This genius of a man , this Jesuit priest is the one who actually turned my head to pay attention to on a couch 5-6 years ago as I was laying in my misery from Cancer treatments at my home. Not the treatments but the attempt at resting or just laying in despair and depression and anxiety and PTSD unable to hardly move an inch. Because of this priest I very slowly began dragging my feet back to a semblance of Catholicism. He is blind , brilliant, I love him and pray when I remember for him that he led me back.
Great testimonial , Mimi. God is Alive. God is Love. Jesus was sent to Earth as a baby to show the rest of us humans, the beloved creature of God's creation, how to behave, live in service to others and in a living and loving relationship with God. That Jesus is considered the Son of God the Father with the Love between the Father and the Son being the manifestation of the Holy Spirit , or the Paraclete as Jesus declared would be sent to carry mankind forward after Jesus would no longer be with His 12 apostles, we have the three persons of the Holy Trinity. The encouragement, love and hope you felt listening to Fr. Spritzer was the Comforter. That is one of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit, the love of God. You were open to it so you were graced with it. People make it so hard to believe because we are all affected by satan's blight to mankind. Those baptized are given the graces to fight against the evil but often fail. Just get back up again. That is all you need to do. Just like Mimi was open to. Seek forgiveness and repentance for not following the best path you knew to follow, and start to experience the peace and contentment that Mimi finally did. It is never too late to turn to the One God who created the universe. Repent and believe in the Lamb of God who died to take away the sins of the world, Jesus Christ. He existed in history. He was born, walked with His chosen 12, allowed himself to be crucified, died was laid in a tomb on a Friday and rose from the grave on Easter Sunday morning. He was the Jewish born Messiah for All of Mankind. That's ALL God asks so little of us. All the unbelief, questioning, confusion, doubting is of the evil one. Bottom line: quit running away and instead run toward the God who made you and wants nothing more than your recognition that you belong to someone who loves you more than you can imagine. If you turn toward God and pray for guidance, watch out. Because you will get a good response!! One last thing to consider that can change how you think of everything: if it is good, it is of God because God is all good. God does Not Cause bad to happen. But He does allow it so He can allow some good to come out of it. ex: illness and dis-ease is not from God. It is a result of the first man's fall from grace. From the result of evil . But God allows illness for a greater good to come from it. Perhaps for Mimi that greater good was the revelation finally understood due to 10:54 Fr. Spitzer's uncanny brains, whit and unwavering faith and conviction that bubbles over because such joy cannot be contained. Fr. Spritzer is a rare breed that sees his challenges even as a gift from God. He has give.his life to serve Jesus Christ as fully as possible. He is smart, insightful, effective in his explanations and research and writings. I imagine he will have a very comfortable reward in heaven one day. He is one of those pretty certain to hear "Welcome my good and faithful servant!" Let's just hope it is not for a long time to come. We need Shepards like Fr. Spritzer here below.
You can tell how giddy and excited he gets simply talking about this stuff. He's super into it like a little kid, tripping over his words and sometimes stuttering. THIS guy BELIEVES
Fr Spitzer has a contagious enthusiasm! The YT logarithm kindly sent me his lecture on the Turin Shroud; I had never really doubted it - but the evidence presented so engagingly by Fr S was like music to my ears! I thank Our Lord for giving us a glimpse of His Holy Face. Makes me cry. 🙏❤️🙏
If you are here. You are here for a reason! JESUS is king. Awesome doesn't even touch his Glory.if you seek him you will find him. He is that good. JESUS loves you! He will change your life. trust him. THANK YOU JESUS for being my SAVIOR. I LOVE YOU JESUS. you are my king❤
Christians boast their lack of quality-control. The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing, is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers. Why would anyone confess Jesus Christ as Lord, when voting is a quality-control? Republicans rig the voting districts. The SCOTUS writes of its own stench. Christians are avoided like the old woman with too many cats, suggesting we travel best with one foot in fantasyland, based on butchered context in Roman propaganda. Who do you think licensed temples, controlled publication, crucified when imperial Rome created Christians? Why do you think every Alex Jones in the country, uses Jesus-lingo in the sales-pitch? The problem is; We depend on the fiction of government being better than no government, actually working, with voting as a quality-control. Christians boast having no quality-control. The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing, is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers. The only difference between a Republican & Democrat is how fast the knee hits the floor when a donor walks in the room. There is no plan, not for greenhouse gases, as long as energy is needed to keep the show on the road. Christians demand ownership of the narrative: We are all gods, children of the highest god. The ultimate vanity is declared, as they make a scene in the temple. Christians are the wolves in sheep's clothing, weighing in on whatnot as if Earth had gravity-free zones, would-be dictators suggesting we must all travel together, as if we all prefer leadership with one foot in fantasyland. We know a tree by the fruit. We know a man by his works. We thank God secular law & order finally ended the witch-killings & inquisitions.
"If you are here. You are here for a reason! " The reason I am here is because the video is titled "The Latest Scientific Evidence of God". Ignoring the fact that "The Latest Scientific Evidence of God" makes no sense because so far no scientific evidence for god has been shown, I watched to see if ANY scientific evidence for god is presented here. None is.
@@TdBone They think this improves God sales, having scientific evidence for characters only known from fiction, as if a deity who can't get everyone's attention, is worthy of the Divine title.
@@cnault3244 Scientism is such a drag, and completely devoid of the more appropriate philosophical treatment of God's existence. What do you want, for God to pop down and pose for a photograph? To say 'cheese' for you and your godless pals before heading back up to heaven?
@@dónalÓNiadh Why not? According to the Bible, god talks to numerous people, or pops down to see them, or wrestles with them ( god lost btw), or has them over for dinner. Let's assume the discussion was about the existence of leprechauns and rephrase your question so you can see how stupid your post was: Scientism is such a drag, and completely devoid of the more appropriate philosophical treatment of leprechauns' existence. What do you want, for a leprechaun to pop over and pose for a photograph? To say 'cheese' for you and your pals before heading back to their pot of gold? The fact is I said NOTHING about scientific evidence for god. Evidence for something does not have to be scientific. Now, what is your BEST evidence for god?
It happened 4 decades ago in a premier research institute in India. The presentation was about the breakthrough in nuclear medicine. The speaker differentiated x-ray from nuclear medicine stating that while the former gave the structural image the later gave a functional image. I was only a student among the audience of top scientists. During the QA session I asked if it can be used to detect what happens when a person dies. The audience and the speaker brushed aside my question with a laughter. I sank in shame. After 40 years, fully detached from science, Fr.Spitzer is making me happy. Thanks.
Thank you for enduring the Shame you felt ....trust me you have no reason to be shameful ....the people who laughed at you are very similar to those who laughed at Noah
@Tbone pretty lonely soul...huh? Stay healthy for the rest of your life. Denying God is eternity in hell, that's a long long time. Now be a good boy and take the garbage out like your mommy asked and do something constructive with yourself like, get a job.
I’ve always believed that science was proof of God’s brilliance and that the beauty of the cosmos and everything within it was an expression of God’s perfect love. I’m glad Father Spitzer provided the evidence to back it up. The truth shall prevail!
The magis center where this man is getting his statistics from is a highly biased Christion organization. Science does not point to God. Don't believe me? Go ask any real scientist.
@@kalords5967 “There are two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.” - Albert Einstein
Praise God there are younger scientists that believe in God! Hopefully that will continue to grow and spread to the general population! Love Fr. Spitzer, and have enjoyed my first Majis Center Catholic Women’s Bible study!
@irishmclass2042, Unfortunately, the world media is totally against God. They withhold gems of information of discoveries about the most astonishing facts already in the Bible. We can only rely on experts like Fr. Spitzer to spread the newfound realities of the Holy Book in Archeology , Science, and with the help of technology. As you say, our hope for the future lies in young scientists-to-be and a revival.
Christians have no quality-control. Christians boast their lack of quality-control. The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing, is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers. Why would anyone confess Jesus Christ as Lord, when voting is a quality-control? Republicans rig the voting districts. The SCOTUS writes of its own stench. Christians are avoided like the old woman with too many cats, suggesting we travel best with one foot in fantasyland, based on butchered context in Roman propaganda. Who do you think licensed temples, controlled publication, crucified when imperial Rome created Christians? Why do you think every Alex Jones in the country, uses Jesus-lingo in the sales-pitch? The problem is; We depend on the fiction of government being better than no government, actually working, with voting as a quality-control. Christians boast having no quality-control. The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing, is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers. The only difference between a Republican & Democrat is how fast the knee hits the floor when a donor walks in the room. There is no plan, not for greenhouse gases, as long as energy is needed to keep the show on the road. Christians demand ownership of the narrative: We are all gods, children of the highest god. The ultimate vanity is declared, as they make a scene in the temple. Christians are the wolves in sheep's clothing, weighing in on whatnot as if Earth had gravity-free zones, would-be dictators suggesting we must all travel together, as if we all prefer leadership with one foot in fantasyland. We know a tree by the fruit. We know a man by his works. We thank God secular law & order finally ended the witch-killings & inquisitions.
@@hoponpop3330 "One of" as if the existence of your mythagog did anything done make another evidential excuses for your tyrannical deity, mythelot. Watch it again on a lense of a outsider of such faith and you'll see how deceptive it is...
@@hoponpop3330 Yep, but the problem with that story is that when Thomas asked for empirical evidence he was provided it. Today however when an atheist asks for empirical evidence of the truth of 1 Corinthians 15: 14 all you get is apologetic excuses.
Fantastic! It is fulfilling for me to hear that, before his death, Dr. Hawkins was able to see the glory of God in His infinite creation of the Universe that He, Himself created by His supreme intelligence and flawless architecture. And praise God for humans to have a soul and that is manifested in Science at the moment of death, and in life, by Jesus Christ.
@@espojespo5 I am not going to argue with you. Your religion is atheism, mine is Christianity. Think how you like but allow me to think like great minds such as Isaac Newton, Hobble, Boyle, Lavoisier, to cite just a few. So, I am in good company.
We consider ourselves extremely intelligent capable of incredible things. The truth is we have all we can do to get up in the morning and tie our shoes. We are weak and fallible. Thank you God for all you have ever done. All glory is yours.
Yes. Thank you god for making us weak and fallible. On purpose. By your design. Making us get sick and hurt both mentally and physically by your design. Thank you for parasites that eat our eyes and all that nice stuff. Thank you for creating - by your design - a nature which is based on living things killing other living things from plants to animals just to survive in the world of your design. Thank you for creating us sick by your design and demanding us to heal ourselves while - by your design - we lack the ability to do so. Thank you for the Hell you created to punish us for being exactly like you designed us to be. Thank you.
"The truth is we have all we can do to get up in the morning and tie our shoes." Speak for yourself. "We are weak and fallible. Thank you God for all you have ever done. " All god has done? According to you he made weak and fallible humans.
Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation. We now know that atheism is based purely on faith. A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there is absolutely no evidence. We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that God does not exist it would have been shoved up our throats in every school for decades! Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.'' A question: Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul) that the slide/research refers to? Am I the body that has a transcendent soul? Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul? A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body? My material body is subject to death, that's obvious, but once the body is gone (buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc) who owns the soul? Maybe a different question: Who am I? Am I the body or am I the soul? Logic points to the latter, I think. We commonly say: my legs, my hands & my body. I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my body and then I look at my body.... Who is doing the looking? My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body? Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body. I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think. But please feel free to accept the version that fits you. Thank you for your attention. God bless you. Salaam Aleikum. Sat Sri Akaal. Hare Krishna. Namaskar.
Father Spitzer always strengthens two things in me. My faith in God...and that I'm dumber than a box of rocks when it comes to anything beyond basic physics. Love his lectures!
I've just listened to part of his talk and I am actually a scientist. He has the complete opposite effect on me, because I can easily identify bad logic and misunderstood science in his talk. My other comments here explain what I mean with examples in the talk.
You're not dumber than rocks,. I th8nk I know less now as a percentage than when I was young and only one year younger than Fr Spitzer. You ask 9ne question, then you find an answer, that leads to two more questions, then those answers lead to four ans so it goes on.
I’m a Christian but the probabilistic rationale for belief in God using the fine tuning of universal constants is faulty because we have no idea of the probability distribution of each universal constant.
Today is the first time seeing Robert Spitzer. He's so funny XD, NOT ONCE, DID I LOSE INTEREST IN THE TALK OR GET DISTRACTED, Furthest being from boring i've ever heard
All priests are exorcists, technically speaking. But I've never heard that Fr. Spitzer ever delved into that. I'll have to ask some search algorithms now.
Fellow admirers Fr. Spitzer is so blessed with this Knowledge that he makes science so interesting because it's through science, that we can try to comprehend the complicity of the Cosmos, intertwined with divine, faith and reason. I feel privileged to be a catholic because it's the true catholic doctrine, that defines the Universe. God Bless you Fr.Spitzer.
Thank you Fr. Spitzer! I have always viewed the Shroud as sort of a time capsule. We didn’t even get to see the image of Jesus as a photo negative until photography was invented. I believe that science will be able to accurately date the Shroud and more mysteries will be unlocked, that will cause the Church to accept the Shroud as a holy relic and the actual burial shroud of Jesus Christ. Moreover, it will prove that not only did this shroud belong to Jesus Christ, but his body was reanimated by supernatural power. I believe that venerating the Shroud as a holy relic and Eucharistic miracles will go a long way to convert the skeptics of our modern scientific community. Praise be Jesus Christ!
Newest video on shroud has a new dating method it's a new x ray technology and writing on shroud says Jesus and Nazarene. Vatican researcher Barbara Frale also found writing on shroud. See video on U Tube
Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation. We now know that atheism is based purely on faith. A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there is absolutely no evidence. We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that God does not exist it would have been shoved up our throats in every school for decades! Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.'' A question: Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul) that the slide/research refers to? Am I the body that has a transcendent soul? Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul? A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body? My material body is subject to death, that's obvious, but once the body is gone (buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc) who owns the soul? Maybe a different question: Who am I? Am I the body or am I the soul? Logic points to the latter, I think. We commonly say: my legs, my hands & my body. I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my body and then I look at my body.... Who is doing the looking? My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body? Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body. I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think. But please feel free to accept the version that fits you. Thank you for your attention. God bless you. Salaam Aleikum. Sat Sri Akaal. Hare Krishna. Namaskar.
We live in an age where many of us require evidence at a very deep level. I was once among the doubters. Now I have friends and family who will often ask me about my 'conversion' and wish to know but they also seek a bit of "proof". Therefore I have shared this information about the Shroud and various Eucharistic miracles, which both also happen to share AB+ blood. The other piece I share is the event in 1968 when Our Lady appeared in Zietoun, Egypt for about two years. Fr. Spitzer, thank you for your great knowledge, wisdom & vision. God bless you. ❤
A question to all?? I’m Looking forward to an intelligent reply.?? Moved by lust at the sight of her, King David called for Bathsheba to be brought to him and slept with her. David committed adultery with a married woman called Bathsheba, wife of Uriah. what's more, David murdered Uriah by proxy by ordering all of Uriah's comrades to abandon him in the midst of battle, so that he ended up getting killed by an opposing army. The Prophet Nathan was sent by God and warned King David. well, Torah verses clearly say that both URIAH and DAVID Blessed by GOD. Well, the question is, if Uriah, David and Bathsheba go to heaven. To whom will Bathsheba be given? This question is ready to test the wisdom of all of you: The Bible [ Torah]: God promised that God had already chosen all three humans for heaven: David, Uriah and Bathsheba. I’m Looking forward to an intelligent reply. Note: God said through Nathan the prophet that King David was rich. Uriah was poor and had nothing but Bathsheba, a little lamb. Therefore, God here assured that the couple was chosen through the parable. David's prayer sought forgiveness and Later King David has been forgiven too. no doubt all three will go to heaven. If So, to whom will Bathsheba be given? Note: Matthew 22/23-30: There will be no right answer. The question raised by the Sadducees was about the impossible situation of a widow having seven husbands, all brothers. If Abraham goes to heaven, Sarah will be his wife in heaven. just as Mary will be Joseph's wife. Matthew 22:23-33/ It has a different meaning. You and your spouse love each other, live together on earth, and are true believers in Christ. If they go to heaven, they don't need to remarry. They don't need to create new babies.
“And the Good News about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, so that all nations will hear it; and then the end will come. (MTHW 24:14).”
A question to all?? I’m Looking forward to an intelligent reply.?? Moved by lust at the sight of her, King David called for Bathsheba to be brought to him and slept with her. David committed adultery with a married woman called Bathsheba, wife of Uriah. what's more, David murdered Uriah by proxy by ordering all of Uriah's comrades to abandon him in the midst of battle, so that he ended up getting killed by an opposing army. The Prophet Nathan was sent by God and warned King David. well, Torah verses clearly say that both URIAH and DAVID Blessed by GOD. Well, the question is, if Uriah, David and Bathsheba go to heaven. To whom will Bathsheba be given? This question is ready to test the wisdom of all of you: The Bible [ Torah]: God promised that God had already chosen all three humans for heaven: David, Uriah and Bathsheba. I’m Looking forward to an intelligent reply. Note: God said through Nathan the prophet that King David was rich. Uriah was poor and had nothing but Bathsheba, a little lamb. Therefore, God here assured that the couple was chosen through the parable. David's prayer sought forgiveness and Later King David has been forgiven too. no doubt all three will go to heaven. If So, to whom will Bathsheba be given? Note: Matthew 22/23-30: There will be no right answer. The question raised by the Sadducees was about the impossible situation of a widow having seven husbands, all brothers. If Abraham goes to heaven, Sarah will be his wife in heaven. just as Mary will be Joseph's wife. Matthew 22:23-33/ It has a different meaning. You and your spouse love each other, live together on earth, and are true believers in Christ. If they go to heaven, they don't need to remarry. They don't need to create new babies.
@@bitmasricco5699 I think a much bigger question is this: according to God's supposedly perfect law, David was guilty of two capital crimes. Bathsheba is either rape victim or guilty of one capital crime (adultery) - we don't know since, like most women in the bible, her views don't matter. The only certainly innocent party is the baby she gives birth to. The outcome? David goes on to be Israel's great king and the model for the coming messiah. Bathsheba goes on to be queen mother. The baby gets executed by slow torture. The question is: what does this say about the justice of God?
@@njhoepner well said, Ok! come to the question is: if Uriah, David and Bathsheba go to heaven. To whom will Bathsheba be given? Note : Every reference to angels in Scripture is in the masculine gender. Angels are never referred to in any gender other than masculine. • In Matthew 22:30 Jesus says that there will be no marriage in heaven because we “will be like the angels in heaven.” This verse states that angels do not marry, but it stops short of commenting on their “gender.” Nothing in Jesus’ statement can be taken to imply that angels are masculine, feminine, or neuter.
@@bitmasricco5699 Well, if one presumes such things as the existence of heaven, and presumes as well that Jesus is in fact god, then one has to go with what he says as ultimate authority, since nothing in the Hebrew bible answers the question. The Hebrew Bible and its marriage laws were written without belief in resurrection and afterlife, so the premise of laws is purely about family continuity and procreation in this world, for the purpose of maintaining family lines and therefore property claims. The ONLY pronouncement in scripture on the subject of marriage laws and resurrection, therefore, is that of Jesus. Under the above premises, that means in heaven marriage is irrelevant. Going further would be speculation, but my speculation would be that even those married for a lifetime on earth are not married in heaven, because it is pointless.
7:29 - a profound misunderstanding of statistics. The odds of the universe being able to sustain life are exactly 1 in 1, because we observe life. Of the billions of possible genetic codes possible the chance that yours exists is also 1 in 1 if you are reading this. They really should teach science in the seminaries.
@@richardlawson6787 Or more specifically - declaring descendants guilty because of the "sin" of an ancestor and therefore shoveling them into "hell"; ordering the killing of anyone who doesn't follow exactly the right religion with exactly the right rituals; insisting that murder is wrong and then ordering genocide; destroying a person's entire life just to make points in a game (story of Job); we don't even need to get to natural disasters before the whole "gentle" thing flies out the window.
“As Terence McKenna observed, “Modern science is based on the principle: ‘Give us one free miracle and we’ll explain the rest.’ The one free miracle is the appearance of all the mass and energy in the universe and all the laws that govern it in a single instant from nothing.” ― Rupert Sheldrake, 'Morphic Resonance: The Nature of Formative Causation'
@@yourkingdomcomeyourwillbedone that is a fascinating question. I guess wed have to start we the use of the term laws regarding natural philosophy is not the same as the term when referring to, say road traffic management. You assuming agency in something you observe. This would be like wondering why a golf ball landed on a particular turf of grass. We don't assume the golf ball was guided. And we don't assume mathematics is more than some phenomenon we observe. I would stress: as I said: we can't conduct an experiment. So who knows the Universe may have been created by a God. That presents a more interesting question as why would a God bother?
@@russellmiles2861 From Wikipedia: "Scientific laws are statements, based on repeated experiments or observations, that describe or predict a range of natural phenomena.". I'm sure you're familiar with the laws of physics - gravity for example. They are "constants" in nature and they describe certain limits of physical reality. I didn't assume agency, I simply asked if you had a better explanation for what created these laws? You said "We have mathematical constructs that explain a universes creation." and I'm arguing that you don't have a mathematical construct for the *first cause* We know that golf balls are guided by golf players and both road traffic management and golf ball striking are conscious, deliberate actions of human beings. Why do you think the laws of physics are perfectly expressed through the language of mathematics? Eugene Paul Wigner once said "The unreasonable efficiency of mathematics in science is a gift we neither understand nor deserve." This is a scientist making a mystical statement about how we are able to understand creation through rational thought. You can't conduct a physical experiment on the creation of the universe but you can conduct thought experiments and there are many hypotheses such as M-theory. When you find a plausible explanation, you can either take a leap of faith that there is some high power/intelligence behind everything (theist), suspend judgement, remain skeptical and live in ignorance (agnostic) or deny any/all supernatural intervention and rely on a materialist, anthropocentric explanation (atheist). As to why God would bother - are you aware that in the Bible it states that "man is created in the likeness and image of God"? I would argue that God bothered so that you and I could experience the gift of life.
@@yourkingdomcomeyourwillbedone thank you for your considered reply. Although I couldn't help feel we are in agreement; ie, laws of physics are observations and as you state repeatable and verifiable. We don't set them. They even change or can be fluid. Eg, you mention Gravity. This is a most useful law for predicting movement of planets, space craft, footballs, etc. It doesn't matter that a subatomic level it doesn't work. We also don't really know what Gravity is: a strange weak force that is intentions across the universe. Much more work to be done there Re: first cause latter
This is flawed logic being dished out in this video. You are getting your science from the wrong person. Expand your knowledge and think for yourself more.
The whole lecture at its core was just a big argument from personal incredulity. But is always good to hear from the opposite viewpoint to try to understand it.
The fact that young scientists are more commonly theists than older ones could mean many things: 1, as suggested here, scientists are becoming more religious 2: scientists lose their faith over the course of their career 3: young scientists are more likely to come from more theistic countries than older ones. So, basically, you can't draw a conclusion from this statistic.
It could also be that the current and/or newly considered evidence - as Father Spitzer laid out - when considered makes it more difficult to not believe in God for individuals open to considering evidence. In the past there were potential explanations other than God for the existence of the Universe, but these potential explanations are falling by the wayside. I would be curious to see what is considered a “scientist” in the polling. In past studies individuals in the hard sciences (chemistry, physics and medicine) had a higher level of believers than those in the soft sciences (psychology, sociology, etc.). One study I read found that 3% of psychologists believed in God, whereas more than 50% of physicians believed. I say all this because the percentage of people in the hard sciences may actually believe at a higher level.
I like your third explanation. Because he doesn't say they are dominantly Christian at all. More and more scientists are coming out of strongly religious societies like India, which would explain why more scientists are religious. Ofc, what scientists think doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the evidence and logical arguments that scientists create.
They r attempting to claim a statistic (that we cannot verify) as evidence, but its barely anecdotal. This man provides no real evidence. That should tell u something. If there was evidence of God, there would b no shortage of churches blasting it from every available platform.
Genesis, Quantum Physics and Reality by Peter Zoeller-Greer. How Quantum Physics proves the existence of God. ‘…leads to a new Anthropic principle - the Divine.”
They are the same odds as a hurricane smashing through a junk yard and at the end, a perfectly working 747 Boeing Jet is created with engineering all ready for take off.
The Holy Shroud of Turin, The Sudarium, the infinitesimal eternal universe and DNA give us the 100% certainty that God is God and Jesus is Who He is. Thank God for The Holy Ghost.
I'd like to know: Who am I? Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation. We now know that atheism is based purely on faith. A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there is absolutely no evidence. We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that God does not exist it would have been shoved up our throats in every school for decades! Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.'' A question: Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul) that the slide/research refers to? Am I the body that has a transcendent soul? Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul? A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body? My material body is subject to death, that's obvious, but once the body is gone (buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc) who owns the soul? Maybe a different question: Who am I? Am I the body or am I the soul? Logic points to the latter, I think. We commonly say: my legs, my hands & my body. I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my body and then I look at my body.... Who is doing the looking? My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body? Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body. I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think. But please feel free to accept the version that fits you. Thank you for your attention. God bless you. Salaam Aleikum. Sat Sri Akaal. Hare Krishna. Namaskar.
Why isn't Thomas's first proof sufficient? Has anyone EVER experienced something causing itself? Putting experience aside, does logic allow the assertion that a thing can cause itself? How? For a thing to cause itself means the causal thing precedes itself in time. That's an absurdity.
One should note that the magis center where this man is getting his statistics from is a highly biased Christion organization. Science does not point to God. Don't believe me? Go ask any real scientist.
@@johnhammond6423 Science of course points to God. What part of 10^10 ^123 : 1 are you missing. Scientism is naive and unscientific. Look up final causality. Most scientists don't study philosophy of science and say really dumb things.
Ecclesiastes 9:5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing at all, nor do they have any more reward, because all memory of them is forgotten. 6 also their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished. John 5:28. All those in their memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out. If everyone is in Heaven or hell, who are those in their memorial tombs.
Firstly..Ad Popularum isnt evidence.The fact that lots of people believe something to be true has no bearing at all on it actually being true..Its a fallacious position.
When the biochemical processes stop, so does consciousness. Life after death is a ridiculous belief, but then so are these people who are incapable of being intellectually honest.
I am a physicist and I will explain why our scientific knowledge refutes the idea that consciousness is generated by the brain and that the origin of our mental experiences is physical/biological (in my youtube channel you can find a video with more detailed explanations). My arguments prove the existence in us of an indivisible unphysical element, which is usually called soul or spirit. Physicalism/naturalism is based on the belief that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, but I will discuss two arguments that prove that this hypothesis implies logical contradictions and is disproved by our scientific knowledge of the microscopic physical processes that take place in the brain. (With the word consciousness I do not refer to self-awareness, but to the property of being conscious= having a mental experiences such as sensations, emotions, thoughts, memories and even dreams). 1) All the alleged emergent properties are just simplified and approximate descriptions or subjective/arbitrary classifications of underlying physical processes or properties, which are described DIRECTLY by the fundamental laws of physics alone, without involving any emergent properties (arbitrariness/subjectivity is involved when more than one option is possible; in this case, more than one possible description). An approximate description is only an abstract idea, and no actual entity exists per se corresponding to that approximate description, simply because an actual entity is exactly what it is and not an approximation of itself. What physically exists are the underlying physical processes and not the emergent properties (=subjective classifications or approximate descriptions). This means that emergent properties do not refer to reality itself but to an arbitrary abstract concept (the approximate conceptual model of reality). Since consciousness is the precondition for the existence of concepts, approximations and arbitrariness/subjectivity, consciousness is a precondition for the existence of emergent properties. Therefore, consciousness cannot itself be an emergent property. The logical fallacy of materialists is that they try to explain the existence of consciousness by comparing consciousness to a concept that, if consciousness existed, a conscious mind could use to describe approximately a set of physical elements. Obviously this is a circular reasoning, since the existence of consciousness is implicitly assumed in an attempt to explain its existence. 2) An emergent property is defined as a property that is possessed by a set of elements that its individual components do not possess. The point is that the concept of set refers to something that has an intrinsically conceptual and subjective nature and implies the arbitrary choice of determining which elements are to be included in the set; what exists objectively are only the single elements (where one person sees a set of elements, another person can only see elements that are not related to each other in their individuality). In fact, when we define a set, it is like drawing an imaginary line that separates some elements from all the other elements; obviously this imaginary line does not exist physically, independently of our mind, and therefore any set is just an abstract idea, and not a physical entity and so are all its properties. Since consciousness is a precondition for the existence of subjectivity/arbitrariness and abstractions, consciousness is the precondition for the existence of any emergent property, and cannot itself be an emergent property. Both arguments 1 and 2 are sufficient to prove that every emergent property requires a consciousness from which to be conceived. Therefore, that conceiving consciousness cannot be the emergent property itself. Conclusion: consciousness cannot be an emergent property; this is true for any property attributed to the neuron, the brain and any other system that can be broken down into smaller elements. On a fundamental material level, there is no brain, or heart, or any higher level groups or sets, but just fundamental particles interacting. Emergence itself is just a category imposed by a mind and used to establish arbitrary classifications, so the mind can't itself be explained as an emergent phenomenon. Obviously we must distinguish the concept of "something" from the "something" to which the concept refers. For example, the concept of consciousness is not the actual consciousness; the actual consciousness exists independently of the concept of consciousness since the actual consciousness is the precondition for the existence of the concept of consciousness itself. However, not all concepts refer to an actual entity and the question is whether a concept refers to an actual entity that can exist independently of consciousness or not. If a concept refers to "something" whose existence presupposes the existence of arbitrariness/subjectivity or is a property of an abstract object, such "something" is by its very nature abstract and cannot exist independently of a conscious mind, but it can only exist as an idea in a conscious mind. For example, consider the property of "beauty": beauty has an intrinsically subjective and conceptual nature and implies arbitrariness; therefore, beauty cannot exist independently of a conscious mind. My arguments prove that emergent properties, as well as complexity, are of the same nature as beauty; they refer to something that is intrinsically subjective, abstract and arbitrary, which is sufficient to prove that consciousness cannot be an emergent property because consciousness is the precondition for the existence of any emergent property. The "brain" doesn't objectively and physically exist as a single entity and the entity “brain” is only a conceptual model. We create the concept of the brain by arbitrarily "separating" it from everything else and by arbitrarily considering a bunch of quantum particles altogether as a whole; this separation is not done on the basis of the laws of physics, but using addictional arbitrary criteria, independent of the laws of physics. The property of being a brain, just like for example the property of being beautiiful, is just something you arbitrarily add in your mind to a bunch of quantum particles. Any set of elements is an arbitrary abstraction therefore any property attributed to the brain is an abstract idea that refers to another arbitrary abstract idea (the concept of brain). Furthermore, brain processes consist of many parallel sequences of ordinary elementary physical processes. There is no direct connection between the separate points in the brain and such connections are just a conceptual model used to approximately describe sequences of many distinct physical processes; interpreting these sequences as a unitary process or connection is an arbitrary act and such connections exist only in our imagination and not in physical reality. Indeed, considering consciousness as a property of an entire sequence of elementary processes implies the arbitrary definition of the entire sequence; the entire sequence as a whole is an arbitrary abstract idea , and not to an actual physical entity. For consciousness to be physical, first of all the brain as a whole (and brain processes as a whole) would have to physically exist, which means the laws of physics themselves would have to imply that the brain exists as a unitary entity and brain processes occur as a unitary process. However, this is false because according to the laws of physics, the brain is not a unitary entity but only an arbitrarily (and approximately) defined set of quantum particles involved in billions of parallel sequences of elementary physical processes occurring at separate points. This is sufficient to prove that consciousness is not physical since it is not reducible to the laws of physics, whereas brain processes are. According to the laws of physics, brain processes do not even have the prerequisites to be a possible cause of consciousness. As discussed above, an emergent property is a concept that refers to an arbitrary abstract idea (the set) and not to an actual entity; this rule out the possibility that the emergent property can exist independently of consciousness. Conversely, if a concept refers to “something” whose existence does not imply the existence of arbitrariness or abstract ideas, then such “something” might exist independently of consciousness. An example of such a concept is the concept of “indivisible entity”. Contrary to emergent properties, the concept of indivisible entity refers to something that might exist independently of the concept itself and independently of our consciousness. My arguments prove that the hypothesis that consciousness is an emergent property implies a logical fallacy and an hypothesis that contains a logical contradiction is certainly wrong. Consciousness cannot be an emergent property whatsoever because any set of elements is a subjective abstraction; since only indivisible elements may exist objectively and independently of consciousness, consciousness can exist only as a property of an indivisible element. Furthermore, this indivisible entity must interact globally with brain processes because we know that there is a correlation between brain processes and consciousness. This indivisible entity is not physical, since according to the laws of physics, there is no physical entity with such properties; therefore this indivisible entity corresponds to what is traditionally called soul or spirit. The soul is the missing element that interprets globally the distinct elementary physical processes occurring at separate points in the brain as a unified mental experience. Marco Biagini
There is no “latest scientific evidence” for the existence of God or the Soul. Indeed, there is NO scientific evidence whatsoever for either of these. It always astonishes me that grown adults believe such supernatural tosh. I would have found such beliefs ludicrous even as an eleven-year-old.
Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation. We now know that atheism is based purely on faith. A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there is absolutely no evidence. We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that God does not exist it would have been shoved up our throats in every school for decades! Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.'' A question: Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul) that the slide/research refers to? Am I the body that has a transcendent soul? Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul? A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body? My material body is subject to death, that's obvious, but once the body is gone (buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc) who owns the soul? Maybe a different question: Who am I? Am I the body or am I the soul? Logic points to the latter, I think. We commonly say: my legs, my hands & my body. I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my body and then I look at my body.... Who is doing the looking? My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body? Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body. I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think. But please feel free to accept the version that fits you. Thank you for your attention. God bless you. Salaam Aleikum. Sat Sri Akaal. Hare Krishna. Namaskar.
100% probably as God is the creator of mathematics and logic. Thinking about an infinite God that never didn't exist does get your brain twisted in a knot. If you added a zero for every atom in the universe to the number of years God existed before today, you wouldn't even come close. Mind boggling.
Good one, and he didn't even mention all the sites and evidence from Arabia around Mt Sinai. From ancient Hebrew inscriptions saying, "died Amelekite" to the Golden Calf Altar, it matches the Biblical story over and over. Too much correlating evidence.
I saw a documentary about (something like) how life could not have a risen by chance from inorganic matter even though there was some proof that certain amino acids have done this, because the odds of that type of mutation happening were so astronomical that given the rate of cellular development and mitosis that there literally wasn't enough seconds in the history of the universe or something like that to have come up haphazardly. Anybody know if Father spitzer has addressed this?
One should note that the magis center where this man is getting his statistics from is a highly biased Christion organization. Science does not point to God. Don't believe me? Go ask any real scientist.
Does not matter if you believe or not, you are continuing after geting out of the body because there if evidence for it. To believe means you don't know, so its better to be honest that you don't know, and go in life with it so you may learn. Do you believe that you have 2 hands, of course not, you know you have two hands. Man that seeks the truth is free from all the beliefs, sociaetys and cultures.
For those who want to know the full story.... THE NDE STUDIES.....(Los Angeles Times excerpts) Researchers estimate that around 17% of people have an NDE. That means about 80% don't. Scratch beneath those alleged flat EKG lines and the stories are a veritable Twilight Zone of inconsistencies. Some near-death voyagers claim to have met God - BUT A FEW SAW ELVIS PRESLEY OR GROUCHO MARX, researchers say. Others get to heaven not through the famous "tunnel", but ABOARD GHOSTLY TAXI CABS, FERRIES THAT CROSS THE RIVER STYX, OR SPANGLED COWS. Even some children - often touted as the best source of unbiased information - sometimes return from "death" CLAIMING THEY WERE GREETED IN THE OTHER WORLD by STILL LIVING TEACHERS and NINTENDO CHARACTERS. HINDUS WHO BELIEVE IN YAMRAJ, the Hindu god of death, EXPERIENCED MEETING HIM. A Hindu girl "died" AND WENT TO HEAVEN ON A COW. Would that mean western people will be riding cows to heaven? Jews who don't believe in Jesus or "hell", experienced meeting God as described in the Old Testament, while messianic Jews experienced God as Jesus. Dr. Richard Eby had an NDE and allegedly Jesus told him he had to back, and that he (Jesus) would be returning (2nd coming) before he died permanently. BUT DR. RICHARD EBY HAS NOW DIED AND JESUS HAS NOT RETURNED. A few hospitals have placed signs in their cardiac units - with nonsensical messages visible only from above - BUT SO FAR NOBODY HAS RETURNED FROM DEATH CLAIMING TO HAVE FLOATED UP AND SEEN ONE. You would expect that if any one particular religious account of the afterlife was true, NDEs would be pretty much the same. BUT THESE ACCOUNTS ARE SO VARIED AND ARE ARE ALL BASED ON CULTURAL EXPOSURE. IN INDIA, PEOPLE SEE HINDU GODS; IN SAUDI ARABIA ITS ALLAH, MOHAMED, AND A BUNCH OF VIRGINS. The kid from the book/movie Heaven Is For Real, saw a Jesus with sea-green blue eyes ON A RAINBOW COLORED HORSE, GOD WITH HUGE WINGS, YELLOW HAIR AND BLUE EYES; and ONE LITTLE GIRL WENT TO HEAVEN AND WAS GREETED BY A PORTLY MAN WITH A WHITE BEARD AND RED CAP, aka SANTA CLAUSE. The Mapuche people of South America and residents of Hawaii are more likely to SEE LANDSCAPES AND VOLCANOES, whereas NDEs in Thailand rarely involve landmarks, tunnels, or light. For Tibetans, light features more heavily AS DO ILLUSIONS OF REINCARNATION. Europeans and North Americans often visualize beautiful gardens; intriguingly the Kalai of Melanesia are more inclined to SEE AN INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD OF FACTORIES. An NDEr's subjective recollections can be attributed to many factors: THE NDEr's PSYCHOLOGY, PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, BACKGROUND, ETC., NOT JUST CULTURE. The terrain of Heaven also varies wildly - from gardens, forests, and CATTLE FILLED PASTURES in some accounts, to clouds, COMPUTER ROOMS OR CASTLES, in others. A TEXAN SAW BARBED WIRE FENCES IN THE AFTERLIFE. Micronesians describe LARGE NOISY CITIES WITH CARS AND SKYSCRAPERS. Drug addicts, felons (murder), suicides, hedonists, abusers, mean people, and gay people have all claimed to encounter heaven. Strangely, people have claimed to enter some "hell" FOR THE SAME REASONS. Contradictions abound. This is a wonder. Is the hereafter actually mining and refining raw materials needed to build castles, cars, barbed wire fences, computers, and skyscrapers? From where do they get this material and tools? Not to mention the raw materials and tools needed to construct an ever increasing number of those cages and cubes in the Christian hell, as a few claim. Who builds those cages? And which of the variety of "hells" do you actually go to? Christian? Buddhist? Spiritualist? Hindu? Muslim? Some other one? The answer seems to be whichever one the experience has been exposed to, as Thai NDErs regularly claim to encounter LORD YAMA AND YAMATOOTS, COMPLETE WITH TALKING DECEASED ROOSTERS, and being sentenced to Buddhist "hell" for butchering and eating chicken, then reincarnated as birds. DOES THAT MEAN WESTERNERS WILL UNKNOWINGLY BE HEADING TO BUDDHIST "HELL" FOR EATING CHICKEN? Thai accounts state that butchers become lumps of meat in Buddhist "hell", so what then awaits Western slaughterhouse workers? Even in her rather homogeneous Western European clientele, Kubler-Ross could see the effects of early enculturation: " I NEVER ENCOUNTERED A PROTESTANT CHILD WHO SAW THE VIRGIN MARY IN HIS LAST MINUTES, YET SHE WAS PERCEIVED BY MANY CATHOLIC CHILDREN." But there also are some hard-to-explain differences, Melvin Morse says. Whereas American near-death survivors are typically sent back by God because “it’s not your time yet,” INDIA'S AFTERLIFE VISITORS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE TOLD THERE WAS A “CLERICAL ERROR.” Even more curious: SOMETIMES THE BEING OF LIGHT IS ELVIS PRESLEY. Moody has chronicled at least two such sightings. Yet the evidence for near-death paranormal powers remains shaky at best. TWO STUDIES HAVE FOUND THAT PATIENTS’ “OUT OF BODY” ACCOUNTS OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE OPERATING ROOM WERE WRONG. So were the 1988 Armageddon forecasts hyped by Ring and others. Michael Sabom, however, offers a compromise stance: He rejects the idea that they provide glimpses of a heaven or hell. "I’m not saying these people didn’t experience something odd. But I am saying that we should take it with a grain of salt, because IF ANECDOTES MEET YOUR STANDARD FOR WHAT QUALIFIES AS EVIDENCE, then you should probably start buying tin foil and food buckets, because THERE ARE JUST AS MANY PEOPLE WHO REPORT SEEING REPTILIANS AND WHO HAVE BEEN ABDUCTED BY ALIENS." Sixty years ago, Dr. Wilder Penfield, a neurosurgeon, poked around the right temporal lobe of some epileptic patients and discovered that they would hear heavenly music, relive their pasts in 3D, and have out-of-body visions. Similar experiments continue. But what about veridical NDEs - near-death experiences in which the person supposedly sees something they couldn’t otherwise have known while ‘flat-lining’ and others are able to verify that what they saw is indeed correct. The most notorious example of this is Maria’s shoe. A lady named Maria reportedly left her body, floated around and saw a shoe on a ledge outside her hospital window, that she ‘couldn’t have possibly seen.’ Her critical care provider, Kimberly Clark, looked outside and saw the shoe, just as described. BUT WHEN RESEARCHERS TRIED TO TRACK DOWN MARIA TO CONFIRM CLARK'S STORY, THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO FIND ANY SUCH PERSON OR ANYONE ELSE TO CORROBORATE THE ACCOUNT. And when they placed a shoe on the ledge, it was clearly visible from the hospital room, PROVING CLARK HAD EXAGGERATED AT LEAST PART OF THE STORY. Here’s the topper. There is no record of Maria being in that hospital. There is Dr. Melvin Morse's discovery of "a portal" in the brain that when stimulated, triggers a NDE. He writes that some are threatened by this, as the discovery makes the experience unreal. There’s growing evidence that the temporal lobe plays a huge role in creating NDEs. When patients had their brains scanned after an NDE, it was discovered that they had increased levels of temporal lobe activity compared with those in a control group. THAT COULD HELP EXPLAIN WHY ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE HAVE NDEs. When Dr. Olaf Blanke implanted electrodes into the brains of patients, HE WAS ABLE TO TRIGGER SUPERNATURAL AND OUT OF BODY EXPERIENCES BY STIMULATING THE TEMPORAL PARIETAL JUNCTION.
He has macular degeneration. I met him first when he was initially diagnosed and could still see with some unusual glasses. I’m sure he now reads as any blind person does-listening to super fast recordings of written material.
@@mommaknos1136 The Bible says just as all died in Adam, all shall be made alive in Christ. So all are saved. Some immediately, others after being purged of their sins and evil in hell.
each cell in the human body is capable of generation 1.4 volts but at a very low amperage. a person about 200 pounds in weight will look like a 100 watt firefly.
@@gfujigo Hi Doctor, I hope and pray that hell is not eternal, but everyone I know, in my church, believes that it is. Can you give me some information of why you think that some people, who end up in hell, are there till their sins are purged? I struggle with doubts about God and how weak my faith is I think. I keep repeating the same cycle of sinning and repenting and I can't help feeling because of that I will end up in hell for all eternity. Thank you.
@@bmm9095 Check out the TH-cam channel “The Total Victory of Christ”. Check out David Bentley Hart’s book “That All Shall Be Saved”. Also check out father Aiden Kimmel, David Bentley Hart, Ilaria Ramelli and Robin Parry on the topic of the salvation of all beings through Jesus Christ. Edit: The correct name is Aiden Kimmel not Alfred Kimmel. My apologies.
How can he say our universe is friendly to life? If there was a field where rice could only grow on .00000000000001% of the field, would you say that field is friendly to rice? It’s a very strange comment.
Yeah I saw one person's estimate of the Earth's volume being 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000003% of the universe. Well that's the _entire_ Earth, but only 1% is crust, and only 29% of _that_ is land, and only a portion of the land is suitable to human life. So the idea of "fine tuning" with respect to humans is ridiculous.
Pray That I Will Keep The Ten Commandments Read The Bible Poor Souls In Purgatory Prayer In Schools That My Property Belongings Will Be Blessed That I Will Live Peacefully With My Neighbors Forgiveness Of Enemies That I Will Reflect Often On The Passion Death Of Jesus Christ
will you please consider being on the Joe Rogan Experience ? I understand the challenges but the key is to get more people to think about Our Lord Jesus
I just started listening and already there is a serious flaw. It's important to keep these discussions intellectually honest. The point being there is a vast cataclysmic difference between "God" and "a higher transcendent power." The God of the Bible was petty and vengeful. As for humanity, there is random beauty and suffering so the nature of this higher power remains a mystery. Anyway my main point here is that the scientists who are theists are likely not referring to the God of the Bible in their belief systems.
One set at a time - you have to believe there is a God to make you decide to read the Bible- and be open to the LESSONS of the Bible (I never liked when my parents punished me when I made a bad decision, but I don’t call them petty and vengeful
One doesn’t science to back up a premise, or interpret science through a focused lens. One sciences to eliminate erroneous ideas. No science proves any gods
Can you provide links to the sources you cite? In particular, what is the source of the Pew research data on belief in God among scientists? I could not find that online. Thank you and God bless!
Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation. We now know that atheism is based purely on faith. A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there is absolutely no evidence. We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that God does not exist it would have been shoved up our throats in every school for decades! Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.'' A question: Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul) that the slide/research refers to? Am I the body that has a transcendent soul? Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul? A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body? My material body is subject to death, that's obvious, but once the body is gone (buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc) who owns the soul? Maybe a different question: Who am I? Am I the body or am I the soul? Logic points to the latter, I think. We commonly say: my legs, my hands & my body. I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my body and then I look at my body.... Who is doing the looking? My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body? Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body. I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think. But please feel free to accept the version that fits you. Thank you for your attention. God bless you. Salaam Aleikum. Sat Sri Akaal. Hare Krishna. Namaskar.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
This genius of a man , this Jesuit priest is the one who actually turned my head to pay attention to on a couch 5-6 years ago as I was laying in my misery from Cancer treatments at my home. Not the treatments but the attempt at resting or just laying in despair and depression and anxiety and PTSD unable to hardly move an inch. Because of this priest I very slowly began dragging my feet back to a semblance of Catholicism. He is blind , brilliant, I love him and pray when I remember for him that he led me back.
Great testimonial , Mimi. God is Alive. God is Love. Jesus was sent to Earth as a baby to show the rest of us humans, the beloved creature of God's creation, how to behave, live in service to others and in a living and loving relationship with God. That Jesus is considered the Son of God the Father with the Love between the Father and the Son being the manifestation of the Holy Spirit , or the Paraclete as Jesus declared would be sent to carry mankind forward after Jesus would no longer be with His 12 apostles, we have the three persons of the Holy Trinity. The encouragement, love and hope you felt listening to Fr. Spritzer was the Comforter. That is one of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit, the love of God. You were open to it so you were graced with it. People make it so hard to believe because we are all affected by satan's blight to mankind. Those baptized are given the graces to fight against the evil but often fail. Just get back up again. That is all you need to do. Just like Mimi was open to. Seek forgiveness and repentance for not following the best path you knew to follow, and start to experience the peace and contentment that Mimi finally did. It is never too late to turn to the One God who created the universe. Repent and believe in the Lamb of God who died to take away the sins of the world, Jesus Christ. He existed in history. He was born, walked with His chosen 12, allowed himself to be crucified, died was laid in a tomb on a Friday and rose from the grave on Easter Sunday morning. He was the Jewish born Messiah for All of Mankind. That's ALL God asks so little of us. All the unbelief, questioning, confusion, doubting is of the evil one. Bottom line: quit running away and instead run toward the God who made you and wants nothing more than your recognition that you belong to someone who loves you more than you can imagine. If you turn toward God and pray for guidance, watch out. Because you will get a good response!! One last thing to consider that can change how you think of everything: if it is good, it is of God because God is all good. God does Not Cause bad to happen. But He does allow it so He can allow some good to come out of it. ex: illness and dis-ease is not from God. It is a result of the first man's fall from grace. From the result of evil . But God allows illness for a greater good to come from it. Perhaps for Mimi that greater good was the revelation finally understood due to 10:54 Fr. Spitzer's uncanny brains, whit and unwavering faith and conviction that bubbles over because such joy cannot be contained. Fr. Spritzer is a rare breed that sees his challenges even as a gift from God. He has give.his life to serve Jesus Christ as fully as possible. He is smart, insightful, effective in his explanations and research and writings. I imagine he will have a very comfortable reward in heaven one day. He is one of those pretty certain to hear "Welcome my good and faithful servant!" Let's just hope it is not for a long time to come. We need Shepards like Fr. Spritzer here below.
You can tell how giddy and excited he gets simply talking about this stuff. He's super into it like a little kid, tripping over his words and sometimes stuttering.
THIS guy BELIEVES
Fr Spitzer has a contagious enthusiasm! The YT logarithm kindly sent me his lecture on the Turin Shroud; I had never really doubted it - but the evidence presented so engagingly by Fr S was like music to my ears! I thank Our Lord for giving us a glimpse of His Holy Face. Makes me cry. 🙏❤️🙏
The so-called "evidence" for the Turin shroud is only convincing for people who already believe the shroud was the burial cloth of Jesus.
I LOVE this guy!!! No disrespect intended whatsoever! Father just blows my minuscule mind!🙏🏻😁😇❤️
If you are here. You are here for a reason! JESUS is king. Awesome doesn't even touch his Glory.if you seek him you will find him. He is that good. JESUS loves you! He will change your life. trust him. THANK YOU JESUS for being my SAVIOR. I LOVE YOU JESUS. you are my king❤
Christians boast their lack of quality-control.
The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing,
is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers.
Why would anyone confess Jesus Christ as Lord,
when voting is a quality-control?
Republicans rig the voting districts.
The SCOTUS writes of its own stench.
Christians are avoided like the old woman with too many cats,
suggesting we travel best with one foot in fantasyland,
based on butchered context in Roman propaganda.
Who do you think licensed temples, controlled publication,
crucified when imperial Rome created Christians?
Why do you think every Alex Jones in the country,
uses Jesus-lingo in the sales-pitch?
The problem is;
We depend on the fiction of government being better than no government, actually working, with voting as a quality-control.
Christians boast having no quality-control.
The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing,
is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers.
The only difference between a Republican & Democrat
is how fast the knee hits the floor when a donor walks in the room.
There is no plan, not for greenhouse gases, as long as energy is needed to keep the show on the road.
Christians demand ownership of the narrative: We are all gods, children of the highest god.
The ultimate vanity is declared,
as they make a scene in the temple.
Christians are the wolves in sheep's clothing,
weighing in on whatnot as if Earth had gravity-free zones,
would-be dictators suggesting we must all travel together,
as if we all prefer leadership with one foot in fantasyland.
We know a tree by the fruit.
We know a man by his works.
We thank God secular law & order
finally ended the witch-killings & inquisitions.
"If you are here. You are here for a reason! "
The reason I am here is because the video is titled "The Latest Scientific Evidence of God".
Ignoring the fact that "The Latest Scientific Evidence of God" makes no sense because so far no scientific evidence for god has been shown, I watched to see if ANY scientific evidence for god is presented here.
None is.
@@TdBone They think this improves God sales, having scientific evidence for characters only known from fiction, as if a deity who can't get everyone's attention, is worthy of the Divine title.
@@cnault3244 Scientism is such a drag, and completely devoid of the more appropriate philosophical treatment of God's existence. What do you want, for God to pop down and pose for a photograph? To say 'cheese' for you and your godless pals before heading back up to heaven?
@@dónalÓNiadh Why not? According to the Bible, god talks to numerous people, or pops down to see them, or wrestles with them ( god lost btw), or has them over for dinner.
Let's assume the discussion was about the existence of leprechauns and rephrase your question so you can see how stupid your post was:
Scientism is such a drag, and completely devoid of the more appropriate philosophical treatment of leprechauns' existence. What do you want, for a leprechaun to pop over and pose for a photograph? To say 'cheese' for you and your pals before heading back to their pot of gold?
The fact is I said NOTHING about scientific evidence for god. Evidence for something does not have to be scientific. Now, what is your BEST evidence for god?
It happened 4 decades ago in a premier research institute in India. The presentation was about the breakthrough in nuclear medicine. The speaker differentiated x-ray from nuclear medicine stating that while the former gave the structural image the later gave a functional image. I was only a student among the audience of top scientists. During the QA session I asked if it can be used to detect what happens when a person dies. The audience and the speaker brushed aside my question with a laughter. I sank in shame. After 40 years, fully detached from science, Fr.Spitzer is making me happy. Thanks.
Thank you for enduring the Shame you felt ....trust me you have no reason to be shameful ....the people who laughed at you are very similar to those who laughed at Noah
Consider yourself in good company. All the visionaries have been mocked and cajoled. It's part of being a Christian.
@@Catquick1957 Ah, here we go; the old Christian persecution complex.
@@nonprogrediestregredi1711 Since when did facts become a complex? :)
@@timmoore9736 And what facts would those be?
What an intellect this priest has.
Absolutely love this man of the cloth! 🙏
God bless you father
@Tbone pretty lonely soul...huh?
Stay healthy for the rest of your life. Denying God is eternity in hell, that's a long long time. Now be a good boy and take the garbage out like your mommy asked and do something constructive with yourself like, get a job.
Thank you Fr Robert for talking about NDE. Yes, things are changing, thank God.
I enjoyed watching this.
This priest is outstanding. My fear is who will succeed him. Father please pass on your brilliant intellect to someone else too.
Aside from everything else, Father recites all this without notes.
I’ve always believed that science was proof of God’s brilliance and that the beauty of the cosmos and everything within it was an expression of God’s perfect love. I’m glad Father Spitzer provided the evidence to back it up. The truth shall prevail!
The magis center where this man is getting his statistics from is a highly biased Christion organization.
Science does not point to God. Don't believe me? Go ask any real scientist.
@Caleb OKAY
What's a scientific ideal?
Sorry, but science has nothing to do with God. Science has nothing to do with miracles or the supernatural. It only deals with information data.
@@kalords5967 “There are two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
- Albert Einstein
@@sxt4447 Albert Einstein did not believe in the personal God who rewards and punishes people based on their actions.
Seen and experienced Miracles from prayers to Jesus Christ!
Praise God there are younger scientists that believe in God! Hopefully that will continue to grow and spread to the general population! Love Fr. Spitzer, and have enjoyed my first Majis Center Catholic Women’s Bible study!
trouble is they'll be mostly Hindu.... you're cool with that.
or do you assume they'll become Christian .... for some reason...
@irishmclass2042, Unfortunately, the world media is totally against God. They withhold gems of information of discoveries about the most astonishing facts already in the Bible. We can only rely on experts like Fr. Spitzer to spread the newfound realities of the Holy Book in Archeology , Science, and with the help of technology. As you say, our hope for the future lies in young scientists-to-be and a revival.
@@ecysmith6652
If only there were organizations with billions of dollars in assets that would stand up for the bible....
Clearly Fr Spitzer was a scientist before God called him to the Priesthood. A wonderful talk. Thank u Fr.
He wasn't ever a scientist.
Superb!
Christians have no quality-control.
Christians boast their lack of quality-control.
The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing,
is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers.
Why would anyone confess Jesus Christ as Lord,
when voting is a quality-control?
Republicans rig the voting districts.
The SCOTUS writes of its own stench.
Christians are avoided like the old woman with too many cats,
suggesting we travel best with one foot in fantasyland,
based on butchered context in Roman propaganda.
Who do you think licensed temples, controlled publication,
crucified when imperial Rome created Christians?
Why do you think every Alex Jones in the country,
uses Jesus-lingo in the sales-pitch?
The problem is;
We depend on the fiction of government being better than no government, actually working, with voting as a quality-control.
Christians boast having no quality-control.
The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing,
is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers.
The only difference between a Republican & Democrat
is how fast the knee hits the floor when a donor walks in the room.
There is no plan, not for greenhouse gases, as long as energy is needed to keep the show on the road.
Christians demand ownership of the narrative: We are all gods, children of the highest god.
The ultimate vanity is declared,
as they make a scene in the temple.
Christians are the wolves in sheep's clothing,
weighing in on whatnot as if Earth had gravity-free zones,
would-be dictators suggesting we must all travel together,
as if we all prefer leadership with one foot in fantasyland.
We know a tree by the fruit.
We know a man by his works.
We thank God secular law & order
finally ended the witch-killings & inquisitions.
Of course he’s one of the good priests. May God bless him. I was feeling very low today but his lecture has lifted me up. Praise the Lord.
Fairytales can be comforting.
@@downenout8705
Okay Thomas
@@hoponpop3330 "One of" as if the existence of your mythagog did anything done make another evidential excuses for your tyrannical deity, mythelot.
Watch it again on a lense of a outsider of such faith and you'll see how deceptive it is...
@@hoponpop3330 Yep, but the problem with that story is that when Thomas asked for empirical evidence he was provided it. Today however when an atheist asks for empirical evidence of the truth of 1 Corinthians 15: 14 all you get is apologetic excuses.
@@hoponpop3330 Should we start a Church of Later Day Thomas's
Fantastic! It is fulfilling for me to hear that, before his death, Dr. Hawkins was able to see the glory of God in His infinite creation of the Universe that He, Himself created by His supreme intelligence and flawless architecture. And praise God for humans to have a soul and that is manifested in Science at the moment of death, and in life, by Jesus Christ.
He seen that it was the only choice to explain the miraculous universe.
Unfortunately that's not true...I'll I say is that the truth regarding that is easily obtainable out there.
@@espojespo5 I am not going to argue with you. Your religion is atheism, mine is Christianity. Think how you like but allow me to think like great minds such as Isaac Newton, Hobble, Boyle, Lavoisier, to cite just a few. So, I am in good company.
@@TdBone That’s your opinion and I am not going to argue with you. I just feel sad that you think this way.
Did you mean Fr. Stephen Hawking ( not Hawkins)? Why are you bearing false witness against Stephen Hawking?
We consider ourselves extremely intelligent capable of incredible things. The truth is we have all we can do to get up in the morning and tie our shoes. We are weak and fallible. Thank you God for all you have ever done. All glory is yours.
Yes. Thank you god for making us weak and fallible. On purpose. By your design. Making us get sick and hurt both mentally and physically by your design. Thank you for parasites that eat our eyes and all that nice stuff. Thank you for creating - by your design - a nature which is based on living things killing other living things from plants to animals just to survive in the world of your design. Thank you for creating us sick by your design and demanding us to heal ourselves while - by your design - we lack the ability to do so. Thank you for the Hell you created to punish us for being exactly like you designed us to be. Thank you.
We suck but we’re the best gods lame
"The truth is we have all we can do to get up in the morning and tie our shoes."
Speak for yourself.
"We are weak and fallible. Thank you God for all you have ever done. "
All god has done? According to you he made weak and fallible humans.
Fr Spitzer gives Glory to God.
May my life do so in some way.
Thank you Dr Spitzer
Myself as well.
Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation.
We now know that atheism is based purely on faith.
A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there
is absolutely no evidence.
We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that
God does not exist it would have been shoved up our
throats in every school for decades!
Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed
medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that
peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have
a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.''
A question:
Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul)
that the slide/research refers to?
Am I the body that has a transcendent soul?
Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul?
A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body?
My material body is subject to death,
that's obvious, but once the body is gone
(buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc)
who owns the soul?
Maybe a different question:
Who am I?
Am I the body or am I the soul?
Logic points to the latter, I think.
We commonly say:
my legs, my hands & my body.
I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside
because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my
body and then I look at my body....
Who is doing the looking?
My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body?
Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body.
I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think.
But please feel free to accept the version that fits you.
Thank you for your attention.
God bless you.
Salaam Aleikum.
Sat Sri Akaal.
Hare Krishna.
Namaskar.
Father Spitzer always strengthens two things in me. My faith in God...and that I'm dumber than a box of rocks when it comes to anything beyond basic physics. Love his lectures!
Me too
Haha amen
I've just listened to part of his talk and I am actually a scientist. He has the complete opposite effect on me, because I can easily identify bad logic and misunderstood science in his talk. My other comments here explain what I mean with examples in the talk.
You're not dumber than rocks,. I th8nk I know less now as a percentage than when I was young and only one year younger than Fr Spitzer.
You ask 9ne question, then you find an answer, that leads to two more questions, then those answers lead to four ans so it goes on.
Amazing how smart you seem to a room full of people that know less than you. Now, try that in a room full of people that are more educated than you.
My Lord
My God !
Love listening and learning from Dr. Father Spitzer. He’s amazing.
Thanks, folks. It is so edifying and uplifting to listen to Father Spitzer: a wonderful voice of reason and sanity. What a brilliant witness.
I’m a Christian but the probabilistic rationale for belief in God using the fine tuning of universal constants is faulty because we have no idea of the probability distribution of each universal constant.
Thank you Fr Spitzer I love listening to you and enjoy your books!! God bless you
Today is the first time seeing Robert Spitzer. He's so funny XD, NOT ONCE, DID I LOSE INTEREST IN THE TALK OR GET DISTRACTED, Furthest being from boring i've ever heard
It’s always inspirational, enlightening, and educational to listen to Father Spitzer. And he’s also an exorcist!
All priests are exorcists, technically speaking. But I've never heard that Fr. Spitzer ever delved into that. I'll have to ask some search algorithms now.
Fellow admirers Fr. Spitzer is so blessed with this Knowledge that he makes science so interesting because it's through science, that we can try to comprehend the complicity of the Cosmos, intertwined with divine, faith and reason.
I feel privileged to be a catholic because it's the true catholic doctrine, that defines the Universe. God Bless you Fr.Spitzer.
Thank you Fr. Spitzer! I have always viewed the Shroud as sort of a time capsule. We didn’t even get to see the image of Jesus as a photo negative until photography was invented. I believe that science will be able to accurately date the Shroud and more mysteries will be unlocked, that will cause the Church to accept the Shroud as a holy relic and the actual burial shroud of Jesus Christ. Moreover, it will prove that not only did this shroud belong to Jesus Christ, but his body was reanimated by supernatural power. I believe that venerating the Shroud as a holy relic and Eucharistic miracles will go a long way to convert the skeptics of our modern scientific community. Praise be Jesus Christ!
Newest video on shroud has a new dating method it's a new x ray technology and writing on shroud says Jesus and Nazarene. Vatican researcher Barbara Frale also found writing on shroud. See video on U Tube
Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation.
We now know that atheism is based purely on faith.
A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there
is absolutely no evidence.
We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that
God does not exist it would have been shoved up our
throats in every school for decades!
Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed
medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that
peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have
a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.''
A question:
Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul)
that the slide/research refers to?
Am I the body that has a transcendent soul?
Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul?
A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body?
My material body is subject to death,
that's obvious, but once the body is gone
(buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc)
who owns the soul?
Maybe a different question:
Who am I?
Am I the body or am I the soul?
Logic points to the latter, I think.
We commonly say:
my legs, my hands & my body.
I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside
because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my
body and then I look at my body....
Who is doing the looking?
My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body?
Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body.
I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think.
But please feel free to accept the version that fits you.
Thank you for your attention.
God bless you.
Salaam Aleikum.
Sat Sri Akaal.
Hare Krishna.
Namaskar.
Sorry but it's from the middle ages...also it was a popular thing they did with the images
@@richardlawson6787 - really? Then please enlighten us on how you fake the burial shroud of Jesus. We can’t even come close to a copy today.
Why are you sorry, Richard? Yours is an opinion, like anyone else’s. You are entitled to have it!
We live in an age where many of us require evidence at a very deep level. I was once among the doubters. Now I have friends and family who will often ask me about my 'conversion' and wish to know but they also seek a bit of "proof". Therefore I have shared this information about the Shroud and various Eucharistic miracles, which both also happen to share AB+ blood. The other piece I share is the event in 1968 when Our Lady appeared in Zietoun, Egypt for about two years. Fr. Spitzer, thank you for your great knowledge, wisdom & vision. God bless you. ❤
There is zero scientific evidence to prove the existence of God and the soul, nor is there life after death.
Universe friendly to life? God did it. I've never understood this answer.
Thoroughly enjoyed this, thank you. Our God is an awesome God. ✝️
A question to all?? I’m Looking forward to an intelligent reply.?? Moved by lust at the sight of her, King David called for Bathsheba to be brought to him and slept with her. David committed adultery with a married woman called Bathsheba, wife of Uriah. what's more, David murdered Uriah by proxy by ordering all of Uriah's comrades to abandon him in the midst of battle, so that he ended up getting killed by an opposing army. The Prophet Nathan was sent by God and warned King David. well, Torah verses clearly say that both URIAH and DAVID Blessed by GOD.
Well, the question is, if Uriah, David and Bathsheba go to heaven. To whom will Bathsheba be given? This question is ready to test the wisdom of all of you: The Bible [ Torah]: God promised that God had already chosen all three humans for heaven: David, Uriah and Bathsheba. I’m Looking forward to an intelligent reply.
Note: God said through Nathan the prophet that King David was rich. Uriah was poor and had nothing but Bathsheba, a little lamb. Therefore, God here assured that the couple was chosen through the parable. David's prayer sought forgiveness and Later King David has been forgiven too. no doubt all three will go to heaven. If So, to whom will Bathsheba be given? Note: Matthew 22/23-30: There will be no right answer. The question raised by the Sadducees was about the impossible situation of a widow having seven husbands, all brothers. If Abraham goes to heaven, Sarah will be his wife in heaven. just as Mary will be Joseph's wife. Matthew 22:23-33/ It has a different meaning. You and your spouse love each other, live together on earth, and are true believers in Christ. If they go to heaven, they don't need to remarry. They don't need to create new babies.
“And the Good News about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, so that all nations will hear it; and then the end will come. (MTHW 24:14).”
A question to all?? I’m Looking forward to an intelligent reply.?? Moved by lust at the sight of her, King David called for Bathsheba to be brought to him and slept with her. David committed adultery with a married woman called Bathsheba, wife of Uriah. what's more, David murdered Uriah by proxy by ordering all of Uriah's comrades to abandon him in the midst of battle, so that he ended up getting killed by an opposing army. The Prophet Nathan was sent by God and warned King David. well, Torah verses clearly say that both URIAH and DAVID Blessed by GOD.
Well, the question is, if Uriah, David and Bathsheba go to heaven. To whom will Bathsheba be given? This question is ready to test the wisdom of all of you: The Bible [ Torah]: God promised that God had already chosen all three humans for heaven: David, Uriah and Bathsheba. I’m Looking forward to an intelligent reply.
Note: God said through Nathan the prophet that King David was rich. Uriah was poor and had nothing but Bathsheba, a little lamb. Therefore, God here assured that the couple was chosen through the parable. David's prayer sought forgiveness and Later King David has been forgiven too. no doubt all three will go to heaven. If So, to whom will Bathsheba be given? Note: Matthew 22/23-30: There will be no right answer. The question raised by the Sadducees was about the impossible situation of a widow having seven husbands, all brothers. If Abraham goes to heaven, Sarah will be his wife in heaven. just as Mary will be Joseph's wife. Matthew 22:23-33/ It has a different meaning. You and your spouse love each other, live together on earth, and are true believers in Christ. If they go to heaven, they don't need to remarry. They don't need to create new babies.
@@bitmasricco5699 Jesus answers this very question in the gospels when it is given to him by the Sadducees.
@@bitmasricco5699 I think a much bigger question is this: according to God's supposedly perfect law, David was guilty of two capital crimes. Bathsheba is either rape victim or guilty of one capital crime (adultery) - we don't know since, like most women in the bible, her views don't matter. The only certainly innocent party is the baby she gives birth to. The outcome? David goes on to be Israel's great king and the model for the coming messiah. Bathsheba goes on to be queen mother. The baby gets executed by slow torture. The question is: what does this say about the justice of God?
@@njhoepner well said, Ok! come to the question is: if Uriah, David and Bathsheba go to heaven. To whom will Bathsheba be given? Note : Every reference to angels in Scripture is in the masculine gender. Angels are never referred to in any gender other than masculine.
• In Matthew 22:30 Jesus says that there will be no marriage in heaven because we “will be like the angels in heaven.” This verse states that angels do not marry, but it stops short of commenting on their “gender.” Nothing in Jesus’ statement can be taken to imply that angels are masculine, feminine, or neuter.
@@bitmasricco5699 Well, if one presumes such things as the existence of heaven, and presumes as well that Jesus is in fact god, then one has to go with what he says as ultimate authority, since nothing in the Hebrew bible answers the question. The Hebrew Bible and its marriage laws were written without belief in resurrection and afterlife, so the premise of laws is purely about family continuity and procreation in this world, for the purpose of maintaining family lines and therefore property claims. The ONLY pronouncement in scripture on the subject of marriage laws and resurrection, therefore, is that of Jesus. Under the above premises, that means in heaven marriage is irrelevant. Going further would be speculation, but my speculation would be that even those married for a lifetime on earth are not married in heaven, because it is pointless.
One of the smartest men ever, and speaks the truth, thanks God
7:29 - a profound misunderstanding of statistics. The odds of the universe being able to sustain life are exactly 1 in 1, because we observe life. Of the billions of possible genetic codes possible the chance that yours exists is also 1 in 1 if you are reading this. They really should teach science in the seminaries.
Thank you for increasing my faith Fr. Excellent presentation. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Like as the Lord said , Blessed are those who believe after they have seen !
Praise God 🙌 and Alleluia!!! God loves us, and He's generous and so gentle with us, infinitely beyond our imagination. ❤
apart from those times when he killed everyone.....
Yes mythelot keep praising the fraudeist...
Hmm...volcanos....hurricanes...asteroids...tornadoes... earthquakes...plagues...I don't know about all that gentle stuff
@@richardlawson6787 Or more specifically - declaring descendants guilty because of the "sin" of an ancestor and therefore shoveling them into "hell"; ordering the killing of anyone who doesn't follow exactly the right religion with exactly the right rituals; insisting that murder is wrong and then ordering genocide; destroying a person's entire life just to make points in a game (story of Job); we don't even need to get to natural disasters before the whole "gentle" thing flies out the window.
“As Terence McKenna observed, “Modern science is based on the principle: ‘Give us one free miracle and we’ll explain the rest.’ The one free miracle is the appearance of all the mass and energy in the universe and all the laws that govern it in a single instant from nothing.”
― Rupert Sheldrake, 'Morphic Resonance: The Nature of Formative Causation'
We have mathematical constructs that explain a universes creation. Of course hard to run an experiment. But we don't have to retort to miracles.
@@russellmiles2861 So what created the laws of physics?
@@yourkingdomcomeyourwillbedone that is a fascinating question. I guess wed have to start we the use of the term laws regarding natural philosophy is not the same as the term when referring to, say road traffic management. You assuming agency in something you observe. This would be like wondering why a golf ball landed on a particular turf of grass. We don't assume the golf ball was guided. And we don't assume mathematics is more than some phenomenon we observe.
I would stress: as I said: we can't conduct an experiment. So who knows the Universe may have been created by a God.
That presents a more interesting question as why would a God bother?
@@russellmiles2861 From Wikipedia: "Scientific laws are statements, based on repeated experiments or observations, that describe or predict a range of natural phenomena.".
I'm sure you're familiar with the laws of physics - gravity for example.
They are "constants" in nature and they describe certain limits of physical reality.
I didn't assume agency, I simply asked if you had a better explanation for what created these laws?
You said "We have mathematical constructs that explain a universes creation." and I'm arguing that you don't have a mathematical construct for the *first cause*
We know that golf balls are guided by golf players and both road traffic management and golf ball striking are conscious, deliberate actions of human beings.
Why do you think the laws of physics are perfectly expressed through the language of mathematics?
Eugene Paul Wigner once said "The unreasonable efficiency of mathematics in science is a gift we neither understand nor deserve."
This is a scientist making a mystical statement about how we are able to understand creation through rational thought.
You can't conduct a physical experiment on the creation of the universe but you can conduct thought experiments and there are many hypotheses such as M-theory.
When you find a plausible explanation, you can either take a leap of faith that there is some high power/intelligence behind everything (theist), suspend judgement, remain skeptical and live in ignorance (agnostic) or deny any/all supernatural intervention and rely on a materialist, anthropocentric explanation (atheist).
As to why God would bother - are you aware that in the Bible it states that "man is created in the likeness and image of God"?
I would argue that God bothered so that you and I could experience the gift of life.
@@yourkingdomcomeyourwillbedone thank you for your considered reply. Although I couldn't help feel we are in agreement; ie, laws of physics are observations and as you state repeatable and verifiable. We don't set them. They even change or can be fluid. Eg, you mention Gravity. This is a most useful law for predicting movement of planets, space craft, footballs, etc. It doesn't matter that a subatomic level it doesn't work. We also don't really know what Gravity is: a strange weak force that is intentions across the universe. Much more work to be done there
Re: first cause latter
Thank you Father Spitzer, some light of faith has sparked in me.
THIS HAS STRENGTGEN MY FAITH
Everyone has evidence of god but no one has ever won any of the world's prizes, no Noble prize.
Follow the science. Praised be Jesus
This is flawed logic being dished out in this video. You are getting your science from the wrong person. Expand your knowledge and think for yourself more.
The whole lecture at its core was just a big argument from personal incredulity.
But is always good to hear from the opposite viewpoint to try to understand it.
The statistics and probabilities don’t matter to you?
Unfortunately it always is.
Theists wonder why we find it so frustrating that their proof is always simply an assertion.
I’m amazed at this man’s ability to rattle off so much off the top of his head.
Very happy 😊 to hear the new results regarding the Shroud. 🙏 I've always believed anyway. We are so blessed to see an image of our Lord.
To me, the number of people who believe in God is irrelevant to any argument as to whether there is a god or not.
WELL DONE FATHER......Thank you so much for this! God bless you for this scientific perspective!😂
The fact that young scientists are more commonly theists than older ones could mean many things:
1, as suggested here, scientists are becoming more religious
2: scientists lose their faith over the course of their career
3: young scientists are more likely to come from more theistic countries than older ones.
So, basically, you can't draw a conclusion from this statistic.
We like the numbers.
@@marcosgonzalez4525 What do you like about them?
It could also be that the current and/or newly considered evidence - as Father Spitzer laid out - when considered makes it more difficult to not believe in God for individuals open to considering evidence. In the past there were potential explanations other than God for the existence of the Universe, but these potential explanations are falling by the wayside.
I would be curious to see what is considered a “scientist” in the polling. In past studies individuals in the hard sciences (chemistry, physics and medicine) had a higher level of believers than those in the soft sciences (psychology, sociology, etc.). One study I read found that 3% of psychologists believed in God, whereas more than 50% of physicians believed. I say all this because the percentage of people in the hard sciences may actually believe at a higher level.
I like your third explanation. Because he doesn't say they are dominantly Christian at all. More and more scientists are coming out of strongly religious societies like India, which would explain why more scientists are religious.
Ofc, what scientists think doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the evidence and logical arguments that scientists create.
They r attempting to claim a statistic (that we cannot verify) as evidence, but its barely anecdotal. This man provides no real evidence. That should tell u something. If there was evidence of God, there would b no shortage of churches blasting it from every available platform.
Amazing that this is still a valid topic for discussion in 2022!
No it isn't.
@@SMacCuUladh ! Which is a problem!
@@j.whisper2379 It's a little more complex than that but I think I know what you're getting at.
Humans a prone to fantasy.
There will always be an audience for this rubbish...
@@roscius6204 ! Noproblem, as long as they keep their rubbish in their own yard~
Genesis, Quantum Physics and Reality by Peter Zoeller-Greer. How Quantum Physics proves the existence of God. ‘…leads to a new Anthropic principle - the Divine.”
They are the same odds as a hurricane smashing through a junk yard and at the end, a perfectly working 747 Boeing Jet is created with engineering all ready for take off.
Wow 2000 years of tradition, and we got you!
One can believe in God without believing in religion
The Holy Shroud of Turin, The Sudarium, the infinitesimal eternal universe and DNA give us the 100% certainty that God is God and Jesus is Who He is. Thank God for The Holy Ghost.
Fr. Spitzer also quoted the scientific organizations giving out the statistics!
Fascinating stuff
I'd like to know:
Who am I?
Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation.
We now know that atheism is based purely on faith.
A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there
is absolutely no evidence.
We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that
God does not exist it would have been shoved up our
throats in every school for decades!
Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed
medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that
peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have
a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.''
A question:
Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul)
that the slide/research refers to?
Am I the body that has a transcendent soul?
Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul?
A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body?
My material body is subject to death,
that's obvious, but once the body is gone
(buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc)
who owns the soul?
Maybe a different question:
Who am I?
Am I the body or am I the soul?
Logic points to the latter, I think.
We commonly say:
my legs, my hands & my body.
I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside
because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my
body and then I look at my body....
Who is doing the looking?
My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body?
Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body.
I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think.
But please feel free to accept the version that fits you.
Thank you for your attention.
God bless you.
Salaam Aleikum.
Sat Sri Akaal.
Hare Krishna.
Namaskar.
Why isn't Thomas's first proof sufficient? Has anyone EVER experienced something causing itself? Putting experience aside, does logic allow the assertion that a thing can cause itself? How? For a thing to cause itself means the causal thing precedes itself in time. That's an absurdity.
A gifted man.
I trust that Father Spitzer is one of the good jesuits.
😂😂
That he is
contradiction in terms - like 'military intelligence' - both catholicism/jesuitism and military are based on control and evil.
There are no good jesuites!
The bad ones are those Jesuits who are funding the invasion at our Southern border.
Any scientist who believes in a God, like after death and or a Devine Jesus has not used the scientific process to reach that decision.
Father Spitzer is a heroic manifestation of grace. A great gift to mankind.
One should note that the magis center where this man is getting his statistics from is a highly biased Christion organization.
Science does not point to God. Don't believe me? Go ask any real scientist.
yet he's following and promoting sin - since he's catholic.
Bible is clear on this, Tom.
@@johnhammond6423 Science of course points to God. What part of 10^10 ^123 : 1 are you missing. Scientism is naive and unscientific. Look up final causality. Most scientists don't study philosophy of science and say really dumb things.
@@tommore3263
_'Most scientists don't study philosophy of science'_
That's right, most scientists do 'science'
He is lying while wearing a collar. He knows this is not real evidence, yet he is willing to make that claim anyway.
Ecclesiastes 9:5
For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing at all, nor do they have any more reward, because all memory of them is forgotten. 6 also their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished.
John 5:28. All those in their memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out.
If everyone is in Heaven or hell, who are those in their memorial tombs.
Firstly..Ad Popularum isnt evidence.The fact that lots of people believe something to be true has no bearing at all on it actually being true..Its a fallacious position.
When the biochemical processes stop, so does consciousness. Life after death is a ridiculous belief, but then so are these people who are incapable of being intellectually honest.
Hard to believe that there is such a thing as an intelligent atheist. A true oxymoron right there.
beverlyhurd8556
No need to be jealous...
I am a physicist and I will explain why our scientific knowledge refutes the idea that consciousness is generated by the brain and that the origin of our mental experiences is physical/biological (in my youtube channel you can find a video with more detailed explanations). My arguments prove the existence in us of an indivisible unphysical element, which is usually called soul or spirit.
Physicalism/naturalism is based on the belief that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, but I will discuss two arguments that prove that this hypothesis implies logical contradictions and is disproved by our scientific knowledge of the microscopic physical processes that take place in the brain. (With the word consciousness I do not refer to self-awareness, but to the property of being conscious= having a mental experiences such as sensations, emotions, thoughts, memories and even dreams).
1) All the alleged emergent properties are just simplified and approximate descriptions or subjective/arbitrary classifications of underlying physical processes or properties, which are described DIRECTLY by the fundamental laws of physics alone, without involving any emergent properties (arbitrariness/subjectivity is involved when more than one option is possible; in this case, more than one possible description). An approximate description is only an abstract idea, and no actual entity exists per se corresponding to that approximate description, simply because an actual entity is exactly what it is and not an approximation of itself. What physically exists are the underlying physical processes and not the emergent properties (=subjective classifications or approximate descriptions). This means that emergent properties do not refer to reality itself but to an arbitrary abstract concept (the approximate conceptual model of reality). Since consciousness is the precondition for the existence of concepts, approximations and arbitrariness/subjectivity, consciousness is a precondition for the existence of emergent properties.
Therefore, consciousness cannot itself be an emergent property.
The logical fallacy of materialists is that they try to explain the existence of consciousness by comparing consciousness to a concept that, if consciousness existed, a conscious mind could use to describe approximately a set of physical elements. Obviously this is a circular reasoning, since the existence of consciousness is implicitly assumed in an attempt to explain its existence.
2) An emergent property is defined as a property that is possessed by a set of elements that its individual components do not possess. The point is that the concept of set refers to something that has an intrinsically conceptual and subjective nature and implies the arbitrary choice of determining which elements are to be included in the set; what exists objectively are only the single elements (where one person sees a set of elements, another person can only see elements that are not related to each other in their individuality). In fact, when we define a set, it is like drawing an imaginary line that separates some elements from all the other elements; obviously this imaginary line does not exist physically, independently of our mind, and therefore any set is just an abstract idea, and not a physical entity and so are all its properties. Since consciousness is a precondition for the existence of subjectivity/arbitrariness and abstractions, consciousness is the precondition for the existence of any emergent property, and cannot itself be an emergent property.
Both arguments 1 and 2 are sufficient to prove that every emergent property requires a consciousness from which to be conceived. Therefore, that conceiving consciousness cannot be the emergent property itself. Conclusion: consciousness cannot be an emergent property; this is true for any property attributed to the neuron, the brain and any other system that can be broken down into smaller elements.
On a fundamental material level, there is no brain, or heart, or any higher level groups or sets, but just fundamental particles interacting. Emergence itself is just a category imposed by a mind and used to establish arbitrary classifications, so the mind can't itself be explained as an emergent phenomenon.
Obviously we must distinguish the concept of "something" from the "something" to which the concept refers. For example, the concept of consciousness is not the actual consciousness; the actual consciousness exists independently of the concept of consciousness since the actual consciousness is the precondition for the existence of the concept of consciousness itself. However, not all concepts refer to an actual entity and the question is whether a concept refers to an actual entity that can exist independently of consciousness or not. If a concept refers to "something" whose existence presupposes the existence of arbitrariness/subjectivity or is a property of an abstract object, such "something" is by its very nature abstract and cannot exist independently of a conscious mind, but it can only exist as an idea in a conscious mind. For example, consider the property of "beauty": beauty has an intrinsically subjective and conceptual nature and implies arbitrariness; therefore, beauty cannot exist independently of a conscious mind.
My arguments prove that emergent properties, as well as complexity, are of the same nature as beauty; they refer to something that is intrinsically subjective, abstract and arbitrary, which is sufficient to prove that consciousness cannot be an emergent property because consciousness is the precondition for the existence of any emergent property.
The "brain" doesn't objectively and physically exist as a single entity and the entity “brain” is only a conceptual model. We create the concept of the brain by arbitrarily "separating" it from everything else and by arbitrarily considering a bunch of quantum particles altogether as a whole; this separation is not done on the basis of the laws of physics, but using addictional arbitrary criteria, independent of the laws of physics. The property of being a brain, just like for example the property of being beautiiful, is just something you arbitrarily add in your mind to a bunch of quantum particles. Any set of elements is an arbitrary abstraction therefore any property attributed to the brain is an abstract idea that refers to another arbitrary abstract idea (the concept of brain).
Furthermore, brain processes consist of many parallel sequences of ordinary elementary physical processes. There is no direct connection between the separate points in the brain and such connections are just a conceptual model used to approximately describe sequences of many distinct physical processes; interpreting these sequences as a unitary process or connection is an arbitrary act and such connections exist only in our imagination and not in physical reality. Indeed, considering consciousness as a property of an entire sequence of elementary processes implies the arbitrary definition of the entire sequence; the entire sequence as a whole is an arbitrary abstract idea , and not to an actual physical entity.
For consciousness to be physical, first of all the brain as a whole (and brain processes as a whole) would have to physically exist, which means the laws of physics themselves would have to imply that the brain exists as a unitary entity and brain processes occur as a unitary process. However, this is false because according to the laws of physics, the brain is not a unitary entity but only an arbitrarily (and approximately) defined set of quantum particles involved in billions of parallel sequences of elementary physical processes occurring at separate points. This is sufficient to prove that consciousness is not physical since it is not reducible to the laws of physics, whereas brain processes are. According to the laws of physics, brain processes do not even have the prerequisites to be a possible cause of consciousness.
As discussed above, an emergent property is a concept that refers to an arbitrary abstract idea (the set) and not to an actual entity; this rule out the possibility that the emergent property can exist independently of consciousness. Conversely, if a concept refers to “something” whose existence does not imply the existence of arbitrariness or abstract ideas, then such “something” might exist independently of consciousness. An example of such a concept is the concept of “indivisible entity”. Contrary to emergent properties, the concept of indivisible entity refers to something that might exist independently of the concept itself and independently of our consciousness.
My arguments prove that the hypothesis that consciousness is an emergent property implies a logical fallacy and an hypothesis that contains a logical contradiction is certainly wrong.
Consciousness cannot be an emergent property whatsoever because any set of elements is a subjective abstraction; since only indivisible elements may exist objectively and independently of consciousness, consciousness can exist only as a property of an indivisible element. Furthermore, this indivisible entity must interact globally with brain processes because we know that there is a correlation between brain processes and consciousness. This indivisible entity is not physical, since according to the laws of physics, there is no physical entity with such properties; therefore this indivisible entity corresponds to what is traditionally called soul or spirit. The soul is the missing element that interprets globally the distinct elementary physical processes occurring at separate points in the brain as a unified mental experience. Marco Biagini
@@lalmuanpuiamizo No he made a sound scientific and rational argument. Read it again.
@@lalmuanpuiamizo You said the argument was from incredulity, when it wasn't. That is what I was addressing.
WOW so very awesome!
There is no “latest scientific evidence” for the existence of God or the Soul. Indeed, there is NO scientific evidence whatsoever for either of these. It always astonishes me that grown adults believe such supernatural tosh. I would have found such beliefs ludicrous even as an eleven-year-old.
How do they calculate the odds. Just pluck them out of the air. I would like to see the figures and the formula.
AMAZING! PRAISE JESUS THE RISEN CHRIST FOREVER AMEN! Thank you Fr. Spitzer!!!🌠💖
Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation.
We now know that atheism is based purely on faith.
A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there
is absolutely no evidence.
We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that
God does not exist it would have been shoved up our
throats in every school for decades!
Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed
medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that
peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have
a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.''
A question:
Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul)
that the slide/research refers to?
Am I the body that has a transcendent soul?
Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul?
A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body?
My material body is subject to death,
that's obvious, but once the body is gone
(buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc)
who owns the soul?
Maybe a different question:
Who am I?
Am I the body or am I the soul?
Logic points to the latter, I think.
We commonly say:
my legs, my hands & my body.
I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside
because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my
body and then I look at my body....
Who is doing the looking?
My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body?
Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body.
I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think.
But please feel free to accept the version that fits you.
Thank you for your attention.
God bless you.
Salaam Aleikum.
Sat Sri Akaal.
Hare Krishna.
Namaskar.
Jesus the Died God according Christians teachings and a God who become human being
Brilliant and beautiful!
Some people simply refuse to live in reality.
So if was so statistically unlikely for life to be created, how statistically difficult was it for God to be created in the first place?
100% probably as God is the creator of mathematics and logic.
Thinking about an infinite God that never didn't exist does get your brain twisted in a knot. If you added a zero for every atom in the universe to the number of years God existed before today, you wouldn't even come close. Mind boggling.
God to 21st Century man: “Gotcha!” Love it😊
Good one, and he didn't even mention all the sites and evidence from Arabia around Mt Sinai. From ancient Hebrew inscriptions saying, "died Amelekite" to the Golden Calf Altar, it matches the Biblical story over and over. Too much correlating evidence.
When priests have poor understanding of science and how to interpret data, this is the half-assed nonsense we get.
A lot of fast talking mindless chatter. Kind of like my wife displays
Nothing proves a god exists. Nothing proves Jesus’ divinity or that he performed any miracles or actually resurrected… Nothing!
Nothing does not exist except as a concept. Nothing cannot prove anything.
I saw a documentary about (something like) how life could not have a risen by chance from inorganic matter even though there was some proof that certain amino acids have done this, because the odds of that type of mutation happening were so astronomical that given the rate of cellular development and mitosis that there literally wasn't enough seconds in the history of the universe or something like that to have come up haphazardly. Anybody know if Father spitzer has addressed this?
The flying spaghetti monster did it. It's conclusive.
this guy is good xxx😍😍
Question, why would jesus resurrect Lazarus if he'd achieved some higher level of existence?
Fr. Spritzer was, is, and will continue to be Brilliant!!! Love his reasoning! God bless him…+Fr.James
One should note that the magis center where this man is getting his statistics from is a highly biased Christion organization.
Science does not point to God. Don't believe me? Go ask any real scientist.
@@johnhammond6423 Science points to what then?
@@loganblackwood2922
To reality.
Does not matter if you believe or not, you are continuing after geting out of the body because there if evidence for it.
To believe means you don't know, so its better to be honest that you don't know, and go in life with it so you may learn.
Do you believe that you have 2 hands, of course not, you know you have two hands.
Man that seeks the truth is free from all the beliefs, sociaetys and cultures.
For those who want to know the full story....
THE NDE STUDIES.....(Los Angeles Times excerpts)
Researchers estimate that around 17% of people have an NDE. That means about 80% don't.
Scratch beneath those alleged flat EKG lines and the stories are a veritable Twilight Zone of inconsistencies. Some near-death voyagers claim to have met God - BUT A FEW SAW ELVIS PRESLEY OR GROUCHO MARX, researchers say. Others get to heaven not through the famous "tunnel", but ABOARD GHOSTLY TAXI CABS, FERRIES THAT CROSS THE RIVER STYX, OR SPANGLED COWS.
Even some children - often touted as the best source of unbiased information - sometimes return from "death" CLAIMING THEY WERE GREETED IN THE OTHER WORLD by STILL LIVING TEACHERS and NINTENDO CHARACTERS.
HINDUS WHO BELIEVE IN YAMRAJ, the Hindu god of death, EXPERIENCED MEETING HIM. A Hindu girl "died" AND WENT TO HEAVEN ON A COW. Would that mean western people will be riding cows to heaven? Jews who don't believe in Jesus or "hell", experienced meeting God as described in the Old Testament, while messianic Jews experienced God as Jesus.
Dr. Richard Eby had an NDE and allegedly Jesus told him he had to back, and that he (Jesus) would be returning (2nd coming) before he died permanently. BUT DR. RICHARD EBY HAS NOW DIED AND JESUS HAS NOT RETURNED.
A few hospitals have placed signs in their cardiac units - with nonsensical messages visible only from above - BUT SO FAR NOBODY HAS RETURNED FROM DEATH CLAIMING TO HAVE FLOATED UP AND SEEN ONE.
You would expect that if any one particular religious account of the afterlife was true, NDEs would be pretty much the same. BUT THESE ACCOUNTS ARE SO VARIED AND ARE ARE ALL BASED ON CULTURAL EXPOSURE. IN INDIA, PEOPLE SEE HINDU GODS; IN SAUDI ARABIA ITS ALLAH, MOHAMED, AND A BUNCH OF VIRGINS. The kid from the book/movie Heaven Is For Real, saw a Jesus with sea-green blue eyes ON A RAINBOW COLORED HORSE, GOD WITH HUGE WINGS, YELLOW HAIR AND BLUE EYES; and ONE LITTLE GIRL WENT TO HEAVEN AND WAS GREETED BY A PORTLY MAN WITH A WHITE BEARD AND RED CAP, aka SANTA CLAUSE.
The Mapuche people of South America and residents of Hawaii are more likely to SEE LANDSCAPES AND VOLCANOES, whereas NDEs in Thailand rarely involve landmarks, tunnels, or light. For Tibetans, light features more heavily AS DO ILLUSIONS OF REINCARNATION. Europeans and North Americans often visualize beautiful gardens; intriguingly the Kalai of Melanesia are more inclined to SEE AN INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD OF FACTORIES. An NDEr's subjective recollections can be attributed to many factors: THE NDEr's PSYCHOLOGY, PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, BACKGROUND, ETC., NOT JUST CULTURE.
The terrain of Heaven also varies wildly - from gardens, forests, and CATTLE FILLED PASTURES in some accounts, to clouds, COMPUTER ROOMS OR CASTLES, in others. A TEXAN SAW BARBED WIRE FENCES IN THE AFTERLIFE. Micronesians describe LARGE NOISY CITIES WITH CARS AND SKYSCRAPERS.
Drug addicts, felons (murder), suicides, hedonists, abusers, mean people, and gay people have all claimed to encounter heaven. Strangely, people have claimed to enter some "hell" FOR THE SAME REASONS. Contradictions abound.
This is a wonder. Is the hereafter actually mining and refining raw materials needed to build castles, cars, barbed wire fences, computers, and skyscrapers? From where do they get this material and tools? Not to mention the raw materials and tools needed to construct an ever increasing number of those cages and cubes in the Christian hell, as a few claim. Who builds those cages? And which of the variety of "hells" do you actually go to? Christian? Buddhist? Spiritualist? Hindu? Muslim? Some other one? The answer seems to be whichever one the experience has been exposed to, as Thai NDErs regularly claim to encounter LORD YAMA AND YAMATOOTS, COMPLETE WITH TALKING DECEASED ROOSTERS, and being sentenced to Buddhist "hell" for butchering and eating chicken, then reincarnated as birds. DOES THAT MEAN WESTERNERS WILL UNKNOWINGLY BE HEADING TO BUDDHIST "HELL" FOR EATING CHICKEN? Thai accounts state that butchers become lumps of meat in Buddhist "hell", so what then awaits Western slaughterhouse workers?
Even in her rather homogeneous Western European clientele, Kubler-Ross could see the effects of early enculturation: " I NEVER ENCOUNTERED A PROTESTANT CHILD WHO SAW THE VIRGIN MARY IN HIS LAST MINUTES, YET SHE WAS PERCEIVED BY MANY CATHOLIC CHILDREN."
But there also are some hard-to-explain differences, Melvin Morse says. Whereas American near-death survivors are typically sent back by God because “it’s not your time yet,” INDIA'S AFTERLIFE VISITORS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE TOLD THERE WAS A “CLERICAL ERROR.”
Even more curious: SOMETIMES THE BEING OF LIGHT IS ELVIS PRESLEY. Moody has chronicled at least two such sightings.
Yet the evidence for near-death paranormal powers remains shaky at best. TWO STUDIES HAVE FOUND THAT PATIENTS’ “OUT OF BODY” ACCOUNTS OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE OPERATING ROOM WERE WRONG. So were the 1988 Armageddon forecasts hyped by Ring and others.
Michael Sabom, however, offers a compromise stance: He rejects the idea that they provide glimpses of a heaven or hell. "I’m not saying these people didn’t experience something odd. But I am saying that we should take it with a grain of salt, because IF ANECDOTES MEET YOUR STANDARD FOR WHAT QUALIFIES AS EVIDENCE, then you should probably start buying tin foil and food buckets, because THERE ARE JUST AS MANY PEOPLE WHO REPORT SEEING REPTILIANS AND WHO HAVE BEEN ABDUCTED BY ALIENS."
Sixty years ago, Dr. Wilder Penfield, a neurosurgeon, poked around the right temporal lobe of some epileptic patients and discovered that they would hear heavenly music, relive their pasts in 3D, and have out-of-body visions. Similar experiments continue.
But what about veridical NDEs - near-death experiences in which the person supposedly sees something they couldn’t otherwise have known while ‘flat-lining’ and others are able to verify that what they saw is indeed correct. The most notorious example of this is Maria’s shoe. A lady named Maria reportedly left her body, floated around and saw a shoe on a ledge outside her hospital window, that she ‘couldn’t have possibly seen.’ Her critical care provider, Kimberly Clark, looked outside and saw the shoe, just as described. BUT WHEN RESEARCHERS TRIED TO TRACK DOWN MARIA TO CONFIRM CLARK'S STORY, THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO FIND ANY SUCH PERSON OR ANYONE ELSE TO CORROBORATE THE ACCOUNT. And when they placed a shoe on the ledge, it was clearly visible from the hospital room, PROVING CLARK HAD EXAGGERATED AT LEAST PART OF THE STORY. Here’s the topper. There is no record of Maria being in that hospital.
There is Dr. Melvin Morse's discovery of "a portal" in the brain that when stimulated, triggers a NDE. He writes that some are threatened by this, as the discovery makes the experience unreal.
There’s growing evidence that the temporal lobe plays a huge role in creating NDEs. When patients had their brains scanned after an NDE, it was discovered that they had increased levels of temporal lobe activity compared with those in a control group. THAT COULD HELP EXPLAIN WHY ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE HAVE NDEs. When Dr. Olaf Blanke implanted electrodes into the brains of patients, HE WAS ABLE TO TRIGGER SUPERNATURAL AND OUT OF BODY EXPERIENCES BY STIMULATING THE TEMPORAL PARIETAL JUNCTION.
General Revelation must be in harmony with Special Revelation.
Father Spitzer is great. I can't figure out if he has a problem with his eyes, and if so, how does he read so much?
He's blind
He is blind
@@barbc6934 only physically : )
His Blind Dear one. 🙏
He has macular degeneration. I met him first when he was initially diagnosed and could still see with some unusual glasses.
I’m sure he now reads as any blind person does-listening to super fast recordings of written material.
Our universe is NOT friendly to life. Just leave the very slim layer of atmosphere covering the earth and see how long you live.
Christopher Hitches would've destroyed this BS
I can’t imagine the amount of energy that will be released when all of humanity is resurrected at the end of time
Not all humanity. I firmly believe we live among people from OTHER gods who are evil at heart.
@@mommaknos1136 The Bible says just as all died in Adam, all shall be made alive in Christ.
So all are saved. Some immediately, others after being purged of their sins and evil in hell.
each cell in the human body is capable of generation 1.4 volts but at a very low amperage. a person about 200 pounds in weight will look like a 100 watt firefly.
@@gfujigo Hi Doctor, I hope and pray that hell is not eternal, but everyone I know, in my church, believes that it is. Can you give me some information of why you think that some people, who end up in hell, are there till their sins are purged? I struggle with doubts about God and how weak my faith is I think. I keep repeating the same cycle of sinning and repenting and I can't help feeling because of that I will end up in hell for all eternity. Thank you.
@@bmm9095 Check out the TH-cam channel “The Total Victory of Christ”. Check out David Bentley Hart’s book “That All Shall Be Saved”. Also check out father Aiden Kimmel, David Bentley Hart, Ilaria Ramelli and Robin Parry on the topic of the salvation of all beings through Jesus Christ.
Edit: The correct name is Aiden Kimmel not Alfred Kimmel. My apologies.
How can he say our universe is friendly to life? If there was a field where rice could only grow on .00000000000001% of the field, would you say that field is friendly to rice? It’s a very strange comment.
Yeah I saw one person's estimate of the Earth's volume being 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000003% of the universe. Well that's the _entire_ Earth, but only 1% is crust, and only 29% of _that_ is land, and only a portion of the land is suitable to human life. So the idea of "fine tuning" with respect to humans is ridiculous.
Our universe has a unique way of thinning the inhabitants off the map. Simply defined
Pray That I Will Keep The Ten Commandments Read The Bible Poor Souls In Purgatory Prayer In Schools That My Property Belongings Will Be Blessed That I Will Live Peacefully With My Neighbors Forgiveness Of Enemies That I Will Reflect Often On The Passion Death Of Jesus Christ
you seem a little ......Spaced Out
This Friar is a freaking genius
will you please consider being on the Joe Rogan Experience ? I understand the challenges but the key is to get more people to think about Our Lord Jesus
Great idea!
Great idea!! I would love to see that as well, Rogan has such a large following.
So he can continue to talk without providing any evidence? Whats the point?
I just started listening and already there is a serious flaw. It's important to keep these discussions intellectually honest. The point being there is a vast cataclysmic difference between "God" and "a higher transcendent power." The God of the Bible was petty and vengeful. As for humanity, there is random beauty and suffering so the nature of this higher power remains a mystery.
Anyway my main point here is that the scientists who are theists are likely not referring to the God of the Bible in their belief systems.
One set at a time - you have to believe there is a God to make you decide to read the Bible- and be open to the LESSONS of the Bible (I never liked when my parents punished me when I made a bad decision, but I don’t call them petty and vengeful
Man I had a car salesman who sounds exactly like him.
Yes but what about all the peer reviews. They have to count. He's just say the findings lol
One doesn’t science to back up a premise, or interpret science through a focused lens. One sciences to eliminate erroneous ideas. No science proves any gods
Can you provide links to the sources you cite? In particular, what is the source of the Pew research data on belief in God among scientists? I could not find that online. Thank you and God bless!
You won't find anything, because "father" is lying.
Thank you Fr Spitzer for a very interesting presentation.
We now know that atheism is based purely on faith.
A blind belief that God does not exist, for which there
is absolutely no evidence.
We can safely deduct that if there was any proof that
God does not exist it would have been shoved up our
throats in every school for decades!
Around 16min 50sec you showed us a slide ''Peer-reviewed
medical studies of a transcendent soul'' stating, ''that
peer-reviewed studies show the high likelihood that we have
a transcendent soul capable of surviving bodily death.''
A question:
Who is the ''we'' (that has/possesses the soul)
that the slide/research refers to?
Am I the body that has a transcendent soul?
Or, maybe, I am the eternal, transcendent soul?
A particle of undying spirit in a temporary body?
My material body is subject to death,
that's obvious, but once the body is gone
(buried, eaten by worms, cremated etc)
who owns the soul?
Maybe a different question:
Who am I?
Am I the body or am I the soul?
Logic points to the latter, I think.
We commonly say:
my legs, my hands & my body.
I cannot be my body having an eternal soul inside
because during an NDE, when my soul gets out of my
body and then I look at my body....
Who is doing the looking?
My soul, my body... but who owns my soul and my body?
Using logic I conclude that I AM the soul and I have a body.
I, the soul, am looking at my body during an NDE, I think.
But please feel free to accept the version that fits you.
Thank you for your attention.
God bless you.
Salaam Aleikum.
Sat Sri Akaal.
Hare Krishna.
Namaskar.
The fact that younger scientist believe in god points to a lack of understanding. Their knowledge will come! Time will tell!
Thank you!
We have incredible quantum instrumentation with fantastic sensitivity.
They have found nothing outside the predicted. Period