Religion Vs Science: Can The Two Coexist? | Neil deGrasse Tyson
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 апр 2020
- FOLLOW THIS IS 42
RUclips - bit.ly/2DGxgXZ
Instagram - bit.ly/2YfLXsI
Facebook - bit.ly/2LxnVbe
Twitter - bit.ly/2Wwmsmw
Website - thisis42.com
FOLLOW NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON
Twitter - bit.ly/2UPiLZj
Facebook - bit.ly/2UtPtjY
#NeildeGrasseTyson #Science #Atheism 
Развлечения
“I’d rather have questions with no answers than have answers than can’t be questioned”
Richard Feynman
thank you for quote
Based
Is this regarding science or religion?
@@nothingtoseehere417 it’s basically saying science > religion
@@blockyshapes7001 I am not trying to start an arguement; I am merely trying to understand where that is not a contradiction to when pple who back up science tell religious pple that they claim as doctrine questions "that have no answers." Did I miss something? And when science has no answers for the how/why of the big bang, or how nature comes into order and eventually law, yet there is no scientific answer for its origin, and it's just supposed to be believed as of without allowing the question of it not being possible.
As long as there are math exams there will be some people who believe in God.
God damn it you are right
LoL. This quote is even better than what Richard Feynman has said 😂🤣😂🤣
Reminds me of when I made a 72 on an exam in my corporate income tax class. I probably deserved a 30.
@@theboombody the good ol time when 70s are good score in college
that may be in the top ten of the dumbest....
As a natural skeptic, when, as a child attending a summer bible school, I asked a question that included "why" -- to which the only answer given me was, "do as you're told"; at which time I abandoned the illogic of religion and, in my mind, put religion in the same category as Santa and the Easter Bunny and the tooth fairy. In my opinion, with the merging of religion and politics to the extent that is being done in the US now, the willful ignorance of unquestioning blind faith is nothing short of dangerous.
So a church behaviour changed your mind on religion?
Bothered answering to others?😊
@@adilaziz5385 It identified the church as a bully that has no reason or justification for itself.
@@adilaziz5385 I've always "answered" to others as appropriate -- school and employment -- but they were not threatening me with eternal torture.
@@suezbell1 lol , the last thing that you should tell a curious person is that, asking questions is a sin!
When i was young i always used to ask questions.....but after that i spent 5 years in religious studies and overall on life.
Now i am a Muslim , even though i know Muslims are not in the best spot light today
@@adilaziz5385it's not just church behavior, but religious behavior. Religions hate it when they are questioned, because there's no answers most of the time. Religion is nothing more than some fairytale that powerful people used to control the masses. It was never about "eternal happiness and peace" or whatever they say. Every scripture and legend of God is always along the lines of "don't question it".
I’m a Christian so I do believe in God. I also love astrophysics so Neil is someone I like to listen to. One thing I love about this man is he will never bash on someone because they believe differently. He’s very respectful
I think his insult went right over your head
Yeah he was pretty condescending in this one.
@@boneheadbill9976 he never have an insult. He states why he has his beliefs. To insult someone you have to talk down or degrade them or their beliefs
Well his offence is only confirmation bias, by selecting the examples that fit his perspective.
@@isaacbrown8844 he stresses that he’s blown away with confusion that the 7% believe in God, and that we should stop everything and get to the bottom of what is wrong with them. Yes that is being arrogant and condescending. I’m not an atheist, but I’m also not gonna claim to be blown away with confusion if there are any people at all who have gone through a technical conservative Bible college, but are today atheists.
The two can coexist as long as the person is open to new ideas and isn't dogmatic beyond reason.
I am religious but i also trust science
But religions are not open to new ideas and are beyond reason.
@@thehound9086 exactly. Ever wonder why God would allow young children to be victims of crimes like rape, trafficking, abuse and murder? Why would he allow the most vulnerable in society to be targeted considering that many who have been abused have been so by priests.
@@curious5887 anyone with a brain know the two can coexist. Stupid people will just think they are seperate
@@coraldiamond1922 Because god isnt your nanny.
He is more like a teacher.
Note that teachers dont punish those who dont learn, they just teach what they know.
“The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence” Carl Sagan
That goes for God too.
yep
@@danielcristancho3524 no ❤️
And you are doing nothing with that comment lmao like your god is this popular bc it has been forced onto ppl it has an historical reason and that reason was never peaceful
Something I can’t stand about humanity at the moment is how people tend to hate each other for beliefs. I’m not saying everyone is like this, but a good handful of people are. Like, if you believe in god, some atheists are like “there is no god and you’re stupid for thinking there is”. Or if you’re an atheist, toxic Catholics say “blasphemy, repent, atheists don’t go to heaven, etc”. At the moment, I’m an agnostic theist, I believe in god but I can’t be 100% sure. I don’t care if you’re and atheist, catholic, Islamic, Muslim, or anything, we’re all human beings, and we should all love each other for who we are, not on our beliefs
I grew up in a Catholic school
And the Science teacher who was a nun, had her bible on the same shelf with her science books.
The books got along just fine.
Back in those days I would NEVER have imagined that Religion and Science would be at odds with each other. It never occurred to me that there would be a problem.
You've said it well. Besides, science, whether one likes to admit it or not, does not exist in a vacuum. It's a human activity which means it's guided by human motives.
Science can be good or bad, it can't be true or false. Good science is one that does well what it's intended to do, that has utility. Utility is grounded in purpose but purpose itself is never based on science.
Let's take a shovel for example. A shovel is good if it does it's job will, if it's reliable. Good shovel is the one that doesn't break during gardening. But, who says it must be used for gardening? Someone may want to use it to harm someone. He has different idea of utility, and those ideas don't come from shovel at hand.
Similary, how, and for what, scientific possibilities will be used depends on underlying philosophy.
@@stephenson19861 Good point.
Sister (science teacher) said a lot of the same things to us that I heard in the lectures from Carl Sagan. She had books with a lot of big science names on them, including Darwin.
She said to us a few times, "Do Not use God or Religion as an excuse to stop learning about science. And do not use science as an excuse to stop studying religion."
At the time I thought she was just telling us to keep our homework done. But I'm starting to realize she meant something else.
Back in those days.
Just like what one of my teachers used to say to us, Science is simply appreciating God's creation
@@bliss_gore5194 That is an excellent statement which nicely summarizes the entire philosophy I was trying to express.
You are indeed an outstanding public speaker and a great communicator. I'm not a physicist, so I don't watch every astrophysics video you broadcast. But I watch every religious video you put out. No other person communicates as well as you.
Anyone who can tackle this topic whether as a neutral or belonging to either side without sounding condescending to the other has already won and is probably living a meaningful life overall.
When you love people you share the truth. Sometimes the truth hurts. More often than not, real truth does hurt.
i dont understand this, if you truly deny an after life, whats the point of your life? why are you alive? anything you do will be meaningless. pls explain
@@SJ-kz3jy you give meaning to YOUR life. Live in the present. Not the non existent afterlife.
, I don’t want to be disrespectful or anything.
@@SJ-kz3jy Exactly.
@@mauritsbuskens6595 There is a afterlife
Both religion and science can coexist if people stop interfering belief with facts..if people keep religion side, use it only for finding a peace in your personal life, and use science to answer any natural phenomenon occuring..many old time scientists were religious but also contributed great research to science
Lol no there weren’t. If they told people they where un religious they would be executed
Just like the man that discovered the earth was round was silenced by the church
The Bible has plenty of stories that are not congruent with Science.
@@minimcgregorminipekka7386 That's a myth. The West has believed the earth is round since Ancient Greece.
@@keithahess lol sure buddy. Keep denying reality
Humanity has always been at it's best when science, religion & philosophy have been working hand-in-hand together; they all seek the same answer (the Truth) and are merely different tools for measuring and observing it.
Like any tool, it can be abused for harm - all three can also attest to that.
Other than that, I don't see how come it's anyone's business one way or another.
Neil's religion is running from science.
The 1LofT states that energy can't be created or destroyed, it can't happen naturally. One aspect of the 2LoT shows that the universe is winding down, usable energy is becoming less usable. It is clear creation had to be done supernaturally yet it is still denied because people are just too proud to accept that, among other things.
Science can cause physical damage, while the rest do- EMOTIONAL DAMAGE
The problem is when all of those tools for discovering truth were utilized for manipulation and power grabbing, twisting their inherent and most of the time harmless nature to a devastating and systemically detrimenting weapon against anyone.
Problem is one uses evidence and the other doesn't
@@briaf3370 Modern science is built on the backs of scientists who were also deeply religious - Galileo, Newton, Lemaitre, Pasteur, Copernicus, Pascal... I would say that they, and countless others, were pretty evidence based men.
I would like to believe they were anyways, since our entire system of modern science that lead me to religion relies on them being accurate.
My only disagreement here, as a holder of a BA in History, is that undergrads in our discipline use textbooks up to our Jr. year, after which we're reading mostly monographs and journal essays, and writing (at length,) and analysing everything our profs throws at us. Same resources used by Masters and Doctoral candidates, but undergrads produce almost no published work, do not present at conferences and seminars, and are not trying to find gaps in the knowledge base in order to find a research subject for their thesis and/or dissertation. However, in my own case, I was performing advanced-degree level work in my Junior and Senior years, getting published in journals, and had profs both recommending me to graduate level classes and writing me letters of recommendation for grad school. I greatly respect Dr. Tyson for not only his inexhaustible enthusiasm for science but the fact that he has no compunction about using the word "idiot," on those anti-intellectuals and knuckle-draggers who well deserve it. Something Carl Sagan never had the stomach for. Alas.
When I was 15 I came up with this question “why can’t religion be the answer as to why we exist, and science be the answer to how?”
Well the latter defies the former.
Because they contradict each other in a multitude of ways.
Simplicity =/= truth. That's a silly thinking trap that people fall into. Something isn't more likely to be true because it sounds profound, or it rhymes, or it uses big words. This is a failure of logic.
@@Xavier_Coogat_the_Mambo_King
I could use your assistance with some choice "thinkers" on this this thread.
Ha.
One in particular took a single high school physics class and claims he can debate with any astrophysicist on the topic of Big Bang, dark matter, inflationary theory and CMBR, all in favour of debunking them for a god while insisting physics has no rooting in math.
This should get more likes
Such a human centric approach, just like the ancient theories of earth being in the center of the universe, the galaxy or the solar system, we humans wanna believe we are the most important thing that ever existed, why can't we just be a by product of entropy and luck? We really don't matter that much to the universe as the next set of asteroids and people have such a hard time swallowing that, why? Because religious...
6:14 I went to that high school in New Jersey and was in that teacher's history class in the mid-90's. The teacher was clearly religious, but behaved himself mostly. When I heard later that he went bat-shit crazy with his religion in the classroom in the early 2000's, I was not too surprised. I guess he must have gotten tenure.
I experienced the opposite as a university student.
I've always thought/said - if one is allowed to pursue their chosen religion to the fullest extent - batshit crazy is the only possible end result.
Many are as not publicly dramatic as this example or Jim Jones, Moon, Koresh and a host of others - but as damaging none the less.
What I find fascinating is most come to the conclusion (Men - with following) that their 'seed' is the only Holy seed.
Much like these wild pain meds out there that "may cause disturbing dreams...." side effects.
Did you know that there is a 'standard disturbing dream' that many have as a side effect?
It is dismembering an infant.
WHAT in the hell primal 'code' are we triggering with these medications that trigger across the demographic board thought/dream of dismembering an infant?????
My Holy Seed and this side effect are linked, IMO, that the human animal left unchecked (or triggered) is an ANIMAL.
Because we are.
In the case of batshit crazy religiousness - this human animal can only reconcile the mental illness of rampant religious fervor with more mental denial (illness) at the super sub conscientiousness level.
@@StudioDaVeed Interesting about that dismembering baby dream. I've never heard of it. But I wouldn't read too much into it before we can gain better understand of our brains which at present is still very much a mystery. It can very well be a evolutionary misfire, like moths flying into fire, rather than some deep "primal code" in us.
@Donald Morris
YAH
I highly doubt tenure has anything to do with it, if he had been teaching for long at all the repetition of teaching often does psychological damage to teachers that is not apparent in most people until old age, if he was predisposed to psychological issues or already suffered from one or more he may have just snapped over time. sadly it happens all the time and is rarely addressed.
As a Hindu, I can confirm that yes Science & Religion can co-exist. As my religion has never stopped me to question things and never stopped my curiosity. In Sanatan Dharma (popularly known as Hinduism) if you are ready to do a proper research just like science, you'll get to know how many things are scientifically based. And I'm glad I did my deep research and I built my own beliefs and I can proudly say that I have a double masters in Science (medicine) & I am a very religious and spiritual person. And another reason why Sanatan called to me that my beliefs won't decide whether I go to heaven or hell but rather my actions (no matter what my belief is) will finally decide whether I will get hell or heaven and maybe both depending on what percentage of good or bad actions I have performed.
Totally out of topic,but my dad is a sound engineer. And live shows are a part of my life. I follow him everywhere. Taking all those speakers,amplifiers,mixers,whole lot of lightings and shit ton of professional audio equipment,put it in big trucks,like 3 or 4 of trucks,hours of journey the event venue and then make a plan of where to place of the equipment and after placing,laying out the wiring which is tens of kilometers long wirings if you sum it all,and testing. It takes days to set it all up.
The thing is,why im saying all this,i see Neil is holding the microphone. The way he is holding them. Those are normal professional audio equipment. Cardiod microphones. Those are very good and very reliable microphones for live events. Provides very good audio. The problem is it is not that sensitive. It is not like condenser mics or phantom mics. Those are sensitive. The one used in studios is event more god damn sensitive. Even the smallest of lowest of sound it can pick it up. The one Neil is using is not that sensitive so you should never hold them that far from your mouth when you are speaking or singing. It is a nightmare for the sound engineer when people do that. Why? So the farther you hold the mic from the source of sound,the ability for the mic to pick up the sound is lessen. So what to do? Raise up the volume of the mic. Problem solved right? No!!! When you raise up the volume of the mic,there is a point it will become that sensitive and start to pick up the sound coming from speakers. From the mics go to speaker and to mics and to speaker and to mics and it will continue and create a feedback loop. Thats why you can hear humming noise in the live event. This is what happening. I must say the sound engineer in this video live show is very skilled. I never heard of the noise even once. He is able to control the sound,make sure everyone can hear Neil and at the same time make sure bo feedback noise. If the venue is echo-ey,it is a hard thing. The feedback is hard to avoid like it will happen.
So i ask,please to those who use mics at live events,doesnt matter small or big,please hold it closer to your mouth when you speak or sing. See professional singer and talkers,the will hold them closer to their mouth. Your mouth is in your head not at your stomach or chest like Neil is holding. The source of the sound is your mouth. Many sound engineers struggle because of this problem. The can lose the contract man. Imagine if the whole event there is constant feedback sound. How you are suppose to enjoy the show? Everyone will say,the sound is very bad in this show. Everyone will put the blame on that sound man. But in reality,he was struggling hard to give you the best sound for you to enjoy. Think of them too guys. They always are there to make sure you enjoy what you listen to. They are professionals. They can overcome hard challenges. But if you keep giving them tsunamis then how they are suppose to overcome that. Small waves are normal thing. Tsunamis,nah...that is the end. So please,pretty please,one more time,please hold the mic closer to your mouth or the source of the sound.
Thank you.
Whenever this type of stuff happens in America, is always interesting to see the dynamics between the freedom of religion and scientific education
*indoctrination
@@jex-the-notebook-guy1002 you are saying religion indoctrination or scientific indoctrination
@@melechgadol both. Education can be indoctrination
Yes, that scientific education causing kids to mutilate themselves in sex changes. Wonderful thing, that "science".
The RC religion is completely corrupt. In case you did not notice, it owns its own bank. Find a righteous religion and it is directly in line with science................Falun Dafa...........The word conscience is the prefix con (with) and the word science.
I'd really like to see a discussion between Neil and Jordan Peterson arguing about religion =D.
That would be interesting I'd watch it. He needs to talk to common sense christians with the ability to argue and know the bible. Not just one or the other. People like ken ham which is the guy who says dinosaurs were on the arc are a little on the crazy side. Good at arguing but no good bible knowledge or science knowledge. So his arguments come off stupid.
Jordan Peterson would be able to be rationable which is why it will never happen the left fears challenge of their opinions
Neil would clap Religious Jordan
I thought the same thing. But this seems to be a re-upload from before 2011, based on his reference of Oct 2011 coming in the future yet.
If so, and based on listing to Neil since the beginning of COVID on Star Talk; I think he's moderated his view points considerably over the last decade. Perahps not is in an accuracy stand point, but from the point of not knowing all aspects of things.
Aye ditto
@@sorakanzoku1748 JBP is a mythologist /psychology professor, what he teaches is like the historical/psychological/humanitarian side of religion. So I could see how he can have a fruitful discussion with someone like Neil. JBP might say “ok religion was good back then because people needed some order and guide on what’s good and bad in a chaotic world” and Neil might say “yes but do we still need it though” and they can argue back and forth. I’d love to hear that.
The more I study Science and History the more I don't believe there's an omnipotent being watching over us
The study harder, the vast majority of the world's scientists are atheist.
Then you are studying it wrong
@@whatman956 he’s studying it right. If you’ve studied even a little bit of quantum theory, you’d realize that it leaves no possibility for an omnipotent being
@@ryugakishatu6372 except that's physics, theology involves metaphysics, the two dicliplines belong to different conceptual spheres
@@whatman956 Nonsense. Grounded reality is what I believe in. If it isn’t logical, is unverifiable or anything else. It’s wrong. Plain and simple
“One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion. So now people assume that religion and morality have a necessary connection. But the basis of morality is really very simple and doesn't require religion at all.” -- Arthur C. Clarke
cameraman thinks he's on a quentin tarantino set
Lmao
😂😂😂👍🏻
😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣😂🤣😂
Lol he even moves the camera like his in django
Neal PLEASE, get yourself someone who knows how to operate a camera!
@Ez G : Wow was I forcing you to 'hear' me complain? I didn't realize I had that much power over you. Let's try this: I order you to put on a dress and run down the street barking like a dog. Please get back to me and let me know about the reaction to your excursion around the community. Posting a video on RUclips would even be better. Make it happen... :-)
lol
Hello James,
I also wish professional public speakers knew how to use a mic. Watch Any singer. You rest the mic on your chin and Leave it there unless you need distance from it on a powerful note. Fixed podium mica are the worst for clarity. Distance = depth for singing or instruments.
Enjoy your day,
Eddie.
Pro musician.😎
James, PLEASE get your self some spelling lessons. **Neil**
@@CollectiveFX : Coupalop: Watz rong wit mi spelin'? Doo yoo no hough 2 ouperate aye kam-ra? :-)
Where to find/watch the entire speech?
There is no religion vs science. Just people vs people. This presentation is so easy to break down for a real thinker.
Fairly close. Science is beyond the fallibility of humans when done properly unlike religions.
@@j-joe-jeans you absolutely just proved my point. You skipped right over the logic of what I just said in order to take a shot at religion.
I literally agreed with you. Do you have a hard time reading? I said: "Fairly close. ..."
Yes, demonstrably all religions have failed at any explaining of reality as apposed to where science holds the exclusive track record in doing so.
Thanks for being consistent. Have a good one.
I know you don't like doing this topic.... but you are so good at it. Mabey a fee more please. I'm 43 and my daughter is 6yo. We both love what you do. This one was another gem. Thank you.
Shock-News (I'm sorry),
but if you agree with 'Religion and Science/Logic can easily co-exist' then youre falling for a Marketing-Ploy. A Marketing-Strategy - and a simple one at that.
Reality is, giant Parts of the Holy Texts of all Religions are debunked thoughoutly and shown to be absolute b.s by Science and just Observations in general.
The Flood and the Age of the Earth; objectively millions of years old no matter how some reject this fact; are just 2 of 2 trillion examples. But the very natural question/reaction coming-up (the question why so much in the holy texts is just wrong) has to be stopped from coming-up.
Let your daughter watch Tom
And Jerry or something 😂
This is an interesting source for further discussion - thank you to the original filmers/suppliers and this RUclips channel for posting it.
Atheism, please believe in science (creationism), don't be superstitious about the self-transfer of energy from low to high energy (the evolution of the universe), pseudoscience. Because warm water does not change back to cold water and hot water, the energy emitted by the sun does not return to the sun. We have evidence of creationism. Scientists have discovered that redshift, radiation and many stars in the universe are dying and no longer evolving, but stars are also evolving, but their gravitational forces are degrading, and their gravitational forces are becoming smaller every moment. According to theory, these evidences are degenerate because the energy spreads outwards, which is the law of entropy increase. What's more, the universe degenerated after being created by God. For this reason, the scientific theory lied, saying that the initial universe had the smallest entropy and was chaotic. But it contradicts the law of entropy. According to the theory, the minimum entropy is the most regular, that is, after God created the universe. Please accept science, don't be superstitious.
@@linlaodenis2933 yeah continue with your fairy tales
@@aguy3953
Scientific theory: Creatures in high-dimensional space can control humans, which is magic.
@@linlaodenis2933 yeah that's what I said it's not a scientific theory it's your fairytale
jesus, you really know how to spew out pure bullshit. *You've never heard of ice and fire?*
Science asks “how” religion and philosophy ask “ why”. As long as each stays in it’s lane, they coexist.
As long as the 'how' and the 'why' are not actually asked of the same thing, then there won't be conflict. When they are, then conflict is highly likely.
For example:
Religion - *Why* did the the earth get created in six days?
Science - *How* did the earth get created in six days?
The 'why' of religion has to be separated from the 'why' of philosophy, as:
*philosophy*
_noun_
the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, *reality, and existence,* especially when considered as an academic discipline.
*religion*
noun
a particular system of faith and worship.
*faith*
_noun_
strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction *rather than proof.*
The 'why' of religion and philosophy are likely to be at odds with each other. only a small percentage of philosophers are theistic.
@@briannewton3535in your example, the why question already intruded the how jurisdiction by mentioning the 6 days
@@ykn7018 I don't recall giving an 'example' which example are you referring to?
@@ykn7018 Okay then, when you talk of six days, is this the six days it took the biblical god to create the earth? If so, has religion asked why it took six days? I don't think science has asked how it took six days, as I think the timings are a few billion years adrift, so .I don't think either side has asked any questions of the six days of creation, be it how or why.
Philosophy asks "why", religion tells you "why".
I'm a religious person who believes in both god and science . Both go hand in hand. Everything is created by god, and science explains to me how it works. And therefore my believe in god increases knowing how magnificent everything is created.
I don't see where the conflict is coming from !?
You can’t be of religious faith and use scientific data to further increase your faith . Defeats the whole purpose of faith . Science and religion are separate
The mind is like a parachute, it works best when opened. I love science and I am a Christian.
@@vopd4459 I would say, the Bible! Is. 40:22. God sitteth above the circle of the earth. (That was 2,700 yrs ago).
Man is not a creator, but an inventor. He can only use what exist in our world to make, modify or change a substance. The Bible has proven itself many time on the ancient civilization it has spoken about. Some have been discovered and in the future many more will be discovered to prove the Bible was right.
@@SNORKYMEDIA I dont know what you mean. Bats are mammals, Birds are Aves. And rabbits dont chew cud.
Being too open-minded will make a person vulnerable to bad ideas and poor reasoning. It’s ok to be a little open minded as long as you’re thinking critically and rationally.
@@knightingalesaid : Your bible says that about bats are birds and rabbits chew the cud.
@@anonymousjohnson976 No! My Bible doesn't say that. I looked it up. You give me book chapter and verse where it says that.
I feel like people need answers to feel security. People want to have THE answer to things. That's why I think a lot of scientists exploring religion reject it because there's so much room for interpretation. On the other hand, a lot of religious folks think their religion is THE correct one and reject others. For me, I have a middle ground. A scientific fact is something I literally can't deny but a religious belief is something I literally can't disprove so I try to be an ally to both side. Play devil's advocate (pun intended)
@Kenneth Schrank if they cannot prove their claims they can’t accept it as a reality. That’s why it’s called the Big Bang theory and the string theory. No scientist will ever say they are 100% facts unless there are tests don’t to prove so or evidence can be collected to prove it. Also you can definitely prove your claims in science it just depends what it is, you can easily defend your claim on evolution or atoms but you can’t prove your claims on the bug bang for example. I also wouldn’t say modern science is identical to Christianity either as one is based on the observable reality and can be proven through experiments and the other one is based solely on your belief in something
@Kenneth Schrank science is based on a a theory and observations, tests are carried out to try and understand and prove, if it is successful then an outcome will occur and will be provable
@Kenneth Schrank you can’t really say that science indoctrinated people because the people who follow it can do the tests themselves and see that what was said can actually be proven, with religion you have to just believe what people say even though it isn’t based on any empirical data and purely on faith due to a lack of knowledge. Although some scientists will say they are intellectually superior, most will admit that we haven’t even scratched the surface of science that can actually prove the existence of humanity, life in general or the universe science can admit it doesn’t have all the answers but religion will always say that hod can do anything hence then admitting that they know god did it. Most people and countries around the world are still religious and science is actually condemned by a lot it is in no way a state religion at all the teachings of science are taught in school because it’s important for students to know how their body works, basic physics basic chemistry etc it’s not a religion at all as a religion requires faith into a figure due to a lack of human understanding. Religion is defined as “the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.” How does this correlate to science in any way. You can compare how they are Carrie spot but that doesn’t show anything and most of what you have said is just based on what you think it is anyway not what it actually is. There’s no hierarchy in science just some people who know more than others but there’s nothing like bishops or a figurehead like the pope
@Kenneth Schrank first of all global warming isn’t the correct phrase to Sue it’s climate change they are different. Second of all it certainly is a thing because we can track the level of co2 in the air and compare it to past times and see the spike is much faster now than before due to human contribution. Thirdly you’re taking one tiny portion of the whole of science to say something that is based purely on your understanding? Do you know how ridiculous that is! How do the books of Christian’s and Jews happen to be correct when they contain such stories as Noah’s ark. Also the genocidal policies of religious are mainly Carrie sour by other religious groups apart from Muslims in China. Modern science is in no way genocidal how many genocides have been based on hating religions in the past 50 years? The majority of the world is religious yet you think the majority is being persecuted by the minority. If anything atheists are ridiculed and persecuted more on a global stage apart from a few countries. Most genocidal and cruel figures in history have been religious or have been carried out due to religion as religion causes mass conflict based on a belief system. If no one was religious and everyone contributed to learning more about he history and nature of humans and the universe, we would grow much more as a species and wouldn’t fight over something based on our beliefs with no actual proof. How do scientists 100% of the time when you can do the tests and find the same fact same results but religion is just completely correct because the bible or any other holy book says so. To believe that a holy book of scripts had more credibility than the gained knowledge of the worlds best intellectuals making observations and gaining results based on pure facts is just incredibly ridiculous. How am I religious fanatic when I have already shown that science is nothing like religion and also my points haven’t been fanatical in manner either.
well, the truth is in the old day they don't call it science. In fact, they called it witchcraft, herablist, and alchemist. ironic isn't it. lol
Once heard a "proud atheist" say "fasting is unscientific..." and the dude was really mad about it. 😅.
I'm happy with different views...
Some times you learn - some times you LOL.
Dr. Michio Kaku---When responding to a question about the meaning of life and God, Kaku surprised his interviewer when he revealed that most top physicists do believe in God because of how the universe is designed. Ours is a universe of order, beauty, elegance, and simplicity. He explained the universe didn’t have to be this way.
Great channel, glad RUclips dropped one of your Neil DeG. Tyson videos in my queue. That said, I would like to see a bit more in the description on when and where the event filmed occurred. Thanks again.
I want to hear the rest of the lecture.
{ Just as God first brought you into being, you will be brought to life again.
Some are guided, while others are destined to stray. They have taken devils as their masters instead of God, thinking they are rightly guided.}
2:48 (ish)
A drop of 90% to 60% is a 1/3 drop (a third of 90% is 30%)
A drop from 60% to 40% is also a 1/3 drop (a third of 60% is 40%).
So according to these numbers, becoming highly educated from general populous and becoming a scientist from highly educated have the same effect. Each group's proportion of religious people has 2/3 times the proportion of the prior group. So the effect is identical as opposed to being educated having a greater effect.
Title should’ve been what percent of scientists believe in God. Did not hear the answer to if science and religion can coexist, although Neil seemed against Christianity.
@ابو ليث الخطيب fuck you for linking that pointless thing
Yes because religion isn’t real!Just like the Easter bunny Santa Claus the tooth fairy little red riding hood Humpty Dumpty people all know the stories but it doesn’t mean they exist!
@@troybradley2575 I agree people use religion to cope with death and there existence. Because if they figured out that there really is no one who is controlling everything but that it just exists. It would blow there mind and some people just can believe that so religion was made.
@@itshappyhyrda3970I know , it’s sad and crazy
@@troybradley2575 If religion isn't real then all those temples, churches, mosques are not really houses of worship and the worshippers are faking it???
I'll ad to that ........Albert Whitehead who hit me hard in my young and old age stated "The simple minded use of the notions of right and wrong are one of the chief obstacles to the progress of understanding" This simple sentence should be in our School system and it is sad that it is not.
I believe the two can coexist because one is about faith, the other is based on theories but both share the idea of finding proper understanding of the world and how those theories or faith relate to the world around them.
they can't.
@@jimgrazis3606 nope.
its kinda saying the same thing as "they can coexist because one is based on reality and the other on fantasy" one is trying to understand the world by making discoveries. the other is asserting to already know all the answers while ignoring data.
But do you understand the CORRECT meaning of theory? In day-to-day speech, the incorrect context of "theory", actually "hunch", is fine.
Sometimes you hear about homicide detectives, "working on a theory that the husband offed a female victim" or a "theory that a disgruntled employee offed a male victim", but the cops actually mean "hunch"; it's what we mean when we say "theory" out of scientific circles.
WITHIN scientific circles it actually means "FACTS as we can best prove by repetition, peer-review and all available evidence to date". Back to the police analogy: A police detective's HUNCH becomes the Prosecuting Attorney's THEORY which a DA seeks to prove beyond Reasonable Doubt.
I teach Music Theory and majored in Music Theory & Composition. I don't have a hunch that C is the Minor 3rd of A. I'm not almost convinced that C# is the Major 3rd of A...C and C# ARE the minor and major 3rds of A respectively.
Humans, Chimpanzees, Bonobos, Gorillas and Orangutans share between 97-99% of the same DNA. It's not a hunch; we DO share a common ancestor with Chimpanzees, Bonobos, Gorillas and Orangutans. Full-stop, no debate.
We DO NOT come from a man who came from out of the dirt and a woman who cam from his rib. Full-stop, no debate.
Religion: "You were healed by your faith"
Science: "You were healed via Placebo Effect"
Go check Dr. Joe Dispenza. He's explaining about healing techniques with some scientific explanation and some of the testimonies of the people that were healed had a similar story from the Bible.
They did a study and they asked people if religion was proven wrong 100% if they would still believe and a large majority said yes
[Citation needed]
@@BlackSailPass_GuitarCovers believing without proof is dangerous
@@houstonpromotion Who did the study?
does anyone know where the full video of this can be found?
Yeah Neil rarely publically compared religion and science.. I also searched for that.
4:47
“Philosophers invented atheism” what a strange claim.
Philosophers revealed atheism perhaps, but they certainly did not invent it.
Saying that is like saying that Isaac Newton invented gravity… not quite. Gravity was always there, Sir Isaac simply discovered and labeled it.
He means this if course let's not squabble over words.
@@sorakanzoku1748 funny, he's a scientist who prides himself on the accuracy of his words so as not to be misinterpreted and here you come along correcting his misinformation of what he means. Maybe you should be holding this lecture.
@@rcbreakdown3066 I could. And I'd probably make more logical points. Alas he is not a achar but a lowly scientist so holding him to perfect word usage in an interview isn't a recommendation
No one invented Atheism because Atheism is nothing.
@@neutrinoexpert825
Atheism is the non belief of a nothing AKA your sky pixie.
As a student studying quantum physics, the more I study, the more I realize that I need to have more faith in random chance, than a God in which can surpass all human knowledge.
That is why you are not seeing the big picture. You are studying the very thing that God created and not me,you, humans or science created it. Science is a series of human observations and discoveries of nature, and this will continue until the end of days. So even if you "discover" something one day it doesn't mean that you now created anything out of thin air. In other words, Scientists are merely observers of nature and uses the rules of nature to discover new ways to our advantage. This in return doesn't mean that we can now call ourselves creators or in some cases equal to God.
A god that creates people wrong and sends them to hell for it?
@Sam-hz1xb You just stated a straw man fallacy. But most of it is due to your ignorance of what the Bible and what God actually means.
@@JaydenTMBTE why should a god rely on a book that was written thousands of years ago when it can just show itself? Surely people would be more motivated to live a Christian life if there was proof. Kind of like how my parents were there every day to raise me and didn’t leave me a book to connect to them yk?
@@Sam-hz1xb Why should we rely on random chance? Historically we have found archaeological evidence relating to the flood in the bible, we have found FISH bones on mountains. The universe is too complicated for random chance. The fact that you don’t want to acknowledge a superior being reflects humanity’s heart of not wanting to acknowledge a being greater then themselves even with all the prophesy’s fulfilled. If you actually took your time and caught up with biblical knowledge you would know why
First, religions need to find a way to coexist with each other. Getting rid of the doctrine that says their god is the only true one, that all the other ones are false, would be a good start.
I'm a religious person who firmly believes in science (no, it's not an oxymoron, it can happen). The relationship between spirituality and science has become so at war, it's depressing.
People think I'm less intelligent or educated because I'm religious... but I still firmly accept the theory of the big bang, evolution, am a big fan of physics, am fascinated by in interested in mathematics, black holes, quantum mechanics, etc. If I'm not being attacked by atheists for being religious, then I'm being attacked by religious people for accepting the facts and most probable theories in science. It's pretty painful and exasperating. I believe in the observable and the unobservable.
Imagine how it feels, as a religious person, reading an article about how a study showed that religious people have lower IQ's.
I became religious at age 30 and went to one of the top 100 universities in the US. I read the bible and am still pro-choice, support gay marriage, and firmly believe in the importance of separation of church and state. My friends are atheist, agnostic, Hindu, Jewish, and a few I have no idea and it doesn't matter. It's humiliating to say I'm a Christian to literally anyone. It's humiliating to tell my Christian friends that gay marriage is just as important and valid as a non-gay marriage. (By the way, a lot of self-proclaimed Christians also believe in evolution.)
It feels incredibly alone in my position. So, I'll keep watching science videos, learning about how the world functions... and I'm going to keep praying and reading scripture because it feels healing and doesn't hurt anyone. And I'll keep voting in ways I BELIEVE causes the most good. Public schools should teach science and not belittle students of any belief.
I think it's okay for any one's beliefs to change at any time in any direction. There's a difference in having your own belief and imposing what you believe on other people. Everyone has judgements about other people. It's what we do and say based on those judgments that I think matter most. Maybe I'm wrong here. But, I'm okay with being wrong -- with new information, I'll readjust my model. Right now, my model of the world hopes there's something bigger than all of us that cares.
I don't thump the bible, tell people where they're going to go after their pulse stops, tell people how to live, or what to think. I'm just trying to get through the day. And, hoping that someone inscrutable and wise has a reason for my suffering MORE BEARABLE. If what I believe in is wrong, but I never hurt anyone with my faith, and I still get dumped on JUST FOR BELIEVING then I guess that's my, um... cross to bear?
@@kevinmathew2785 thanks for the comment, but I think you made some broad sweeping assumptions about what I believe in. I believe in allegory and am not a fundamentalist. I'm not alone in that. There is a concept of spiritual truth... Like taking the moral of the story. Parables, for instance. People love lumping religious groups together. It's humorous when I've had people tell me what I believe in. It also stifles real dialogue because of pigeon-holing. I've found some atheists to be just as staunch, rigid, and zealous as many Bible thumpers. Everyone just wants to be right and argue with their fingers in their ears.
Even though I dont agree with everything because Im religious, I still respect people of questioning the bible because of lack of evidence, because there are so little backing up. But I see science as theories that makes sense, that will go against biblical truth, but those are theories shaping our reality. And lack of archaeologistic findings disproves it even more. But I cant deny the spiritual events happening to me, similar to the stuff happening in the bible. Just because people are religious, it does not make one dumb, and just because someone holds the title of being a scientist, it doesnt make them smarter than the rest of the public. Scientists have a better understanding of how the world seems to me working, but those are just theories, and it is inconsistent in a way. Science progresses everyday, religion stay still. it does not have to be science vs religion. I would rather have Humans vs Truth
Ur username is dont be mean LOL
So you are a Christian Do you believe that Christianity tells you the truth? If not, which parts of Christianity do you not believe to be true. if you accept true bits and false bits, how did you figure which bits are true, and which bits are false?
@@oskarrafoss5857 Re: "Just because people are religious, it does not make one dumb,..." No it does not make you dumb, though it usually means that you are okay in believing things without having a good reason for why you believe them.
You say of science "but those are just theories, and it is inconsistent in a way,..." Yes they are theories, not 'just theories' Scientific theories are well demonstrated facts that are currently proven not to be false. Please explain how science done by scientists is 'inconsistent'?
I do not understand how some atheists look at this and go "LMAO nEIl jUst prOvEd rElIgIOn wrOng tAkE thAt thEIsts!1!" when literally all he did is just say that being religious or non-religious does not make you wiser nor more intellegent.
All Neil said is that whenever you are religious or not, never think you know more than you actually do, do not go thinking that religious people are delusional, and that delusional people are those that deny scientifically proven knowledge that we have gained over the years.
Religion transforms an individual
1. You go from condemning evil like Hitler and his Nazis dumping ALL Jews into gas chambers - didn't matter who the Jew was - good, honest, young or old, children, babies, pregnant women - ALL callously dumped into gas chambers
TO
Becoming willing Nazis dumping ALL unbelievers into gas chambers in hell - doesn't matter who the unbeliever was - friend, neighbor, your kids teacher, the doctor who saved your life, children, babies, pregnant women - ready and willing to dump them all into gas chambers in hell
2. You go from mocking leeches/freeloaders/prostitutes/gigolos as vermin, unfit for human life because they don't make a honest living
TO
Dreaming of shamelessly sponging off a Sugar Daddy in the sky for eternity
3. You go from being proud of your achievements, hard work and sacrifice, that everything you own was EARNED, that no one GAVE you anything
TO
Down on your knees begging and groveling, ready to crawl into heaven on your belly
@@ramaraksha01 Proving my point, I see.
By that insane logic, being an atheist turns you into a hateful being bent on destroying religious people.
@@razi_man Do you see me becoming a Nazi and condemning you to gas chambers in hell?
No sir, I can never get that low
I am asking how you people can be that callous?
All this religion is doing is exploiting you - telling you what you want to hear - that is there is a nice life after death
Why is that not enough?
Why must everyone who don't share your beliefs must suffer terribly?
Quite obvious, you have zero evidence, it is all based on greed for the easy lazy life, you are trying to live in a children's fairy tale and afraid that people are laughing at you and so the threats
@@ramaraksha01 Do you see conservatism as a religious cult?
Your next answer will either prove you have no idea what you are saying, or you are somewhat consistent.
@@razi_man I am Hindu, we don't label people that way - there is good and bad in every person or idea
Conservatives talk of pulling one's weight, not taking handouts and yet that is exactly what they will be doing in Heaven - Heaven is a handout
You don't have to be a conservative to talk of making a honest living, being proud of saying everything that I ever owned, was hard-EARNED, no one ever GAVE me anything
And yet once religion brainwashes these people they are willing to get down on their knees, grovel and crawl into heaven on their belly
Where they think they will get to live as shameless dependents, gigolos/leeches/freeloaders sponging off God for eternity
Makes no sense to me
How can I get the full video
Richard Feynman did have an answer that scientists do not allow to be questioned. Richard Feynman was a theoretical physicist who won the Albert Einstein award in 1954. Here is the question: If there is a clock in a flying airplane that is slower than a clock on the ground, will the pilot of the airplane get the same speed for the airplane as an observer on the ground if each uses his local clock to time the flight of the airplane? I discovered this question when I was in high school, and our physics teacher was explaining Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity to the class. It seemed obvious to me that if the clock in the airplane was slower, then the pilot of the airplane would get a faster speed for the airplane than an observer on the ground. But then I read Einstein's book on the subject and learned that the equations that Einstein used and all scientists since Einstein have used to describe relativity show that the pilot of the airplane and the observer on the ground would get the same speed for the airplane. So I think we need to talk about reality. Reality shows us that no matter how many scientists tell us that both observers get the same speed for the airplane, if the clock in the airplane is slower, the pilot of the airplane will get a faster speed for the airplane. That is just the way it is. I would have more respect for science if someone could show me a scientist who does not believe that the pilot of the airplane and the observer on the ground get the same speed for the airplane.
Thats nice that he made that distinction, because there are educated people (like me), who take science seriously, and do not make claims that flatly contradict science. and yet I do make hypotheses based on theology, then test them against what we know scientifically, or work in the other direction, take scientific claims and see what theological adjustments I need to make based on them.
Yes, unfortunately the subset of hyper literal Christians who preach flat Earth, anti-evolution, etc, are also the LOUDEST Christians. So people assume that science and the Bible are at odds. Many Christian theologians before the scientific revolution had problems with taking Genesis literally. It’s also a problem for other reasons. As if it took thousands of years for people to realize that Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 were at (literal) odds with each other.
@@joebuck4496 question Nasa
@@RUclipsTookMyNickname.WhyNot flat earth makes more sense than the shit you still believe in
@@RUclipsTookMyNickname.WhyNot I don't give a shit about society. Everyone is so generic. It's like all of you are following whatever is popular. I'm the kind of person that doesn't care about popularity. If something is fun it's fun. I'm upset that the good stuff is blocked by the popular good and bad stuff.
Why should I care about a society that promotes vanity? Ameica is nothing but a place to get manipulated in. Screw the flag and its occult symbols.
@@joebuck4496 the Bible does not conflict with science . The scriptures hold historical accounts of the past and origins of man. All that it creates can be trusted.
7% is surprisingly high for people who claim to be scientists. Education, logic and reason would normally apply.
Well, I know few, but it's a completely different phenomenon. They basically know that Bible is bullshit, they are certain that classical Hebrew biblical god makes no sense and is fucked up, but they seek mysticity and sometimes need to allow supernatural to feel better, and because they were raised in christian families, they call themselves Christians.. but they are most certainly not
Yes, as far as electrostatic force keeps producing a rational magnetism as a constant and consistent binding force?
Because if we deny the creator, we unconsiously deny the persistent and determined laws of nature as a science. And if we deny the science, we consciously deny its the omnipresent creator.
When consciousness and unconsciousness interact with stubbornness, short-circuiting happens.
For instance, if there was an unbelievable cold in the room and I turned on heater. What I did applied another natural law through a heating device on a cold force. In the same way, different laws of nature keep interacting each other to support/live the cycle of nature.
Just Reality
A ten year old can understand the facts and truth If they have not been lied to and deceived by adults.
Can anybody tell me where and when this was filmed?? Pls I need help citing this!
lectern says Melbourne (Australia), some slides say 2011
Tyson states 2011 during this presentation
It was after the big bang
@@freedomworks3976 ....the what?
@@freedomworks3976 I see what you did there. (Evidently s.o. else didn't.)
There’s a problem I see in the methodology used in the study which Neil pointed to.
In the study, people were asked if they believe in a god that listen to their prayers and based on their answer they were defined as atheists or believers!
The problem with this method is that it neglects the fact that so many people (mostly the highly educated ones I might add) do not believe in a god that listen to their prayers (aka, a “personal god”), instead they believe in a god that is harmonious with the universe and does not interrupt in the issues of the universe (aka, a “Spinoza god”).
This little detail in here might significantly change the percentage of people identified as “religious”.
Deists of the Spinoza type that believe in a First Cause deity are in a way just using the Deity as a place holder for what we do not yet understand. This god of the gaps occupies an ever dismissing spot.
...if a person is sick, the person search for a medical doctor ...if a person has to repair a building, the person search for a constructor ...if needs help to protect a property, searches for devices and people to do that ...if at war, then for tech to fight, if for food, then the person enters in the domain of work, creation, researches, invention and ownership, never in Prayers to implore for all the above. In religion vs. Science, the first is ignorance toward self-destruction, the second is survival to be.
An exceptional scientist that I quote a lot in my books. Real passion, sincerely processed knowledge, professional intelligence of the highest quality.!!! These are the scientists that we need to talk to the young minds and shape them for the molding the Super Artificial Intelligence in the best human way.
Thanks a lot for enlighteni8ng us in the most deep and insightful science-religion -unity way that leads us to a new, science-literacy direction. .
Dr. Rimaletta Ray
He's a liar and you're so bad you can't even detect it. He runs from science and you are in favor of that too.
The 1LofT states that energy can't be created or destroyed, it can't happen naturally. One aspect of the 2LoT shows that the universe is winding down, usable energy is becoming less usable. It is clear creation had to be done supernaturally yet it is still denied because people are just too proud to accept that, among other things.
@@2fast2block ''Usable'' energy is a human concept, because we consider some forms of energy useful to us (for example, heat) and others not useful (for example, radiation). In the natural world, there is no ''usable'' and ''less usable'' energy. Energy just turns into other forms, which naturally happens ALL the time. Nothing supernatural, nothing requiring creation. You just misunderstand the LofT, or someone told you this ''argument'' and you didn't care to research how valid it is.
Neil is an impostor. A fraud.
@@martbro135 you just showed how clueless you are. Go give your lecture to other clueless beings that hate science like you.
The RC religion is completely corrupt. In case you did not notice, it owns its own bank. Find a righteous religion and it is directly in line with science................Falun Dafa...........The word conscience is the prefix con (with) and the word science.
This was entertaining though. I enjoy watching Neil. He's well spoken. I hope his character as an individual is as modest and open minded as he appears to be in his lectures.
I hate watching this faker. He is ill spoken. He is a closed minded and egotistic idiot. There fixed it for you.
@@buckyoung4578 Close minded? How?
Idiot? Why?
Egotistic? Okay maybe a little, but I suppose we can tolerate that much. Is he wrong, though? He may sound a little condescending and proud, but does that discredit him in any way? I don't see his presentations as dishonest, as they are backed up by facts.
@@buckyoung4578 - Let me guess: you rabidly follow a fake religion and a failed loser politician...
@@buckyoung4578 Depression is common
@@coachhannah2403 I can tell when people aren't vaxed and their significant other is gravitationally disadvantaged !
Be free to think, question and explore.
Well said
Jerry Coyne makes the best argument on RUclips of Why Science and Religion Shouldn’t Cohabit.
Hearing only 7% of elite scientists believe in objective morality and don’t reject God makes me less trusting of them and our leaders in general.
To many scientific minds put aside there own feelings for science which can be useful if not taken to seriously. To not lose our own humanity within science is the greatest task of our times.
@Jit 8 ?
@@danpiehler7160
You have a typo in your comment right at the beginning. It looks like he was being alecky about that.
They are not weak
How do scientists lose their humanity?
@@SimonWoodburyForget by destroying someones hope.
This video and the entire comment section makes me think of a meme, I saw some years back:
"Tell someone, that a man exists in the sky and that he is judging all of our actions and has the ability to send us to an afterlife of either eternal bliss or eternal damnation... and you'll believe it without questioning it.
Hang a sign on a bench saying "Wet Paint" and immediately you feel compelled to touch the bench to verify that claim. "
Note: I'm paraphrasing, so the quote is not exact.
Believe without questioning lol
That’s a phrase atheist play with to ridicule ALL religions Not knowing that Allah says in the Quran that u have to question things
But hold up!
There’s blind belief in the method of science Which is accepting the belief that u are conscious to begin with
Which u have to accept with no observable evidence
@@Abdallah_79916 I'd like to see you provide the texts in the Quran, that asks of Allah's followers to question things, perhaps even Allah himself.
@@pHD77
Its funny 😄 how u disregarded my point about blind belief in the scientific method
But ANYHOW
Quran 29 verse 20
Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
Quran96 verse3-7
3. Read: And your Lord is the Most Generous.
4. He Who taught by the pen.
5. Taught man what he never knew.
6. No! [But] indeed, man transgresses
7.Because he sees himself self-sufficient
Quran21 verse30
Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
Quran29 verse43
And (as for) these examples, We set them forth for men, and none understand them but the learned.
Many more
From authentic Hadith (sayin of prophet Mohammad pbuh)
1. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "He who goes forth in search of knowledge is considered as struggling in the Cause of Allah (jihad) until he returns."
2. Anas ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Seeking knowledge is an obligation upon every Muslim; and one who imparts knowledge to one undeserving is like him who puts jewels, pearls, and gold around the necks of swine.”
3.The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "The world, with all that it contains, is accursed except for the remembrance of Allah that which pleases Allah; and the religious scholars and seekers of knowledge."
Have u heard of the Islamic golden age??
One of the many scholars works
الخوارزمي was algorithms which we use for our phones today
@@Abdallah_79916 Do you agree with the Quran about Jesus?
@@TshaajThomas
Yes of course I am a Muslim
And he is a prophet like all the prophets sent before with the same message
Ppl corrupted to message of the messengers and that’s why God from his mercy send another messenger
I love hearing someone’s world view, aka belief, being talked about as though it was science.
The main reason for the conflict between "science" and "Christianity" is a mutual disregard for logic. Spokesmen for both groups - and I fully recognize those are not all of either faction - cannot understand one fact does not negate another in many cases.
The fact that Fargo, North Dakota is north of Colorado does indeed conflict with the claim Denver, Colorado is the closest city to Canada.
The fact that one ton is heavier than the typical tea cup does not conflict with the observation of gravity.
The concept that God is Creator of all things does not rule out the existence of evolution or the idea of plate tectonics.
The concept that plants grow from seeds (or spores or other) does not eliminate the existence of God.
The 'objectors' to both sides are driven primarily by ego to show they are right, and therefore all others are wrong. Science deals with what can be measured, analyzed and 'fiddled with'. Christianity deals primarily with the relationship of man to God, who wants to restore humanity to a knowledge and connection with Him.
Those two concepts does not require conflict.
Religion is ridiculous. Who's to say who's right. So many religions right now, which one is right?!?! And what about the dead religions?!? All those people are burning in hell for eternity because they got it wrong? This absolutely insane.
Science pretty conclusively shows none of the religions are right, not a one.
As long as religion doesn't try to disprove science or evolution, I am fine with it
Religion tries too
@@blacklyfe5543 No, it doesn't. Religious people sometimes do, especially in the US.
@@cbxk1xg As is the same with all "imagined orders".
Oh religion isn't trying to disprove science. Okay for example Jesus I don't know he brought countless fish for people to eat or he brought wine for people to drink. OK someone is a scientist and a Christian. So he says I believe in religion he did it and also that's scientifically impossible. HOW ARE THESE TWO CONNECTED I NEVER FUCKING UNDERSTOOD. I am a physicist myself. Like how can u be religious and be a scientist and not u derstand that this is a terribly poor trick for some people to make money based on exploiting people a weaknesses as 100.000 scams out there. Like it blows my mind how dumb people are. I like discussing the matter of "god" and in which context it must be discussed but religion ain't that way for sure.
@@spastosNM There's a "level" to it, I guess. It's pretty hard to be very religious and be scientific. You can't believe Mohammed went into the sky on a winged horse and be much of a scientist. But something like believing in God isn't that farfetched. Religion isn't "scientifically impossible". It's an imagined order, like a company, like a football club or volleyball rules... I think you mean to mention the things religions often claim.
In that case, you can't be a Communist and a scientist. Communism is no more a religion than Buddhism. Both Communism and every religion makes unquestionable claims about humanity. The beliefs of Communism are unprovable by any science, yet if you're a Communist you need to believe these. Who gives the supreme commandments in Communism? Same with other ideologies. And don't forget how it has its martyrs and saints, too - those fundamentalists who died for the cause. And how about its endeavors to spread their gospel to the world, and convert people?.... Exactly. See how ridiculous what you said was? Believing in Allah won't make you suddenly a terrible scientist willing to have faith in or believing just anything.
For a better understanding on this topic; Trailhead de Chardin can provide
some very sound insights.
One is the pursuit of truth, while the other is based on nothing more than belief. And as Carl Sagan, one said, “belief is immune to logic.”
Religion Vs Science: Can The Two Coexist? If you take the "Vs" out of the equation, Coexist, YES. Religion and Science are based on two very different Paradigms and belief systems. Yes, there are aspects that either can or try to explain or justify seeingly about the other but in the end, each is its own reality separate and distinct to itself.
Well, as activities, they are very different, yes. An important difference is in epistemology, what is knowable. No scientist would grant that that religions advance knowledge.
As Matt Dillahunty once said, "If a man says that the Sun is his god, then I'd have to agree w/ him that his god is real. If he starts ascribing traits to the Sun that are false, that is where I take issue."
God is the Creator.
the sun is His creation
And he stole it from George Carlin, who used as a comedy bit long before Dillahunty, "...I worship the sun. Why? Unlike other imaginary deities, I can see the sun. I dunno, for me, it helps with the credibility. But, I don't pray to the sun. Know who I pray to? I pray to Joe Pesci, because Joe just seems like a guy that can get things done". No true scientist is an atheist, they are agnostic. Even Neil admits he is not an atheist, that he is agnostic. Why? Because you cannot prove a negative. You cannot prove something does not exist. You can only prove something exists. Until then, there is no proof either way. Making a decision based on a lack of proof is not the how the scientific method works. It works the exact opposite. You do not make a decision either way until you have proof to back it up. You can never truly prove something "isn't", only that something "is".
@@aaronharun1394H god is a man made concept man did not create the sun
God is the Creator.
The Creator created all things.
And there is only one Creator.
We are all creation.
We are created, as are everything that we see all around us including the sun, the moon, this earth etc.
creation do not create.
We do not create.
We make something out of what is already created
We cannot even create an atom. Even less than that. Even if every man throughout history assembled and tried.
We shouldnt worship creation.
We shoudnt worship the sun.
We should worship the creator of the sun.
We should worship our Creator.
Typical materialist point if view. Unfortunately materialism can not explain knowledge or truth
My thought on prayers is that the ‘god’ that listens to them is me, but it helps I think as it focuses/reminds myself re: things that matter to me and sort of is a good ritual for ending my day and sort of has a structure to work things out from the day that bothered me almost like talking to a therapist/third person and then automatically/reflexively due to empathy I suppose seeing it from another/their perspective as we do when we talk about things to other people, and in prayers’ case from some abstraction of an omniscient benevolent omnipotent being that ultimately is just yourself in many ways, that can be helpful because it sort of exercises the imagination and gives outside and ‘higher’ perspective on what should matter to you and how to proceed in a positive way rather than getting stuck in your own feedback loops of negativity or pettiness or some other maladaptive pattern.
Do let us know if even a SINGLE explanation for ANYTHING AT ALL has ever been SUPERNATURAL.
The "no one knows the day" from the bible is very clever. If someone says a date and it doesn't happen then they can quote the verse. If it does happens then its an I told you so. In the mean time its a maybe. They cant lose with that logic.
Here's the thing, nobody's supposed to be guessing...
It's uncertain... that happens with anything that's uncertain.
The "hypothesis testing" from the scientific method is very clever. If someone says a theory and it doesn't work, then they can say that's scientce. If it does happens then its an I told you so. In the mean time its a maybe. They cant lose with that logic.
I'm not saying one way or the other, but your argument is illogical.
@@shai5651 the line mrgees is referencing is worded so that it can never technically be wrong. the scientific method does not claim to be absolute, and is not, so I would say that his statement is more accurate.
however, i have to say that i hate his line "they cant lose with that logic". if theres one thing I cant stand, its this us vs them mentality that seems to be more and more prevalent.
Shock-News,
but if you agree with 'Religion and Science/Logic can easily co-exist' then youre falling for a Marketing-Ploy. A Marketing-Strategy - and a simple one at that.
Reality is, giant Parts of the Holy Texts of all Religions are debunked thoughoutly and shown to be absolute b.s by Science and just Observations in general.
The Flood and the Age of the Earth; objectively millions of years old no matter how some reject this fact; are just 2 of 2 trillion examples. But the very natural question/reaction coming-up (the question why so much in the holy texts is just wrong) has to be stopped from coming-up.
Unpleasant quesitons have to be supressed and that's what we're seeing. I am sorry, i know you mean Well (you really do) when trying to 'c-xist' but no. This is just Marketing and Supression of questions that have to be asked.
A simple google search reveals that around 10-20% in some cases almost 30% of philosophers are theists so I have no idea where you got this from, but this has nothing to do with "can religion and science coexist" and yes they can religion talks about why science deals with the how
Religion doesn't actually explain anything at all. You're expressing some wishful thinking but I can't think of a single "why" question that religion answers in 2022.
@@MrTheclevercat why do things have an intrinsic will to live, why are people here, is there a purpose to all of this? Why are there so many languages? Why do bad things happen to good people
You can disregard the answers, but you can't disregard that there are answers
@@livingtoaster1358 why presupposes an agent with intent. The correct answer is HOW
@@livingtoaster1358 you are talking very biblical. Do you really believe thats how languages were created?
@@topsunnn not necessarily, it can be part of it, it's also be of environmental circumstances
I'm in the 'non overlapping' camp. The two examine different matters.
Agreed.
I know there is no god but some kind of universal energy or cosmic energy.....and i belive in it...Thanks universe for creating all of us🙏🏼🙏🏼
I believe in proven science, the rest, requires a ton of faith to accept.
Hi there friend. what do you mean by proven science?
@@michaellie3333 stuff that we can see and observe
@@michaellie3333 hypothesis that can be demonstrated through experimantation
@@juliusemperor907 Hi thanks for your response. Can i clarify some of your statements.
1. "see and observe" as it means that stuffs that can interact with out 5 senses. Am i correct?
2. "Hypothesis through experimentation" Could you give some examples of this?
Thank youu 😊
Since that you May call proveen sience is not even capable of proveimg what happens in the singularity of a black Hole, so what do we do? Dont belive in sience then? Because if you can belive in something that can not be proved then how can you not belive in god...
I was for a long time a believer in both, but eventually faced the fact that they are indeed mutually exclusive. It is possible, as we often see, to practice religion in a way as to refuse to confront the contradictions. In the end, when one deeply examines their faith against knowledge and reason, and honestly recognizes our strong desire for a God and for enter all life, one comes to see religion as wholly man-made. Regardless of any benefit of faith, if it’s not true then it is not worth having.
I believe the Good Doctor is speaking from an Agnostic position of HAVING NEVER believed. HAVING ONCE believed is an entirely different "breed of cat". The predominate religions teach you that "Gay is a sin". Science shows it exists across 425 species 424 of which have no concept of sin...but it's not as sexy to watch them eat each other, BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
Exactly!
That ending is poetry
☝🏽😂 dude this is complex I appreciate you kept your train of thoughts , feelings, & magnify this thing 😂 THANKS AGAIN 💖
Civilization will not attain to its perfection until the last stone from the last church falls on the last priest.
Well said.
there would be no civilization without religion. you are a bigot.
@@sylviamontaez3889
Demonstrably you are wrong.
What school failed you?
Time is based on our perspective, experience, or perception. If something has an ♾️ "lifespan" would it perceive time at all or would everything be happening at once? Books aside everything is energy and mass perhaps this everything is a collection of what we call god. Every society every gathering of humans has felt some sort of connection to this energy and in order to explain this they use religion or books to try to explain it, or maybe humans just have a fear of the unknown, but are always staring into it to understand it.
I don't think any atheists would agree with what you believe to be universal experiences.
I am ordained and licensed Minister.
I am not Christian. I believe Universe and God are one and the same. That we are all part of a greater living Whole.
I fully support scientific research at all levels. I believe there is other life out there in vastness of space somewhere.
I had just come from drawing a zebra for my son then straight to this video. Man, replicating a 2D zebra on a sheet of paper was difficult, never mind I was copying from a google image. I took my time to admire the distribution of its stripes, how they are wide on the back but thin out on smaller body parts like legs and the head, oh the pattern on the head is beautiful.
Anyway, to cut a long story short, I find it hard to believe that a human who can't conjure up even one grain of sand believes that all there is, as far as the eye can see, is a work of random chance. That all the intelligence, order, beauty and intricacy displayed in the universe is random chance. I have loved science all my days. I knew all the details of getting to the moon and back at age 9. Today I'm an engineer and above all I am a Christian. I believe in the beginning GOD...
PS: Humans will do better if they'd pay more attention as to why we are here before trying to figure out the universe. Pay more attention on WHO IS than WHAT IS. If indeed you reckon that all there is didn't exist by chance, then launch on a quest for God. He will find you before you find him.
There are so many religions and gods. Which one is true....each will show you why they are the true religion...it says so right there in their special book.
Only one God showed true love, only through one God there are countless healings done in His name, only one true, just God wants a relationship with His people, instead of mindless rituals or ”seat warmers” at church. Jesus has resurrected, all the rest are dead ex: Mohammed. Jesus didn't come to start a religion, but to give us a way to God, through His resurrection. I know there are many misconceptions and false ideas twisted towards Christianity, it's very saddening; this is the human flaw. I will gladly explain any of my points and answer any questions. The point is, don't listen to what people tell you, but read for yourself, ask is this really what God said-in this book there are the answers to life's every problem. I encourage everyone to read it with an open mind and humility. There are many wonderful things about God and the Bible, this is just a shortened point.
@Paul Drake I agree, therefore I think not a single one of them is true, a book is not evidence
And they were all brought up to worship the "right" god, thats luck
There are so many drinks in the world, which of them is the best? People claim different ones are the best, therefore there cannot be a best drink!
@@user-ow2dv4ul8w god isnt real. There is so much proof for the big bang.
Ese 7% no me impresionó mucho (ya lo intuía desde hace tiempo); lo que realmente encontré interesante fue la gran animosidad contenida en la mayoría de respuestas por este tema: casi nadie puede mantenerse indiferente hacia el mismo.
Bien dicho, estoy de acuerdo. Creo que una persona puede crear en los al mismo tiempo. Neil habla como soloo hay una religión y sistema de creencias.. para mí, si hay un Dios, no es una persona. Más como una fuerza, como el big bang.. Lo siento, Español no es mi primera lengua.
Prácticamente todas las religiones se basan en que hay uno o varios dioses que le dan propósito a todo lo que exista, si ahora decimos más bien que dios no es más que el conjunto de leyes que rigen el universo, esta definición implica propósito? Y si no, sigue siendo un dios o sólo casualidad?
Sí
Muchos podran negar la existencia de un Creador. Pero nadien podra cambiar tus experiencias con Dios
Hace ańos estaba destruido por malas decisiones destruido por la vida misma hasta que un dia el Dios de universo se revelo a mi vida y transformo mi vida ahora puedo escuchar su voz lo mas importante es que el conoce mi futuro y aveces me da pistas de lo que quiere hacer en mi vida Dios es bueno y el quiere ser tu megor amigo y tu megor padre como el lo es para conmigo hasta el dia de hoy 😊
Humanity will awaken to a great expansion in awareness as more key scientists understand, embody, and transmit "certain" (?) "swept under the carpet" higher ways of functioning. The collective expansion of scientists is the forerunner for our individual and collective expansion.
Awareness is known by awareness alone; is the sole irreducible axiom of reality. To put forth a syllable to the contrary is but to concede.
I disagree that one who believes in a god or prays to a god is religious. I am spiritual, I believe in a higher power but I do not follow a religion. Spiritualism unites where as religion divides
Im kind of the same, do you pray to this "higher power"? Im afraid my prayer is futile lmao
Being "spiritual" like spirituality and "spiritualism" is different. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiritualism
cringe take
Ouch. That was a sick burn. Really true though.
I can't believe how wonderfully he has done this
Cool name you got there
@@hamzaneitaddi7420 Did you know names are assigned by parents?
Are you muslim
@@hamzaneitaddi7420 yes
Are you atheist
Carl Sagan said it nicely in Contact:
The universe was made on purpose, the circle said. In whatever galaxy
you happen to find yourself, you take the circumference of a circle, divide it
by its diameter, measure closely enough, and uncover a miracle-another
circle, drawn kilometers downstream of the decimal point. There would be
richer messages farther in. It doesn’t matter what you look like, or what
you’re made of, or where you come from. As long as you live in this universe,
and have a modest talent for mathematics, sooner or later you’ll find it. It’s
already here. It’s inside everything. You don’t have to leave your planet to find
it. In the fabric of space and in the nature of matter, as in a great work of art,
there is, written small, the artist’s signature. Standing over humans, gods, and
demons, subsuming Caretakers and Tunnel builders, there is an intelligence
that antedates the universe.
The circle had closed.
She found what she had been searching for.
Read a great book a long time ago - "Magic, Science, and Religion" - and can't find anymore, but it did a fascinating job of delving into the coexistence of the three, even implying that they were all one and the same, with only wardrobe changes!
Bronislaw Malinowski. Your summary of his thesis is pretty loose. Magic he saw as a practical means to achieve cn
I think I recall coming across this book on Amazon very recently
I wrote a paper myself that included more than just Adam and Eve during creation. As a day for God is a thousand years for man. It was 6 days between Lucifer and Adam. In that time 6 thousand years, Earth had Mystical beings. Element controlling abilities in mankind. Gateways and Portals that span the Planet and are Natural by design. Sometimes I miss school because it was the only time I felt sharing information and knowledge was a good thing. I was removed from a few subject classes because of my theoretical mindset. But I had to learn. In the 5th grade I told my teacher in history class that the Conquistadores conquered the world and still own it. Conquerers don't give back what they take. That was my mindset. Still is lol.
Well unfortunately due to post-modernism people can only focus on the negatives of any one thing, and since everything has a negative side, fights aren’t about who has the better idea but who has the least negatives. It’s sad, really, because truly empathizing with others is long gone and it shows
"fights aren’t about who has the better idea but who has the least negatives"
Appeal to emotion argument? One side is correct because it hurts less your personal feelings?
Great apologist rhetoric for religion…well written but still bullshit!
Religion poisons everything.
Religion requires lack of critical thinking.
Not negative but factual statements.
@@nibsvkh how is this apologist? All it does is ask for people to expand their point of view to look at things with positives and negatives in mind.
For example, religion has poisoned the well and harmed many people, and for many instances used the lack of critical thinking to harm their believers, but is that INHERENT in religion? I say no, based on my own personal experience. Same thing with politics - is it inherently about blinding people to reality to get a cult-like fanbase to do your every whim like trump has? No, but it certainly happened in politics.
Things can change. We can affect change in things. But before we start fixing the negatives and boosting the positives, we need to know what those are. Only focusing on the negatives fails at that
bars
False. Equating religious belief and empathy is false. Easy to demonstrate. Centuries of hatred between Catholics and Protestants, between Christians and Muslims.
I love watching stuff like this even if I am of devout religious faith. Science is amazing, it has saved lives, and has made humans more inteligant over the years. Hell i study science
@@darthvader1793 Your name suits you well
It has saved lives by expanding our knowledge in medicine, farming, power creation, and lots more that's all I am telling you.
@@slender169101 Exactly, science is a double-edged sword. We can't make anything good without making anything bad.
@@darthvader1793 hey are u still a kid? haven't you realized yet this world is a cruel place? why do you wear clothes? to protect the body from germs right? so now imagine other countries has germs and the guns and nuclear bombs has the clothes which protect.
_Missed a few classes?_
@@darthvader1793 Science has given us medical advancements. 4 generations ago, my ancestors fought in the American Civil War, and when they were injured, they were treated with anaesthesia and sometimes proper hygiene; these were SCIENTIFIC advancements. How the fuck does people making guns in the US disprove that Science has saved lives?
Religion is not about god.
The purpose of religion is to connect people and give them a philosophy by which they can live.
Even if god doesnt exist,in some peoples minds,religion DOES benefit people in a lot of ways.
Neil is a fantastic communicator but I think he wants to desperately prove that he is the smartest and the funniest man in a room full of really smart people…..that’s the feeling I get when I watched a few of the videos where he was one among many speakers like Brian Greene, Lawrence Krauss, Dawkins etc….
Shock-News (I'm sorry),
but if you agree with 'Religion and Science/Logic can easily co-exist' then youre falling for a Marketing-Ploy. A Marketing-Strategy - and a simple one at that.
Reality is, giant Parts of the Holy Texts of all Religions are debunked thoughoutly and shown to be absolute b.s by Science and just Observations in general.
The Flood and the Age of the Earth; objectively millions of years old no matter how some reject this fact; are just 2 of 2 trillion examples. But the very natural question/reaction coming-up (the question why so much in the holy texts is just wrong) has to be stopped from coming-up.
Unpleasant quesitons have to be supressed and that's what we're seeing. I am sorry, i know you mean Well (you really do) when trying to 'c-xist' but no. This is just Marketing and Supression of questions that have to be asked.
I have ways believed the only problem in science and religion coexisting is when one side tries to disprove the other. As a Christian I firmly hold to my beliefs, and to me science reinforces my beliefs.
Science has kept humans alive. Religion has done absolutely nothing.
@@Highesttech1 and that's your opinion. I have had one on one conversations with people who have had their entire lives changed through Christ. Smirk at that if you want that's fine. I however get annoyed at scientists and science enthusiasts who spit at religion with their words, theories and actions. And yet I also get just as annoyed when those of religious belief reject scientific facts or just dismiss anything scientific out of ignorance. To me the Bible teaches me that God created what we see, science explains how it all works.
@@Highesttech1 only abrahamic culture don't have science , first ever discovery of gravity found in religious hyms (2000/1700bce old rigveda) ,first reference of round earth found in rigveda , first ever descovery of planets found in religious scripture of sumerian, rigvedic and Indo Europeans culture
@@Highesttech1 it was Hindu sage who calculated each of earth 4.35 billions around 3000 year ago ( modern science says 4.52 billion years) , rigveda also says earth rounds around the sun including all other planets
@@Highesttech1 yoga meditation ( scientific proven and it is one Wonder of science ) has Origin in religion ( of Hindu and then Jainism and buddism )
is anchovie breaded chicken legs are coated with fryer oil before the mushroom sauce is added to the sardine soup mix, will the cheesecake go sour after the lemons in the pudding mix go well with the refried frog legs in garlic butter milk cake topping with onions and garlic cloves..????
Have science and faith always been at odds?
Most of the great founders of modern science saw it as a way of understanding God’s creation. They saw what they learned about the natural world as revealing something about its creator.
One of my favorite quotes is from Johannes Kepler, who said, “I thank thee, Lord God, our creator that thou allowest me to see the beauty in thy work of creation.” That was a typical attitude. The founders of modern science saw it as a way to learn about God’s creation.
You’ve said that monotheism cleared the way for science. What do you mean by that?
First of all, the idea in ancient paganism was that the world itself was either divine or permeated with occult or spiritual forces. Judaism and Christianity said no, there’s something beyond Nature.
Since God is completely distinct from the world he’s created, the world was kind of stripped of these gods and supernatural beings and therefore became a natural world. So the world was thus seen as a work of engineering.
Secondly, the Bible portrays God as a lawgiver, not only to human beings, but to the cosmos itself. In the book of Jeremiah, the Lord says, “When I have no covenant with day and night, and have given no laws to heaven and earth, then too will I reject the descendants of Jacob and of my servant David.”
Another concept is introduced in Genesis, that the world is good and we’re in charge of taking care of it… which means understanding how it works. The world of matter in some pagan religions was evil and you wanted to escape it.
What accounts for miracles? Things that seem to defy the laws of physics?
Miracles don’t contradict that we live in a universe with laws, because if God is the lawgiver, then he has the power to suspend the laws. There are supernatural realities that don’t necessarily violate the laws of Nature.
For example, Grace. God doesn’t have to violate the laws of Nature to give Grace to us. Nevertheless, miracles are not the fundamental reason for believing in God. Jesus didn’t perform miracles to convince his Jewish audience that God existed; they already believed in God.
The reason he performed miracles was to show God’s favor to his people. When he opens the eyes of the blind or cures people of disease, it’s God showing his love for his people. He’s not trying to convert them to belief. They already believed.
The primary way to see God is in this Universe he’s created. Which is a miracle in itself.
Some argue that unlikely things-like life-happen all the time because with enough random iterations and enough time, they’re bound to happen…
I would use this analogy. If you went to a library and you wanted to find a specific, but rather obscure recipe, and you picked a cookbook at random off the shelf, you’d be kind of surprised if it contained that particular recipe. A pretty tremendous coincidence.
Then a skeptic can come along and say maybe the book you picked has a trillion recipes in it, or all conceivable recipes. Then it wouldn’t be surprising to find that obscure recipe… but it would be even more surprising to find a book that had every conceivable recipe.
If we live in a Universe where practically every conceivable possibility is realized somewhere, that’s a very strange kind of Universe. Maybe even more surprising than the idea that we live in a Universe that’s fine tuned for life.
Is science ever capable of proving or disproving God?
Krushev, the head of the Soviet Union back in the sixties, when they sent up the first Cosmonauts, said “Look, they didn’t see any God out there.” Well, Christians never thought you could see God floating around in space, that’s a primitive idea.
God is not a part of the world where you can go up in a spaceship and shake hands with him. God is not in the Universe. We can only see God if he chooses to reveal himself in some way. In this world we all know him “in a glass darkly,” as St. Paul said. We see God’s reflection.
How do you share your views on faith and science with your five children?
All the stuff I write on science and religion, I’ve never made them read any of it. Some of my kids have read some of the things I’ve written, but of course I think I’ve raised them in the faith. I’ve sent them to religious schools, I make sure they go to church every Sunday and practice their faith.
I believe that much more important than any arguments you give them is the way you live your life and the example you set. When my kids were young we didn’t have the money to take nice trips to beautiful places, but I wish more people would show their families the beauty of Nature.
People are more open to religious ideas if they’re exposed to the magnificence of Nature. Maybe this is a problem today. We can’t see the stars because there’s too much light in the cities. A lot of us, we’re sitting in our rooms attached to the internet. We don’t go out to see the glories.
"Is there a god that listens to your prayers?" can't mean religious, it means theist. Lots of secular people, Universal Unitarian, believe in god and claim to be not religious.
It does not even mean theist because if you believe in a god you are a theist even if that god does not listen to your prayers. As for religious, you can even be religious without believing in a god and, just as you correctly point out, you can believe in a god that listens to your prayers and still not be religious,
Remember this is Neil. He doesn't understand theism/atheism very well. His idea of religion is essentially theism in a nutshell.
@@drmadjdsadjadi I think he means: "(do you belive) a god listens to your prayers?" Again it just shows how Neil isn't in his area of expertise. This is a typical kind of error. Wording things slighlty incorrectly can cause a lot of trouble. Praying for example isn't even a thing all theists believe can be done. Certain religions don't believe in praying at all.
I’m too busy indulging in my flesh!