Видео

구독합니다. 귀한 말씀사역 하나님의 은혜와 자비가 있길 기도합니다. 샬롬.

God bless you

하나님에 대해 더 잘 이해할 수 있는 유익한 내용의 영상입니다. 거룩하신 하나님께 영광을 올려드립니다.

Amen

성경주해설교 말씀 잘 들었습니다 주 하나님께서는 모두에게 선한 생활을 바라시는데 이를 따를것을 노력하며 살아가겠습니다

0:45 By dissolving salt in water first, you can mix the oil more easily

00:04:26 "...so there came a time in my life when I thought, wait a minute, there cannot be any reconciliation between creation and evolution..." No.There is no way to reconcile these two ideas because there is no way to compare or contrast them. They are radically different notions in every way, and do not overlap at any point. There is no way that a scientific theory can hold *any* view on any items of religious dogma, and vice-versa. See link below for more info. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-overlapping_magisteria 00:05:13 "So, I asked...how many people...have walked away from the faith because of evolution?..." No. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection says nothing at all, anywhere, about faith, or religion, or god, or any other metaphysical or supernatural matter. It can't, and no scientific theory can. If somebody's faith is damaged by evolution, then that person is doing both faith AND science wrong and needs to seriously reconsider what they're doing. 00:07:58 "...the conflict is between true religion and false science..." No. Darwin's theory is as much a part of the discipline of science as plate tectonic theory or any other theory, arrived at in the same way, and confirmed over and over again for nearly 150 years. It is not "false science". Further, no conflict can exist between Darwin's theory because, as noted above, it makes no supernatural or religious claims of any kind, anywhere. Darwin's theory does ONE thing: it offers a tentative explanation for biological diversity. That's it. That's all it does. 00:08:27 "...if we have children who are walking away from the faith, then where will the future of the church be?..." No. This is a question best answered by religion or philosophy. It has nothing at all to do with Darwin's theory or anything else in science. 00:09:12 "...our children are walking after the false idol of evolution..." No. Darwin's theory, as noted above, and as is obvious in any case, has zero religious content. It says nothing about what a person should "follow". Anybody who "follows" evolution in the sense that a person might follow a religion does not understand either science or religion, and really needs to get a clue. Not even ten minutes into this mess, and I can already tell that the speaker has no idea what he's talking about. He does not understand what science if for, or how it works, and, incredibly, he does not understand the difference between scientific theories and religious dogma. I will not waste any more of my time with this, but I will make a prediction. Without watching any more of it, I will be willing to bet that the video will mention some or all of the following: for sure a conspiracy theory that claims that all scientists are lying soft tissue in dinosaur fossils Hitler claims that dinosaurs and humans lived together. "the origin of life" misrepresentations of geology, astronomy, history and other serious subjects, either from inexcusable ignorance or from deliberate dishonesty.

A comparison of evolution and creationism?! Apples and oranges, right off the bat. Creationism offers an explanation for literally everything--where the planets and stars and seahorses and granites and dandelions came from, plus it offers an explanation even for the origin of intangible phenomena like happiness and souls. It also contains an justification for religion and faith. Creationism is also, as a religious dogma, not subject to questioning, revision, or falsification, those all being technically heretical if not outright blasphemous. Darwin's theory of evolution is different in every way: it offers a tentative explanation of ONE observed phenomenon--speciation. That's it. That's all it does. It says nothing about where anything came from. It also says nothing at all about God or religion. It's also by definition as a scientific theory tentative, meaning that it can be falsified. And as a theory, it's subject to all the testing anybody cares to do. I am baffled as to why creationists continually conflate these two kinds of statements. Creationism is about everything, and is based in religious dogma; scientific theories are about one thing at a time and are based on empirical evidence. Creationism is by definition immune to inquiry; scientific theories must be tested. Two different kinds of statements, incompatible in every way: why do creationists keep trying to compare them? I really wonder about that.