Scientist Shows Why GOD Best Explains The UNIVERSE
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ต.ค. 2023
- Grab Atlas VPN for just $1.83/mo + 3 months extra before the BIG DEAL deal expires: get.atlasvpn.com/DoseOfWisdom
In this video, @DrStephenMeyer powerfully debunks the idea that materialism is able to sufficiently explain everything that modern science is revealing to us & makes a brilliant case for why Christian theism best explains the universe as well as the human experience. Enjoy!
Check out his book HERE: www.amazon.com/Signature-Cell...
Grab Atlas VPN for just $1.83/mo + 3 months extra before the BIG DEAL deal expires: get.atlasvpn.com/DoseOfWisdom
This is so far from the truth, here goes another Christian jumping to conclusions again. Even if god does exist how can you prove your god (the god of the bible) is the correct one when we all know many other gods were worshipped in the past and now? Please just show or provide evidence.
Video title is not consistent with religious teachings. Supernatural god is the only explanation for the universe.
@@extraordinary.verses it is not retard.
Can u explain the difference between natural and supernatural universe? Do u have both to compare? Or u just make claims outside of your ass just like rest of the believers?
Well, for one thing, none of these other gods other than Allah are creator gods. They are all gods emerged from a pre-existing universe. Want more?
Extraordinary verses in the Quran...
Quran 41.11 mentions that in the early creation the sky was smoke. God ordered the sky and Earth to come into being from smoke.
_11-Then He directed Himself to the heaven while it was smoke and said to it and to the earth, "Come [into being], willingly or by compulsion." They said, "We have come willingly”._
Navigate to herscheltelescope and see on the website the following wording which exactly matches Quran 41.11:
"The Universe is a very dusty place. Cosmic dust consists of tiny particles of solid material floating around in the space between the stars. It is not the same as the dust you find in your house but more like smoke with small particles varying from collections of just a few molecules to grains of 0.1 mm in size. Dust is important because we find lots of it around young stars. In fact it helps them to form, and it is also the raw material from which planets like the Earth are formed."
I have recently read the Bible best decision of my life it makes so much sense to me now especially what is going on in modern times I feel so much better converting to Christianity 🙏
The Creator KNOWS
that his favor and reward for Followers of Jesus Christ and believers of his teachings about the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead"
is
Eternal Life and existence without sufferings, pains, griefs, sickness and death on a safe and peaceful earth without arrogant, cruel, and merciless persons, without liars, traitors, deceivers, slanderers, perverts, and murderers.
Jesus Christ KNOWS
that all Atheists, Jehovah's Witnesses, SDAs, Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Born Again Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and fanatics of all kinds of Religions in the world
who rejected his authority and teachings as worthless and useless
and believe instead the lies, false and Unbiblical teachings of his enemies or the anti-Christs about "Armageddon", "rapture", "heaven and hellfire", "Trinity", and "reincarnation"
will
not be honored and rewarded by the Creator with anything nor tortured for eternity in their invented and fictitious Hell but just turn into worthless and useless dusts on earth forever after their inescapable deaths.
Followers of Jesus Christ KNOW
and are fully aware that all human beings have no immortal souls and will just become worthless and useless dusts on earth after their deaths just like the animals
but
all worshippers of the Creator who died recently and thousands of years ago like Abel, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Job, Naomi, Ruth, King David, Jesus Christ's disciples and followers, and many others will not remain as worthless and useless dusts on earth forever,
Instead,
in the Creator's right and proper time,
Jesus Christ will freely, happily, and willingly RESURRECT them back to life so they can all happily and abundantly live and exist on earth forever as submissive and obedient subjects of the "KINGDOM of GOD"
and fully enjoy his and the Creator's eternal love, kindness, goodness, compassions, generosities, favors, and blessings for eternity under his loving and kind rulership, guidance, and protection as the Creator's Chosen King and Ruler of the heavens and the earth.
Amen thr world gave me some hardships for it but its totally worth it and it made my strenght only stronger❤❤
Anything in particular?
@donnynunn6523 How did you feel about all the slavery and misogyny in the bible?
Your god murdering innocent babies and children makes sense to you?
Steven Meyer is so calm and engaging, I really love hearing him ❤
I have an amazing story. One day I was driving home and I felt the presence of the Lord, come down to me from above. It was as real as anything and I felt so comfortable with Him.
I knew if I asked Him to play a song on the radio, He would.
So I said "Ok Lord, play Come as you are..."
I didn't know what station it was on or anything, but I turned the radio on and the song started playing right on the spot, perfectly...
I started getting flooded with chills inside, trembling, and crying tears of joy. When I got home, He stayed with me for 10 minutes till I got out of the car.
Since then, I've been getting prayers answered wayyyy more often, because that experience made me stop doubting when I pray, and I follow Biblical instructions for praying, as best I can.
@@ThoseCowardsDeleteMyReply When you find God, Jesus, the first thing you learn is that all your requests or prayers won't be answered as you prefer, because only God knows what is good for your salvation. His will be done, not yours.
@@ThoseCowardsDeleteMyReply A while after that happened, I was watching a preacher on TH-cam and I felt this compassion come over me by the Holy Spirit, I believe.
So I prayed for him. "Father, I pray you double this man's ministry, double his finances, and double his marital life, in Jesus holy name. Amen."
The next day he released a new video. He was standing on stage for a bit, smiling. Then he said "The Lord has just doubled his ministry. He's doubled his finances and He's doubled his marital life...!!
My heart started pounding from shock, because I wasn't even thinking about how I prayed and he said my exact prayer from the night before.
Then a week or two later, another prayer like that was answered. It went on and on like that so much. It still happens.
@@ThoseCowardsDeleteMyReply Humans are made in God’s “image” (Genesis 1:26). Spirit (Our life force), Soul (Our mind, will, emotions/ aka our individuality/ personality), and Body (The temporary Dwelling place for our Spirit and Soul).… 3 parts that make up 1 person. Not three people, but 1 person made up of three parts. If this is possible with humans who were made in God’s image, it’s possible for God.
People have similar stories about being abducted by aliens.
@@stephenolan5539 Maybe aliens exist. Why would God create an ocean and only put one fish it. The universe is a big place. I don't know much about that, but my testimony is true. Please hear me out a sec.
There have been 3 or 4 people healed from stage four cancer at one church I go to. Another woman was healed of cancer there recently.
A deaf woman had hearing restored in another church.
A few years ago a woman called me out of the blue and told me her schizophrenia was completely healed after I prayed for her years ago.
A few years ago, I told a co-worker 2 stories and asked if I could pray for him and he said yeah. I grabbed his hands and prayed for his family, his finances, and things. I came to work 4 days later. He said he had gotten promoted to GM Manager over a bunch of different stores. Getting paid from 900 to 1600 and his wife was getting insane overtime hours. I mentioned that we prayed and he looked at me like he saw a ghost.
I feel like I just commented a few days ago about how much bigger your channel is getting to be. Another 15k since! I love how your platform is reaching so many, God bless the work you’re doing Brandon!
Thank you my friend in Christ!
@@Daily_Dose_Of_Wisdom
You should interview real biblical scholars but you won't I know. LMAO
Dr. Price is correct. The existence of Christ is a myth. You should listen to Bible scholars Dr. Richard C. Miller PhD, Dr. Kipp Davis Ph.D., and Dr. Dennis R. MacDonald. on their discoveries about Christianity while studying other religions.
This!
I am glad you mentioned beauty, that category of human experience with no other direct purpose but the enjoyment of creation. An atheist can explain why a sunset is beautiful - light and particles - but can't explain why we would see it as something we call beautiful. A survival argument for beauty does not really work without many mental gymnastics. And beauty seems to be a human need for living a full and prospering human life beyond pure survival. Why beauty? That's the question. My answer: Because God is the Supreme source of the Beautiful and we are made in HIs image.
beauty is a philosophical term that has a psychological effect. observing an object, event or idea that is beautiful invokes a psychological, emotional and hence a behavioral effect. think "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" why is that? beauty can take many forms, musical, visual, verbal, physical etc. if its in the eye of the beholder.. then it would be inferred that psychologically, it is observed and interpreted with respect to the individual observing it and how they are affected/respond to whats described as beautiful moreso than the object itself being inherently beautiful. a great example of this is art. art can be scientific like the Fibonacci sequence in geometry, or more creative such as Picasso or VanGogh. both can be beautiful, or can be appreciated as not beautiful but intellectually involved. this can be paralleled to belief, you're correct in that belief is for your own purpose, and not for anyone elses but everyone can believe or not believe differently.
Thanks, that was really well thought out and worded extremely well. I'll be pondering over your words for quite some time to come. Not to try to take it apart, but in order to memorize the concept well enough so as to be able to use the principle as I require it. Your message is really wonderful. Thank you!
Here we go again. We don’t know why we think things are beautiful therefore it must be god. U theists have absolute zero logic, theists are just the low quality version of humans and damage to the humanity species…
@donthesitatebegin9283 So, are you just a by-product of this creator? This creator doesn't know you nor care that you exist? Yet somehow you live on a perfect carbon-based planet that allows you to survive and think above basic instinctual thoughts, even to the extent that you question your own existence?
What type of animal questions it's own existence? If DNA is what made us why would it encode into us the ability to questions our existence and meaning of how were living in terms of morality? And why do we all at one point or another seek that which is greater than ourselves? I don't think the existence of a random creator which doesn't care about you explains any of this well.
Why should we care for the disabled and weak? What's the evolutionary benefit to that? What's the point of it? Why would DNA care about giving us the brain capacity to want to help and care for the weaker versions of ourselves and why would this random creator of yours want that as well.
A random sentient creator that just exists in infinite space just to exist would'nt have created the reality we currently live in. And If it did please explain to me how you think it makes sense.
Because I don't see the objective correlation in our reality for a random existing creator that doesn't care and by happen stance we exists due to this creaters ability to create things that work and function on a sub atomic level at a very extreme and complicated accuracy. If you ask me the fact that we're so complicated proves what created us does care personally about us. And the Bible explains this perfectly
@@donthesitatebegin9283instead of trying to be a condescending smart-ass why don't you actually be straight to the point and ask your question? Also no Christian refers to their God as a supernatural 'Sky-God' so what's the point of using so many idiotic buzz-words and descriptors that people like yourself commonly use to insult or downgrade someone's beliefs?
This was written almost 2000 years ago.
Hebrews 11:3 ESV
By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
Faith is believing in something without good reason or evidence. Other religions say their god or gods created the universe. You can't all be right, but you can all be wrong.
I cannot wait to listen to this entire interview. There’s not a lot I enjoy more than listening to a brilliant Christian. (Even when it’s a little over my head)
👍
th-cam.com/video/5A-Z9rjXJCc/w-d-xo.html&feature=share
.
th-cam.com/video/DlDAUsO6AVk/w-d-xo.html&si=DU7iVcjRDK2doy-6
I’d be more than happy to answer any questions you may have.
@@joshua2707
I have a question
Can you provide a mechanism for intelligent design ?
@@Unconskep In what sense?
I’m glad I subscribed. These are the types of conversation I was hoping to find here on YT. Great and informative discussion, thank you. God Bless
I have come to believe in a conscious, creator god mostly through deduction. I believe in the risen Christ through corroboration. Everything else is hearsay.
Agreed. But I had to comment because I like how close hearsay and heresy looks in your comment. 😂
This is so far from the truth, here goes another Christian jumping to conclusions again. Even if god does exist how can you prove your god (the god of the bible) is the correct one when we all know many other gods were worshipped in the past and now? Please just show or provide evidence.
@@cabindatimmy2451 Atheist Pack (Science Speaks).
@@cabindatimmy2451 I'm curious why do atheists like yourself troll Christian channels. If you know you're not at all concerned about God or Christianity, then why not get a hobby or a life instead of speaking to Christians on TH-cam?
Why ask questions when you can research and study for yourself, you're not convinced by what you find, that's fine. You don't have to be an antitheist, just move on.
@@cabindatimmy2451 Israel
“Atheism fails to explain this.” Atheism isn’t intended to explain anything. It’s the lack of a belief.
No, it is a religion devoid of self-awareness.
Great conversation. Thank you Dr. Meyer for all the work you've done in combating the deceptive dogmas that have lead people away from the Lord. May God bless you both and the good work you are doing 🙏✝️🙏
Thank you! 🙏❤️
@@Daily_Dose_Of_Wisdom love you bro God bless
Stephen Meyer wouldn't recognise science of he tripped over a science book in his church. He's nothing more than another preacher. He publishes in no scientific journals, and no real scientists take him seriously at all.
Dr. Meyer has not proven theism whatsoever. He is just adding on more sophistry. I can refute his argument if you want.
@@CMVMic Thank you for the reply. I woke in the middle of the night and happened to see your comments, so need more sleep and don't have time for an in depth conversation at the moment, but I would say that Meyer has never claimed an absolute proof of anything as the same problem can easily be pointed to in reverse as to claims about some absolute proof of a purely undirected materialistic origin of the universe. Now this is a short clip of an interview and not representative of his full length books or lectures that unpack his full positions or his various references of mainstream scientific concessions of points he's made as well. Something I elaborated on in another comment I made here about this video.
I think reading his latest book in full would be more helpful in that regard as well as his other books and lectures.
What he has brilliantly referenced in public dialogue elsewhere is that according to Darwin's own mechanisms of "inference to the best explanation" which is something we can observe already in operation, that that logic Darwin and his mentor used straightforwardly points to an intelligent designer outside space and time.
Meyer certainly has specifically addressed how the origin of complex information has only been observed in operation coming from an intelligent mind, rather than a mindless thing, and therefore we can logically infer that when we find code like DNA in our own cells, that is like our own computer code but only more complex, that an intelligent designer is the agent responsible for that code, blueprints and instructional language in our own bodies.
So that's a groggy quick reply on that subject. There's certainly much more than this short clip encapsulates. I would recommend Meyer's interview with Dr. Michael Shemer the head of the Skeptic Society. Meyer's given credit in that interview for the robust arguments he gives in his newest book as well as praised that it was published by a University Press grade publisher. So gotta leave it there for now. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. God bless you and yours friend 🙏✝️🙏
I listen to these scholars and intellectuals- and while I'm blessed to actually have come from an academically enriched existence and actually understand the debates at hand, I cannot help from hearing my parents in the background (who did not have the luxury of "time" and exhaustive patience) saying, "because I SAID so, THAT'S why"....
Thanks for posting this discussion with Stephen Meyer. He is extremely intelligent, well informed, articulate AND humbly modest. Even when discussing and quoting 'opponents' he is gracious and respectful. Your engagement with him is most enjoyable and meaningful. I can think of a few (atheistic) relatives who need to hear this discussion.😊
Can scientist give us any evidence of bible god or any particular god?
Ah yes, the creationist playing at being a scientist. Stephen Meyer is a professional liar.
" Stephen Meyer. He is extremely intelligent" That is a load of bull crap. Can you show me any scientific journals where Meyer published his work?
I‘ve been listening to you & John Lennox for a long time now & am simply thrilled by your clips - please continue making such valuable clips. 🇦🇹
Great Interview really enjoyed it, thank you.
Not sure if this summarizes what Meyer is saying correctly, but essentially, it's like trying to build a new complex structure that's like a Jenga, but at the same time, hoping it doesn't fall apart before you finish the new construction.
The common theme with this and a previous video seems to be that keeping the new structure stable long enough before completion is very hard, if not near impossible, unless there was something else to hold it together.
Thanks for sharing this video!
Or, maybe it's like a tornado in a junk yard...
Once you study biochemistry, you will marvel at how incredibly complex and organized the human body is. Just processing sugar for energy takes many processes that needs to work simultaneously and consecutively, otherwise it will all fail to work. It's also the reason why the idea of evolution as the origin of life, nor the reason there's biodiversity of life since everything needed to work together just to perform a single action. In other words, it's everything or nothing. The half life of amino acids and proteins is very very short, amounting in just hours. And then, you needed to create enzymes to go along with it, otherwise it will take millions of years to undergo reaction. You can't really use the reason that time made it all possible since time literally is the enemy of evolution due to the law of entropy.
@@jeffersonrubia9606 How's it feel to be wrong about everything?
@@mrhyde7600can you provide an argument to support your claim?
@@mrhyde7600 How am I wrong then? Can you provide something instead of leaving a statement without countering any of my claims? I'm open for an intellectual discussion, unlike you who seems to be a troll.
Brandon you did it again brother! CHRIST is Lord!✝️🙏
Love how you shot out at the beginning like a bullet 😅 thank you for the video!
Haha!! Had to cut to the chase!
This is so far from the truth, here goes another Christian jumping to conclusions again. Even if god does exist how can you prove your god (the god of the bible) is the correct one when we all know many other gods were worshipped in the past and now? Please just show or provide evidence.
@@cabindatimmy2451And here you are again. Echo.
@@cabindatimmy2451Seek and you will find. Don't seek and you surely will not find. Today, 2.5 billion have found the one true God. God reveals Himself to all who read his scripture and call on His name.
@@cabindatimmy2451 When an atheist can explain to me where the physical laws of the universe existed prior to the "Big Bang"...or how the laws of thermodynamics are violated by having matter appear out of nowhere to create the universe (matter can neither be created or destroyed in a closed system (the system being the universe)...or even explaining if "0" is the presence of nothing or the absence of something -- give some honest, reasonable answers to questions like that (and many others - such as: how does a system so precise with the exact physical laws necessary for life to exist come about out of an explosion (explosions create disorder, not order) -- then maybe you people will be taken more seriously than the comedians you are... it is easier to believe in creationism than the BS that atheists spew (By the way, I am neither! I keep an open mind!)
Another excellent interview!! This might be my favorite yet! Must take notes as usual 😊
No point taking notes. What Stephen Meyers produces is pure drivel. Just drool on your notepad, it will be just as informative.
I love your videos! Keep ‘‘em coming.
It always sounds hypocritical to me when Atheists accuse Believers of trusting in a mythical figure.
The idea that nothing, literally no matter or energy or time or space or natural laws, could explode into everything and order itself sounds more mythical to me than Zeus.
Nothing is not a scientific concept, it is a reliogious one. Science has never founfd 'nothing' and scientists would not know where to start looking for it. Your god came from nothing, not the Universe.
U know what is even more stupid? To claim god exists with no demonstration or evidence to prove it
Infinite time causes infinite possibilities. If u can comprehend this then u can comprehend lots of other things rather than assumptions. Good luck
@@WildThoughtsAI Are you suggesting our Universe is infinite? As in it has no beginning? I would love to hear your explanation of "infinite time causes infinite possibilities". Thanks!
@@HistorymakerD i am not suggesting nor claiming
I am giving an another possibility that doesn’t require god and it may be the case but again I am not claiming like theists that god exists, atheists don’t claim
I look forward to Dr Meyer winning a Nobel Prize for this discover which definitely makes novel testable predictions.
Pigs will fly before that happens………he’s not even a scientist.
Excellent episode
Totally transendant presentation. Brought me to a beautiful moment of worship. Thank you ❤ !!!
😁😅🤣😂🙃🙃🤢🤢🤮🤮
Stephen Meyer is a very clear, cogent thinker, in my view. Thanks, Stephen for using the brain God gave you to help steer us to clear thinking about origins, etc!
Stephen Meyers can think? I've never come across him putting a single cogent idea together yet. Certainly not any scientific one. He's just a two-penny preacher.
When will the long format be available?
This week! 🙌
This is soooooo good!
God bless you both
At about minute 21:00 Meyer was asked:
"what is the philosophical significance of what you just unpacked there [about protein folds and their rarity happening by chance].
And he starts down the horrible odds for undirected evolution path, but then he stops and doesn't fully go down that important road of how the odds are against the origin of life happening by atheistic chance according to the mainstream data.
Instead he transitions down the moral argument/ethics path of discussion, but I think the significance is much more important on his intial answer and he's spoken about that in more depth in the past elsewhere (link on that below). Let me elaborate...
He's referenced that important work by Douglas Axe (Now a colleague at the Discovery Institute) showing that there's not enough time even with Billions of years in the age of the earth/universe for proteins to fold by chance on their own according to the data and what we know about rate of mutation and the complexity and odds of proper protein folds occuring.
So it's an argument against an undirected cause of of our origins. An argument against Atheism or simply dead materialism having the time even with all the ingredients for a single protein to be created by itself. That's one protein and a human is made up of countless proteins.
Basically people have claimed God doesn't exist because evolution was undirected by anyone and came about by itself and simply time and chance will make life happen. Douglas's work he's referring to absolutely crushed that argument with hard data and it was peer reviewed work at that from a prestigious institution and if memory serves was referenced in at least 1 of not more prominent scientific journals. It's also available in the National Institute of Medicine (Pubmed) scientific library page where all such similar peer reviewed science is stored in America.
So it's no small deal as an argument for a designer i.e God needing to facilitate life according to an argument based on odds. The data points to intelligent design and the God of the Bible at that. So I wanted to add that important information on the Philosophical significance of that data.
Here's a few short TH-cam clips one from Meyer and another related video as well on this subject:
Odds for proteins evolving by chance:
th-cam.com/video/JQ3hUlU0vR4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=9fh3XS2FsVXT9TWY
Origin of life "by chance":
th-cam.com/video/W1_KEVaCyaA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=GetwiWHhlDpoS_n5
The protein data is just like the significance of the Big Bang. Something also referenced in the Bible like 12 different times. It speaks of an expanding universe as God rolled out the heavens like a blanket and so on... something another brilliant friend of Meyer's (David Berlinki) wrote about in His book "The Devil's Delusion" where he quotes a Nobel Prize winning Laureate who helped Discover and develop the Big Bang Theory saying how we could have predicted the Big Bang simply having looked at the Old Testament and the Bible as a whole.
So thank you both for the important conversation. Thank you Dr. Meyer for all the work you've done and the Discovery Institute as well in combating the deceptive dogmas that have lead people away from the Lord. May God bless you both and the good work you are doing getting the word out to the general public on these vital topics🙏✝️🙏
Are yiu willing g to answer some straightforward questions concerning your comment?
It just amazes me that folk who believe in a God use this argument for humans existing, but then do not use this same argument for God existing. If we were designed, then God must have been designed , and his designer must have been designed etc etc. So forth and so on.
God is eternal, meaning there is no source of power and wisdom greater than Him. He is called the First and the Last for that very reason. There is no God besides Him. Thinking that He needs a designer is a flaw of human reasoning about an eternal God.
@@davidalvarado6420 Thinking that everything else in the world needs a designer, except a God, is an even bigger flaw.
@@clew5687 please explain how it is a bigger flaw. Everything is in the world shows design from the simplest forms all the way to the most complex, as a result it points to a designer. God by definition is transcendent above of all creation and has made Himself known through creation and His perfect word. The fact that you don't want to accept it is on the basis of your unbelief. God is not subject to our ability to reason.
What makes more sense, everything came about by chance, unguided random processes and time or God made everything with a purpose and it functions accordingly?
The love of sin is why people reject God and walk in unbelief. I lived like that for years until God by His grace and mercy, saved me from who I was a rebel, sinner, scoffer, mocker, and atheist by choice. Our conscience is the moral compass given to us by God, leaving us without excuse. Why do you think we have an innate sense of morality or desire for justice?
Anyway, God loves us all even when we have wronged Him time and time again worshipping creation rather than the Creator. He initiated salvation by sending His Son to die on the cross for the sins of the world. Receive His forgiveness, mercy and grace by changing your mind about God and sin. Believe in Him, calling on Him to save you by faith and I assure you it will transform your life if you genuinely seek Him who is the One True God!
God bless brother
God plays a guiding hand in everything we do in this realm of existence. He works alongside his children to mold and grow consciousness and love.
Your channel is the best.!!
Thank you! Glory to God!
Stephen Meyer's book The Return of the God Hypothesis fleshes out everything he said here (along with much more)! I think it's one of the best books arguing for Christian theism. Even Jordan Peterson said: "Reading Stephen C. Meyer's Return of the God Hypothesis. It's a difficult book, well-written, densely informative. He claims (p. 211) 'without functional criteria to guide a search through the vast space of possible sequences, random variation is probabilistically doomed.' Is this an accurate claim? He makes the case very carefully. It's not often that I encounter a book that contains so much that I did not know...."
The question you need to ask is whether any of the claims in Meyers book have been peer reviewed.
@@horridhenry9920 Yes, quite a bit of it has been peer reviewed. That said, peer review has its own significant problems. See the work of John Ioannides for example.
@@pattube Are you saying “The God Hypothesis” has been peer reviewed? In which scientific journal?
Intelligent Design of which Meyer is a proponent was put on trial in Kitsmiller V. Dover. Michael Behe, and Meyer gave evidence in the trial. Behe admitted that no articles appearing in peer reviewed scientific journals argue in favour of ID. Meyer has just rehashed the same arguments rejected by the court.
I am aware of the issues with peer review.
@@horridhenry9920 I specifically answered your statement regarding "claims in Meyers book have been peer reviewed". And yes, certain "claims in Meyers book" have been peer reviewed. That doesn't mean the book itself has been peer reviewed which would be silly since it's meant to be a popular level book.
@@pattube Which claims have been peer reviewed, and by whom?
Has any of his creationist / ID claims been peer reviewed ? His “scientific “claims cannot be taught in science lessons, why is that?
I have a board game I created called "the human race".
Now there are certain things you can learn by analysing the design, pixels etc.
There are certain things you can learn from analysing the material it's printed on etc.
But you can learn more when you acknowledge that it was created by a mind and ask "why was this created?" You could hypothesize that maybe there was a purpose, maybe there's meaning, maybe it was for fun, maybe I was bored...
You'd learn more by looking at the instruction book about how it operates and what my purpose was...
You'd learn the MOST by asking me, the creator, which involves being in relationship with me, about what my purpose is/was for the game and the players.
I can tell you where I got the inspiration from, the backstory etc.
Also, sidenote. I exist outside the game world, I existed BEFORE the game was created, and I'll exist when the game ends.
I have to be outside the game to create it
If your instructions or game rules are anything like the Bible you can expect people to be throwing the pieces at each other and burning the board. I hope you are a better god than the psycho clown that got foisted on us.
@@kevinkelly2162By what moral standard do you judge God to be a psycho clown?
I often relay this perspective with a different spin. It goes like this:
The creator of a gasoline powered vehicle does not need gasoline to operate. The creator of a watch does not function with gears. The creator of a computer does not operate on 1s and 0s. In the like manner, the creator of space is not contained by space. The creator of time is not bound by time. The creator of matter is immaterial. To then ask where God came from is like asking what sequence of 1s and 0s the creator of a computer exists by. I do not believe that anyone has ever seen matter materialize from nothing and yet there exists an entire universe. In my opinion, the logic says space, time, and matter had to originate from a creator that is outside of space, time, and matter. The creator cannot be seen as they exist outside of the physical but we know it exists because the physical cannot create the physical.
The only thing I would add to the creator being outside the creation is that they are also not subject to the rules of the creation.
Maybe the human race is the abandoned science project of some alien child.
@@horridhenry9920 At least we have come to the conclusion that there is, in fact, a creator. Once that is acknowledged, one can move forward with addressing who or what that creator may be.
Dr Meyer and Dr James Tour are such a blessing, awesome and humble men(if they weren’t Christian they’d be arrogant like Dawkins, for example). Great job with the interview, your doing great work for the Kingdom.
James Tour is a humble man. Really? Did you see his debate with Dave Farina? He was deranged. To his credit he has since admitted that it was not his best moment.
@@horridhenry9920 your moniker fits you well. Enthusiastic and frustrated is not the same as deranged.
@@bobdalton2062 Ad hominem’s suits you well. Screaming like a banshee, and writing symbols on a board, in my opinion, is not the actions of a balanced, in control, rational person.
The fact that he know has a person from the DI overseeing his output is telling.
Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature: (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.)
Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree.
String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring?
What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine.
Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules:
“We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr
(lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958)
The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics?
When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry.
Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other.
Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change.
=====================
Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons?
Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension?
Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons
. Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase.
Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length )
The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge.
Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms.
In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.
1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.
The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)
How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter?
Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles?
I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles.
....
Only the deepest philosophers come to the conclusion that God is the reason for our existence.
Philosophy is an explanation not evidence, philosophies can explain science, they are not the science itself, they are an abstract
Meaningless twaddle.
You know... "we" have found that the heart's nervous system contains around 40,000 neurons. When someone starts thinking with the heart... 8~)
@gondwanaape9384 it's called the God paradox. God stays just out of reach but to the brightest, most humble minds.
@@ghost11282 Like yours?
Bless you for this content! In Jesus name amen 🙏
@@ThoseCowardsDeleteMyReply An illegitimate Jew according to one old collection of myths and legends.
@@ThoseCowardsDeleteMyReply He is the “image of the invisible God” IE - the incarnation.
John 15:18-19 GW
[18] “If the world hates you, realize that it hated me before it hated you. [19] If you had anything in common with the world, the world would love you as one of its own. But you don’t have anything in common with the world. I chose you from the world, and that’s why the world hates you.
Thanks
Mind blowing reality
And a psychotic episode best explains god.
"God is love" and ‘God is life’ therefore ‘love is life’. God made us and the earth in his image…self-sacrificial love. Everything is circles within circles, the universe to atoms. When the water ‘cycle’ is broken a pool becomes stagnant and death ensues, when our blood ‘circulation’ is severed death ensues. Eternal life is built upon the precept of self-sacrificial love, everything giving for the good of everything else. We fail to love (give self-sacrificially) therefore the entire system of wheels within wheels fails and death ensues. Evolution depends upon the opposite - selfishness; survival of the fittest; dog eat dog; kill or be killed, resulting in cycles of death, leading to extinction. Creation can be proven by scientifically testing the existence of Gods ‘law of love’, is life dependant upon circles of self-sacrificial love, does the bee need to pollinate the flower? If love is essential for life then it flies in the face of evolution, because evolution cannot create a system which defies itself.
He didn't sacrifice anything. There was no loss.
Evolution creates nothing. Try looking up the meanings of words before you use them. It will spare you from lookinglike some parrot. Everything you said is meaningless. And pollination is a side effect of bees collecting pollen. Do you really think bees understand that?
Stop the poet non sense. U religious ppl are the downfall of humanity. Stop poem and use some logic
We up 🙏
That is no answer but there is a revelation. An experience of unspeakable love.
Stephen Meyer is a scientist? Since when?
Since never, just another creationist kook
This is epic
This is so far from the truth, here goes another Christian jumping to conclusions again. Even if god does exist how can you prove your god (the god of the bible) is the correct one when we all know many other gods were worshipped in the past and now? Please just show or provide evidence.
@@cabindatimmy2451There is zero evidence that supports Evolution or Atheism. It is itself a religious belief based completely on a unprovable world view of history with no real science to back it up, which also goes against mathematical odds, goes again obvious complex design in the DNA coding system, which goes against the scientific law of biogenesis. In your world view, impossible things can happen.... just given enough time, time is the magic word, millions and billions of years ago... append a fairy tale..
@@cabindatimmy2451 They can't. There is no provable evidence there is a god, or gods. Quarks, which were mentioned, can't be seen or felt, but they are determined to be there because of interactions of other particles. God cannot be proved to be there by an interaction of particles. But I always say I am willing and able to believe in a God or the God if he/she/it would simply show themselves and prove they are what they say. It's simple. And if you read the bible God showed up many times and did many things. Why not now?
@@cabindatimmy2451 how many time you going to say that please shut up
@@cabindatimmy2451Near Death Experiences that correlate with biblical teachings
Hello could you post some videos about Alex O Connor
we love you
I'm not convinced about some of the protein folding stuff in the way that Meyer is using it. Just because evolution probably can't change one sort of protein fold into another doesn't mean that evolution is impossible, all it means is that it is highly constricted as to which way it can go. A bit like rain running into a series of rivers, a small change at the beginning makes a big change at the end that cannot be reversed, the water from one river can't get into another. I'm sure that's why so many animals go extinct, their environment has changed but there's no pathway for them to adapt by evolution, and they get replaced by something simpler or more adaptable that can find a way. But I regard evolution is a miracle in itself, it requires very specific laws and constants of physics for it to happen. I think it would be highly improbable in a universe created by pure chance. And that it's more helpful to theists' arguments than it is to the atheists'.
Can you list the specific laws required for evolution? Think it through….physics has nothing to do with the process of evolution…so your thought is already off to begin with. Sexual recombination, drift, mutation all play significant roles in evolution…none of them are laws let alone anything Specific. Look at peoples offspring they all differ slightly as they combine traits from their parents for example…what law is that? But a necessary component for evolution….mutations are simply copying errors….does a specific law create mistakes? Selection? What law applies? Anyway….seems like you want to think things through…which is good….but consider the simplicity of the evolutionary process against your idea of making it constrained and specific? Does it add up? Lastly…the idea of a universe from pure chance….is it? Could it be quantum processes will always produce a result…..much like the correct conditions for precipitation will make snow flakes? Each individual snow flake seems unlikely to form by pure chance….but yet we know it’s more complicated than calling it pure chance….the right conditions produce snow flakes nothing miraculous and no one wonders at the pure chance of the snow flake (though we might enjoy the individual shapes).
His explanation for evolution is fundamentally flawed. Mutations are indeed random, but natural selection(or reproductive success) is non-random. Moreover, mutations of proteins, usually give a slightly different protein, but a protein nonetheless. This is experimentally confirmed. Meyer is being fundamentally dishonest by comparing computer code to DNA.
His probability argument is meaningless, as any long sequence is EQUALLY unlikely to happen.
Wish you would have gotten to the fine tuning discussion.
Simply do this: Be still, and lay aside all thoughts of what you are and what God is; all concepts you have learned about the world; all images you hold about yourself. Empty your mind of everything it thinks is either true or false, or good or bad, of every thought it judges worthy, and all the ideas of which it is ashamed. Hold onto nothing. Do not bring with you one thought the past has taught, nor one belief you ever learned before from anything. Forget this world, forget this course, and come with wholly empty hands unto your God.
You choose "Christian" as the colour for your Yoga class....adorable.
Absolutely, the best sort of Christian is one who has empties his mind of all thought and reason. ROFL.
God bless you both dear brothers in Christ for this wonderful, plausible & logical explanation for the existence of our God. God bless & protect both of you. Please continue making such interesting clips. Medizinalrat Mag.phil. Dr. med. Issam Elias/ Austria 🇦🇹
I can explain anything if you let me invoke an all powerful superhero from the ether.
And what if it's not some mere "all powerful superhero from the ether", but an all powerful being that people have seen, touched, and witnessed demonstrating mastery over space, time, matter, and life?
@@StageWatcher Cool imagination. Let me guess this all powerful being just happens to be the same God from the folklore given to you as a child. You can totally prove this tall tale but your dog just ate all the really good evidence and now you have " historical eye witness claims". 🙄
@@TurinTuramber "Cool imagination. Let me guess this all powerful being just happens to be the same God from the folklore given to you as a child."
Let me guess, your parents taught you about electricity. How dumb that you still believe in it.
"You can totally prove this tall tale but your dog just ate all the really good evidence and now you have " historical eye witness claims"."
What if I could give you a precise prophecy from the God of the Bible that anyone can corroborate, just as anyone can corroborate the existence of electricity after their parents tell them about it?
I commend these scientists for striving for a rational explanation of reality that brings to light the necessity of a creator God, but the more and more I watch these videos it seems to me that they’re trying to persuade people that God exists because the science points in that direction, but not because they themselves have come to KNOW the creator personally.
As someone who has encountered God in a personal way, I can’t help but wonder what awesome works would these scientists put out, if they moved from the science, to the actual KNOWLEDGE OF GOD!
I thank God for my natural skepticism and not just taking the word of someone else’s understanding of the Bible, but rather my need to seek the Truth for myself!
I had searched for the truth ever since I was a little child. Never approaching religious dogma but rather science and physics in particular. I was a person that needed to understand things in order to believe in them.
Although I was not interested in church nor it’s rituals, being a Catholic by tradition not choice, I did believe in a creator God due to the complexity, organization, and majesty I observed in nature.
In a turn of events in my life I came to the utter realization that “science” was never going to save my soul. It was at this point that I joined a little non-denominational Christian church, walked down its aisle October of 1991, and received Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. I was prayed over by the pastor and told at that moment I was saved and going to Heaven. Really? That’s it? I didn’t feel any different, my motives, thoughts, and desires were exactly the same as before. Am I suppose to just take this Pastor’s word and trust what he says? I think not!
This is when I decided to dig into the Holy Bible with the same fervor and zeal I had always studied science. I didn’t submit myself to any denominational doctrine or any pastoral authority, but rather bought the King James Bible on CD and decided to listen to it passionately in those wasted hours during rush hour traffic. This was a total of 15 hrs of word a week for over 3 years. That’s a lot of Word! My reasoning was if what pastors are using to teach and guide their congregations is the Bible, why not study it on your own? I’m certainly not going to trust my soul to some guy with what I saw as a MAN MADE degree in theology; my eternal destiny is way too important for me not to do my homework!
My biblical endeavor allowed me to not only have scores and scores of scriptures memorized, but also entire CHAPTERS memorized verbatim, word for word. I could tell you what is in the Bible, and what is not. I had a tremendous amount of scriptures in my head, yet the TRUE meaning and understanding of them had not yet DOWNLOADED into my heart.
This would soon change one Saturday morning March 25, 1995 while alone at the beach in my car, listening to Hosana integrity Worship music, reading the Bible, and loving God with all my heart, mind, soul, and strength! That day I remember reading to “love your enemies”, something I could never see myself doing; how can you possibly love someone causing you harm? This is something that to me defied all understanding! I remember putting my Bible down and looking up to the sky with my heart simply overwhelmed with love towards God and fantasizing about how beautiful it would be to be just like Jesus!
Suddenly it happened, it really happened! I saw something open within my mind and all that word I had accumulated for years came rushing in, and in that one sweep powerful things took place. First I felt the DEMONS that had lived inside me all my life and I never even knew were there jump out of me with a hideous screech. Second, my eyes were opened to a spiritual realm that is hidden to us in plain sight. And third, my brain processes had skyrocketed to levels I never knew the brain was even capable of!
I sat there in my car trembling in fear not knowing what was happening pleading and asking God for help. Of course He obliged by bringing some of those memorized scriptures to the forefront of my mind:
“My son, if thou wilt receive my Words, and hide my commandments with thee; So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, and apply thine heart to understanding; Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding; If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures; Then shalt thou understand the FEAR OF THE LORD, and find the KNOWLEDGE OF GOD.”
(Proverbs 2:1-5)
When I picked up the Bible and looked at its pages it was simply unbelievable! The Words had become HOLOGRAPHIC, as if they were hovering just above the pages with 3-D like qualities! No contradictions whatsoever! There is no way man wrote this; I thought! How can mere men write a book in 3-D? The Word’s perfection was absolutely staggering! Every parable, every scripture I didn’t quite seem to understand before, was as plain as if reading a children’s book!
“Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my Spirit unto you, I will make known my Words unto you.”
(Proverbs 1:23)
“All the Words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them. They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge.”
(Proverbs 8:8-9)
Everything the Bible speaks about was TRUE, and I was experiencing it first hand!
“For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding. He layeth up sound wisdom for the righteous: he is a buckler to them that walk uprightly. He keepeth the paths of judgment, and preserveth the way of his saints. Then shalt thou understand righteousness, and judgment, and equity; yea, every good path. When wisdom entereth into thine heart, and knowledge is pleasant unto thy soul; Discretion shall preserve thee, understanding shall keep thee:”
(Proverbs 2:6-11)
It was also while I was experiencing this in all its glorious splendor that God revealed to me the True Gospel! It was then I was shocked to realize “Oh my Lord! This means we’re not suppose to sin at all! Once again the fear of the Lord flooded me! I had sinned all my life; I had been told that we are sinners by nature; I was convinced that it is impossible not to sin; but now it was as if I’m going to have to live the rest of my life walking on egg shells! That’s impossible! I thought; There is no way I can do this! The Lord suddenly showed me that no one makes us sin, but rather we CHOOSE to sin. It suddenly dawned on me, you’re right Lord, I know what is right, and I know what is wrong, I will just “choose” to do what is right! I don’t have to sin anymore! I was full of joy and excitement ready to start living my new life walking in the FAITH of the gospel! I couldn’t help but burst into tears when I realized God had planned this moment from the beginning of time when I read:
“But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”
(2 Thessalonians 2:13-15)
People, I have taken the time to write this long post as a testimony of God’s love and faithfulness to those that diligently SEEK and LOVE Him.
The Bible is “GOD” in written form:
If A=B , and B=C, then A=C
A=GOD , B=JESUS, C=WORD
If GOD=JESUS,
and JESUS=WORD
then GOD=WORD
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the WORD WAS GOD.”
(John 1:1)
But as it turns out the WORD is also the HOLY SPIRIT!
“It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the WORDS THAT I SPEAK UNTO YOU, they are SPIRIT, and they are life.
(John 6:63)
“And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the SPIRIT, which is the WORD OF GOD.”
(Ephesians 6:17)
So the equation is now :
GOD = WORDSPIRIT or G=WS
When God takes the BEAM out of your eye spoken of by Jesus that hinders you from SEEING CLEARLY and you realize those WORDS are speaking directly to you once the HOLY SPIRIT enters you, it turns the equation into:
G = WS^2 (squared)
Now doesn’t science claim that everything is made out of “ENERGY” which they themselves have shown is E=MC^2 (squared), talk about CHECKMATE!
“By the WORD of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.”
(Psalms 33:6)
“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my WORDS shall not pass away.”
(Matthew 24:35)
“He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my WORDS, hath one that judgeth him: the WORD that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”
(John 12:48)
HENCE THE IMPORTANCE OF FINDING OUT WHAT THE “WORD” HAS TO SAY!
God Bless.
Well, they didn't actually produce any evidence for this young earth creationist god. What's the evidence that the book of Genesis is literally true, because that's what preachers like Stephen Meyers claim? He's not a scientist, by the way. Just a preacher like every other.
I'm just going to post this reminder about what evolution means.
1. Life forms reproduce and therefore have a tendency to become more numerous.
2. Factors such as predation and competition work against the survival of individuals.
3. Each offspring differs from their parent(s) in minor, random ways.
4. If these differences are beneficial, the offspring is more likely to survive and reproduce.
5. This makes it likely that more offspring in the next generation will have beneficial differences and fewer will have detrimental differences.
6. These differences accumulate over generations, resulting in changes within the population.
7. Over time, populations can split or branch off into new species.
8. These processes, collectively known as evolution, are responsible for the many diverse life forms seen in the world.
-wikipedia
This is a nice educational posting but I'm afraid I don't see the relevance to the video.
This talk is about the failure of evolutionists to even come close to explaining #7 (aka macro-evolution). Oh, I forgot to add: time is not the friend of evolution with small incremental changes. Code changes in software destroy the program more than help the program. In order to change a software program into a new species of program, the developer has to change the entire code base. Programming 101.
@@harlowcj I'm glad you asked.
In the video Stephen Meyer suggested that protein needed to be just right in order for the protein to fold properly. This is true, however it isn't the whole truth.
"The mutational tolerance of proteins is often high in many regions of the sequence (Matthews,C.R. (1993) Annu. Rev. Biochem., 62, 139-160)"
"Overall it is concluded that evolution is not a chance process, except in the epistemic sense of “chance.”"
There are many examples of proteins that have evolved from existing proteins. For example, the human hemoglobin protein evolved from a similar protein in fish.
@@michaelbabbitt3837
A biological species is a group of organisms that can reproduce with one another in nature and produce fertile offspring.
Here's an example of why speciation seems plausible. The fossil record contains fossils of an animal called Eohippus that are dated about 55 million years ago. These animals were about 12 inches tall at the shoulders. There's no way that this animal species is the same as modern horses.
However, the fossil record also shows the existence of Orohippus which is slightly bigger than Eohippus which is dated to about 45 million years ago. Another is Mesohippus which is even bigger and more horse-like than Orohippus dated about 37 million years ago. This record of fossils suggests that the characteristics of populations of animals change and this would include the ability to interbreed with certain populations of organisms.
@@mesplin3is the primordial ooze truly how people who subscribe to different evolution theories believe the process of evolution started or is that an oversimplification? If it is could you explain it for me? Genuinely interested.
From what I understand you can't really compare DNA etc with computer code.
So if that is true he is falsly changing the analogy from DNA to computer science and then discussing how evolution can't work because it can't work on computer code. If I understand the argument.
Meyer has been telling the same old tired lies for two decades. DNA isn't brittle like human written computer code is. DNA is can tolerate large amounts of change and still retain its functionality, or develop new functionality. That's one of the main reasons evolution works the way it does.
If Meyer would even know anything about computer science then he would not be spitting all this bull crap about the "code".
@@LGpi314 It is part of his job as a professional liar to spread "all this bull crap about the "code""
@@derhafi I agree DI is full of professional-looking liars.
We know that whatever or however the universe started, it wunt the Judeo-Christian god. For this god has unmistakable trappings of creation by our ancient primitive ancestors
Bussin
No cap
This is so far from the truth, here goes another Christian jumping to conclusions again. Even if god does exist how can you prove your god (the god of the bible) is the correct one when we all know many other gods were worshipped in the past and now? Please just show or provide evidence.
@@cabindatimmy2451And here you are again. Same comment.
@@voiceofreason162 maybe he's a bot
@@voiceofreason162 I watched the full video and all your comments are based on highly problematic arguments. We humans have several possible means of reassuring any evidence we may have of god. Things like observation, and interpretation are a few but faith can't be one of them because you can't afford to be confident in faith. And this goes against any possible methods for humans to be knowledgeable about god. If humans can't sense god then he is hiding or doesn't exist.
It's similar to saying we don't need evidence to believe in god. But most believe first to know him.
I'll never understand how people are so uncomfortable saying 'I don't know' that they start to value simply having an explanation with little to no regard for whether it is actually true.
Truth is at the heart of any religion my friend. Rather presumptuous of you to think otherwise, considering all the texts basically have the same stories and mythologies.
@ghost11282 A) That's just factually incorrect. Religious texts all make contradictory claims, and so 'truth' can't be at the heart of them all by definition.
B) what I find interesting is the way people employ terms like "but this explains everything" like that in and of itself makes it true by default, bereft of any evidence.
@@timcollett99 a. Care to give some evidence to support that claim? Floods, fires, famines, moral codes and all kinds of similarities appear in EVERY religious text and mythologies. B. Law of conservation of mass and energy. You can't have consequences without antecedents.
@@ghost11282 I never said they have no similarities. I mean, they are all comprised of words for a start. They do, however, all make contradictory claims.
I'm not sure why you are talking about the law of conservation of energy. Are you about to trot out a flimsy inductive argument about how there MUST have been a prime mover 🙄
@@timcollett99 you've still provided exactly no evidence to support your claim like I did. Only provided more to support my claim that the wicked only try to destroy, not build. It's the lazy, easy way out dude. It's not inductive, it's physics. Every thing that exists in this universe exists because something else existed beforehand. Logic.
Yipppeeee!!!!!😊
Even more importantly, you have to have a pre-existing specific decoding system. If all you understood was Chinese, then these letters would be meaningless despite the fact they carry information. You first have to know the language before you can arrange the characters in a way that makes sense. If you only know Chinese, it doesn’t matter how many times you rearrange these letters they’ll always be meaningless.
DNA is not a code. It is not instructions.
@@stephenolan5539 says those who ignore what every scientist says about it..
It’s not called the genetic code for nothing and every biologist understands it codes for the production of proteins and regulates every biological function… you fanatics will say anything to preserve your belief system….
th-cam.com/video/9EbsZ10wqnA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=4d7GmCer4bc45vjJ
God created everything!
But what was he doing for all eternity before he took 6 days to create his little science project?
@@millennialpoes5674 First off, that's a misconception of what time is. Time is part of what God created.
Second, there are very varied interpretations of the creation account. I lean towards that reading it as literal 24 hour day cycles makes little sense.
@@midimusicforever um no. That just makes no sense. He apparently took 6 days to make everything, so there's that. For anything to transpire at all, time has to exist. Think about this: he's up there welcoming people into heaven all day. Every 10 seconds maybe. That's time. You die, you go up there, you wait for your relatives to join you. Without time, either nothing happens at all, or everything happens at once.
@@millennialpoes5674 Well, that's how it works for us. It's very hard for a being confined in time and space to imagine what a being not confined in time and space can, or cannot do. Just like with matter and energy, it cannot be created nor destroyed. Well, that's how it works inside the universe, but modern science points towards that it hasn't existed forever, but had a beginning. And if matter, energy, time and space had a beginning, then whatever caused them to come into existence must be independent of matter, energy, time and space.
@@midimusicforever let me put it another way. If he's watching us supposedly always, how can time simultaneously pass here but not in his "realm"? Let's say you're in heaven. You're watching over your relatives. Time is passing for them normally. If you're observing them, time is passing normally for you too. Else they're in slow motion or fast forward. You can't have it both ways. That's just nonsensical mumbo jumbo.
ATHEISM IS NOT SUPPOSED TO EXPLAIN ANYTHING!
When will you people work this out?
Never. They are theists for a reason, they will always be dumb
So because you lack belief in everything, then no one else should believe in anything.
@@MastaE2288 yea we won’t believe in unicorns if there is no evidence.
Root cause of world is literally false belief dictated by religion
@@MastaE2288 Who said "everything"?
You did. Atheism is the answer to one question only.
And you're free to believe what you like. I'd be interested to know if you know why you believe.
How convenient. 😂
0:22 Only events have beginnings, not substances. Theism refuted.
Nature works its magic from the bottom up. It is beautiful because it is true. Once you see it, you will understand.
In my opinion there are many flaws, or, to put it mildly, many questions being begged in that the Universe (take note: AS WE KNOW IT), had a beginning. Apparently the main physical evidence of this beginning, is related to the Penzias and Wilson observation of a strong "background radiation", supposed evidence of a Big Bang moment of the beginning of the Universe. Flimsy evidence, showing a penchant for jumping to conclusions. In the first place, the question begged is: if the Universe started in a small egg (ie Lemaitre's hypothesis), and it expanded at a certain rate (deducible perhaps by Hubble's theory), then we could conceivably measure the size of the Universe. Ok, then what lies beyond the supposed "spheroid", a vacuum? Why instead not stick to what has been observed by powerful telescopes as new stars being born in the outskirts of the observable Universe? Has God's power terminated after the supposed "Big Bang". Couldn't it be that God's creative power is generating the "background radiation"? Clearly no one, that I know of at least, has the slightest idea. It seems presumptuous to imagine that us created beings will ever come even close to understanding how God did it. But Life is beautiful, so "what, me worry?"
Even before the discovery of the expansion of the universe and the postulation of a Big Bang by Georges Lemaitre, the second law of thermodynamics was strong evidence that the universe had a beginning (and an end), and that it started from a "wound up" or high free energy state. But it couldn't go back infinitely in that direction just like there's a limit as to how far a clock can be wound up. Also Eintein's fiddle factor or "cosmological constant" to prevent gravitational collapse was in itself evidence that the universe was not eternal in either direction. Einstein was trying hard against reality to postulate an eternal universe.
"in that the Universe (take note: AS WE KNOW IT), had a beginning."
Hmm. You need to educate yourself. Planck's epoch. Human knowledge is imncomplete.
There would have been nothing outside the "egg". Not even vacuum.
And I don't know is an acceptable answer. Making stuff up isn't.
You can’t explain X, therefore Y. Classic argument from incredulity.
Steve Meyers from the plastic university.
How does inheritance explain why every single persons face,retina and finger prints are different
Whats wrong with saying we don't know? No evidence for any gods. Science says we don't know so lets find out and look at the evidence. Religion says this book says its true so it must be! 🤦
Science says we don't know so we cannot know. Thats your stance. What do you accept for evidence? Scientific empiric evidence? Empiricism cannot be empirically proven. You can't even justify the epistemology of your worldview.
@@linusloth4145if we don’t know then we can’t claim random bullcrap, is that hard to understand?
@@WildThoughtsAI If you listened and understood what was said in this video you would know that a substantial case was made for the existance of God and not some random unreasonable claims.
If you claim 'what science cannot demonstrate, mankind cannot know' that is a self-refuting claim because science cannot demonstate this.
@@linusloth4145 It’s vital to recognize the distinction between empirical evidence and philosophical or theological reasoning. While the statement “what science cannot demonstrate, mankind cannot know” may seem self-refuting on the surface, it points to a deeper question about the limits of empirical knowledge. Just because science cannot currently demonstrate something doesn’t mean it’s unknowable; it may just be unknown at this time. The ongoing exploration of science helps humanity approach, but perhaps never fully attain, a complete understanding of existence.
@@linusloth4145 if someone makes a strong claim with 100 certainty then the evidence and reasoning for its claim must be strong as well. Religions claims with no evidence and reason
"God" was literally never a scientific hypothesis.
Unfalsifiable explanations are not science.
It would be like saying Leprechauns are a scientific hypothesis
that explains gold, rainbows, and short Irishmen.
We can't rule it out. But we also can't test it.
Unless someone can show how leprechauns are testable and falsifiable, leprechauns will never be a "scientific hypothesis".
The same applies to gods.
The Big Bang is not science either then.
How would you falsify it even in principle?
The falsifiability criterion applies in general, but not in the limit case of cosmology.
@@tgenov Well, there is currently evidence that supports the Big Bang theory. To falsify it, you simply find evidence that refutes it, or at least changes the model in some significant way.
So far, none has been found. If/When it is, science will 100% change their models and understanding. The beauty of science is they go where evidence leads, not stick dogmatically to a preconceived idea.
Pretty simple.
So you can't believe in macro evolution then?
@@teks-kj1nj > To falsify it, you simply find evidence that refutes it
You've just paraphrased the falsifiability criterion without actually making the limits/breaking point of the model explicit.
You are just waving your hands. Unless you can state a priori what a falsifiability condition amounts to in practice you are demonstrating the unfalsifiability of the theory.
>or at least changes the model in some significant way.
What could possibly do that? The Big Bang is a singulary.
A point without any characteristics. You can characterize a point however you want.
New phenomenon gets discovered by science not accounted for by The Big Bang? No problem. The singularity explains it - because a singularity explains anything.
In Category Theory (Mathematics) anything follows from the initial object.
The Big Bang's unfalsifiable.
@@teks-kj1njIt's not a theory. Learn what a theory is. A theory is a SUCCESSFUL hypothesis which makes accurate predictions which the god idea CANNOT and DOES NOT do.
If God just IS, there is no question on beginning. He’s above of beginning. So Big Bang is only for now. God if exists is more than BB
PROOF that ATHEISM and all KINDS of RELIGIONS CAUSE DISHONOR and ETERNAL DEATHS to MANKIND
All the great and superior Atheists, Jehovah's Witnesses, SDAs, Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Born Again Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, and fanatics of all kinds of Religions in the world
who are angered, offended, and can't accept that -
1. the Creator is the One who should be honored and respected by all heavenly and earthly beings as the True and Sovereign God as written in Matthew 22: 37 and John 17: 3 and
2. Jesus Christ too should be honored and respected by all heavenly and earthly beings as the One given by the Creator all authority in heaven and on earth as written in Matthew 28: 18
are
obviously the arrogant, fierce, offensive, and rebellious earthly beings
who
don't respect and value their own lives, dignities, and existence....
not bothered at all and just don't care even if their Satanic hatred, mockeries, opposition, and defiance of the Creator's Sovereignty and his Christ's authority and teachings bring and cause their own dishonor, disgrace, downfall and ETERNAL DEATHS, just worthless and useless dusts on earth forever.
PROOF that ATHEISTS and FANATICS of RELIGIONS CAUSE the SUFFERINGS, GRIEFS, and DEATHS of MANKIND
All Atheists, Jehovah's Witnesses, SDAs, Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Born Again Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, and fanatics of all kinds of Religions in the world
who trick, mislead, and deceive their co-human beings to hate and reject the authority and teachings of Jesus Christ about the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead"
and believe instead their lies, false and Unbiblical teachings about "Armageddon", "Trinity", "heaven and hellfire", "rapture", and "reincarnation"
are
obviously the unkind, merciless, disrespectful, and deceitful persons on earth
who
don't respect and value the lives, dignities, and existence of their own co-human beings including that of their own families, friends, and neighbors...
not bothered at all and just don't care even if their Satanic arrogance, hatred, anger, lies, deceits, unkindness, cruelties, and hypocrisies offend, hurt, insult, humiliate, and degrade the lives and dignities of their own families, friends, and neighbors, all human beings and cause their sufferings, pains, griefs, sickness, and DEATHS.
PROOF of the WORTH, VALUE, and IMPORTANCE of JESUS CHRIST to IMPERFECT, SUFFERING, and DYING HUMAN BEINGS
Jesus Christ KNOWS
that all imperfect, suffering, and dying human beings who freely and willingly honor and obey him as their loving, kind, and merciful Heavenly Master and King and believe his teachings about the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead"
in their obedience to what were written in Matthew 28: 18, Luke 4: 43, and John 11: 25, 26
are
his kind, respectful, and submissive Followers on earth
who
will be freely, happily, and willingly honored, favored, and rewarded by the loving, kind, and merciful Creator with ETERNAL LIFE and existence without sufferings, pains, griefs, sickness, and death on a safe, secure, and peaceful earth without mockers and haters, without liars, deceivers, perverts, traitors, the immoral, and murderers as written in Revelation 21: 3, 4, 8.
PROOF of the WORTH, VALUE, and IMPORTANCE of the LIVES and EXISTENCE on EARTH of ALL WORSHIPPERS of the CREATOR
Followers of Jesus Christ KNOW
and are fully aware that all human beings have no immortal souls and will just become worthless and useless dusts on earth after their deaths just like the animals as written in Ecclesiastes 3: 19: 20 ; 9: 5, 6,
but
all worshippers of the Creator who died recently and thousands of years ago like Abel, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Job, Naomi, Ruth, King David, Jesus Christ's disciples and followers, and many others will not remain as worthless and useless dusts on earth forever,
Instead,
in the Creator's right and proper time and as written in John 11: 25, 26,
Jesus Christ will freely, happily, and willingly RESURRECT them back to life so they can all happily and abundantly live and exist on earth forever as submissive and obedient subjects of the "KINGDOM of GOD"
and fully enjoy his and the Creator's eternal love, kindness, goodness, compassions, generosities, favors, and blessings for eternity under his loving and kind rulership, guidance, and protection as the Creator's Chosen King and Ruler of the heavens and the earth. as written in Revelation 11: 15.
Yes, we know matter does not come out of nowhere. We also know that time, space, and matter are all dependent on one another and came into existence simultaneously. The creator of space, time, and matter is outside of space, time, and matter. They are also not subject to the rules of space, time, and matter. This is perfectly in line with every creator/creation relationship that exists.
Oh, he references the cosmological argument which has already been ripped to pieces in many debates.
Ripped apart how? And by whom? How is it, that you even exist? A Creator, at the very least, is every bit the plausible explanation for existence of time, space, and matter, as any hypothesis ever put forth by a materialist.
Ripped to pieces? Yes, when did this happen and by whom? I'd like to know also.
I know how I exist by the laws of materialism. Materialists don't put forth hypotheses about the origin of the universe. Cosmologists study it but they are actual scientists. And BTW, a plausible hypothesis is absolutely worthless on its own. If you test the hypothesis using scientific research and discover evidence, then you are closer to a claim that there is a creator. But logic alone is insufficient to prove anything.@@BPond7
If you would really like to know, then find a bunch of videos that debunk the cosmological argument. The burden of proof is on you to prove the existence of your invisible deity. Philosophical arguments by themselves are insufficient to prove anything. You can't show me empirical evidence for your god so I can, with a high degree of probability, conclude that your god is highly unlikely to exist. And probability can be expressed mathematically. This is far superior to Christian apologists saying if god exists, which is in the realm of possibility but not in the realm of probability. If you don't know the difference between the two, you're a dunce.@@lauramann8275
Pondimus Maximus? Well, you finally admitted that we all evolved from pond scum.@@BPond7
it's just so frustrating that you are titling this video as "debunks atheism." atheism is a null position...there's nothing to debunk. there's no claim to debate, no belief to debunk; and I suspect you know that. so this is just a disingenuous, bad faith, intellectually dishonest video from the start.
I’m assuming you prefer the term materialism? (With the claim being that there is nothing but matter)
@@Daily_Dose_Of_Wisdom
How bout allowing a person to speak rather than a label? Just a natural conversation where you find out what another human says rather than trying to CORRECT the person on their own position.
@@Daily_Dose_Of_Wisdom people (including, and especially, folks like Dr. Meyer and Dr. Craig) tend to get caught up in what "atheism" means, and the debate ends up being about semantics instead of substance. that seems to be what you're doing here as well..."atheism," "materialism," "naturalism..." let's stop trying to box people into a corner and slap a label on them.
instead, try to reply to the position (not the label) of most non-believers: I don't believe in your god, in the exact same way you don't believe in the gods of any other religion. any argument you make for your god is the logical equivalent of arguments others will make for their gods. I'm unconvinced by any of these arguments. I am NOT, however, positing my own belief. I'm comfortable saying "I don't know" when it comes to the universe and existence. I don't have the need to fill the void of my ignorance with more ignorance (i.e. "the god of the gaps").
thanks for replying!
At 4:35 of my listening, my natural tendency is to ask something like : how a transcendant separate being at the origin of the universe can explain both why at millions Light years away a star is forming, and why here on earth a baby is born mute deaf and blind? How can I make the link between this transcendant being responsible for both of these events and the biblical God ?
Let see if the rest of the video answers that.
Edit at 22:16 : the philosophical consequence of the impossibility of neo-darwinism theory of random mutations to explain efficiently the evolution, as random mutations of proteins generate such a mess that you cannot believe this is an efficient process IS...
24:08 ...that evolutionary process cannot explain our capacity to distinguish between the good and the evil and have a morality. So....(he has 2 mn left to explain the relationship between neo-darwinism flaws and the Biblical God).
Edit at 25:55 : so, as believing in evolutionary process based on survival instincts (that he says does exist by the way) leads to the triumph of immorality and eugenistic policies or Hitler.... (1 mn left)
End of the video : so you cannot trust the evolutionary people when they say that morality is a by-product of evolution.
Yes and it was all created in seven days right
God of the gap. You can't explain it so God 😂😂😂
How would you explain?
@whatistruth560 I don't know is the best explanation
@@kalords5967 it's God of the gaps or god of the multiverses?
@@whatistruth560 The multiverse is not just wrong but stupid.
@@kalords5967 agreed
Meyer's "explanation" is exceptionally poor. He posits a "personal transcendental cause" cannot be tested, even in principle. So that makes the whole hypothesis as fundamentally flawed.
What is it that atheism simply fails to explain?
19:42 this is a good point. Why haven't we seen viruses actually become self-replicating and fully "alive?"
They don't have the means to and no way to achieve the means.
@stephenolan5539 incorrect, according to cell theory, simple cells combined with other simple cells to make a complex cell. According to virus theory, a virus hijacks a cell to reproduce. Therefore, according to evolutionary theory, it absolutely has the means by chances (the multitudes of encounters to become fully alive) by hijacking the already alive cells.
Nope, no actual scientist would claim science can demonstrate a god of any sort, let alone specifically the Christian one. That remains a fable, like every other religion.
You look like to be a proud joke .
more of the same - connect unconnected subjects to try and discredit the lack of belief in god- which is all Atheism is - same Fail
More of the same. Atheists in the comments addressing absolutely nothing that was said in the video.
@@harlowcj it's bunkum, Atheism is simply the lack of belief in any god, as there is no evidence. This video doesn't provide evidence, there isn't any, but as ever tries to discredit Atheism nefariously.
@@roydodds3693 It's more than a lack of belief in god. Atheists believe that there is no god.
You never see agnostics getting into fights with theists lol. they don’t care because they don’t have a belief one way or the other while atheists do.
@@roydodds3693 more proof that the wicked only try to destroy or you'd build your own arguments. There's a God, no consequences without antecedents. Something can't come from nothing. We can't have matter and energy in this universe without some divine intervention.
@@ghost11282 no scientist claims the universe came from nothing....only theists do.
I like that Stephen Meyer breaks down concepts in a way that we can grasp. Well, grasp is a strong word in my case 😅 but he is a lot easier to follow than others I’ve listened to. Really great interview!
"I like that Stephen Meyer breaks down concepts in a way that we can grasp." LMAO. Sure, sparky, sure. If Joe Rogan can make Meyer look dumbdumb then it is the end of the line.
Joe Rogan: " Some people believe in big food. Do you Meyer this it is true?"
Meyer: "Well., hhmmmm , well......"
That is a breakdown for you.
Why can't we say, "That we just do not know"? Just live a happy and filfilled life. The Concept of God is Manmade.
Meyer studied and got a Master of Philosophy and Doctor of Philosophy in history and the philosophy of science. That doesn't qualify him to talk about evolutionary biology, astrophysics, or anything else. "Scientist shows why god..." is in this case nonsense, intellectual dishonesty, he's not a scientist in any relevant field. His intelligent design work has been thoroughly debunked by experts many times.
🔥🙏God loves his children. It is scientific fact. The unambiguous order, truth, and structure of the universe illustrates the fact. Even the fundamental order, structure, and truth of 3D space and 1D time confirm it to be true. Before the big bang there was no 3D space and 1D time, it was just cold dead random chaos. A force acted on that infinite chaos outside of space time and set forth order in our Universe. Name that creative force God or give it any other name, doesn't matter, it is scientifically irrefutable 🔥🙏
@@ryngrd1 it's amazing how arrogant, confident and adamant a person can be about their ignorance.
You have no idea what happened before the universe began. More importantly you definitely can't conclude it was created by something at all. You people undermine your intelligence when you pretend to know things you can't know to sound smart, ultimately exposing the fact that you're far from it.
You do not have to waste your time listening to this highly unqualified individual who creates content on their channel.
This type of ad hominem fallacy has always fascinated me. Muslims would use it too: "you haven't studied Arabic or the Coran for 150 years, so your arguments have no value". Completely dishonest. But if you accept it, I forbid you to ever use ANY argument for which you cannot show a 5-year diploma, nor have recourse to ANY philosophical argument thought out by ANY ancient, classical or modern philosopher -- for none of then ever "studied" their topic or got a diploma in their field, or published randomized studies, etc. Foolishness.
So the classic argument “appeal to authority” isn’t intellectually lazy & disingenuous? Just because he isn’t any of those doesn't automatically undercut his argument.
I listened to the entire video and heard nothing but the typical Christian apologetics and "god of the gaps" arguments. Nothing new here at all. And...nothing of value.
And how he portrays "the evolutionary argument" in morality is appallingly short sighted. He is setting up a Strawman fallacy against evolution by using the most absurd arguments. Just all the typical nonsense I've heard multiple times.
It's clear to me that so many humans want to ask who, when, what, and where about God. I was in that boat many years. Then one day I realized that the amoebas in the petri dish might wonder about me....of course we inhabit the same time and space but something/someone had to also create that time and space. Do I have to live in that petri dish for all the amoebas to believe that I started it? It may be a leap of faith but it isn't as far as a jump you might believe.
The Creator KNOWS
that his favor and reward for Followers of Jesus Christ and believers of his teachings about the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead"
is
ETERNAL LIFE and EXISTENCE without sufferings, pains, griefs, sickness and death on a safe and peaceful earth without arrogant, cruel, and merciless persons, without liars, traitors, deceivers, slanderers, perverts, and murderers.
Atheists, Evolutionists, Jehovah's Witnesses, SDAs, Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Born Again Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and fanatics of all kinds of Religions in the world KNOW and are fully aware
that they are
NOT Followers of Jesus Christ and believers of his teachings
simply because
Jesus Christ is offensive and unacceptable to them... worthless, useless, and undeserving to be honored and respected as the Creator's Chosen King and Ruler of the heavens and the earth
and his teachings about the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead", worthless and useless too, no value whatsoever in their lives and existence
They also KNOW and are fully aware that they
are
NOT and will never ever be Worshippers of the Creator
simply because
the Creator is offensive and unacceptable to them.... worthless, useless, and undeserving to be honored and respected as the True and Sovereign God.
Worshippers of the Creator and Followers of Jesus Christ KNOW
and are fully aware that all human beings have no immortal souls and will just become worthless and useless dusts on earth after their deaths just like the animals
but
all worshippers of the loving, kind, and merciful Creator who died recently and thousands of years ago like Abel, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Job, Naomi, Ruth, King David, Jesus Christ's disciples and followers, and many others will not remain as worthless and useless dusts on earth forever,
Instead,
in the Creator's right and proper time,
Jesus Christ will freely, happily, and willingly RESURRECT them back to life so they can all happily and abundantly live and exist on earth forever as submissive and obedient subjects of the "KINGDOM of GOD"
and fully enjoy his and the Creator's eternal love, kindness, goodness, compassions, generosities, favors, and blessings for eternity under his loving and kind rulership, guidance, and protection as the Creator's Chosen King and Ruler of the heavens and the earth.
And your evidence for your god is...? Somehow, you didn't put any in that post. Must have escaped you.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki we have a finely tuned universe around us that involves an incredible amount of complexity. We also have immaterial concepts of things such as "justice" that appears to go beyond "what's best for the group" in many cases. There are also laws of logic which, while we can describe how they work, we have no formal explanation for how they came to be except that logic transcends the human experience.
.
Each one of those pieces of evidence by itself isn't proof positive that God/god/the gods exist, but when we add those together with a host of other pieces of evidence, it becomes like a courtroom where one must judge. While there is no smoking gun, we certainly have plenty of evidence. So now we have to ask ourselves: "What is the most likely explanation?"
.
1) That all of this randomly happened by chance?
2) That all of this was designed and created on purpose?
.
Based on all the evidence, the more likely explanation is #2. If you have evidence why #1 is more likely, I'd like to hear it.
@@sidwhiting665 If you want to claim our universe is "finely tuned," you need to provide evidence for the tuner you like to believe in. What I see is that we're adapted to the universe we evolved in.
So the universe operates by laws that are logical. How does that prove your Christian god? If the laws weren't non-random, we wouldn't exist. This proves your god... how exactly?
So we cannot explain how the universe is the way it is. Your answer is to make up imaginary gods that poofed it into existence. And your evidence for these gods is...? Oh, of course, you don't need evidence, you just demand we believe in magic the way you do.
When you can provide evidence that some magical sky-daddy designed and created us for some purpose you can't even define, I'll take your bloviations seriously. Till then, you're just another religious nutcase.
@@sidwhiting665
When you see a puddle, are you amazed that the hole it is in exactly fits it?
Fine tuning is not a valid argument.
And when someone wins a lottery jackpot, was it random or were they chosen ahead of time by the people running the lottery?
Where did matter and energy originate? See Isaiah 40:26
Why are things the way they are? See 1 John 5:19
Will things ever change? See Psalms 37 & 2 Timothy 3:1-5
Basically see the bible if you have zero desire to learn anything considering there are no peer reviewed scientific discoveries associated with any bible verse.
@@randyblackman6271 Scientific research is proving the Bible right every day. It doesn’t prove God exists, but it’s congruent with what the Bible says about the world.
@@tomcoop9750 you couldn't be more wrong. The bible literally starts off wrong in Genesis 1.
Has science confirmed talking donkeys and serpents?
Has science proved people can be resurrected after being dead for three days?
What about walking on water?
No, no, no and more no's.
All the bible proves is how ignorant and fanciful the people that wrote it were. If the bible actually explained the world, it would be used as science and taught as such. It's not even taught as true history.
Is it possible Christian's just engage in alot of wishful thinking?
2 Samuel Ch 12 v14-18. Nathan said your child will die. God struck the child and it died.
What is the relationship between your video and that verse?
God is good!
Which one? I heard Zeus was pretty nifty, handy with sword and spear.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Yahweh is the only true and living God.
@@corrysmith Prove it. Then prove to me all other gods are false. Take your time, you'll be the very first! LOL!
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Actually I wouldn't be the first. Asking me to list all the evidence in support of Yahweh and against Zeus is disingenuous and cowardly because the list is long. But as simply as can be put is as Yahweh says in his word that his creation is a testament to Him.
@@corrysmith Yeah, you believe in your god because he told you personally. If you had any evidence, you'd provide it, but like all Christians, you prefer just to make stuff up.
god is light upon light he described himself he has a face hands but are unique he said in the quran
If. Your radio receiver is damaged , you cannot receive radio waves on your radio.This does not mean that radio waves do not exist.Those who do not believe in God have their spiritual receivers damaged which is their spirit . Those who are born again have their spirit enlivened and so they can believe in God .We as believers should pray all the more for unbelievers to be saved and come to the full knowledge of God .
The Creator KNOWS
that his favor and reward for Followers of Jesus Christ and believers of his teachings about the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead"
is
ETERNAL LIFE and EXISTENCE without sufferings, pains, griefs, sickness and death on a safe and peaceful earth without arrogant, cruel, and merciless persons, without liars, traitors, deceivers, slanderers, perverts, and murderers.
Atheists, Evolutionists, Jehovah's Witnesses, SDAs, Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Born Again Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and fanatics of all kinds of Religions in the world KNOW and are fully aware
that they are
NOT Followers of Jesus Christ and believers of his teachings
simply because
Jesus Christ is offensive and unacceptable to them... worthless, useless, and undeserving to be honored and respected as the Creator's Chosen King and Ruler of the heavens and the earth
and his teachings about the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead", worthless and useless too, no value whatsoever in their lives and existence
They also KNOW and are fully aware that they
are
NOT and will never ever be Worshippers of the Creator
simply because
the Creator is offensive and unacceptable to them.... worthless, useless, and undeserving to be honored and respected as the True and Sovereign God.
Worshippers of the Creator and Followers of Jesus Christ KNOW
and are fully aware that all human beings have no immortal souls and will just become worthless and useless dusts on earth after their deaths just like the animals
but
all worshippers of the loving, kind, and merciful Creator who died recently and thousands of years ago like Abel, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Job, Naomi, Ruth, King David, Jesus Christ's disciples and followers, and many others will not remain as worthless and useless dusts on earth forever,
Instead,
in the Creator's right and proper time,
Jesus Christ will freely, happily, and willingly RESURRECT them back to life so they can all happily and abundantly live and exist on earth forever as submissive and obedient subjects of the "KINGDOM of GOD"
and fully enjoy his and the Creator's eternal love, kindness, goodness, compassions, generosities, favors, and blessings for eternity under his loving and kind rulership, guidance, and protection as the Creator's Chosen King and Ruler of the heavens and the earth.
@@jaflenbond7854 Dream on.
Maybe your god has a faulty transmitter. Ever thought of that? No, of course not. Believe in magic all you like, you can't show an iota of evidence for any of it.
a thought- God is of some other realm/dimension where He being non material and outside created matter space and time and can also enter creation ..
Which god?
Evidence?
With evidence you probably mean scientific empirical evidence. Empiricism can't be emiprically proven. Your worldview cannot even justify itself.
1. Creatio ex nihilo is incoherent:
P1: Creatio ex nihilo posits the creation of the universe from absolute nothingness, implying a state of non-existence before creation.
P2: Non-existence is not a state but rather the absence of existence.
P3: Minds are events, which means they are temporal occurrences or processes.
P4: If minds are events, they cannot exist in a state of non-existence before the creation of the universe.
P5: Therefore, the notion of a divine mind or creative consciousness existing in a state of non-existence before creation is incoherent since events (minds) cannot exist in a state of non-existence.
2.Christianity makes a category mistake because minds aren't substances, minds are events:
P1: The mind is a nominal concept for a specific set of cognitive events.
P2: If minds are events, they are grounded in substances.
P3: A living being represent a specific separation within a single substance that behaves in a specific way.
P4: Minds are grounded in living beings.
P5: Therefore, minds do not exist independently of living beings
3. Substance dualism is false because it encounters the interaction problem. There can be no necessary connections between distinct existences (Hume's Dictum).
4. Necessitarianism is true because logical possibilities do not entail metaphysical possibilities, and it cannot be proven that things could have been or happened otherwise, hence, free will is false.
5. Argument for Substance Monism:
P1: If substance dualism is false, then substance monism is true.
P2: There is only one substance that things are made out of, making it impossible to conceive of another substance, hence, substance dualism is false.
P3: Substance Monism is true.
P4: If Substance Monism is true, it can be either Physicalism, Neutral Monism, or Idealism.
P5: Idealism makes a category mistake, and physicalism attaches an arbitrary label to the substance.
P6: Neutral Monism is true.
P7: If neutral monism is true, there is only one substance in reality, and it exists as an ontologically independent brute fact.
6. Argument for Existence as a brute fact:
P1: Existence is the totality of all that exists.
P2: If an explanation or reason is something that exists, it belongs to the totality of all that exists.
P3: Explanations or reasons exist.
P4: Explanations or reasons belong to the totality of all that exists.
P5: Existence has no explanation or reason.
7. Argument from Functionalism and Nominalism:
P1: Mental states are events.
P2: If P1 is true, then mental states do not exist.
P3: Events are not existents but occurrences.
P4: Events have beginnings.
P5: Existence is made of a single substance that grounds events.
P6: Labeling the substance "God" is tautologous and arbitrary.
P7: Such a definition conflicts with the Christian definition of God as a personal creator.
Defense of p1. If something involves the unfolding of events to be made coherent, then it is itself an event. Concepts are dynamic and require an unfolding of events to be articulated and conceived, hence, platonism is false
8. Argument against Idealism and Physicalism Labels:
p1. Idealism assumes that mental states are independent existences.
p2. This assumption commits a category mistake, as, under extreme nominalism, mental states are events, not independently existing particulars.
p3. Therefore, labeling them as separate existences is erroneous.
p4. Idealism, as well as, Physicalism labels the ontologically independent substance as "physical" or "mind" arbitrarily.
p5. Such labeling is arbitrary because the substance itself lacks inherent properties categorically defining it as "physical" or "mind".
Conclusion:
Under extreme nominalism, the substance can be understood as the ontologically independent brute fact without the need for arbitrary labels. By resorting to occasionalism or parallelism to address the interaction problem, substance dualism engages in special pleading. As a nominalist, I reject the existence of emergent properties in favor of aspects.
While a theist may post that God (a divine consciousness) was in a state of existence, pre-instantiation of change, this makes a category mistake since minds are mere concepts for a specific set of cognitive events grounded in living beings and it also makes an existential fallacy. Minds can further be defined as specific divisions within a single ongoing event established by arbitrary boundaries.
Job 26:7
Although some may claim they cannot see Him, I assure you, others may claim that He is very seeable
And those are the people we call crazy. MFers that run around seeing siht that ain't there are crazy.
@@mrhyde7600That's not there is to it though. It's also interpreting things we can see, grabbing our attention at just the right moments, telling us things in ways we understand, sometimes even audibly, making things work out to our benefit or putting us in a position to help others without our involvement. God is good!❤
But when you ask, they cannot show him to anybody else.
@@lauramann8275 God so IS good! Just looking at the word "good": I'd say "Promote the "g" and marry the rings"! hehehe =~D
@@kevinkelly2162 He reveals Himself to those that believe in Him.
Below is what finally lead me to saving faith in Him, the fact that it's all true and has far surpassed the requirements of Historicity.
With all of the evidence we now have there's simply no way I can logically doubt His Word and by extension the Coauthor Himself.
These other books and writings from antiquity are held up as truth and in some cases factual history.
These other books/poems and there evidence/sources:
Second most common manuscript document Homer's Iliad meaning there are more copies of it than any other secular writing/document from antiquity of which only 643 exist dating from 13th century AD. Homer is believed to have wrote it in the 8th century BC.
The Gallic Wars of Cesar in 1st century BC, there are only 10 manuscripts of that in existence dating over 1000 years after they were supposed to have been written.
Herodotus wrote of history and is known as one of the first historians 5th century BC and only 8 manuscripts exist and they are from more than 1300 years after he wrote anything.
History of the Peloponnesian War written by Thucydides. There are only 8 manuscripts that are from 1300 years after he supposedly wrote his account.
Book of Mormon and their various writings prior to the 1820-30's = 0 as in nothing has been found to support any of it except where it is clearly plagiarized from Scripture.
Now let's look at Biblical proofs:
We have a reliable collection of historical documents written by eyewitnesses during the lifetime of other eyewitnesses. They report super natural events that took place in fulfilment of specific prophecies and claim that their writings are via divine inspiration, not from men alone.
Jesus Christ cast out demons, healed the sick, blind, deaf, dumb and paralyzed, walked on water, fed thousands with little, and was resurrected all of which have eyewitness accounts.
The feedings alone were witnessed by the thousands He fed on the two separate occasions that we are told of in the Gospels.
John tells us that there were many more miracles/signs than what are recorded in the Bible/Gospels and that it would have filled the entire earth were they all to have been written down.
There can be no doubt as to the accuracy of our current Bibles as it is proven via all the source fragments, scrolls, papyri, codex' and sources dating all the way back to before Christ around 700 BC for the OT and between 100 to 150 AD for the NT. We have more proof for God's Word than any other written word in history, it is by order of magnitudes more.
The early Church Fathers prior to 325 AD:
Those known as the Anti-Nicene Fathers writings contain over 32,000 quotes from the New Testament from which we could reconstruct the entire/complete NT from just those.
They also contain over 19,000+ quotes from the Gospels alone prior to 325 AD.
The Bible is not just a book it is a collection of 66 Books all of which are linked together by One Divine Author. In this collection of Books there are over 40 authors but only one Devine Author who links them all together via the Holy Spirit. Those authors wrote down His inspired Word.
The bulk of the New Testament was written over a period of around 50 years. It was in 49 AD to 53 AD when the Scripture writings of the New Testament are thought to have begun. With the last living Apostle John dying in 100 AD.
Over a period of around 1500 years it was preserved and passed on:
In 3 Languages
On 3 Continents
There are 66,360+ source documents that have been found for the entire Bible of which there are 24,360 and counting source documents for the New Testament alone.
5,839 in the original Greek, some 2 million pages
18,524 translations of that Greek into other languages
Some of the oldest sources date to 125AD which is within decades of the completion of all the books that were canonized as the New Testament.
The New Testament cannon, (Gospels of the Apostles, Epistles to the early Churches), was decided at the Synod of Carthage in 397 AD.
(At that council they included some of the Apocryphal books but the early churches rejected them, a few saw some of the content in those books to be useful for historical reasons but never used them as doctrinal or held them in the same regard as Scripture)
Those asking for "Scientific Proof" of the Bible are either ignorant or asking with evil intent.
Scientific Method is:
1) Has to be observable.
2) Has to be measurable.
3) Has to be repeatable.
Therefore no history can ever be proven via scientific method.
You must use the historical method based on:
Eyewitnesses accounts.
Documents from the time or as close as possible.
Make sure the story is corroborated by as many sources as possible.
Look for anyone/anything that attempted to prove any of it false in that time period or as close to it as possible.
Did anyone successfully prove any of it untrue if they did there's no record of it?
Mathew = Was written more to the Jewish audience and that's one of the reasons for the extensive genealogy of Christ. There are also more references to the Old Testament in his Gospel compared to the others.
Mark = The shortest of the Gospels and is very direct or "Just the Facts" if you like.
Luke = Historian
A man of science, a physician, an educated and logical man who researched and gathered the accounts of eyewitnesses. He recorded the actual eyewitness accounts of our Lord and Savior, those who had heard Him speak and were present/saw the signs/miracles He performed, such as the Apostle Peter. He did this because the life of those eyewitnesses were coming to an end due to age, or Martyrdom, and he was inspired to write them down via the Holy Spirit before they could be lost or perverted by time.
John = Evangelist
John is organized around 7 specific events/signs/miracles all seen by eyewitnesses and corroborated by many. So he also provides proof of accuracy/truth.
All of the Apostles were eyewitnesses of Jesus and/or of the resurrected Christ. Including Paul whom Jesus came to as he was on the road traveling to Damascus to persecute more Christians. This would have been the resurrected Christ or a form of Him that came from Heaven.
There were at least 300 eyewitnesses still alive when Corinthians was written who could have disputed it but no one did.
Mathias became the 12th Apostles after Judas hung himself so the argument of there not being 12 Apostles comes from ignorance or evil intent.
Other cultures and non believer's historical documents show or corroborate many things that are in the Bible. Yet none of them prove any of it to be false yet they do strengthen it.
All these sources allow us to be critical when it comes to the level of accuracy in our Bibles.
The oldest manuscripts end The Gospel of Mark at chapter 16 verse 8.
There is a lot of evidence that anything after Mark 16:8 was added later gathering parts from all the other Gospels and even Acts.
4th Century Church fathers Eusebius and Gerome both wrote that Mark ended at 16:8. Many, early Church Fathers, (after 325AD and beyond), knew these alternate endings existed and didn't use them.
This is an error in the KJV, NKJV and the Book of Mormon, (unless it's been changed), which are based on more recent manuscripts that the older manuscripts disprove. Those translations have the added ending consisting of anything after Mark 16:8. Newer translations may or may not include the additions but if they do they're bracketed or mentioned in the notes.
The external evidence, (oldest sources), indicates that anything after 16:8 does not belong in the Gospel of Mark because those additions are not there.
The internal evidence is that it is all borrowed from the other Gospel accounts and Acts.
We don't know who these additions came from but we know where they got them:
(below are not time stamps but Chapter and verses)
.16:9 = is taken write out of Luke 8:1-3
.16:10 = John 20:18
.16:12 = Luke 24:13-32
.16:13 = Luke 24:14
.16:14 = Luke 24:36-38
.16:15 = Mathew 28:19
.16:16 = John 20:23
.16:17-18 = drawn from a lot of sources: Mathew 10, Mark 6, Luke 10, just a lot of stuff cobbled together. Acts 23-26 and Acts 28:3-6 Paul's encounter with the Asp/venomous snake. None of it after Mark 16:8 makes any sense and adds more than a little confusion with the discussion of signs/miracles and other such things.
Why does Mark end the way he does?
Look at the beginning of his Gospel and all throughout it reads like a highlight real of Christ's Deity and that He is in fact the very Son of God.
Mark's last words were about fear, a Godly Fear of our Lord and the pure awe and wonderment of Him.
No other book in history has the proof the Bible does, it is not even close. As I've shown because of the over abundance of source materials we can even be critical of what we have and know for certain whether we have His Word or not.
Word for Word Translations prove just how accurate what we have is.
Biblical Historian/Theologian AT. Robertson said we have a vast array of Biblical Manuscripts that allow us to reconstruct the Bible with more than a 99.9% degree of accuracy.
With the number of archaeological excavations, (25,000+ and counting to date), it is only a matter of time until we see more ancient biblical texts found.
The Bible is the very Word of God, it is a collection of eyewitness accounts written by other inspired eyewitnesses.
There's no longer any excuse for anyone to ignore that fact or to dispute it.
The evidence simply does not support their arguments/views.
Take care and God Bless...
The Bible is not reliable.
You are using it as it's own standard.
The Census was after the death of Herod but the Bible has Christ born after the census but before the death of Herod.
At the time of the Exodus, Canaan was part of Egyptian territory.
If the Islrealites had traveled four abreast along the sea shore the people in front would reached the promised land before the people ar the back started traveling. But they got lost for fourth years?
And there are versions of the Bible with more than 66 books.
You are taking all your points on faith.
Also it is now believed that there was no one person named Homer that wrote the Iliad.
@@stephenolan5539 Did you even read my post? Yes I agree we have no idea who wrote the work accredited to Homer considering so few existing manuscripts and a 1300 year spread, that's kind of the point.
The New Testament cannon, (Gospels of the Apostles, Epistles to the early Churches), was decided at the Synod of Carthage in 397 AD.
(At that council they included some of the Apocryphal books but the early churches rejected them, a few saw some of the content in those books to be useful for historical reasons but never used them as doctrinal or held them in the same regard as Scripture).
I'm taking all my points on historical evidence. Maybe read the post all the way through before commenting. Until then I leave you with Mathew 7:6...
@@PastorwithoutaPulpit
You are taking your points on very carefully selected historical evidence.
That is extremely dishonest. Use ALL evidence or don't use evidence. But don't choose a conclusion and filter for that conclusion.
You did not reach your conclusion based on evidence. You started with it.
@@stephenolan5539 Umm, isn't using evidence what we're supposed to do? Let me ask you another question in a court of law would you be able discredit multiple witnesses simply because you don't like or agree with what they say? The evidence I've used is the historical documents themselves, so if I can't use that what evidence are you suggesting I use?
Again Mathew 7:6.