Hopi, Comanche, Lokut, Navajo, Indian, Russian, Scandinavian, Canadian Folklore, Taiwanese, and all the other religious creationist stories.
Because children should hear all sides of the same story!
MarshalJimRaynor 1 year ago
@MarshalJimRaynor lol fuck yeah! who's to say any which one of the religions are correct? thats why i don't have a religion, would rather not commit to a single one if there does happen to end up being a "higher being"
WolfenGamer69 11 months ago
Creationism taught is schools?-- what would one teach apart from "god did it"? There is zero science, zero understanding and what if the student disagreed and instead answered "evolution" on the tests?
sweetsweatyfeet 1 year ago
Ahh Perks!
luerexbob 1 year ago
To state definitions A theory in science is a tested hypothesis which best explains the observations and evidence and makes predictions. It remains until a better theory comes along which explains MORE or better or makes more accurate predictions. Science is methodological naturalism, a method of finding explanations for the natural world, supernatural events are not in the scope of science.
SqueakerAlpha 1 year ago
WE MUST tech CREATIONISM !!! Bumba the vomit God of africa puked up the world , people , animals and plants at the beginning. He felt much better and went back to heaven. The end . This wont take long in class . Then on with science.
SqueakerAlpha 1 year ago
Of course not.
kjakobsen 1 year ago
If we teach creationism, which one shall we teach? That the world was formed when the Sea god and the land god fornicated?, that the Flying Spaghetti Monster made the Universe out of Itself? That God spoke it into existence?
That man is made of clay, just always was or was brought forth from the gods?
That life began by God creating them, that they sprouted from a fountain, other?
Teach world religions (history) but not creationism (not science, history..).
drfoxcourt 1 year ago
Of course creationism should be taught. Right after 3 little pigs and little red riding hood. Oh and don't forget Peter Pan.
BANBANBANBANful 1 year ago 2
The A Cartesian B , The source of everything we call GOD. God is the universe but the universe is not God, this is the mathematics of the Matrix universe, absolute hierarchy of VECTOR in opposite directions.
tm874m765 1 year ago
God is the universe but the universe is not God, this is the mathematics of the Matrix universe, absolute hierarchy of VECTOR in opposite directions.
tm874m765 1 year ago
Before there was the universe eternal life and absolute existed, existed prior knowledge of the universe, mathematics existed before the universe because the logic of science is based on planning, organization and calculations for something to work correctly The Cartesian B , The source of everything we call GOD
tm874m765 1 year ago
For fucks sake if anyone tried too teach me creationism I would have to leave because I would just pick holes in the whole thing
aviolentkill 1 year ago
@aviolentkill
I think thats the point. Science is based on asking questions upon questions to find truth. There are still holes in evolution, thats why its still just a theory. That beings evolve is fact, what they originally evolved from is the bigger question that leads into creationism.
mystikalhavok 1 year ago
@mystikalhavok Woooah... "There are still holes in evolution, thats why its still just a theory" This couldn't be more false.. There is a book called "Just a Theory" because people make the statement you just did. Well.. gravity is also "just a theory".. and atoms, and math, and english, and music, oh.. and EVERYTHING that we know and can prove.. You see, knowledge doesn't graduate from theory to fact. There is a huge difference between a SCIENTIFIC Theory and a common theory... look it up!
ScholarlyGentleman81 1 year ago
@mystikalhavok Please look up "Ken Miller".. I'm not trying to insult you, I'm simply stating what I know is correct. Scientific Theories are not guesses... or conjecture, they explain facts. No matter how many fossils are found, creationists will always claim there are "in-betweens".. this is way to make the debate never-ending, like most creationist lines. The fact is evolution has been observed, and is APPLIED every day. Regardless of whether you accept evolution or not, it is still true.
ScholarlyGentleman81 1 year ago
when people think of the word theory they think that it means belief from there own imagination but that is not what theory is in the sceintific world it means conclusions based on repeated tests scientists have so much evidence for the theory from the fossels that are still being unearthed and the comon fact that dna mutates makes the whole creation "theory" more of an imposed myth to suite the same establishment that went after people who said the earth revolve around the sun
sagitarian000028 1 year ago
Very sad that we even need to address this and its the year 2010.
MyITRcom 1 year ago
Even if biological evolution were as tentative or implausible as bible people claim, creationism still shouldn't be taught. It isn't just biological evolution they attack. They try to rewrite ALL of cosmic history. They desperately struggle to reject everything from the formation of planets, stars, and chemical elements, to the constancy of the speed of light, which is fundamental in physics. They even try to explain all geology in terms of 'noah's flood'. Lol, we can't teach this baloney!
adkinsjr 1 year ago
Moby Dick isn't real. They teach that.
Retact 1 year ago
agreed. religion is faith based. thats what makes it religion. but in questions like what was before the big bang or what caused the big bang, we dont have conclusive answers (btw, teaching big bangs are caused by cosmic collisions is pure speculation and no more science then creationism if we stick to your standard). and its not a question of religion, its; could there have been an intellegent being that initiated a singularity to explode. discussing what intellegent being it was, is religion
Ruben0918 1 year ago
agreed. since creationism and evolution both adress "origins", then, how much more is teaching one "origins" theory (ie just evolution) narrow and arrogant. never before in history have generations of scientists been so convinced of something as do our secular scientists. what convinces you that your "truth" is as absolute as you suppose? what if in 1000 years you find out your wrong? 1000 years ago you were......hmmmm
Ruben0918 1 year ago
Creationism wants to be science? Really? That's amazing. Let's have them start sending in bible passages for peer review, and we will teach whatever passes.
Unfortunately science is NOT lying, cheating, misleading, willful dishonesty, ignorance, quote mining, or backstabbing.
Honestly, if Creationism wants to pose as science, their religion will be exposed for the lies it is.
If those idiots actually apply the same standards of evidence for their belief, IT WOULD'NT EVEN BE CONSIDERED.
Raherin 1 year ago
creationism doesnt not want to pose as science. it cannot b proven as it is faith. however, creationism does hold hugely significant arguments in philosophy classes even in secular universities, arguments that cannot be brushed of or (as you put it) "not be considered". logically (not scientifically; though that can be discussed) christianity has much support. in fact im reading a book on just such a topic. we all need to be a little more open minded i think.
Ruben0918 1 year ago
Creationism does try to pose as science, go check out the creation museum. Go check out what they are trying to put in classrooms. Until we actually start seeing some empirical peer reviewed evidence of God, there shouldn't be anything about it in the classroom, end of story.
When Christianity can explain how their God is the one true God, then it can be considered. So no, it has no more support than any other belief with a deity.
I am open minded, but not so open minded my brain falls out.
Raherin 1 year ago
well... theres evidence there might be a flood. they found chariots in the middle of the red sea. historically the bible is accurate. logically creationism can make much sense as well (as reason is embraced by secular society with such verve). point is, there is such cencorship among scientists upon anything not "darwin" people dont know about it. you dont find it rational because God didnt scrape a giant "God was here" in the earths crust. what proof are you waiting for exactly? im curious.
Ruben0918 1 year ago
@Ruben0918 A world wide flood is simply not possible. Maybe there were big floods, but not one in which the bible claims. Historic accuracy doesn't not permit accuracy to extraordinary claims. These kind of claims need extraordinary evidence to match. Especially given that we don't see these kind of things happening today.
God is the answer to everything, but explains nothing. So why bother putting him to the picture? What aspect of the universe actually requires a God? None that I can see.
Raherin 1 year ago
why is it not possible? you logically reason out the possibillity of it happening because we dont see it happen now, even if there is scientific evidence that supports a possible flood. this is unscientific. and to a certain degree historic accuracy does permit accuracy, im not saying its the end all and be all. but for the things we can observe, looking back now, it does give it a sense of reliabillity that other religions don't have.
Ruben0918 1 year ago
@Ruben0918 No, to assume there WAS a flood is not scientific. There is no empirical evidence of a flood like that, the water doesn't have enough water for it, and they can date ice, and found ice that was wayyyy older than the biblical flood, and if there WAS a flood, we wouldn't find ice...
Historical accuracy can be accurate sometimes. Once you start talking about supernatural things though, things indicate some form of inaccuracy of people who could not know better, and didn't know anything.
Raherin 1 year ago
@Raherin the world doesn't have enough water*** opps
Raherin 1 year ago
also we dont see macro evolution occur today (ie. jumps from species to species), we dont see big bangs happening today (sure the universe is expanding now, but that does not make the theory reasonably justifiable at all). the fact that we dont see it happening today does not take away from the possibillity of it having happened. thats a logical fallacy.
Ruben0918 1 year ago
@Ruben0918 Yes, we have 'seen' macro Evolution. And if micro evolution exists, which it does, macro evolution would have to exist by default. Smaller changes over smaller amounts of time equals bigger changes over bigger amounts of time.
I don't understand what Evolution, or the big bang has to do with anything. You're jumping all over the place. Evolution is the only explanation for biodiversity, and the big bang is the best explanation for the expansion of time and space available.
Raherin 1 year ago
@Ruben0918 We aren't waiting for any proof, we have plenty to prove that creationism is just not the way it happened.
MyITRcom 1 year ago
keep in mind that God wouldnt be a "something" as we understand "something". God is no more "something" than my left foot and my envy constitute a pair of objects. rid yourself of the idea that God is a grandpa in the sky.
Ruben0918 1 year ago
@Ruben0918 How exactly do you define God? Like the Christian God?
Does the bible explain exactly what God is? From what I've read the Christian God has emotions just like humans, and thinks, and judges, unlike what you stated earlier.
And what would the purpose of God be? The more we learn about the universe the less God seems to do. We used to think lightning was God's punishment, opps.
Raherin 1 year ago
i agree with you that God thinks and judges and has emotions. i never said anything contradicting that. on the contrary, man was made in the image of God and so we harbour the same emotions as we have a God who can simpathize with us. im talking about Gods physical being. I define God as being above space, time, and matter and therefore he is not anything at any particular point in time. as for his purpose; he upholds the universe, acts most often consistently in doing so (ie; scientific laws)
Ruben0918 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Creationism does try to pose as science, go check out the creation museum. Go check out what they are trying to put in classrooms. Until we actually start seeing some empirical peer reviewed evidence of God, there shouldn't be anything about it in the classroom, end of story.
When Christianity can explain how their God is the one true God, then it can be considered. So no, it has no more support than any other belief with a deity.
I am open minded, but not so open minded my brain falls out.
Raherin 1 year ago
Not sure if my messages are sending. Gonna try this.
Raherin 1 year ago
Comment removed
Raherin 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
2. neither can be fully prooved(we werent there) or disprooved(again.....we werent there)....to me it looks like all that has happend is the (modern) world has accociated creation with faith because its in the bible, not as a teachable theory....but.....based upon my previous comments i dont see any reason why they should be unequal....chew on it :)
MrCurdo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
from what i am seeing in the comments the point of the debate....or at least the title has been completely disregaurded.....the question is whether or not creation should be taught in schools.....here are my reasons why it SHOULD(btw these comments are COMPLETELY unbiased....).1.Both evolution and creation(assuming these are the only ones possibly taugt) are "theories" of our origins....
MrCurdo 2 years ago
Yes. Schools should teach creationism.
In English Lit and in Sociology, right beside the Oddessy, Mein Kampf, and Dante's Inferno, as a historical work of fiction that is responsible for shaping our culture and cultures across the world. Specific note should be paid to which were considered merely fictions, and which became a force of ignorance that held civilization back for a thousand years in the Dark Ages.
rkyeun 2 years ago 3
that iranian guy brought up a good point
Novas546 2 years ago
Look up Membrane theory for why we have such a huge number of universes.
In short, there are many thousands of membranes in the 11th dimension, and when they collide, big bangs go off.
Space is the one thing that can expand faster than the speed of light, as it has no mass to speak of, or such a negligible mass that it can be propelled to superluminal (faster than speed of light) speeds.
And again, the argument from the man from the suit is a false dichotomy; a fallacy.
Pealanor 2 years ago
The bloke in the light blue shirt has a rather interesting looking head.
Geochron 2 years ago
creationism should not be taught in schools
its oblivious that creationism is just an outdated belief, just like most other parts of Christianity
why can't people just admit that we were not created by "God"
m0tl3ysl4y3r 2 years ago 5
types uv became so worldly cleaver that you have darkened your mind you DO belive in cold but u chose not to acknowlodge him the foolsays in thy heart. there is no god. courpt are they, and aboninable iniquity; there is none that doeth good. psalm 53;1
llemgeta 2 years ago
Creationism should obviously not be taught in schools.
We don't teach that the holocaust never happened in history, we don't teach that 2 plus 2 is 5 in mathematics and for the same reasons we should not teach creationism.
RationalConclusion 2 years ago 26
Whenever I hear arguments for creationism to be taught, its usually by the Christians. To be fair, we should teach the creationist arguments of Thor, Zeus, Vishnu, JuJu, and all the other gods. After all, they could all have been right!
wild112233 1 year ago 3
Yeah I vote for thor
RazielKain 1 year ago
do it... spend 20 minutes in a philosophy class supporting thor, zeus, vishnu, and juju. now spend 20 minutes to bring about christian arguments and compare as to which are more compelling to your audience..... dont compare christianity to all other religions. because its not the same, its just not. of all religions, it is the only one that will hold its own, simply because it is so sound.
Ruben0918 1 year ago
@wild112233 Wild, you make an excellent point. The only way it would be fair is to offer equal time to all the religions/ belief systems. Anything short of that would be wrong/unfair. Now think about all the time that it would take to give equal time !!!!!! Truthfully, there would be NO TIME left to teach science !!! Even just the common/ well-known belief systems would make it impossible. I know that "X-amount" of Christians want theirs exclusively, but that is unfair. So ???
Cheers !!
orangemod 9 months ago
@RationalConclusion Well we teach evolution and there is no evidence of that
ada2step 4 months ago
@ada2step Bullshit. There's massive evidence for it. I encourage you to educate yourself on the subject.
RationalConclusion 4 months ago
@RationalConclusion Oreally that is why over 700 scientist and proffessors don't believe that there is evidence. There is no fossil recored and the cambrian explosion was darwins delema because it proved a burst of life and not a slow progression over millions of years
ada2step 4 months ago
@ada2step RNA Discoveries Refute Key Evolutionary Argument
ada2step 4 months ago
@ada2step Evolution is real. Go and educate yourself on the subject.
RationalConclusion 4 months ago
@RationalConclusion Lol It takes more faith to believe that life came from nothing then to believe in god. Also a cell can't live without oxygen so it would have died in the dirt
ada2step 4 months ago
@ada2step You are clearly ignorant. Evolution does not mean that life came from nothing. Go and read some books on abiogenesis. Educate youself. You'll be a better person for it.
RationalConclusion 4 months ago
@ada2step RationalConclusion is partly right and partly wrong. Darwinian evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. There are actually about 6 kinds of evolution. The one that scientists often call chemical evolution can deal with nucleosynthesis, abiogenesis or molecular evolution.
Check my channel, esp. the creation science playlists for quite a volume of videos with hard evidence for creation science, which in most areas, beats the pants off of universal common descent.
TruthIsLife7 4 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Thank you for telling me about your channel! It rocks! Love it
ada2step 4 months ago
@ada2step glad to help. See the new video #1 on the creation-evidence for the flood playlist especially.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 You should go on the atheist experience channel I got blocked for mentioning Dr William Lance Craig. Thanks for your channel god bless you
ada2step 3 months ago
@ada2step Can you show that you got blocked there and your last comment. If you could send me a screenshot of that, it would be great.
The only way that atheism survives is by intolerance and repression of facts in science and history. I'm not aware of any view that is more of an enemy to the weight of evidence in science and history. I'm actually in a debate right now at a major atheist website right now, but VERY busy, so it's a bit slow.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 It will take a while but I will show you and the nasty messages that they gave me. I think that they might have deleted it but I will check
ada2step 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Hey I just put the video up on my channel of the blocking incident
ada2step 3 months ago
@ada2step Thanks for doing this...it will help show how time after time after time after time, atheism is not interested in free speech free thought or tolerance at all and neither is evolution. These videos summarize a new book out, Slaughter of the dissidents, by former atheist Dr. Jerry Bergman, about how this is constantly done:
watch?v=YlUEYHOwP4E
watch?v=63UbZ1cpS4g
watch?v=8H-IQeiUhog
Atheism survives almost totally by repression of free thought, esp. at state and academic levels.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 No problem! I am already geting some bad mail from it o'well. Thank you I will look up those links
ada2step 3 months ago
@RationalConclusion Your comment is absolute nonsense&a non-sequitur.ALL scientists believe in about 1/2 of the major pillars of creation science already&many are coming to adopt many smaller aspects. They have also abandoned many claims of evolution, both minor&major.
There are so many vindications of creation science. See my recent uploads&truthislife7.Start with this:
watch?v=L-BaMAt4dnE (seminar is at 36:00 & catastrophic plate tectonics part is ~54:00)
dotoree 4 months ago
@dotoree Creationism is bullshit.
RationalConclusion 4 months ago
@RationalConclusion The law of biogenesis was BS too to those who just followed the establishment like sheep without actually checking the evidence for themselves. You are actually already a creationist in some parts, and in most aspects you should be a creationist if you care about science at all, esp. the weight of evidence since in most areas, creation science beats the pants off of universal common descent...and atheism? It's a tragic joke that has only done harm to people and science.
TruthIsLife7 4 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 Creationism is false. Evolution is true. Atheism has done no harm to people or science. You're talking bullshit.
RationalConclusion 4 months ago
Isn't atheism supposed to be a free thinking ideology? Well then why:
1) In EVERY country where atheism was the official view of the state was free thinking persecuted more than almost anywhere else.
2) do atheists assert against the evidence that no kind of science can ever point to the supernatural, violating the foundation of science that we should follow the evidence wherever it leads.
I could assert things like atheists do&say science can never point to evolution or atheism. Done. I win.
TruthIsLife7 4 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 To answer your questions: 1)Provide examples..If you point to the Soviet Union I'll respond that you have no proof to justify the claim that people were prosecuted for not being atheists.Finally I will point to the Burning of the Library of Alexandria(one of the most hideous acts done by Christians-It basically destroyed the knowledge of mankind),the Middle Ages,the destruction of the ancient greek civilization by Christians and the Crusades.2)Science deals with the NATURAL.
Stevoukos 3 months ago
In fact, Christians protected libraries and translated many foreign works into Latin so European scholars could use their knowledge. See:
watch?v=I-k24Q01vck (¬es)
This link also shows a tiny bit of how it was Christianity that built the foundations of modern science without which modern civilization wouldn't exist, or would be centuries delayed. It's by Dr. Hannam, Ph.D in the history of science from Cambridge. There's much more at his site and much he doesn't even talk about.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
@RationalConclusion It's easy to think creation is false when it is banned a priori for political ideological reasons and then its rival is ingrained in people's minds with no one ever informing most people of the many ways it has been falsified numerous times in the past. or of the fact that creation has been vindicated numerous times. Your attitude would cause you to be a hardcore communist if you had lived under Stalin or Kim Jung Il now, ridiculing democracy as false.
TruthIsLife7 4 months ago
@RationalConclusion It's easy to think creation is false when it is banned a priori for political ideological reasons and then its rival is ingrained in people's minds with no one ever informing most people of the many ways it has been falsified numerous times in the past. or of the fact that creation has been vindicated numerous times. Your attitude would cause you to be a hardcore communist if you had lived under Stalin or Kim Jung Il now, ridiculing democracy as false.
TruthIsLife7 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RationalConclusion It's easy to think creation is false when it is banned a priori for political ideological reasons and then its rival is ingrained in people's minds with no one ever informing most people of the many ways it has been falsified numerous times in the past. or of the fact that creation has been vindicated numerous times. Your attitude would cause you to be a hardcore communist if you had lived under Stalin or Kim Jung Il now, ridiculing democracy as false.
TruthIsLife7 4 months ago
@RationalConclusion Evolution and atheism have harmed science by banning or hindering scientists from investigating areas that evolution had labeled junk and useless. Vestigial organs and junkDNA were both labeled junk due to evolution ideology. Creation predicted most of them would be found to have important function. Evolution's claims were falsified conclusively and creation's vindicated. WORSE, many people had their "vestigial organs" like tonsils removed, making them sick and killing some.
TruthIsLife7 4 months ago
@TruthIsLife7 You're talking nonsense. Neither atheism nor evolution has banned or hindered science from investigating vestigial organs. As with many other species there are various things that we have within our bodies which once served a purpose but which now do not. Science does not have any restrictions or hinderances from atheists or evolutionists on investigating this at all. Science goes where the evidence goes not where people want it to go. You're talking utter nonsense.
RationalConclusion 4 months ago
@RationalConclusion Sorry, but Darwinians explicitly discouraged people from investigating vestigial organs, "junkDNA" and other things. Not only that, Darwinian philosophy encouraged doctors to think organs were useless and to surgically remove many of them.
The foundation of science is that it is SUPPOSED to go wherever the evidence leads. But, methodological naturalism that both atheism and Darwinism advocate is diametrically opposed to this concept and can NEVER be reconciled with it.
TruthIsLife7 3 months ago
From this debate it is obvious that creationism should not be taught in schools - at least not in the science class. Teach it in mythology, philosophy class or somewhere if you want, but it obviously does not belong in science class.
It was mentioned many times that there is no evidence for a creator - therefore it is not science! We do not know what happened before the big bang - therefore god must exist is not science!
mtbee9 2 years ago 19
This has been flagged as spam show
no fucking way.
mecher3k 2 years ago
David Perks totally shows the fallacy of Intelligent Design and why Creationism should never be taught in a science class.
The creationists here were totally owned, I am surprised BereanBerean keeps this on his channel as it shows all the weaknesses of his belief.
hexkid 2 years ago 5
You needn't be surprised. I doubt if creationists have the intelligence to realize when their butts are being whacked!
;-)
wild112233 2 years ago 5
"Sadly, I had rejected the Bible by focusing on a little list of 'alleged Bible contradictions'. Yet, when presented with the miracle of the Bible's structure, survival, integration, historical veracity, archaeological evidence, scientific insights, outside corroborating records, and hundreds of fulfilled prophecies, I stubbornly looked the other way. Now, the double standard I was living started to reveal itself to me!" From an individual who WAS critical of the Bible.
markpianoman 2 years ago
what should have put you off the bible was the complete lack of evidence for all of it's absurd claims, not to mention the fact that the christian God is a narcissist with split personalities and has the tenancy of killing everyone on earth.
types10001 2 years ago
types10001, have you ever taken the time to research the prophesies of the Bible which were made in one century and fulfilled in other centuries. You just spew the common BS criticisms without doing your own personal research. You sound like a bitter unbelieving Catholic....I think most Catholic are actually unbelievers going through the religious motions of church.
markpianoman 2 years ago
yes i have done the research which is how i know that the prophecies are bullshit.
there is a basic benchmark the prophecies would have to meet.
1). proven not to be postdiction (ie written after the event occurred)
2). be precise not vague (ie. names and dates).
there is not a single prophecy in existence that meets these simple criteria. if you have one point it out otherwise what your saying is complete bullshit.
types10001 2 years ago 4
1). the bible was compiled in 325 CE, the attempt was made to remove conflicting versus.
2). Christianity is simply another savior religion, there were many, the fact that one survived is not remarkable.
3). integration into what? society? cause it's been in conflict with that for the better part of a thousand years
4). historical veracity? lol there's no evidence the Moses story even occurred.
5). again fairytale making reference to real events.
6). there are ZERO full-filled prophecies.
types10001 2 years ago 5
God's servant would die for our sins
Bible prophecy: Isaiah 53:4-6
Prophecy written: Between 701-681 BC
Prophecy fulfilled: About 31 AD
In Isaiah 53:4-6, prophet described a servant as being punished for the sins of others, and that others would be healed by the wounds of this person. As explained in the New Testament - such as in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - Jesus was crucified for our sins, and he was sinless.
And there are many others!
markpianoman 2 years ago
you still dont get it do you, the jews were looking for a savior that would die for their sins and so forth AND THEY GOT ONE. you think this is prophecy? you are an idiot.
again, very very vague, could refer to anyone in the christian tradition who was persecuted whilst attempting to help others
types10000 2 years ago 3
Read the whole Isaiah chapter 53...this is clearly talking about Christ...and what do you mean "the jews got the savior they were looking for" -- interesting that the Jews completely reject this "savior they were looking for." Having to call me an idiot to strength your very weak argument is a typical example of atheistic behavior. Our arguments are very weak, so let's call them idiots and imply a low level of education and considerable naiveté...typical rejector of God the creator of all.
markpianoman 2 years ago
explain it here so i can publicly discredit it.
the jews were expecting a savior so one popped up and started following the script set by the old testament...this is assuming he existed.
you fail to understand basic logic, if that doesn't warrant the use of the term idiot i dont know what does.
you made the affirmative claim that there were undeniable fullfilled prophecies in the bible and then try to support it with vague statements and possible postdiction. your evidence doesnt hold up
types10000 2 years ago 3
i can tell you dont get it, so im going to make it very simple for you.
if your going to make claims you need to back them up. for your evidence to be valid:
- it cant be postdiction
- it cant be self-fullfilling
- and it must be clear as day (ie. making reference to specific people places and events)
- independently verifiable
this is an incredibly reasonable standard, if you cant look at a piece of evidence and see it meets those claims then it's pure bullshit
types10000 2 years ago
- a servant being punished for the sins of others and some metaphorical bullshit about healing. this is as vague as it gets.
- those Gospels were not written by those people and Jesus (who's evidence for existing as a human is sketchy enough) was not a divine
types10001 2 years ago
types10001, you've got some info mix up...you said, "a servant being punished for the sins of others" -- Christ out of his great love for us offered Himself....He laid His life down for us...no one made Him do it. He was the only sinless one who could pay our debt! If you know anything about Old Testament types, you know that the Lamb offerings had to be spotless...Christ was the "spotless Lamb of God" which takes away the sin of the world.
Your other comments are pure wishful thinking!
markpianoman 2 years ago
you missed the point didn't you? the verse i was responding to could have been reference any christian throughout history who was subject to those conditions.
'Christ was the "spotless Lamb of God" ' - the verse mentioned did not say anything about that.
types10001 2 years ago
it would appear that at the making of this video abiognesis the origin of life from non-life had not been demonstrated in the lab...or that the creationist speaker had simply not bothered to look it up
types10001 2 years ago
types10001, you must be a bitter catholic or former catholic to have so many misconceptions about the Bible. The RC church is so full of lies and misconceptions about the content of scripture...I can't say I blame you.
markpianoman 2 years ago
"you must be a bitter catholic or former catholic" - no, i just dont like people like you spreading misinformation to the public. you have presented no evidence at all and your statements are crushed under even minor logical scrutiny.
whilst you might not blame me, i do blame you. you are ignorant about your own texts and cling