Not true. It's not based on believing anything, it's based on observable evidence and undeniable logic. Perhaps you just don't understand it? You can't just deny something because YOU don't understand it.
God created everything complete , ready . When Jesus resurrected Lasario , Lasario had already been decomposing for 4 days and Jesus said Lasario to come out , Lasario come out immediately . The chemical process and biologically process in the body or Lasaro was made in the moment . God has powers that human beings are unaware of .
No, that never happened. The decay of the brain sets in only minutes after the bloodflow stops, and is irreversible on a biological level, on a chemical level and even at the level of quantum physics. Your god obviously has no control over quantum physics, because he needed no less than six busy days to create the Earth. With proper magic powers, he could have just snapped his godly fingers and make everything appear the way he wanted. And then, he spends more than a year on that entire flood nonsense, while he could just have made an entire new Earth in six days... Plot consistency is not really important to christian folks, is it?
@@gusolsthoorn1002 Could be your attempt to limit God in what He can or cannot do is unbelievable arrogance against God. Sounds like you know better than God? Amazing! God can use any process He wants inspite of your protests. Christ is Saviour and King. PTL
What was? His evolution research was purely scientific. At the time he had enough evidence to strongly suggest it. And now of course we have more than enough evidence to confirm it. Whatever Darwin might have thought morally is irrelevant to the science of evolution.
@jockyoung4491 Darwin had already rejected God and the Bible because he refused to accept that those that don't accept Jesus as Savior go to hell. He was looking for an explanation of the universe with out God.
@@crystalclearwindowcleaning3458 Whoever told you that was simply lying. It is slanderous, dishonest, and pointless. Smearing Darwin would not even dent the theory of biological evolution, which does not depend on anything Darwin said, some of which we know to be wrong. Darwin is of historical interest only. Believing lies about him will not make science go away. It would be laughable if it weren't so mean-spirited and pathetic.
@@Bearthalamass I was calling a comment a lie because I have read two biographies of Darwin and know that what they are saying is not only false, but they clearly never considered trying to verify it before parroting it around. Wouldn't you think that was dishonest if I did it?
No, scientists are not motivated to study science as a conspiracy against your faith. That is a ridiculous slander. We study science because we want to know how the world works. We would have NO incentive to get it wrong.
@@jockyoung4491 Read the comments I just sent. The fathers of modern science, Christian men, also studied science. They paved the way for the amazing science we have now. They were not evolutionists, or atheists. If there was no powerful motivation by some scientists to push evolution, against divine creation, the theory would have died a long time ago. You need to remember that scientists are just men. Most scientists work in fields that have nothing to do with evolution. But those that do know full well that if they do not tow the line in full support of evolutionary theory, they would not have a job very long. Certainly they would not be respect for their views if it did not align with orthodoxy. You have made it clear the disdain who have for those who do not bow the knee to evolution.
The accountability that is contingent on you making attributions to god instead of having evidence 🙄
13 дней назад+1
What struck to me in the discussion is that the science discourse is always imperative and impositive and wants you to pick a side. God instead of it calls us to seek and know the truth, piecefully.
“I was a young man with ‘Uninformed’ Ideas. People made a ‘RELIGION’ out of them,,,” ~ Charles Darwin ~~~ “Oh, If I could only ‘Undo’ what I have done.” ~ Charles Darwin (3 Weeks Before his Death) ~~~ :o ~~~ Charles Darwin 'REPENTED' !!! ~~~ :) ~~~ Have 'Y-O-U' ??? ~~~ :o ~~~ “Evolution is the Central and Radical LIE In the whole ‘Web of Falsehood’ that now governs our lives.” ~ C.S. Lewis ~~~ :o
@@gusolsthoorn1002 Exactly. Darwin never became an atheist, but he wanted nothing more to do with God for the same reason as many others: human suffering. It had nothing to do with his scientific research, which never threatened God.
@@jockyoung4491 If I lost a young child, I can appreciate why people would be angry with God, but I have also seen people who underwent incredible suffering who still loved God. As case in point, there was a family in our church that were meeting outside in their backyard with another family. For some reason there was an explosion that severely burned the mother and 12 year old daughter who go to our church. Unfortunately a young girl in the other family died from her injuries. The 12 year old girl was in intensive care for many months, undergoing skin grafts, some which didn't take and had to be redone. She got an infection in her lungs which almost killed her. She was a pretty girl but there will be permanent facial scars. When she was finally released from hospital, the first thing she wanted to do was to go to church. To see her in church was very touching. Given her permanent scars and the pain she endured, she could have hated God but she didn't. Rather she found comfort in God even in her suffering. This is one of the main messages that is found in Christianity, and which Jesus himself demonstrated. This girl is a great inspiration. Jesus is the ultimate example, because his suffering was not because of an accident but because he knowingly took incredible suffering upon himself for our sake. If you really knew him, you would really like him, my friend.
(@17:34) 1st question of the Westminster Confession of Faith: What is the chief end [purpose] of man?". Answer: "…to glorify God, & to enjoy Him forever.” God created the universe to Demonstrate who He Is, in all His Glory, and to give us the opportunity to know and appreciate him. In so doing, he gave us the gift of “ BEING” (consciousness). In him, we live and move and have our being. Ancient philosophers came to that conclusion several millennia ago. God is a giver, not a taker. There is so much more to the story in the Bible. We are blessed to read it. Many blessings to you!
@jockyoung4491 hi. You want to explain your comment? I use to believe in evolution too. Now I know it's just a bunch of bs that supported white supremacy and Marxism and genocide.
@@jockyoung4491 and how did you observe these changes over millions of yrs? The smaller, believable claims of evolution are non sequiturs and don't logically lead to the bigger claims imo. Can you really explain to me how fossils lead to the conclusion that we evolved from lesser beings?
@@treadstoned9915 It's the sequence of morphological changes in the fossil record which can be tracked over time. Fossil sequences which show the distinct branching nested hierarchy pattern unique to common descent. The kicker is the genetic record shows the same distinct branching nested hierarchy which matches the fossil one to better than 99.9%
Does my soul good to see the brethren gathering! Praise Christ 🎉🎉🎉 keep up the Good work! Interestingly enough, just yesterday i was taking to a Hebrew Phd man who was saying Adam and eve are a myth. I told him he was wrong, hope i got thru to him. I grew up thinking everyone knew The Bible is true, everyone knows Christ is Lord. Now i see maybe 4% of Americans have a biblical world view. I'll keep praying for the lost souls and share this message.
And how do you know he was wrong? What objective evidence do you have that your Big Boy's Book of Fairy Stories is accurate? Because it says it is? You should have listened to the 'Hebrew Pd.D. man'. Today you would be a better informed person.
You can't see the stars? I think this quote is true " to those who believe no explanation is necessary, to those who don't, none will suffice. The Bible is Truth, i pray 1 day you'll see that@spikefunakoshi5667
It's not just the theory of evolution that puts death and corruption before sin - it's the long ages also - upon which the theory of evolution is built.
Lets look at the evolution and geneology of the theory of evolution. It all goes back to Erasmus Darwin, (Charles Darwins grandfather/2nd cousin). 😶 He wrote the preface to Mary Shellys Frankenstien. Plus he published a few books. But Mary asked Erasmus for his consultation in the book for scientific terms and methods to bring a sense of realism to the book. In the preface, he wrote how scientist were closing in on being able to bring dead bodies back to life with a process called galvanism. And it could be a reality in the near future. My point is...scientist were having to pay grave robbers for human corpses, and there was no funding or investors for such tabboo things they were trying to do. Like swap souls from one body to another. (An actual expirament) or bring dead things back to life. That kind of thing was considered unethical, and illegal because ot was considered messing around with Gods creation. Hence the need to remove God from the equation. The whole theory of evolution was dreamed up by some inbred scientist to explain why it was not unethical because theres no God. You cant say we dont know for shure if theres a God or not, but were pretty sure its ok to bring dead bodies back to life with electricity. It doesnt work that way. It abuse of a corpse, and messing around with creation. No wonder the ppl were chasing Dr Frankenstein with pitchforks. They thought he was gonna bring Gods judgement down on them. Scientist and academia absolutely had to come up with a way to write God out of history just to do the things they wanted to do and not be unethical. Hence....the theory of evolution.
@@Bearthalamass I have read two biographies of Darwin and I can assure you that his scientific research had nothing to do with his attitudes about God. And why should they? He was describing scientific data, which is true regardless of anything about God. And he had no religious doubts when the first started out anyway. To claim he only came up with evolution to reject God is not only dishonest but really just stupid. Don't get your "history" from creationist web sites that think smearing Dawrin will somehow make science go away.
@jockyoung4491 Charles didn't even come up with the theory of evolution. Erasmus his grandfather/cousin already wrote two books about it himself. And other scientist were working on it at the same time he was and it was a race to see who got published first at the end. The theory of evolution was already around for about a century before Charles ever started studying it. His grandfather had published zoonomia and desent of mankind, and there was two French scientist publishing evolution theories before Charles. There was a movement to rewrite history and write God out of it. You just zeroed in on Charles because I said some inbred scientist, and he was the one everybody gives credit to. Bit there was decades many scientist worked on a way to solve their ethical problem with evolution. That's why they mock ppl and guard their worldview so zealously. If there's even a chance that there might be a God, all their gene editing and cell technology instantly becomes unethical. They know there's a chance that there is a creator, but they'll never admit it.
@@Bearthalamass All of that was true except the last sentence. Theories of evolution were developed because it was obvious that species changed over time. That was known before Charles, yes. He was just the first one to come up with a plausible mechanism. Scientists are motivated by discovering how the natural world works. They have no incentive to be wrong.
Who are these people? Why are you posting this stuff? "If evolution was true people would be out for number one" ... yeah maybe that's why people are out for number one.
@@MusicalRaichu If evolution, survival of the fittest, is true then why are people getting fatter, slower, dumber, and less talented. Why would we need A.I. to make up for our shortfalls if evolution is on the job getting rid of them already? Why can we not even begin to wrap our minds around, and understand the accomplishments of those in our distant past. If evolution, survival of the fittest, was the key to advancement of the species then why are the pyramids not child's play? Why can't we simply point to the archaic methods that built Machu Picchu or Balbec? How did those far less fit, less evolved cretons move 13 ton stones that we can't even come close to moving today, even with our largest machinery? Where has evolution been since ancient Egypt?
@MusicalRaichu Mercy... "Maybe that's why everyone is only out for themselves" 😎 Or something to that effect 🧐 Which, by the way, validates what the man was saying in the video... "" If People believe their progenitor is an amoeba... They should go for everything they can get.. regardless of who gets harmed in the process""... I refer you back to your closing remark... Simply preface it with the words...."people don't believe they'll be held accountable.... Yeah, maybe that 's...." I'm so silly...🤪 I just now realized that you knew the answer before you formulated your ridiculous question 🙄 Feel like I've been Rick rolled😭 Well done 🤣🤣
@@anilkanda611 Not sure where your office is located but there are some amazing scientists at Creation Ministries International. I recommend Dr. Robert Carter as a possible guest for your show. He is located in Georgia, USA
@@anilkanda611 I especially like the mention of the adolescent...who feels crappy and therefore our beliefs are dedicated by something that's not reason but as Blaise pascal put : By what we find attractive
2 Timothy 3:1-4 (KJV) This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
That’s your assumption because your brainwashed by the world. I used to watch a lot of science content as a child growing up until I realized some parts are made up foolishness to deny our creator. God is real don’t take my word for it seek and you’ll find. God can speak to you directly just seek him and ask him to reveal himself to you and start by reading the Bible, faith comments by hearing and hearing the word of God. I never truly got that until I started reading my Bible and seeking a personal relationship with God and he filled me with his spirit and that’s how I know with out a doubt God is real when I got directly connected to him.
If there was some random process forming life in ever-improving compilations, it would be impossible for a human embryo to increase in both matter and energy plus consciousness and sentience and then following puberty, reverse processes and begin a decline in all the same. Random processes cannot instantly reverse at a uniform point of progress in a random direction without an external force acting upon it. Just like a body in motion cannot change course without an external agency acting upon it. Nothing can increase and decrease randomly, either it adds or subtracts, not both. Either something is in motion or inanimate, eternal or temporary, increasing or decreasing and nothing random is a process of predictable alteration. Moreover, D.N.A. is actually a prophecy. It professes the substance of a creature prior to its existence. D.N.A. can and does exist apart from life but life cannot exist unless it is first written in the prophetic code. Likewise, the universe is the product of the WORD and could not exist without it. Nor could there be "laws" constraining the behaviors of physical matter nor could the contrasts of light and dark, good and evil, etc. exist other than as blended grays and lesser evils without the "law", the "Word", having proclaimed a distinction which prevents their merger. So many common sense, observable facts make random processes impossible as an explanation for life and creation that it is simply absurd to cling to evolution as an explanation for anything other that genetic changes within living organisms. No explanation for life itself or even inanimate matter. Even if life "evolved" from matter, from what does matter come from and why cannot matter evolve even microscopically today? How does the evolutionary process arise from matter which has no such process itself?
You sound terribly confused. Do some proper studying before posting all this convoluted nonsense. In the meantime, as long as your own knowledge is inadequate, my advice is that you accept the mainstream scientific views that are not only supported by all observable evidence, but also by tens of thousands of knowledgable scientists, who have no interest in anything else than finding out how the world actually works.
@@Mario_Sky_521Not "a lot of people", but "all of the world's experts on the topic". There's a difference. Also, a gap in our knowledge does not invalidate the rest of it, especially not if the rest of that knowledge is in perfect agreement with all known observations of reality. Scientists don't make things up, they just say "we don't know", and keep investigating. It's religious people who make things up rather than just saying "we don't know". Inventing a magic man in the sky as a standard answer for everything you don't know or don't understand is not going to help you find out how the world really works.
@@henno3889 this comment is nothing but assertions and appeals to authority. You can't demonstrate any of this to be true yourself or site the source for these claims that "all the experts on the subject" (very ambiguous statement btw) affirm evolution.
@@Mario_Sky_521 Nope. Not the same. Saying he's second means there could be a third coming along, which is where Izzlaam came up with the idea of Moh. He - Jesus - is the Last Adam cos there won't be another after Him. He is the Way, the Truth and the Life, and no man comes to the Father except through Him!!
@Mario_Sky_521 no chance. 1600 years of threats and fear are bashed into your poor ancestors until only gullible genes are active. They abused all of you with wicked Christian lies. Adam cannot exist because any animal species that survives needs 40 mitochondrial mothers. period. Why are humans so poorly designed, sick bodies, weak minds, disconnected from reality and nature? Because we have 39 traceable mitochondrial mothers.
In the description it says, "dismantles the philosophical foundations of evolutionary theory". The video does nothing to address the evidence. Please, explain the evidence without evolution.
little thinks he's a descendant of an ape. Why did the decendant not fear fire, like all animals do? How was fire discovered, and when it was, why didn't the man run scared? LOL.
@@untoldhistory2800 So no scientific evidence of evolution being wrong, just a self-published book by a YEC repeating the same long discredited claims. Less than impressive.
Anil, in 20:00 you said, "If evidence for Christianity was true, would an atheist, a sceptic, an agnostic, would willing to become a Christian?" Will you invite the scientists who studied and gave the hard evidence through scienctific procedures of Jesus resurrection on the shroud of Turin, and on many eucharistic miracles? Many Christians are also sceptic on those miracles. Are you willing to change your believe after knowing God's miracle in His true Church?
The Shroud of Turin was tested and discovered to be a medieval forgery. It was created in the late 14th or early 15th century, a time which saw a huge number of religious fakes made to sell to those on religious pilgrimages.
How do you explain galaxies that are billions of light years away. It would mean that it would take billions of years for light to reach us.stard exploding into super novas or explosions and would mean stars are extremely unstable. Any ideas here
There's a whole cottage industry of creationists making up the wackiest most scientifically unsupported excuses for denying the physical evidence which crushes their YEC claims. Claims like "the starlight was created when it was only 6000 light years away" or "the speed of light changed by 10 orders of magnitude since creation week!" 🤪🤪🤪 There's no excuse so ridiculous some creationist won't cough it up.
Cosmology is a challenge for everybody. Since we cannot leave the earth to verify anything, we are left with observations, and some test, to try to figure out what the heck we are seeing. The James Webb Space Telescope is throwing a monkey wrench into current theories, with some arguing that the Big Bang never happened, to it happened 26 billion years ago. These questions frankly cannot be answered with the information we have. That being said, the issue of distant starlight is challenging, and comes up often in my talks. When it comes to space we are dealing with things going the speed of light (including light itself). Under Newtonian physics we could do a simple calculation to divide the speed by distance to get time. But, we know from Einstein that time is not a constant, and that according to relativity, time is inverse with c, which means that the closer we get to the speed of light time slows down to zero. So essentially there is no time passing for objects moving the speed of light, yet the observer believes it billions of years. That is one idea. It could also be that the stars were created "near" the earth, then the fabric of space time was stretched out at unimaginable speed. This could explain why the stars look so distant but they are not that old. Many creationists, and evolutionists, are struggling with these questions but, as it stands, there is little we can say for sure, other than God created them (and yes, I understand that evolutionists and atheist would not agree).
@@donteatthecats0001believing everything you’re told Q what are the biggest telescopes ? Visual? Is the information interpreted ? Who owns them? What’s the name of the largest? Lucifer ~ the vatican and yes ( name was changed) wonder why??
While he makes some good points. It should be pointed out that Copernicus was the one who said that earth was not the center of the Universe and the Churches Canonized him, which was their highest honor besides saint hood. It appears the Church did not persecute Galileo as claimed, There is nothing making that claim until the 1700's. It appears to be a false claim. There is no evidence that it is true. The first historical evidence is the equivalent of a middle school text book written in 1750 about 100 years after Galileo passed away.
Galileo got in trouble more for political reasons. He was not tried for writing the book because the Church had asked him to right the book. But since some of the statements were unorthodox he was vulnerable to attack from people for other reasons. I'm not sure we can know the exact motivations.
He WAS persecuted by the christian church! Pope John Paul the second apologised in1992 for the actions taken against Gaileo in 1633! His only crime was to claim that planet Earth revolved around the sun. That was in contradiction with the "holy" scriptures that stated that the Earth was at the center, not the sun.
@@jockyoung4491 Baloney. He was kept under house arrest for life and specifically enjoined from investigating matters the church found unpleasant. Don't sugar coat the history. He was suppressed. In fact, in the Ascent of Man, Bronowski had access (given to quality scholars) to the Galileo trial documents that the Vatican has carefully preserved. They were (and presumably are) kept right next to the divorce requests from Henry VIII and like things. It showed a thoroughly dishonest "show trial" according to him.
Given that the 6 days (periods) of creation fit the science for the 5bn years of creation of the Earth in Hebrew. Plus that the Jews have always seen Adam & Eve In Hebrew as allegorical poetry (similar to parables of a story with truths in it). To state that the English translation of Genesis is God's word and therefore literally true is a position that defies logic. Evolution is a perfectly logical way for God to create the universe and life as God is outside of linear time and a billion years are the same as a second to him.
Theistic evolution like for example what Teilhard De Chardin teaches, or process theology is not merely the evolution of the creation, which could be interpreted and harmonized with the Theistic worldview, though not necessarily with the revelation of scripture and genesis, but what would not be reconcilable would be that God or our concepts of God is evolving. Yes their is some truth regarding the fallen nature of man whose degenerate knowledge rather than evolving, actually was the loss of the original knowledge of the one true God, who is tanscendent and eternal, not a created being, not just a first cause ti set everything in motion.
There is nothing fundamental to the story of Genesis that dictates is must be interpreted as a literal description of events. Even the very conservative PCA university Covenant College teaches in its Old Testament classes that the Genesis account of creation can be legitimately understood to be primarily metaphor and to not exclude evolution as a scientific framework. The conviction and faith of the believer ought to be in Christ and him crucified and resurrected, not in a particular interpretation of the creation story based on a lack of hermeneutical education.
DNA and what science calls one human cell. A computer with the greatest hard drive known to man. and DNA strand as basically a zip file of the most enormous size known to man. In essence, all that exists is a data stream.
Evolution means,might makes right,no good or evil,if it feels good,do it.The athesit world view has no basis to have laws,law enforcement, courts,prisons,ect. ,only opinions exist and who judges if chocolate or vanilla is the best?
First of all, evolutionary theory can't be "dangerous" because it is just a description of reality. Reality is only as dangerous as people make it themselves. And obviously it isn't "wrecked" because it is still universally accepted among biologists. And always will be. And none of it threatens faith.
We have observed evolution. I don't know what Dawkins was referring to in that informal comment taken out of context, and neither do you. Throwing out cherry-picked comments like that as if they were "established science" is dishonest. Dawkins may have been saying that we observe the evidence for evolution rather than the process itself, but it amounts to the same thing. We have documented, measured, and manipulated evolution many times.
@@jockyoung4491Could you present said evidence for the claim of evolution please? Every time I try to find said proof it's not evolution at all it turns out to be microevolution (seen and observed) NOT macroevolution (never witnessed).
@@darinb.3273 Micro-evolution IS evolution. "Macro" is just the pattern it produces when looked at over millions of years. It is all the same evolution, where no individual ever gives birth to a different species.
Furthermore, if evolution was true it would mean that Jesus evolved. Consider the implications of that conclusion for a moment.The evolution of Jesus would imply that the entire trinity evolved!!
@@earlysda I said life evolves, regardless of where it came from. We don't know how it originally started. God could have done it for all we know. I'm talking about biological evolution, which happens whenever life reproduces.
Since the very building blocks of everything in existence are electrical in nature, and the functions of iving things are controlled by electrical impulses, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that what or whoever God is begins or at least depends on electricity? Now consider that everywhere we look in space we find electricaly charged plasmas and magnetic fields stretching thousands of lightyears in all directions. Magnetism itself being a byproduct of electrical charge and interaction. Now consider that the universe is structured in exactly the same way that a brain cell is structured. Would it not be a reasonable conclusion that GOD is a conciousness that is broadcast by and throughout the entire universe. That our brains are made up of cells that, like radios, recieve a small and unique bandwidth of this overarching conciousness. This unique connection, together with the free will of action, makes us who we are. God can be explained and understood scientifically without compromise to the idea that he is omnipresent and connected to everyone regardless of religious beliefs. And evolution is simply one of the functions of how life continues, but is in no way the one key to the advancement of any species. God is conciousness and conciousness is electric!
Old Testament (Dead sea scrolls) are not older than the Ugaritic texts. Within the ugaritic texts you find the pantheon of god’s worshipped in the ancient Levant. EL is the father of YHWH and Baal through the consort Astoreth. This means the Hebrews were an overlapping culture that borrowed mythology from the Phoenician (Canaanites) The Bible wasn’t gathered and finished till the Iron Age🤦🏽♂️. There’s no Torah till the fall of the Bronze Age. No history of Moses. The Bible is a primitive goat herders beliefs of the natural world.
If you went to college in the late 1800s and tried to claim black ppl were just as evolved as white ppl, you would have been laughed out of the University and told they were not as evolved as white ppl and that was based on established scientific facts. 😅
@@jon__doe Another creationist that thinks the popular meaning of theory is what a scientific theory is. Go relieve your ignorance. Science and its theories are not so easily confounded. You want to take on Darwinism? Then get serious about the subject. Or, you can settle for Sunday School level pablum. It's up to you.
@@curious968 Do you remove your shoe before putting your foot in your mouth? The theory of evolution is not a fact, do you disapprove of this statement? The statement evolution is a fact refers to the fact that life is diverse combined with the belief that it was caused by evolution. This is why I disagree that evolution is a fact, unless you want to cite adaptation which is empirically verifiable. Adaptation is not evolution, no matter how many times that claim is made. I'll pit my "pablum" against Darwinism any day.
I had a dream last night that fully made me agree the there is no such thing as evolution. Humans are something different. I can't pinpoint what or who created us, but we are something special.
The pride of sinners sets God against them. He that, being high in estate is proud in heart, whose spirit is elevated with his condition, so that he becomes insolent in his conduct towards God and man, let him know that though he admires himself, and others caress him, yet he is an abomination to the Lord. The great God despises him; the holy God detest him. The power of sinners cannot secure them against God, though they strengthen themselves with body and hands. Though they may strengthen one another with their confederacies and combinations, joining forces against God, they shall not escape his righteous judgment. Woe unto him that strives against his Maker.
@jockyoung4491 Romans 1:18-23, 25 (KJV) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
2 Timothy 3:1-4 (KJV) This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
On the contrary, what they are saying is that you cannot believe the Bible and evolution at the same time. It makes no sense to believe both. Theist evolutionists are inconsistent in their rationale.
You can't even argue for a God from a logical standpoint, because every argument for God is flawed and defy the laws of logic, Theists cannot destroy the argument of The Atheists, The atheist depend on observable evidence, Not philosophical arguments. even if he could debunked Evolution, he hasn't said a single thing to show or demonstrate that creation is true.
Yeah he didn't show evidence for creationism bc he was doing an internal critique, duh what kind of argument is that? Can you contend with any of the points made?
😅what was the evolution of a tree with mango fruit did it evolve from what king of tree..😊.. day and night was not evolving ..it is permanently called 1 day
@@jockyoung4491 so what created the tree? What created the grass? What created water? What created the air you breathe? What created dirt? What created the world?
To base a life's belief on a plagiarized collection of myths shows how shallow the thinking process is. But, I guess a lot of people need to construct an imaginary protector and punisher to keep them on the straight and narrow and to deny the finality of death.
To believe that the human is so complex animated full of life and ideas and energy To die that is it ? 😂😂😂 Even science teaches you can’t destroy energy! 😂 We are Spiritual….. The life leaves the dead empty body like a hand leaving a glove 🧤👋🏼
"collection of myths" That's your first mistake. Your history is all over the place. Where does it begin? The ancient asyrians/sumerians introduced the wheel, irrigation, artwork, writing. You accept that historical information, but you don't accept what they drew, and wrote about - claiming them to be myths. The clue is in the name, artifacts, Art depicting FACTS.
This is the worst part of an extremely good interview. There are ZERO repercussions for living in an evolutionary or "athestic perspective." While on the flip side, there are immeasurable repercussions for living with a theistic perspective. The reason science (not just evolutionary but ALL science) dominates knowledge is because it can be proven. Religion cannot. The very first step of all religions is to prove a god in general exist and the furthest they can get is "how do you explain X?"
@@etherealblacketernal2889 Evolution is an idea that goes unproven. We have not seen species evolve; we have not seen the environment trigger biological changes in species. What we have are multiple people that share your faith in evolution proclaiming it as true. A sick version of the Emperor's New Clothes.
@@coolbreeze6532 *We have not seen species evolve* There are hundreds of documented cases of observed speciation in the scientific record. You should do some research before making such silly proclamations.
Are you serious? That comment makes it seem you are totally ignorant of history. Evolutionary theory heavily influenced Hitler and the Nazi party. Ernst Haeckel, father of the now discredited recapitulation theory, greatly influenced Hitler, who adopted the fundamental philosophy of Darwinism, namely the survival of the fittest. The awful eugenics program likewise was based on evolutionary ideas. The Naziis were big on eugenics. There were even public marches apologizing to natural selection for allowing the handicapped to live! Communism likewise was also influenced by Darwinism. Joseph Stalin, who studied to be a priest, was influenced by Darwin's writings. In an autobiographical novel of Joseph Stalin the author specifically attributed Stalin's cruelties to his adoption of Darwinian ideas. The Holodomor, orchestrated by Stalin, killed almost 4 millions Ukrainians, through starvation. Evolutionary teaching was, and is, a foundational teaching of the communist philosophy and was extensively taught in the Soviet Union. The combined death tolls of Naziism, and Communism amounted to no less that 100 million in the 20th century. And you have the gall to argue that evolution had no influence? With regards to science, again you are seriously ignorant of the history of science. Virtually all fathers of modern science, like Newton, Bacon, Linnaeus, Kepler, Locke to name a few were religious people. Some, like Mendel and Lemaitre were priests. It was their theology that gave rise to modern science. The underlying philosophy to science in their mind was that God had created the universe with purpose, design and order. This led them to question whether they could uncovered that order. Science is the systematic investigation of the order in creation. Unless you have this understanding why would you ever do science? Evolution is not science per se. It is a story of history that excludes God. That is one of the reasons it was, and is, popular. If evolution was just about science it would have been abandoned years ago but it isn't and based on the massive and hostile reactions that any suggestion God was involved, it is clear science is not the real issue.
@@gusolsthoorn1002 Evolution is 100% about science the same way gravity and plate tectonics and the germ theory of disease are 100% about science. The only folks who get hostile over it are science illiterate creationist Fundies who feel the scientific facts threaten their religious beliefs.
Sounds like these speakers are telling God what He can or cannot do. Misinformation in the video.. God can use any tool/process to form His creation as He wills. Do not limit God. The Holy Scriptures and THEISTIC adaptation/evolution are not in conflict. God's book of words ie. the bible and His " book of works " ie the comos are in harmony. God is author of good , love and ,life and the universe. Christ is Saviour and King. PTL.
The implications of God using evolution, while attractive, says a lot about God himself. Evolution is a bloody, drawn-out, kill or be killed process, that relies on trial and error, resulting in the sacrifice of trillions of animals and billions upon billions of humans, just so that God could say, "It is good"? That is a disgusting proposition. Theistic evolution makes God out to be in incompetent designer and the worst imaginable butcher to have ever existed, much worse than Satan. Is that the God you think came as a man to die for our sins? The God of theistic evolution is absolutely NOT the God of the Bible. While God can do whatever He pleases, that is not the issue here. The issue is what God said He did. It is quite clear. And what He said he did, is nothing like the theistic evolution you believe happened. I have more respect for atheists who argue for evolution, than for Christians who say God used evolution. The former are consistent, the latter make God out to be liar, and a cruel and bloodthirsty creator. No thanks.
@@jockyoung4491 No, it is the insistent that God's Word is true, and we can understand it. The Bible is not man's musing about God but God's involvement with man. Rather than limiting God it allows us to take God at His word. And that is what Faith is.
It is not arrogant to believe what God said. God could have done whatever he wanted. The point is not what he could have done but what he said he did. I submit that the Scripture is pretty clear on this matter. He created the universe. He told us when and how he did it. You need to be careful you don't do what Satan did, and say, "Did God really say?". That did not end well.
@gusolsthoorn1002 God is creator of all but literal extremist reading of Genesis is shallow reading. The reader understand the ancient culture language usage and genre of the written word including audience and writer's purpose
Logical conclusion as a "Theistic Evolutionist": 1) God is Stupid/Limited in His transmission of His Creative acts OR 2) God is a Liar. . . NOT the God of the Bible or Jesus Christ. {:]
@jockyoung4491 it does not "look" a billion years old. Fabricated methodologies to try to support "long ages" not withstanding, there is absolutely no accurate method for "dating" rocks. Carbon 14 requires organic materials & then "assumes" no variances in decay rates nor does it "know" a starting ratio for any sort of baseline starting point. (I doubt any evolutionary "true believers" are very anxious to begin carbon 14 analysis of the soft tissue samples retrieved from dinosaur remains?!?) The "look" is merely a confirmation bias skewed by "a priori" prejudices. . .. Most of what humanity knows is from historical records. Science is great for Observational (& "testable") processes. When it comes to "origins", Science has nothing to contribute. One-time past events (like a postulated Big Bang or Creation ex nihilo) are irreproducible. . . Most likely "proof" for times MIGHT be light-years transition time from stars, etc. However, recently observed "redshift" data has already debunked(?) &/or complicated the Hubble, Big Bang theory (I.e., no central "start" "pattern" to support a centralized "beginning point". So we also do not know when/if light "started" from stars' current locations . . .) {:] Essentially it all depends on what "filter" one uses to attempt interpretation of the data. Circumstantial Evidence in any investigatory process is tough or impossible to state w/certainty in a Court of Law. Multiple possibilities . . .
Chicken 🐓 or eggs 🥚 Protein and amino acids DNA 🧬⁉️ Please explain and show us the process route available (What does evolution do? Use time, what is the life span of the protein and the amino acids?)😂
@@P.H.888 Your questions are incoherent. Also irrelevant to Evolution Theory. Darwin did not know of proteins or amino acids. This is a strawman question, with the point of trying to make the other look foolish. I can do what your trying to do too. Explain God and endogenous retroviruses?🤤
Evolution is not a theory..............its a fact. Live in your religious fantasy world if you want ( and i get the perceived benefits) but denying plain and simple facts do you no credit at all.
Facts and theories are different. A theory is an explanation while a fact is simply something that is true. Theories do not become facts. Facts can be proven, theories cannot. So, can you prove evolution? Of course not. That's not its problem, it also cannot be falsified. A theory that cannot be falsified is a belief.
@@jon__doe _Theories do not become facts_ Evolution is both a fact and a theory. That evolution has occurred - the changes and diversification of life on the planet over the last 4+ billion years - is a well verified scientific *fact.* The *theory* of evolution is the scientific explanation of the mechanisms which produced the observed *fact* of evolution. Evolutionary theory can easily be falsified. Just find groups of animals with completely different and incompatible forms of DNA. Or show evidence "kinds" are a real thing and identify the magic barrier which makes a common ancestor of two "kinds" impossible. Evolutionary theory is very falsifiable; it just has never been falsified.
@@donteatthecats0001 life is diverse, this is fact. That it was caused by evolution is a belief. It cannot proven because the theory cannot be verified. It's assumed true. Assumption: the act of taking for granted (in this case). The validity of the theory of evolution (ToE) is taken for granted because there are no competing materialist theories that don't suffer at least as much improbability. This is ontology in action, not science. You won't get the typical AIG argument from me, I don't need it. Evolution is self-defeating.
@@jon__doe OK, you're going to ignore everything I posted and just keep repeating your same argument from ignorance based personal incredulity. Real impressive. 🤣
@@jon__doe *That it was caused by evolution is a belief.* Still brutally wrong. Belief = accepted despite a lack of evidence. Confirmed = accepted due to the large quantity and quality of positive evidence. Evolution through mutations and selection has been *confirmed* beyond all reasonable doubt.
I may be out of line here, but in some ways I have empathy for Darwin. I may be way wrong, but I think Darwin would be shocked by the downstream consequences of his theories. He showed that animals adapted, something that every farmer who bread animals knew. He also suggested that mutation was a factor, which is now accepted science. But, it's the atheistic belief that "all things are possible when you have infinite time". Weirdly Christian in tone, almost all mutations are bad and lead to death; only a few are beneficial and even sustainable for life. I'm seeing that a lot of time is needed to explain our Chemical evolution on Earth; then conversion of chemical to biochemical (Carbon based life); the biochemical to organic (alive in some way); then organic to life (plants and animals); then life evolved to us animals with consciousness. Maybe God created man in his image? I think way more faith is needed to be an atheistic evolutionist than a Christian. I suspect many are wounded by bad Christian experiences, which is a shame to us all.
"it's the atheistic belief that "all things are possible when you have infinite time"." Nobody believes that. It is sad that you all tell each other these ridiculous stories of what OTHER people think. And you believe them because you are always hearing it from each other. Quit looking for excuses to dismiss other viewpoints. Evolution has nothing to do with atheism, and there is nothing illogical about it.
@@jockyoung4491 jocky, it someone tells you that a woman kissed a frog and turned into a price immediately - we all know it's a fairy tale. But give the god of aeons of time some zeroes, suddenly it becomes Evolution!
@@earlysda "Darwin specifically came up with Evolution because he wanted to fight God.' That is so absurdly untrue it is laughable. What is more, you KNOW that you have no idea what Darwin was thinking, and yet you believe whatever slander you hear about him because you think smearing him will make science go away. Also laughable.
@@jockyoung4491 That's understandable that you stand up for the founder of the religion of Evolution. . “After years of backsliding, Darwin finally broke with Christianity (though he continued to believe in God). His father’s death had spiked the faith; Annie’s clinched the point”. . Charles' father was against Christianity, and he himself started out to become a priest/preacher, and later lost faith when thinking about how his father and brother and others would probably never go to heaven, and instead, be burned to ashes.
Evolution is undeniable scientific fact. Perhaps you have just never understood it properly. Allow me to explain how it works: (1) Each individual inherits half of its genes from its father and half of its genes from its mother. Some genes mutate more or less randomly during the process of recombination, within small limits otherwise the recombination won't work properly. The set of genes of any individual is slightly different from the set of genes of either parent, but also slightly different from the sets of genes of any brothers or sisters (with the exception of identical twins). INHERITANCE and RANDOM GENETIC VARIATION are important elements of evolution, but are not enough by themselves. (2) Because each individual has a slightly different set of genes, any characteristics of the individual that are genetically determined are also slightly different between siblings, cousins, etc. For instance, a baby deer may have slightly longer legs or slightly shorter legs than the average leg length among its brothers, sisters and cousins. Or, they may have less-than-average eyesight, better-than-average hearing, and so on. Some young animals will then cope better with ENVIRONMENTAL PRESSURES than others. Environmental pressures may be: lions hunting the deer; extreme weather like droughts; periods with lack of food; viral diseases; and so on. From any generation of young deers those that have slightly shorter legs are more likely to get caught by a lion than those that have slightly longer legs. Those that have slightly better eyesight will spot a tiger earlier than those with below-average eyesight, and so on. (3) From a group of young deer, perhaps 25% will reach reproductive age, while the other 75% die before producing offspring. Obviously, young animals that have slightly superior genetic properties than their siblings and cousins (e.g. longer legs, better eyesight, etc.) just have a better chance of reaching reproductive age than individuals with slightly inferior properties. This means that among the 25% survivors, there will be more individuals that were born with above-average leg length than with below-average leg length, because the short-legged young deer were just easier to catch by the lions. This process is called SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST. The "filtering" of the genes under environmental pressures is also called NATURAL SELECTION. (4) Because properties that are helpful to survive under environmental pressure will be passed on to a next generation in larger percentage than the properties that are below average, the species as a whole will gradually develop to have longer legs, better eyesight, etc., while unfavourable properties (shorter legs, poor eyesight) will die out after a while. This is called ADAPTATION of the species to its environment. It is of course a very slow process, because it takes many generations while each generation needs some time for natural selection to do its work. (5) If the sets of genes of two individuals are too different the chemical process of genetic recombination (1) does not work properly anymore, and the two individuals cannot reproduce with each other. This is obvious for e.g. a dog and a cat, but perhaps slightly less obvious for mules (horse and donkey) or ligers (cross between a lion and a tiger). If plants or animals remain together as a group, they will reproduce with other individuals from that entire group, and the individual sets of genes will not drift apart too far from each other. However, if a large group of individuals splits up, and one half ends up in a different environment than the other half, then over time the two groups will adapt to their two different environments independently from the other group. After many generations, the two sets of genes have drifted apart to the extent that reproduction between individuals from the two original groups no longer works. This is called SPECIATION: the separation of one species into two new species that can no longer interbreed, even though they had a common ancestor species some time in the past. There you go: the elements of evolution are inheritance, random genetic variation, environmental pressure, natural selection, adaptation to the environment and speciation. It's all explained here above in easy terms, and NONE OF IT CAN BE DENIED. These mechanisms are observed again and again in nature, and have even been exploited by mankind over many centuries, to develop plants or animals with specific properties for specific purposes. If you look at the many different species of animals and plants around us, you can quite easily identify similar species that will have had a relatively recent common ancestor species (e.g. dogs and foxes), and other species with which they were related further back in the past (e.g. dogs and cats), just from analysis of their genes. This research has shown that all life once had a single common ancestor. There are around 1.5 million known species of animals and 400,000 species of plants, so to put them all in a single tree-like figure would be a bit of a challenge. A small section of the genetic tree of life is here upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Tree_of_life_SVG.svg/1024px-Tree_of_life_SVG.svg.png. You will find yourself (homo sapiens) just left of the top centre, together with your cousin the chimpansees (pan troglodytes) with whom you share 96% of your genes, thanks to a common ancestor species that lived around 7 million years ago. If you want to deny evolution you are detaching yourself from scientific thinking, from millions of verifiable observations in biology, geology, paleontology, chemistry etc., and from the undeniable logic behind mechanisms such as natural selection under environmental pressure. Good luck with that...
U know know NO mathematics, probability or statistical theory. All the probabilities are impossibilities. John Froelich Ph.D mathematics, NSF postdoc, IT consultant .........etc.......etc......
@@WmTyndale Oh dear, how wrong you are... I have a PhD in computer science and applied mathematics and a couple of decades of experience in very large statistical estimation processes. I have chaired international scientific commissions on the subject, and will happily eat people like your John Froelich for breakfast. If he thinks he should disagree with mainstream science, undoubtedly he has published his remarkable findings in proper scientific journals? Can you please give us a few papers he has published on the subject? No? Didn't think so. My poor friend... you have been misled.
@@WmTyndale Actually, I have a PhD in computer science and applied mathematics, but that's irrelevant. I would like you to point out which aspect of my explanations you disagree with, because I deliberately wrote it in such simple terms that there is not much room for discussion. Namedropping of some numbskull creationist semi-scientist doesn't work, you should instead just give us a proper reference to his scientific publications on this topic. Let me guess... mr. Froelich doesn't really have any accepted publications in mainstream science on this subject, does he? Oh dear. We might easily think that he's just pushing his creationist views, rather than doing honest science.
@@anilkanda611 There is no debate. On one side are provable scientific facts backed up by years of research and testing in fields such as biology, genetics, geology, etc. On the other is a collection of bronze age myths and uninformed assumptions presented as if they had some intellectual value. They do not. Belief is not evidence. Faith is not evidence.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. - Romans 1:18-32
Atheism is a created religion which allows for man to be free from God. The problem with this "faith" is that it is a lie being propagated and leading mankind away from its Creator. This isn't a new idea. The serpent of old did it then and is doing the same now. The bitter truth is always better than a sweet lie. I have tasted them both.
Goldstein doesn't even believe in the real Jesus of the Bible ..so what difference does it make what he believes ..he believes in an 1844 Levite Jesus..that does not forgive him at the cross. Created by the false interpretation of Daniel 8:14!!
Right but the evidence has to be researched and studied and when you do that there is overwhelming evidence evidence for Jesus being God and the biblical account being true
@@georg7120there literally is zero evidence for Darwinian macro evolution of the species ..there is factual evidence for adaptation between the different kinds but there is absolutely zero evidence life started from amoeba microorganism and man came from lower life forms etc
I've recognized at a very early age that Evolution is the largest religion on the planet because you have to have blind faith to believe in it. ✝️🇺🇲💯😎
Then why is it accepted as obvious by virtually all the biologists in the world? How do you explain all of the massive amounts of evidence for it?
Not true. It's not based on believing anything, it's based on observable evidence and undeniable logic. Perhaps you just don't understand it? You can't just deny something because YOU don't understand it.
@@jockyoung4491 Mutations are real therefore alligators came from birds? Cars are real and didnt came from motorcycles.
@jockyoung4491 there is no evidence
@henno3889 yeah the battle cry of the indoctrinated...you just aren't smart enough 😅😅😅😊😅😅
God created everything complete , ready . When Jesus resurrected Lasario , Lasario had already been decomposing for 4 days and Jesus said Lasario to come out , Lasario come out immediately . The chemical process and biologically process in the body or Lasaro was made in the moment . God has powers that human beings are unaware of .
Presupposition. Dude get a better argument
Strange that it didn't happen 2000 years after Christ, God could have proven himself beautifully.
now it's just guesswork😂
Such bullshit
No, that never happened. The decay of the brain sets in only minutes after the bloodflow stops, and is irreversible on a biological level, on a chemical level and even at the level of quantum physics. Your god obviously has no control over quantum physics, because he needed no less than six busy days to create the Earth. With proper magic powers, he could have just snapped his godly fingers and make everything appear the way he wanted. And then, he spends more than a year on that entire flood nonsense, while he could just have made an entire new Earth in six days... Plot consistency is not really important to christian folks, is it?
When will Jesus come back?😊
Theistic evolution is an unbelievable slander against the character and integrity of God.
Exactly.
Ye I hate it
Evolution is a lie. We are not walking, talking, mutated fish.
The problem is that there is sufficient evidence for evolution but there is nothing for your fking god
@@gusolsthoorn1002 Could be your attempt to limit God in what He can or cannot do is unbelievable arrogance against God. Sounds like you know better than God? Amazing! God can use any process He wants inspite of your protests. Christ is Saviour and King. PTL
Even for Dawin, it was a moral issue, not a scientific one.
What was? His evolution research was purely scientific. At the time he had enough evidence to strongly suggest it. And now of course we have more than enough evidence to confirm it. Whatever Darwin might have thought morally is irrelevant to the science of evolution.
@jockyoung4491 Darwin had already rejected God and the Bible because he refused to accept that those that don't accept Jesus as Savior go to hell. He was looking for an explanation of the universe with out God.
@@crystalclearwindowcleaning3458
Whoever told you that was simply lying. It is slanderous, dishonest, and pointless. Smearing Darwin would not even dent the theory of biological evolution, which does not depend on anything Darwin said, some of which we know to be wrong. Darwin is of historical interest only. Believing lies about him will not make science go away. It would be laughable if it weren't so mean-spirited and pathetic.
@@jockyoung4491so that's your argument? Calling somebody a liar because you say so? 😅
@@Bearthalamass
I was calling a comment a lie because I have read two biographies of Darwin and know that what they are saying is not only false, but they clearly never considered trying to verify it before parroting it around. Wouldn't you think that was dishonest if I did it?
They refuse to acknowledge the truth because their deeds were evil...
Maybe there's something to that. As long as they have a captive audience and money to scam, they'll keep making this nonsense.
Right on, brother. Evolution is a very powerful excuse to try to avoid accountability to God.
Thank you! *don’t forget to like and subscribe for more
No, it's just science.
No, scientists are not motivated to study science as a conspiracy against your faith. That is a ridiculous slander. We study science because we want to know how the world works. We would have NO incentive to get it wrong.
@@jockyoung4491 Read the comments I just sent.
The fathers of modern science, Christian men, also studied science. They paved the way for the amazing science we have now. They were not evolutionists, or atheists.
If there was no powerful motivation by some scientists to push evolution, against divine creation, the theory would have died a long time ago.
You need to remember that scientists are just men. Most scientists work in fields that have nothing to do with evolution. But those that do know full well that if they do not tow the line in full support of evolutionary theory, they would not have a job very long. Certainly they would not be respect for their views if it did not align with orthodoxy. You have made it clear the disdain who have for those who do not bow the knee to evolution.
The accountability that is contingent on you making attributions to god instead of having evidence 🙄
What struck to me in the discussion is that the science discourse is always imperative and impositive and wants you to pick a side. God instead of it calls us to seek and know the truth, piecefully.
“I was a young man with ‘Uninformed’ Ideas.
People made a ‘RELIGION’ out of them,,,”
~ Charles Darwin
~~~
“Oh, If I could only ‘Undo’ what I have done.”
~ Charles Darwin
(3 Weeks Before his Death)
~~~
:o
~~~
Charles Darwin 'REPENTED' !!!
~~~
:)
~~~
Have 'Y-O-U' ???
~~~
:o
~~~
“Evolution is the Central and Radical LIE
In the whole ‘Web of Falsehood’ that now governs our lives.”
~ C.S. Lewis
~~~
:o
Thinking and copy and pasting are not exactly the same thing.
There is no evidence Darwin repented. Quite possibly his animosity towards God was because of the death of his young daughter.
@@gusolsthoorn1002
Exactly. Darwin never became an atheist, but he wanted nothing more to do with God for the same reason as many others: human suffering. It had nothing to do with his scientific research, which never threatened God.
@@jockyoung4491 If I lost a young child, I can appreciate why people would be angry with God, but I have also seen people who underwent incredible suffering who still loved God.
As case in point, there was a family in our church that were meeting outside in their backyard with another family. For some reason there was an explosion that severely burned the mother and 12 year old daughter who go to our church. Unfortunately a young girl in the other family died from her injuries. The 12 year old girl was in intensive care for many months, undergoing skin grafts, some which didn't take and had to be redone. She got an infection in her lungs which almost killed her. She was a pretty girl but there will be permanent facial scars. When she was finally released from hospital, the first thing she wanted to do was to go to church. To see her in church was very touching.
Given her permanent scars and the pain she endured, she could have hated God but she didn't. Rather she found comfort in God even in her suffering. This is one of the main messages that is found in Christianity, and which Jesus himself demonstrated. This girl is a great inspiration. Jesus is the ultimate example, because his suffering was not because of an accident but because he knowingly took incredible suffering upon himself for our sake.
If you really knew him, you would really like him, my friend.
All lies!
(@17:34) 1st question of the Westminster Confession of Faith: What is the chief end [purpose] of man?". Answer: "…to glorify God, & to enjoy Him forever.”
God created the universe to Demonstrate who He Is, in all His Glory, and to give us the opportunity to know and appreciate him. In so doing, he gave us the gift of “ BEING” (consciousness).
In him, we live and move and have our being.
Ancient philosophers came to that conclusion several millennia ago.
God is a giver, not a taker.
There is so much more to the story in the Bible. We are blessed to read it. Many blessings to you!
I used to believe absolutely in the theory in my days of intellectual Pride and vanity. Now I laugh at myself for ever believing it.
Then you got a frontal lobotomy?
Now you believe absolutely in something that makes less sense.
@jockyoung4491 hi. You want to explain your comment? I use to believe in evolution too. Now I know it's just a bunch of bs that supported white supremacy and Marxism and genocide.
@@jockyoung4491 and how did you observe these changes over millions of yrs? The smaller, believable claims of evolution are non sequiturs and don't logically lead to the bigger claims imo. Can you really explain to me how fossils lead to the conclusion that we evolved from lesser beings?
@@treadstoned9915 It's the sequence of morphological changes in the fossil record which can be tracked over time. Fossil sequences which show the distinct branching nested hierarchy pattern unique to common descent. The kicker is the genetic record shows the same distinct branching nested hierarchy which matches the fossil one to better than 99.9%
Does my soul good to see the brethren gathering! Praise Christ 🎉🎉🎉 keep up the Good work! Interestingly enough, just yesterday i was taking to a Hebrew Phd man who was saying Adam and eve are a myth. I told him he was wrong, hope i got thru to him. I grew up thinking everyone knew The Bible is true, everyone knows Christ is Lord. Now i see maybe 4% of Americans have a biblical world view. I'll keep praying for the lost souls and share this message.
And how do you know he was wrong?
What objective evidence do you have that your Big Boy's Book of Fairy Stories is accurate?
Because it says it is?
You should have listened to the 'Hebrew Pd.D. man'. Today you would be a better informed person.
You can't see the stars? I think this quote is true " to those who believe no explanation is necessary, to those who don't, none will suffice. The Bible is Truth, i pray 1 day you'll see that@spikefunakoshi5667
It's not just the theory of evolution that puts death and corruption before sin - it's the long ages also - upon which the theory of evolution is built.
Wow. First video I'm seeing from this channel, very awesome. Sub'd
Lets look at the evolution and geneology of the theory of evolution. It all goes back to Erasmus Darwin, (Charles Darwins grandfather/2nd cousin). 😶 He wrote the preface to Mary Shellys Frankenstien. Plus he published a few books. But Mary asked Erasmus for his consultation in the book for scientific terms and methods to bring a sense of realism to the book. In the preface, he wrote how scientist were closing in on being able to bring dead bodies back to life with a process called galvanism. And it could be a reality in the near future. My point is...scientist were having to pay grave robbers for human corpses, and there was no funding or investors for such tabboo things they were trying to do. Like swap souls from one body to another. (An actual expirament) or bring dead things back to life. That kind of thing was considered unethical, and illegal because ot was considered messing around with Gods creation. Hence the need to remove God from the equation. The whole theory of evolution was dreamed up by some inbred scientist to explain why it was not unethical because theres no God. You cant say we dont know for shure if theres a God or not, but were pretty sure its ok to bring dead bodies back to life with electricity. It doesnt work that way. It abuse of a corpse, and messing around with creation. No wonder the ppl were chasing Dr Frankenstein with pitchforks. They thought he was gonna bring Gods judgement down on them. Scientist and academia absolutely had to come up with a way to write God out of history just to do the things they wanted to do and not be unethical. Hence....the theory of evolution.
That is total and obvious bullshit. I doubt you even believe it.
Obviously not true.
@@Bearthalamass I have read two biographies of Darwin and I can assure you that his scientific research had nothing to do with his attitudes about God. And why should they? He was describing scientific data, which is true regardless of anything about God. And he had no religious doubts when the first started out anyway. To claim he only came up with evolution to reject God is not only dishonest but really just stupid. Don't get your "history" from creationist web sites that think smearing Dawrin will somehow make science go away.
@jockyoung4491 Charles didn't even come up with the theory of evolution. Erasmus his grandfather/cousin already wrote two books about it himself. And other scientist were working on it at the same time he was and it was a race to see who got published first at the end. The theory of evolution was already around for about a century before Charles ever started studying it. His grandfather had published zoonomia and desent of mankind, and there was two French scientist publishing evolution theories before Charles. There was a movement to rewrite history and write God out of it. You just zeroed in on Charles because I said some inbred scientist, and he was the one everybody gives credit to. Bit there was decades many scientist worked on a way to solve their ethical problem with evolution. That's why they mock ppl and guard their worldview so zealously. If there's even a chance that there might be a God, all their gene editing and cell technology instantly becomes unethical. They know there's a chance that there is a creator, but they'll never admit it.
@@Bearthalamass
All of that was true except the last sentence. Theories of evolution were developed because it was obvious that species changed over time. That was known before Charles, yes. He was just the first one to come up with a plausible mechanism. Scientists are motivated by discovering how the natural world works. They have no incentive to be wrong.
Woow"We have some similarities because we have same creator"
Thank you so much for such mind opening information, may God bless!
Who are these people? Why are you posting this stuff? "If evolution was true people would be out for number one" ... yeah maybe that's why people are out for number one.
@@MusicalRaichu If evolution, survival of the fittest, is true then why are people getting fatter, slower, dumber, and less talented. Why would we need A.I. to make up for our shortfalls if evolution is on the job getting rid of them already? Why can we not even begin to wrap our minds around, and understand the accomplishments of those in our distant past. If evolution, survival of the fittest, was the key to advancement of the species then why are the pyramids not child's play? Why can't we simply point to the archaic methods that built Machu Picchu or Balbec? How did those far less fit, less evolved cretons move 13 ton stones that we can't even come close to moving today, even with our largest machinery? Where has evolution been since ancient Egypt?
"Should be"...
If you're not answerable for your life... Then life is meaningless...
@@jimhughes1070 Who said your not answerable for your life?
@@jimhughes1070 ...and?
@MusicalRaichu
Mercy...
"Maybe that's why everyone is only out for themselves" 😎
Or something to that effect 🧐
Which, by the way, validates what the man was saying in the video...
"" If People believe their progenitor is an amoeba... They should go for everything they can get.. regardless of who gets harmed in the process""...
I refer you back to your closing remark...
Simply preface it with the words...."people don't believe they'll be held accountable.... Yeah, maybe that 's...."
I'm so silly...🤪 I just now realized that you knew the answer before you formulated your ridiculous question 🙄
Feel like I've been Rick rolled😭
Well done 🤣🤣
Amen, brothers! Thank you!
Welcome! Thank you
@@anilkanda611 Not sure where your office is located but there are some amazing scientists at Creation Ministries International. I recommend Dr. Robert Carter as a possible guest for your show. He is located in Georgia, USA
This is a great interview.
Yea! He was great to talk to!
*don’t forget to subscribe for more!
@@anilkanda611 I especially like the mention of the adolescent...who feels crappy and therefore our beliefs are dedicated by something that's not reason but as Blaise pascal put : By what we find attractive
No change needed, the Bible tells it all
Fantasy!
2 Timothy 3:1-4 (KJV) This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
Science is religion and scientists are their sacred priests.
Yup! It’s undeniable! It is a religion. Just look at the comments.
*don’t forget to like and subscribe for more! Thanks friend
It takes just as much faith in the unseen to be an evolutionist as it does to be a creationist.
Right off the bat, this guy is so full of it.
He definitely doesn't listen to anything other than his religious leaders.
That’s your assumption because your brainwashed by the world. I used to watch a lot of science content as a child growing up until I realized some parts are made up foolishness to deny our creator. God is real don’t take my word for it seek and you’ll find. God can speak to you directly just seek him and ask him to reveal himself to you and start by reading the Bible, faith comments by hearing and hearing the word of God. I never truly got that until I started reading my Bible and seeking a personal relationship with God and he filled me with his spirit and that’s how I know with out a doubt God is real when I got directly connected to him.
You think oil is dino juice lol
@@treadstoned9915
I doubt there is much dinosaur in oil. Most oil was formed at sea or lake bottoms from bulk biomass such as plankton or algae.
@treadstoned9915
Nobody thinks it's Dinosaurs, just prehistoric organic matter.
Oil companies don't use Noah's flood geology to find oil deposits.
If there was some random process forming life in ever-improving compilations, it would be impossible for a human embryo to increase in both matter and energy plus consciousness and sentience and then following puberty, reverse processes and begin a decline in all the same. Random processes cannot instantly reverse at a uniform point of progress in a random direction without an external force acting upon it. Just like a body in motion cannot change course without an external agency acting upon it. Nothing can increase and decrease randomly, either it adds or subtracts, not both. Either something is in motion or inanimate, eternal or temporary, increasing or decreasing and nothing random is a process of predictable alteration. Moreover, D.N.A. is actually a prophecy. It professes the substance of a creature prior to its existence. D.N.A. can and does exist apart from life but life cannot exist unless it is first written in the prophetic code. Likewise, the universe is the product of the WORD and could not exist without it. Nor could there be "laws" constraining the behaviors of physical matter nor could the contrasts of light and dark, good and evil, etc. exist other than as blended grays and lesser evils without the "law", the "Word", having proclaimed a distinction which prevents their merger. So many common sense, observable facts make random processes impossible as an explanation for life and creation that it is simply absurd to cling to evolution as an explanation for anything other that genetic changes within living organisms. No explanation for life itself or even inanimate matter. Even if life "evolved" from matter, from what does matter come from and why cannot matter evolve even microscopically today? How does the evolutionary process arise from matter which has no such process itself?
I will answer that but first how about a sacrifice. Let's say two goats and a sheep and we'll call it even.
You sound terribly confused. Do some proper studying before posting all this convoluted nonsense. In the meantime, as long as your own knowledge is inadequate, my advice is that you accept the mainstream scientific views that are not only supported by all observable evidence, but also by tens of thousands of knowledgable scientists, who have no interest in anything else than finding out how the world actually works.
@@Mario_Sky_521Not "a lot of people", but "all of the world's experts on the topic". There's a difference. Also, a gap in our knowledge does not invalidate the rest of it, especially not if the rest of that knowledge is in perfect agreement with all known observations of reality. Scientists don't make things up, they just say "we don't know", and keep investigating. It's religious people who make things up rather than just saying "we don't know". Inventing a magic man in the sky as a standard answer for everything you don't know or don't understand is not going to help you find out how the world really works.
@@henno3889 this comment is nothing but assertions and appeals to authority. You can't demonstrate any of this to be true yourself or site the source for these claims that "all the experts on the subject" (very ambiguous statement btw) affirm evolution.
@@treadstoned9915 Well, why don;t you find me an "expert" who disagrees with evolution, and I will personally debunk his nonsensical ideas.
JESUS ISN'T THE SECOND ADAM, HE IS THE "LAST" ADAM!!! Go check it out.
Jesus and Adam are actually completely different people
Therefore fiction because Adam was impossible and Jesus might have existed but everything about him is totally impossible.
@@Mario_Sky_521lol...people are crazy!😂
@@Mario_Sky_521 Nope. Not the same. Saying he's second means there could be a third coming along, which is where Izzlaam came up with the idea of Moh. He - Jesus - is the Last Adam cos there won't be another after Him. He is the Way, the Truth and the Life, and no man comes to the Father except through Him!!
@Mario_Sky_521 no chance. 1600 years of threats and fear are bashed into your poor ancestors until only gullible genes are active. They abused all of you with wicked Christian lies.
Adam cannot exist because any animal species that survives needs 40 mitochondrial mothers. period.
Why are humans so poorly designed, sick bodies, weak minds, disconnected from reality and nature? Because we have 39 traceable mitochondrial mothers.
In the description it says, "dismantles the philosophical foundations of evolutionary theory".
The video does nothing to address the evidence. Please, explain the evidence without evolution.
Where in this video was evolution "wrecked"? I seem to have missed it among all the nonsensical creationist blathering.
You have picked your side and are camped in it ~ very tribal
Closed and frozen.
little thinks he's a descendant of an ape. Why did the decendant not fear fire, like all animals do? How was fire discovered, and when it was, why didn't the man run scared? LOL.
@@P.H.888 I'm open to being shown evolution is wrong. However these lame creationist hand-waving excuses don't cut the muster.
@@littleacorn2244I recommend ‘The Genesis Conflict’ by Professor in Zoology Walter Veith 👌
@@untoldhistory2800 So no scientific evidence of evolution being wrong, just a self-published book by a YEC repeating the same long discredited claims. Less than impressive.
Anil, in 20:00 you said, "If evidence for Christianity was true, would an atheist, a sceptic, an agnostic, would willing to become a Christian?" Will you invite the scientists who studied and gave the hard evidence through scienctific procedures of Jesus resurrection on the shroud of Turin, and on many eucharistic miracles? Many Christians are also sceptic on those miracles. Are you willing to change your believe after knowing God's miracle in His true Church?
The Shroud of Turin was tested and discovered to be a medieval forgery. It was created in the late 14th or early 15th century, a time which saw a huge number of religious fakes made to sell to those on religious pilgrimages.
If they can provide credible proof and experience.
How do you explain galaxies that are billions of light years away. It would mean that it would take billions of years for light to reach us.stard exploding into super novas or explosions and would mean stars are extremely unstable. Any ideas here
There's a whole cottage industry of creationists making up the wackiest most scientifically unsupported excuses for denying the physical evidence which crushes their YEC claims. Claims like "the starlight was created when it was only 6000 light years away" or "the speed of light changed by 10 orders of magnitude since creation week!" 🤪🤪🤪 There's no excuse so ridiculous some creationist won't cough it up.
Cosmology is a challenge for everybody. Since we cannot leave the earth to verify anything, we are left with observations, and some test, to try to figure out what the heck we are seeing. The James Webb Space Telescope is throwing a monkey wrench into current theories, with some arguing that the Big Bang never happened, to it happened 26 billion years ago. These questions frankly cannot be answered with the information we have.
That being said, the issue of distant starlight is challenging, and comes up often in my talks. When it comes to space we are dealing with things going the speed of light (including light itself). Under Newtonian physics we could do a simple calculation to divide the speed by distance to get time. But, we know from Einstein that time is not a constant, and that according to relativity, time is inverse with c, which means that the closer we get to the speed of light time slows down to zero. So essentially there is no time passing for objects moving the speed of light, yet the observer believes it billions of years. That is one idea. It could also be that the stars were created "near" the earth, then the fabric of space time was stretched out at unimaginable speed. This could explain why the stars look so distant but they are not that old.
Many creationists, and evolutionists, are struggling with these questions but, as it stands, there is little we can say for sure, other than God created them (and yes, I understand that evolutionists and atheist would not agree).
@@donteatthecats0001believing everything you’re told
Q what are the biggest telescopes ? Visual? Is the information interpreted ?
Who owns them?
What’s the name of the largest?
Lucifer ~ the vatican and yes
( name was changed) wonder why??
@@Mario_Sky_521 Yet you still think they are only 6000 years old? 😄
@@Mario_Sky_521
LOL. Yeah, you kind of walked into that one.
While he makes some good points. It should be pointed out that Copernicus was the one who said that earth was not the center of the Universe and the Churches Canonized him, which was their highest honor besides saint hood. It appears the Church did not persecute Galileo as claimed, There is nothing making that claim until the 1700's. It appears to be a false claim. There is no evidence that it is true. The first historical evidence is the equivalent of a middle school text book written in 1750 about 100 years after Galileo passed away.
Galileo got in trouble more for political reasons. He was not tried for writing the book because the Church had asked him to right the book. But since some of the statements were unorthodox he was vulnerable to attack from people for other reasons. I'm not sure we can know the exact motivations.
He WAS persecuted by the christian church! Pope John Paul the second apologised in1992 for the actions taken against Gaileo in 1633! His only crime was to claim that planet Earth revolved around the sun. That was in contradiction with the "holy" scriptures that stated that the Earth was at the center, not the sun.
@@jockyoung4491 Baloney. He was kept under house arrest for life and specifically enjoined from investigating matters the church found unpleasant.
Don't sugar coat the history. He was suppressed.
In fact, in the Ascent of Man, Bronowski had access (given to quality scholars) to the Galileo trial documents that the Vatican has carefully preserved. They were (and presumably are) kept right next to the divorce requests from Henry VIII and like things. It showed a thoroughly dishonest "show trial" according to him.
And others over 500 years before cappie.
CG will never know what the other side sounds like, because he must be the only one who gets to speak.
I think this guy is dangerous
Given that the 6 days (periods) of creation fit the science for the 5bn years of creation of the Earth in Hebrew. Plus that the Jews have always seen Adam & Eve In Hebrew as allegorical poetry (similar to parables of a story with truths in it). To state that the English translation of Genesis is God's word and therefore literally true is a position that defies logic.
Evolution is a perfectly logical way for God to create the universe and life as God is outside of linear time and a billion years are the same as a second to him.
Theistic evolution like for example what Teilhard De Chardin teaches, or process theology is not merely the evolution of the creation, which could be interpreted and harmonized with the Theistic worldview, though not necessarily with the revelation of scripture and genesis, but what would not be reconcilable would be that God or our concepts of God is evolving. Yes their is some truth regarding the fallen nature of man whose degenerate knowledge rather than evolving, actually was the loss of the original knowledge of the one true God, who is tanscendent and eternal, not a created being, not just a first cause ti set everything in motion.
Anil, the quote you used late in the episode was said by Mark Twain. Jesus is King
Why can't you have no Evolution and yet a universe that is 13 to 14 billion years old?
There is nothing fundamental to the story of Genesis that dictates is must be interpreted as a literal description of events. Even the very conservative PCA university Covenant College teaches in its Old Testament classes that the Genesis account of creation can be legitimately understood to be primarily metaphor and to not exclude evolution as a scientific framework.
The conviction and faith of the believer ought to be in Christ and him crucified and resurrected, not in a particular interpretation of the creation story based on a lack of hermeneutical education.
Except the language, the actual words, the affirmation of Jesus, the 10 Commandments, the proceeding events, other writers in the Bible.
But sure.
This man is using the same hypnosis on the audience that was used on him. Who here doesn't know how hypnosis works?
Well... I'm going to guess you might be having a little trouble with it😢
@jimhughes1070 so you don't get how it works? Or you have a comprehension deficit?
Eden wreck the theory of evolution I didn't even come close
DNA and what science calls one human cell. A computer with the greatest hard drive known to man. and DNA strand as basically a zip file of the most enormous size known to man. In essence, all that exists is a data stream.
No religion no cash cow for churches
No control over people
Oh, they'd figure out same other way to do it.
@jockyoung4491 believe so
You don't think atheistic governments control people??
Evolution is the biggest religion in the world today.
But it is failing to win hearts, as more people see holes in its doctrines.
@jacktbugx1658 Hmm, seems to me an awful lot of money is being spent on evolutionary theories.
Evolution means,might makes right,no good or evil,if it feels good,do it.The athesit world view has no basis to have laws,law enforcement, courts,prisons,ect. ,only opinions exist and who judges if chocolate or vanilla is the best?
In homology you're using your assumption of heredity as evidence for your assumption of heredity. It is circular reasoning, a logically fallacy.
First of all, evolutionary theory can't be "dangerous" because it is just a description of reality. Reality is only as dangerous as people make it themselves.
And obviously it isn't "wrecked" because it is still universally accepted among biologists. And always will be.
And none of it threatens faith.
You dont know what you're talking about....that theory is absolutely acidic and demonic!
"Evolution hasn't been observed while it's happening."
No one has yet been able to refute what Richard Dawkins rightly observed.
We have observed evolution. I don't know what Dawkins was referring to in that informal comment taken out of context, and neither do you. Throwing out cherry-picked comments like that as if they were "established science" is dishonest. Dawkins may have been saying that we observe the evidence for evolution rather than the process itself, but it amounts to the same thing. We have documented, measured, and manipulated evolution many times.
@@jockyoung4491Could you present said evidence for the claim of evolution please? Every time I try to find said proof it's not evolution at all it turns out to be microevolution (seen and observed) NOT macroevolution (never witnessed).
@@darinb.3273
Micro-evolution IS evolution. "Macro" is just the pattern it produces when looked at over millions of years. It is all the same evolution, where no individual ever gives birth to a different species.
@@jockyoung4491 jockyoung, Why are you sad that the chief priest of Evolution doesn't believe the same as you do?
.
Awww.
@@darinb.3273 There is no micro-evolution. Please stop believing in Evolution of any form.
Fanatic interpretation of everything always point to god.
Furthermore, if evolution was true it would mean that Jesus evolved. Consider the implications of that conclusion for a moment.The evolution of Jesus would imply that the entire trinity evolved!!
god evolved he used to be a volcano.
Actually, no. Life evolves because it reproduces. The idea of Jesus has changed because ideas change.
@@jockyoung4491 jocky, surely you know that life doesn't come from non-life.
@@earlysda
I said life evolves, regardless of where it came from. We don't know how it originally started. God could have done it for all we know. I'm talking about biological evolution, which happens whenever life reproduces.
@@jockyoung4491 So do you believe like some other Evolutionists that every living thing is a transitional form?
Nope, still not wrecked.
Seen some bunkum and these guys have by the bucket loads! The fairy story they believe is beyond belief!
Evolution is beyond belief. So why should the supernatural be so unrealistic?
@@jon__doe *Evolution is beyond belief* Not to intelligent educated people. That doesn't include you unfortunately.
What’s beyond belief is believing the universe created itself
@@donteatthecats0001 Ah the magic of comment population...
I don't know... I'm educated. Had a pretty good GPA, so I reckon I'm fairly intelligent.
@@anilkanda611 While there are speculations, there's no scientific theory that explains how the universe came into being.
Since the very building blocks of everything in existence are electrical in nature, and the functions of iving things are controlled by electrical impulses, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that what or whoever God is begins or at least depends on electricity?
Now consider that everywhere we look in space we find electricaly charged plasmas and magnetic fields stretching thousands of lightyears in all directions. Magnetism itself being a byproduct of electrical charge and interaction. Now consider that the universe is structured in exactly the same way that a brain cell is structured. Would it not be a reasonable conclusion that GOD is a conciousness that is broadcast by and throughout the entire universe. That our brains are made up of cells that, like radios, recieve a small and unique bandwidth of this overarching conciousness. This unique connection, together with the free will of action, makes us who we are.
God can be explained and understood scientifically without compromise to the idea that he is omnipresent and connected to everyone regardless of religious beliefs. And evolution is simply one of the functions of how life continues, but is in no way the one key to the advancement of any species. God is conciousness and conciousness is electric!
Old Testament (Dead sea scrolls) are not older than the Ugaritic texts. Within the ugaritic texts you find the pantheon of god’s worshipped in the ancient Levant. EL is the father of YHWH and Baal through the consort Astoreth. This means the Hebrews were an overlapping culture that borrowed mythology from the Phoenician (Canaanites) The Bible wasn’t gathered and finished till the Iron Age🤦🏽♂️. There’s no Torah till the fall of the Bronze Age. No history of Moses. The Bible is a primitive goat herders beliefs of the natural world.
Evolution: A wonderful popular excuse, which is sweetened by intellectual pride.
It is also established scientific fact.
If you went to college in the late 1800s and tried to claim black ppl were just as evolved as white ppl, you would have been laughed out of the University and told they were not as evolved as white ppl and that was based on established scientific facts. 😅
@@jockyoung4491 facts can be proven. Theories do not become facts.
@@jon__doe Another creationist that thinks the popular meaning of theory is what a scientific theory is.
Go relieve your ignorance. Science and its theories are not so easily confounded.
You want to take on Darwinism? Then get serious about the subject. Or, you can settle for Sunday School level pablum. It's up to you.
@@curious968 Do you remove your shoe before putting your foot in your mouth?
The theory of evolution is not a fact, do you disapprove of this statement?
The statement evolution is a fact refers to the fact that life is diverse combined with the belief that it was caused by evolution. This is why I disagree that evolution is a fact, unless you want to cite adaptation which is empirically verifiable.
Adaptation is not evolution, no matter how many times that claim is made.
I'll pit my "pablum" against Darwinism any day.
I had a dream last night that fully made me agree the there is no such thing as evolution. Humans are something different. I can't pinpoint what or who created us, but we are something special.
The pride of sinners sets God against them. He that, being high in estate is proud in heart, whose spirit is elevated with his condition, so that he becomes insolent in his conduct towards God and man, let him know that though he admires himself, and others caress him, yet he is an abomination to the Lord. The great God despises him; the holy God detest him.
The power of sinners cannot secure them against God, though they strengthen themselves with body and hands. Though they may strengthen one another with their confederacies and combinations, joining forces against God, they shall not escape his righteous judgment. Woe unto him that strives against his Maker.
You sound extremely prideful in your holier-than-thou attitude.
@jockyoung4491 Romans 1:18-23, 25 (KJV) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
2 Timothy 3:1-4 (KJV) This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
@@Xyrogenix
Thank you for proving my point.
@@jockyoung4491 You have no point. These are warnings. It's not my fault if you're offended.
So, lemme get this straight -- these two believe in God, but, at the same time discredit the Bible?
On the contrary, what they are saying is that you cannot believe the Bible and evolution at the same time. It makes no sense to believe both. Theist evolutionists are inconsistent in their rationale.
Wow, this guy is all over the place. He sounds completely baffled and confused.
Evolution is a fact. It doesn’t matter whether or not you acknowledge it.
Which comes first the chicken 🐓 or the egg 🥚
Proteins and amino acids
DNA 🧬??
@@P.H.888 Chickens, eggs, proteins, DNA all need electrical charge to even begin to form. So what came first? Electricity did!
If evolution, survival of the fittest, is the key then why are people growing fatter, slower, dumber, and by far less intelligent and talented?
@@FECtetra1918 If evolution is a fact then why hasn't it been proven to be a fact yet buddy 😆
@@alexdrake8079 If hasn’t been proven for those who are uneducated.
You can't even argue for a God from a logical standpoint, because every
argument for God is flawed and defy the laws of logic, Theists cannot
destroy the argument of The Atheists, The atheist depend on observable
evidence, Not philosophical arguments. even if he could debunked
Evolution, he hasn't said a single thing to show or demonstrate that creation
is true.
Yeah he didn't show evidence for creationism bc he was doing an internal critique, duh what kind of argument is that? Can you contend with any of the points made?
Is no evolution but devil-use-cion
😅what was the evolution of a tree with mango fruit did it evolve from what king of tree..😊.. day and night was not evolving ..it is permanently called 1 day
It evolved from a tree that had fruit only slightly different than mango, and no individual ever produced a different species.
@@jockyoung4491 jocky, your comments are hilarious in their rejection of logic and observed facts.
@@jockyoung4491 so what created the tree? What created the grass? What created water? What created the air you breathe? What created dirt? What created the world?
To base a life's belief on a plagiarized collection of myths shows how shallow the thinking process is. But, I guess a lot of people need to construct an imaginary protector and punisher to keep them on the straight and narrow and to deny the finality of death.
To believe that the human is so complex animated full of life and ideas and energy
To die that is it ? 😂😂😂
Even science teaches you can’t destroy energy! 😂
We are Spiritual…..
The life leaves the dead empty body like a hand leaving a glove 🧤👋🏼
"collection of myths" That's your first mistake.
Your history is all over the place.
Where does it begin?
The ancient asyrians/sumerians introduced the wheel, irrigation, artwork, writing. You accept that historical information, but you don't accept what they drew, and wrote about - claiming them to be myths. The clue is in the name, artifacts, Art depicting FACTS.
Only if you experienced God for yourself you’d know he’s real.
@@swagboss10000 and you experienced your god, how?
Notice how all you have is rhetoric and zero real arguments?
This is the worst part of an extremely good interview. There are ZERO repercussions for living in an evolutionary or "athestic perspective." While on the flip side, there are immeasurable repercussions for living with a theistic perspective.
The reason science (not just evolutionary but ALL science) dominates knowledge is because it can be proven. Religion cannot. The very first step of all religions is to prove a god in general exist and the furthest they can get is "how do you explain X?"
@@etherealblacketernal2889 Evolution is an idea that goes unproven. We have not seen species evolve; we have not seen the environment trigger biological changes in species.
What we have are multiple people that share your faith in evolution proclaiming it as true. A sick version of the Emperor's New Clothes.
@@coolbreeze6532 *We have not seen species evolve* There are hundreds of documented cases of observed speciation in the scientific record. You should do some research before making such silly proclamations.
@littleacorn2244 I should do research? Ok. Tell me evolution you have observed.
I get it, people told you that it occurs. Have you seen this?
Are you serious? That comment makes it seem you are totally ignorant of history. Evolutionary theory heavily influenced Hitler and the Nazi party. Ernst Haeckel, father of the now discredited recapitulation theory, greatly influenced Hitler, who adopted the fundamental philosophy of Darwinism, namely the survival of the fittest.
The awful eugenics program likewise was based on evolutionary ideas. The Naziis were big on eugenics. There were even public marches apologizing to natural selection for allowing the handicapped to live!
Communism likewise was also influenced by Darwinism. Joseph Stalin, who studied to be a priest, was influenced by Darwin's writings. In an autobiographical novel of Joseph Stalin the author specifically attributed Stalin's cruelties to his adoption of Darwinian ideas. The Holodomor, orchestrated by Stalin, killed almost 4 millions Ukrainians, through starvation.
Evolutionary teaching was, and is, a foundational teaching of the communist philosophy and was extensively taught in the Soviet Union.
The combined death tolls of Naziism, and Communism amounted to no less that 100 million in the 20th century.
And you have the gall to argue that evolution had no influence?
With regards to science, again you are seriously ignorant of the history of science. Virtually all fathers of modern science, like Newton, Bacon, Linnaeus, Kepler, Locke to name a few were religious people. Some, like Mendel and Lemaitre were priests. It was their theology that gave rise to modern science. The underlying philosophy to science in their mind was that God had created the universe with purpose, design and order. This led them to question whether they could uncovered that order. Science is the systematic investigation of the order in creation. Unless you have this understanding why would you ever do science?
Evolution is not science per se. It is a story of history that excludes God. That is one of the reasons it was, and is, popular.
If evolution was just about science it would have been abandoned years ago but it isn't and based on the massive and hostile reactions that any suggestion God was involved, it is clear science is not the real issue.
@@gusolsthoorn1002 Evolution is 100% about science the same way gravity and plate tectonics and the germ theory of disease are 100% about science. The only folks who get hostile over it are science illiterate creationist Fundies who feel the scientific facts threaten their religious beliefs.
Sounds like these speakers are telling God what He can or cannot do. Misinformation in the video.. God can use any tool/process to form His creation as He wills. Do not limit God. The Holy Scriptures and THEISTIC adaptation/evolution are not in conflict. God's book of words ie. the bible and His " book of works " ie the comos are in harmony. God is author of good , love and ,life and the universe. Christ is Saviour and King. PTL.
Insistence on a literal interpretation of the Bible limits God. It is a claim that God has to follow the exact meanings of mere human words.
The implications of God using evolution, while attractive, says a lot about God himself. Evolution is a bloody, drawn-out, kill or be killed process, that relies on trial and error, resulting in the sacrifice of trillions of animals and billions upon billions of humans, just so that God could say, "It is good"? That is a disgusting proposition.
Theistic evolution makes God out to be in incompetent designer and the worst imaginable butcher to have ever existed, much worse than Satan. Is that the God you think came as a man to die for our sins?
The God of theistic evolution is absolutely NOT the God of the Bible.
While God can do whatever He pleases, that is not the issue here. The issue is what God said He did. It is quite clear. And what He said he did, is nothing like the theistic evolution you believe happened.
I have more respect for atheists who argue for evolution, than for Christians who say God used evolution. The former are consistent, the latter make God out to be liar, and a cruel and bloodthirsty creator. No thanks.
@@jockyoung4491 No, it is the insistent that God's Word is true, and we can understand it. The Bible is not man's musing about God but God's involvement with man. Rather than limiting God it allows us to take God at His word. And that is what Faith is.
It is not arrogant to believe what God said. God could have done whatever he wanted. The point is not what he could have done but what he said he did. I submit that the Scripture is pretty clear on this matter. He created the universe. He told us when and how he did it. You need to be careful you don't do what Satan did, and say, "Did God really say?". That did not end well.
@gusolsthoorn1002 God is creator of all but literal extremist reading of Genesis is shallow reading. The reader understand the ancient culture language usage and genre of the written word including audience and writer's purpose
Logical conclusion as a "Theistic Evolutionist": 1) God is Stupid/Limited in His transmission of His Creative acts OR
2) God is a Liar. . .
NOT the God of the Bible or Jesus Christ. {:]
Why did God make the Earth look billions of years old if it wasn't?
@jockyoung4491 it does not "look" a billion years old. Fabricated methodologies to try to support "long ages" not withstanding, there is absolutely no accurate method for "dating" rocks. Carbon 14 requires organic materials & then "assumes" no variances in decay rates nor does it "know" a starting ratio for any sort of baseline starting point. (I doubt any evolutionary "true believers" are very anxious to begin carbon 14 analysis of the soft tissue samples retrieved from dinosaur remains?!?) The "look" is merely a confirmation bias skewed by "a priori" prejudices. . ..
Most of what humanity knows is from historical records. Science is great for Observational (& "testable") processes. When it comes to "origins", Science has nothing to contribute. One-time past events (like a postulated Big Bang or Creation ex nihilo) are irreproducible. . .
Most likely "proof" for times MIGHT be light-years transition time from stars, etc. However, recently observed "redshift" data has already debunked(?) &/or complicated the Hubble, Big Bang theory (I.e., no central "start" "pattern" to support a centralized "beginning point". So we also do not know when/if light "started" from stars' current locations . . .) {:]
Essentially it all depends on what "filter" one uses to attempt interpretation of the data. Circumstantial Evidence in any investigatory process is tough or impossible to state w/certainty in a Court of Law. Multiple possibilities . . .
A barrage of ignorant statements in the video. It would be exhausting to point them all out.
Please try after watching the whole video
It's in the low 500s. Astonishing bs bombing.
Chicken 🐓 or eggs 🥚
Protein and amino acids DNA 🧬⁉️
Please explain and show us the process route available
(What does evolution do? Use time, what is the life span of the protein and the amino acids?)😂
@@P.H.888 Your questions are incoherent. Also irrelevant to Evolution Theory. Darwin did not know of proteins or amino acids. This is a strawman question, with the point of trying to make the other look foolish. I can do what your trying to do too. Explain God and endogenous retroviruses?🤤
@@P.H.888 Eggs and egg laying evolved 195 MY before extant chickens did.
Evolution is not a theory..............its a fact. Live in your religious fantasy world if you want ( and i get the perceived benefits) but denying plain and simple facts do you no credit at all.
Facts and theories are different. A theory is an explanation while a fact is simply something that is true. Theories do not become facts. Facts can be proven, theories cannot.
So, can you prove evolution? Of course not. That's not its problem, it also cannot be falsified. A theory that cannot be falsified is a belief.
@@jon__doe _Theories do not become facts_ Evolution is both a fact and a theory. That evolution has occurred - the changes and diversification of life on the planet over the last 4+ billion years - is a well verified scientific *fact.* The *theory* of evolution is the scientific explanation of the mechanisms which produced the observed *fact* of evolution.
Evolutionary theory can easily be falsified. Just find groups of animals with completely different and incompatible forms of DNA. Or show evidence "kinds" are a real thing and identify the magic barrier which makes a common ancestor of two "kinds" impossible. Evolutionary theory is very falsifiable; it just has never been falsified.
@@donteatthecats0001 life is diverse, this is fact. That it was caused by evolution is a belief. It cannot proven because the theory cannot be verified. It's assumed true.
Assumption: the act of taking for granted (in this case).
The validity of the theory of evolution (ToE) is taken for granted because there are no competing materialist theories that don't suffer at least as much improbability. This is ontology in action, not science.
You won't get the typical AIG argument from me, I don't need it. Evolution is self-defeating.
@@jon__doe OK, you're going to ignore everything I posted and just keep repeating your same argument from ignorance based personal incredulity. Real impressive. 🤣
@@jon__doe *That it was caused by evolution is a belief.* Still brutally wrong.
Belief = accepted despite a lack of evidence.
Confirmed = accepted due to the large quantity and quality of positive evidence.
Evolution through mutations and selection has been *confirmed* beyond all reasonable doubt.
A.danger to people who believe in fairy tales?
The big bang is a fairytale
Believing in walking, talking mutated fish is actually a fairy tale.
@@justinemereni689 Interesting that it was first proposed by a Catholic priest.
@@kris78787
We have fossils of walking fish, but I'm pretty sure they didn't talk. I don't know where you got that from.
@@jockyoung4491 so does a Dr. Seuss book. Lots of walking, talking fish in there as well.
I may be out of line here, but in some ways I have empathy for Darwin. I may be way wrong, but I think Darwin would be shocked by the downstream consequences of his theories. He showed that animals adapted, something that every farmer who bread animals knew. He also suggested that mutation was a factor, which is now accepted science. But, it's the atheistic belief that "all things are possible when you have infinite time". Weirdly Christian in tone, almost all mutations are bad and lead to death; only a few are beneficial and even sustainable for life. I'm seeing that a lot of time is needed to explain our Chemical evolution on Earth; then conversion of chemical to biochemical (Carbon based life); the biochemical to organic (alive in some way); then organic to life (plants and animals); then life evolved to us animals with consciousness. Maybe God created man in his image? I think way more faith is needed to be an atheistic evolutionist than a Christian. I suspect many are wounded by bad Christian experiences, which is a shame to us all.
"it's the atheistic belief that "all things are possible when you have infinite time"."
Nobody believes that. It is sad that you all tell each other these ridiculous stories of what OTHER people think. And you believe them because you are always hearing it from each other. Quit looking for excuses to dismiss other viewpoints. Evolution has nothing to do with atheism, and there is nothing illogical about it.
coolt, Darwin specifically came up with Evolution because he wanted to fight God.
@@jockyoung4491 jocky, it someone tells you that a woman kissed a frog and turned into a price immediately - we all know it's a fairy tale.
But give the god of aeons of time some zeroes, suddenly it becomes Evolution!
@@earlysda "Darwin specifically came up with Evolution because he wanted to fight God.'
That is so absurdly untrue it is laughable. What is more, you KNOW that you have no idea what Darwin was thinking, and yet you believe whatever slander you hear about him because you think smearing him will make science go away. Also laughable.
@@jockyoung4491 That's understandable that you stand up for the founder of the religion of Evolution.
.
“After years of backsliding, Darwin finally broke with Christianity (though he continued to believe in God). His father’s death had spiked the faith; Annie’s clinched the point”.
.
Charles' father was against Christianity, and he himself started out to become a priest/preacher, and later lost faith when thinking about how his father and brother and others would probably never go to heaven, and instead, be burned to ashes.
This is theist talking to thrists. Let that theist debate with Richard Dawson
I think you mean Richard Dawkins. Watch the Lennox vs Dawkins debate.
@anilkanda611 yes, thank you for correction. I wached. What do you want to say?
Dorkins won't even debate WLC much less Jay Dyer or anyone who really knows church history lol
@@treadstoned9915 all theists that ever debated Dawkins prove their faith. But, never prove that their fate is based on evidence
@@treadstoned9915 NASA won't debate the Flat Earthers either, and for darn good reason.
Evolution is undeniable scientific fact. Perhaps you have just never understood it properly. Allow me to explain how it works:
(1) Each individual inherits half of its genes from its father and half of its genes from its mother. Some genes mutate more or less randomly during the process of recombination, within small limits otherwise the recombination won't work properly. The set of genes of any individual is slightly different from the set of genes of either parent, but also slightly different from the sets of genes of any brothers or sisters (with the exception of identical twins). INHERITANCE and RANDOM GENETIC VARIATION are important elements of evolution, but are not enough by themselves.
(2) Because each individual has a slightly different set of genes, any characteristics of the individual that are genetically determined are also slightly different between siblings, cousins, etc. For instance, a baby deer may have slightly longer legs or slightly shorter legs than the average leg length among its brothers, sisters and cousins. Or, they may have less-than-average eyesight, better-than-average hearing, and so on. Some young animals will then cope better with ENVIRONMENTAL PRESSURES than others. Environmental pressures may be: lions hunting the deer; extreme weather like droughts; periods with lack of food; viral diseases; and so on. From any generation of young deers those that have slightly shorter legs are more likely to get caught by a lion than those that have slightly longer legs. Those that have slightly better eyesight will spot a tiger earlier than those with below-average eyesight, and so on.
(3) From a group of young deer, perhaps 25% will reach reproductive age, while the other 75% die before producing offspring. Obviously, young animals that have slightly superior genetic properties than their siblings and cousins (e.g. longer legs, better eyesight, etc.) just have a better chance of reaching reproductive age than individuals with slightly inferior properties. This means that among the 25% survivors, there will be more individuals that were born with above-average leg length than with below-average leg length, because the short-legged young deer were just easier to catch by the lions. This process is called SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST. The "filtering" of the genes under environmental pressures is also called NATURAL SELECTION.
(4) Because properties that are helpful to survive under environmental pressure will be passed on to a next generation in larger percentage than the properties that are below average, the species as a whole will gradually develop to have longer legs, better eyesight, etc., while unfavourable properties (shorter legs, poor eyesight) will die out after a while. This is called ADAPTATION of the species to its environment. It is of course a very slow process, because it takes many generations while each generation needs some time for natural selection to do its work.
(5) If the sets of genes of two individuals are too different the chemical process of genetic recombination (1) does not work properly anymore, and the two individuals cannot reproduce with each other. This is obvious for e.g. a dog and a cat, but perhaps slightly less obvious for mules (horse and donkey) or ligers (cross between a lion and a tiger). If plants or animals remain together as a group, they will reproduce with other individuals from that entire group, and the individual sets of genes will not drift apart too far from each other. However, if a large group of individuals splits up, and one half ends up in a different environment than the other half, then over time the two groups will adapt to their two different environments independently from the other group. After many generations, the two sets of genes have drifted apart to the extent that reproduction between individuals from the two original groups no longer works. This is called SPECIATION: the separation of one species into two new species that can no longer interbreed, even though they had a common ancestor species some time in the past.
There you go: the elements of evolution are inheritance, random genetic variation, environmental pressure, natural selection, adaptation to the environment and speciation. It's all explained here above in easy terms, and NONE OF IT CAN BE DENIED. These mechanisms are observed again and again in nature, and have even been exploited by mankind over many centuries, to develop plants or animals with specific properties for specific purposes.
If you look at the many different species of animals and plants around us, you can quite easily identify similar species that will have had a relatively recent common ancestor species (e.g. dogs and foxes), and other species with which they were related further back in the past (e.g. dogs and cats), just from analysis of their genes. This research has shown that all life once had a single common ancestor. There are around 1.5 million known species of animals and 400,000 species of plants, so to put them all in a single tree-like figure would be a bit of a challenge. A small section of the genetic tree of life is here upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Tree_of_life_SVG.svg/1024px-Tree_of_life_SVG.svg.png. You will find yourself (homo sapiens) just left of the top centre, together with your cousin the chimpansees (pan troglodytes) with whom you share 96% of your genes, thanks to a common ancestor species that lived around 7 million years ago.
If you want to deny evolution you are detaching yourself from scientific thinking, from millions of verifiable observations in biology, geology, paleontology, chemistry etc., and from the undeniable logic behind mechanisms such as natural selection under environmental pressure. Good luck with that...
To paraphrase Upton Sinclair: "You can't make someone understand scientific facts when their religious beliefs depend on not understanding them."
Another appropriate quote: "You can't reason someone out of a position they weren't reasoned into in the first place."
U know know NO mathematics, probability or statistical theory. All the probabilities are impossibilities. John Froelich Ph.D mathematics, NSF postdoc, IT consultant .........etc.......etc......
@@WmTyndale Oh dear, how wrong you are... I have a PhD in computer science and applied mathematics and a couple of decades of experience in very large statistical estimation processes. I have chaired international scientific commissions on the subject, and will happily eat people like your John Froelich for breakfast. If he thinks he should disagree with mainstream science, undoubtedly he has published his remarkable findings in proper scientific journals? Can you please give us a few papers he has published on the subject?
No? Didn't think so. My poor friend... you have been misled.
@@WmTyndale Actually, I have a PhD in computer science and applied mathematics, but that's irrelevant. I would like you to point out which aspect of my explanations you disagree with, because I deliberately wrote it in such simple terms that there is not much room for discussion. Namedropping of some numbskull creationist semi-scientist doesn't work, you should instead just give us a proper reference to his scientific publications on this topic. Let me guess... mr. Froelich doesn't really have any accepted publications in mainstream science on this subject, does he? Oh dear. We might easily think that he's just pushing his creationist views, rather than doing honest science.
Extremely lousy... lazy. Not even among the top apologists... just lame
This comment is lazy. At least provide what you disagree.
Typical theist. Very little knowledge about reality. Big ego.
Typical atheist. ^
@@anilkanda611 so - you also waste your and other's time on fables?
What a load of uninformed drivel!
Sure. But what did you bring to the debate? Nothing.
@@anilkanda611 There is no debate.
On one side are provable scientific facts backed up by years of research and testing in fields such as biology, genetics, geology, etc.
On the other is a collection of bronze age myths and uninformed assumptions presented as if they had some intellectual value. They do not.
Belief is not evidence. Faith is not evidence.
So even ancient people knew theres no god. ..
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
- Romans 1:18-32
Atheism is a created religion which allows for man to be free from God. The problem with this "faith" is that it is a lie being propagated and leading mankind away from its Creator. This isn't a new idea. The serpent of old did it then and is doing the same now. The bitter truth is always better than a sweet lie. I have tasted them both.
You'll find out
nata, noone is really an Atheist. It's not possible.
@@earlysda I see that cognitive bias is strong....
Goldstein doesn't even believe in the real Jesus of the Bible ..so what difference does it make what he believes ..he believes in an 1844 Levite Jesus..that does not forgive him at the cross. Created by the false interpretation of Daniel 8:14!!
Evolution cannot be proven, but neither can God
But there is a lot of evidence for evolution.
Right but the evidence has to be researched and studied and when you do that there is overwhelming evidence evidence for Jesus being God and the biblical account being true
@@georg7120there literally is zero evidence for Darwinian macro evolution of the species ..there is factual evidence for adaptation between the different kinds but there is absolutely zero evidence life started from amoeba microorganism and man came from lower life forms etc
@ryanesau8147 There iI s not even evidence that Jesus really existed.
@@georg7120 ya there is, you haven’t done any research. There is overwhelming evidence