Sean Kamali Vs Rabbi Barry Silver "Is Religion Compatible With Science" Debate
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 мар 2022
- This is a debate between Sean Kamali & Rabbi Barry Silver on "Is Religion Compatible With Science."
To support this channel for the thousands of hours dedicated to bringing you the content you like, please join our Patreon / agatanfnd .
Or donate through Paypal to agatanfnd@gmail.com email address
You can purchase Christopher Hitchens T-Shirts and other products at shop.spreadshirt.com/AgatanFo...
To visit our traveling RUclips channel, please go to / agatantravel .
Our Facebook page is / agatanfoundation
To watch videos that we are unable to post on RUclips due to copyright restrictions, please visit our Dailymotion channel at
www.dailymotion.com/Agatan_Fnd
All religious organizations should be required to pay: federal, state, County and property taxes. They should be required to do bookkeeping.
That's funny, churches paying taxes to a church.
I loved Barry's introduction. Can feel the love. Right back at both of you!
Good to see you again, Sean.
Much appreciated!
Good stuff. “Jewish values have permiated so all people are practicing all those good traits.” Wrong! Even a baby are gentle towards a kitten, just like Koko the gorilla. You don’t need religion for people to be kind, but in order to make people cruel, religion is an effective tool.
Welcome back online Sean!!! Thanks a lot for posting! We missed you
My pleasure!
Wow, Sean seems to be very open-minded and a genius. He comes up with analogies and counterarguments on the spot. After watching this debate I like him even more now. Thank you for all your hard work and keep up the good work.
Greatly appreciate it. I think it still needs a lot of work, but for my very first debate ever I did okay. Lol
Can we call this the Resurrection of Agatan?
Hopefully lol
Welcome back to the discussion, Agatan. You were missed!
Thank you David
Uu the channel that started my deconversion is back nice nice
Thank you
Love your vids. Thanks for another great upload! :)
What a pleasant surprise, welcome back sir😃
So nice of you guys. Thank you
Science needs to come up with a pill to keep the religion leaders hands of our children!
I miss your videos. You make really good content
I appreciate that!
Wow you’re back !
Finally
👏🙂
3:10 Awesome to see Christopher Hitchens being appreciated. I hope he is remembered a hundred years from now as David Hume is today.
Kudos to Rabbi Berry Silver for saying that.
8:45 it's very sad about his dog Cindy.
10:30 Rabbi Barry sounds like a nice guy.
19:10 Lol.
30:00 that's interesting and uncommon to hear a Rabbi disregarding genesis 😁
1:13:00 wow Sean is making some really good arguments and it looks like it's difficult for Rabbi to see the fallacies in his self description as being Jewish even though it has nothing do Judaism.
Great job Sean, thanks again for all you do.
My pleasure and thank you
So why don't we suspend the belief in the supernatural aspect of religion as Rabbi silver has and call it secular humanism
Sean was trying to explain that the rabbi was basically making his own Judaism..In otherwords a new denomination of Judaism.The Star of David hood ornament on a different car.
Yo where tf has this guy been? Hasn't done a video in years.
Twenty minutes in, I'm waiting for the game to begin. This isn't really a debate, is it? I think the answer to the question is obvious: religions invariably claim to be based on "divine revelation", which means that they *already know the answer* to the great mystery of existence, which is, of course, an unprovable assertion. They may *believe* they know "the truth", but it's sheer speculation. Therefore, apologists for religion must spend their entire lives trying to thwart scientific progress because it threatens their assumptions. History is full of examples of "the faith community" punishing, torturing and even killing those brave scientists who try to expand human knowledge.
Then, once they can no longer deny the truth, they engage in twisted rationalizations to try retrofit their "faith" to commonly accepted reality. (See: Copernicus, Galileo, Isaac Newton, etc.).
Scientists on the other hand, happily and routinely discard old theories as new, more accurate information comes to light, always moving forward in their quest for knowledge.
In other words:
Science is a series of questions that must be answered.
Religion is a bunch of answers that must not be questioned.
"Is religion compatible with science?"
The answer is obvious: "No".
And (as Christopher Hitchens said so many times) we'd be better off if "religion" would just get out of the way and allow humanity to achieve its full potential.
There is a narrow but potentially valuable possibility of applied secular mythology that could be called "religion" because of its reflection upon the human condition. There's no reason in principle why this couldn't be scientific.
The modest Secular Buddhist movement, for example, is active in this area, and yes, it nevertheless generates surprisingly much controversy, over what might seem to be trivial points.
I think that's because religion has indulged irrationality for so long that, to some people at least, the giving up of irrationality is simply inconceivable.
But when religion relies upon "faith" - that is, belief which controversy evidence - then I think there will always be an insurmountable barrier to reconciliation with science. You can't have it both ways. And science works, whereas religion merely provides the illusion of security.
Bottlenose dolphins, orcas, elephants, and Eurasian magpies and the greats apes have all been observed torturing other animals. Cruelty is not solely the human animal behavior.
Nope. Religion has NEVER in the course of history demonstrated any evidence of their supernatural claims. Science has demonstrated many hundreds of thousands of facts about the universe. This is not even a debatable topic.
Clearly, you can see the other side believes otherwise.
Have you ever considered people from the other side who maybe were never exposed to the logic or a topic that may seem so apparent to you?
Even I used to believe differently until I was exposed to the work of great scientists, philosophers, and intellectuals.
Because of that fact, I believe every topic should be debated, no matter how obvious or controversial.
Who cares? What we need to be worried about is our constitutional freedom of religion. That's what you need to be discussing.
Sir! Put down the guitar and back slowly away!!
Answer is yes. Obviously these internet atheist types that don’t know history would say no, because they assume all religion to be on the level of creationism. This explicit conflict between religion and science as a whole is purely modern.
If a religion makes a false scientific claim
This isn't compatible with science
Example
Jesus being born of a virgin mother
This makes a claim about biology, which is not possible...
Now religion forces you to believe that claim in order to make sense if the bible for example
So yes religion isn't compatible with science
That old guy is really smart I think the same religion needs to evolve with since our next generation needs to know what's God or bad and even that's relative 😅 but we need to edentify what's genocide and what's haven agreeing on this with majority cause each opinion matters...
Just change the name of jeuism religion in something more modern and spelling to New generation religion should embrace and promote since just my 2 cents
If everything needed to be created nothing would exist, therefore God exists. The God's paradox is that it is impossible to exist existance without the existence of an impossibility. It is impossible for existence to exist without the existence of an eternal entity that was not created. The existence of an eternal entity or infinitude is an impossibility. Can a car go at infinite speed, have a painting infinite colors, start a race an eternity ago, have a football pitch infinite surface? It is impossible. The God's paradox is resolved being the eternal entity a miracle or impossibility that God makes possible. God is the eternal miracle of Life and Death, everything that ever existed, exists and would exist. The debate between religious people and atheists is encysted because God exists and the religious god doesn’t, so both are wrong having arguments to be right.
People who based their atheism on science are really good at fooling themselves of course ;)
?
How’s that?
I appreciate the sarcasm. It's ALMOST as if science is so unreliable that we should not dream of using it to investigate supernatural claims. Except of course it's highly reliable, and supernatural claims are extravagantly the converse.
@@starfishsystems If you think Friedman Walker Parameter and Robitaille-Gamow- De Sitter universe aren't pure magical thinking , there's no hope for you to be impartial . Mathematical speculation at best
𝖕𝖗𝖔𝖒𝖔𝖘𝖒 🙈
In solidarity with Nazi Azovs 😂