Let us take science back. I worship God through my works and my studies. When I was an atheist, the world was a different place...I saw no reason for it. Now it is beautiful to observe.
Trueee, when i haven't fully accepted Him yet, everything looks like just a thing kind of a lirtle just the way they are, but now i see it in a different way and a little more special thaan before because i know it won't be possible without God
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Christian scientists were among the founders of genetics, thermodynamics, calculus, set theory, classical mechanics, electromagnetism, modern chemistry, microbiology, quantum mechanics, etc.
Adding onto that, In the 20th century, 72.5% of Nobel Prize winners in Chemistry identified themselves as Christians, and 65.3% of Nobel Prize winners in Physics identified themselves as Christians. And that’s just Christianity, I bet if you look at theists, the percent will be even bigger
@@ZTAudio First, here is a Wikipedia article on the issue: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_Nobel_laureates And here is a commonly cited source for that stat: Baruch A. Shalev, 100 Years of Nobel Prizes (2003), Atlantic Publishers & Distributors, p. 57: between 1901 and 2000 reveals that 654 Laureates belong to 28 different religions. Most (65.4%) have identified Christianity in its various forms as their religious preference.
I'm a scientist and Christian. God created the universe, the laws of physics, life.. . Science explains how God's creation works. It does not explain who orchestrated the creation.
Add the fact that the big bang is impossible and may even has a negative chance of happening since when you don't have anything to start with, how will you start then? It defies the laws of physics Meanwhile, the possiblities of someone, Who is a God, and lives outside time, therefore no start nor end, and lives outside the physical world, then very probably, God does exist.
@@lorenslorens1707 whether the big bang happened or not (I'm not a physicist - and we didn't learn about it in physics when I was at school) I believe God made it happen. No other answer that I have heard is as good as, "there is a being outside time and space and our undestanding' - all other answers result in, "yes but where did that come from" or "how did that happen". God answers those questions.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Someone is going to mention Galileo getting arrested by the church, but that's because he insulted the Pope not because of what his theory on what the universe was.
I think he did not just say that Sun was the center of solar system, he also claimed that the Sun was the center of the universe. If the Church fully endorsed that, history will view them as terrible for science. It’s a lose-lose situation for them. If it was just because of the theory, why did Kepler not receive the same treatment, despite being a little bit earlier in heliocentric model? Anyway, I do not have primary sources on this, so take everything I say with a grain of salt, lol.
@@aldrichemrys Galileo’s arrogance played into this. At the time it was a wash as to which model was better supported by the observational data. Galileo’s insistence on heliocentrism had him at odds not just with the church but with many of his fellow scientists.
@@nathanaelculver5308 There was an article published anonymously by Pope Urban VII, who was actually a friend of Galileo up to this point. Galileo wrote a reply that was, well, somewhat savage in its dissection of the Pope's views. It pretty much called him an idiot. So Galileo was ordered not to write about heliocentricism. He could have moved out of Italy and published anything he wanted, but he stuck around and wrote another book critical of geocentricism. So he was punished by having to stay in his house and write his most important book.
Further, if one is going to hold that the Church was punishing Galileo solely for his heliocentrism, one has to ask why Copernicus and Nicholas of Cusa were not also condemned. The latter proposed a cosmology much more radical than simple heliocentrism: an infinite universe.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Using this comment to get top. One correction. Ethiopia is one of the first christian nations. And yet was stopped from developing through famine and war there are more factors that play into this. Also I would argue that science most biggest jumps were only possible through inhuman unchristian colonialism and capitalism oriented abominations that layed the foundation of development. Edit: This is does not take away from good works from these individuals ofcourse. All the glory to God.
@@user-mp7yz2qt2t Since you are willing to make a counterargument, we'll be happy for you to support your claims in detail to show them as being overwhelmingly more plausible and a more suitable explanation than what people like Johannes Kepler or Isaac Newton claimed as the inspiration for their own foundational contributions. Now if you cannot do so for each and every foundation scientist then please understand why your claim will be rejected...due to lack of supporting evidence. Your move 🙂
I'll also note that your objection seems to start with a non-sequitur since you bring up Ethiopia but then suggest that it didn't develop due to wars and other hardships, which does nothing to discount the examples provided in the video. See my comment above regarding the second half of yours. It's also difficult to see how the ill-gotten gains you alluded to are the real reasons rather than Christian theological and philosophical presuppositions for the founders of modern science. Had Ethiopia not had the hardships it did, then perhaps it might also have been the birthplace of modern science. I have no problem with that, and I doubt others do either, but again the position is that Christian philosophy was the inspiration... you even hint at that yourself at first. Hopefully you'll come up with a truly mindblowing explanation to support your claims, but at this point I must confess my skepticism and doubts.
@@thoughtfulpilgrim1521 You misunderstood. Its not a counter argument. My bad, I should have worded it better. (Still need to better my english) I'm only stating that there are multiple factors that come into play. I gave the example of Ethiopia (My etnicity), which is literally the second to establish Christianity through their king in 330 AD, after Armenia in 301 AD. Both not particulary known for scientific discoveries letalone riches as foundation. The foundation the west had to truely go through enlightment (Illuminati) after establishing Capitalism with disregard for human life within their own nations and against other nations through colonialism. This all was only a counterargument towards the particular notion madr in this video regarding the developing of so called christian nations disregarding the very first christian nations that did not develop to that extent. Even today when were using our smartphone, lets say to preach the Gospel, we cannot disregard the suffering and afflictions of humans in the winning of the raw meterials. Does that anull the christians good works? Certainly not. This does not take away the good works and role of true christianity in growing their nations. After all God uses both good and allows evil to establish his kingdom since the beginning.
@@user-mp7yz2qt2t I agree. Warlords didn't care at all what your faith, IQ or research project was. So we must be wise with our resources and recognize the threats. The modern warlords are the godless social justice mobs.
And there is a unit for pressure named for him too. One especially can't say "he was just a Christian because everyone else was in his culture." His Pensees are a work of apologetics. If writing an apologetics work doesn't demonstrate that you are a committed Christian on a personal level, I don't know what does Thanks for bringing up Pascal!
I, a former atheist, accepted the Bible as Gods Work and Gods Word because I studied science first. From science (chemistry) I learned how to also study the Bible properly Strange but true!
I'm an atheist so could you explain to me how you arrived at that conclusion? I see nothing good in atheism, no morals, no free will or consciousness, no logical consistency, no nothing. However, I just can't wrap my head around stuff like miracles happening. My mind just doesn't seem to be capable of doing that. I can accept that there's a necessary existence and all that stuff from reasoning but I just can't bring myself to believe in miracles
@William Wallis Thanks. I'm still thinking how to establish God as a personal being. I will investigate Christianity itself soon enough. If I realise that I would've accepted the historical accounts if they had been about anything other than the resurrection (like eating an apple or something), then I would know that logic leads that way and I should follow it instead of what I feel like.
@@Dev-zr8si Hi Dev. Thanks for your comment. isn’t the fact that you and I exist a phenomenal miracle in the first place, regardless if you believe in a creator or in the big bang? If the big bang is your creator, to me that is quite a miracle. To me that is a much bigger miracle that that an eternal being made us. Because the big bang is “something out of nothing and then out of chaos”. And in my university study I learned that thát is an impossibility. Just a thought. 😉.
@@Dev-zr8si It's interesting that you propose yourself to be an atheist, while stating the same confusion about atheism, like many theists do ... Is it possible that you just realized recently that you don't believe in a god, but are still stuck on a false definition of atheism?
@@onethdasanayake3689 How am I generalizing? Denying the evidence for evolution is like being a flat earther… it’s as dumb as it gets. But if he can still invent stuff like an MRI while being very ignorant in other scientific fields then he is demonstrably smart and dumb at the same time. Even Nobel laureates can be imbeciles in fields that are unrelated to their area of expertise.😂
@@ramigilneas9274 your arguing on the premise that evolution is fact, it is still a theory and will always be that. Before you say it... it doesn't matter most scientists believe in evolution because 100 years ago most scientists believed in eugenics but that's no longer considered fact is it. It's not even an accepted theory anymore. Think about it, if that "fact" changed, how long until your "fact" changes? And if a fact can change it was never a fact.
@@realchristianmusicchannele9532 Well, 100 years ago all of those scientists who supported eugenics were also Christians, so that’s a pretty dumb argument. The problem is that you don’t seem to understand what a scientific theory is. Evolution started as a hypothesis… and after it has been proven to be true it became a theory. A scientific theory is more that just a fact, it’s a collection of verifiable facts and mechanisms that explain how those facts are connected. Today most Christians no longer take the stories of the Bible literally and no longer believe that Adam and Eve or the garden of Eden existed at all… so this means that the Genesis account was always just a myth.😉
Actually, it's _god_ Free World. Looks to me as if he _deliberately_ left the 'g' as a lower-case letter because he knows Christians always capitalize God out of respect for Him. Now, I'm not saying anti-theists are petty, but if the shoe fits....
Atheist: You know the greatest minds in history believed in science. Theist: You know they were all Christians, right? Atheist: That’s just because they didn’t understand science.
@@Tyler-Hoskins in context it's not the atheist, because they are arguing in circles. The fact the atheist can't square Christians not only practicing science but being forerunners in science, shows their narrowmindedness on the matter. It's their problem to solve but rep pen logic still makes the issue as clear as day.
I have never thought of studying creation as worship material of God, but I completely agree with it. That, at least for me, honestly motivates to be more engaged with learning things simply because I'm learning how God's creation works. Wow, I am genuinely in awe of that perspective!
All these scientists didn't say "well now I know more about the natural world, guess I don't need God now", they instead thought "Now I know more about the natural world God created." It was part of the gift God gave us, the rational minds and the ability to study, understand and make use of the world.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
I loved it. Tim, you have the most amazing way of using humor to teach. Atheists must build their argument upon the existence of God otherwise they have nothing to argue against and no way to argue against it. Sometimes it can be humorous, but many times it's sad.
Yes, atheists have to argue against God ... because this is 100% of what atheism is ... the disbelieve or rejection of belief in God. If no person on earth would belief in God, atheism would not exist ... It is like people play chess (theists) vs. the people who don't (arheists) ... There is no word for it, but if there were, the word for people who don't would vanish the moment, when chess vanishes ... So yes, to argue against God, one has to argue against God ... good observation >.>
Great points. We also wouldn’t have modern musical notation if not for Guido, a devout 11 century monk who began the earliest form of it in order to pass down worship chants. And not to mention all the brilliant composers who later used their art as worship to God: Mendelssohn, Bach, Bruckner, Handel, and so forth. Some of the most incredible, beautiful, and practical discoveries of the world were made in pursuit of glorifying God. A “God-free” world would indeed be ignorant, lawless, and lacking in beauty.
Without GOD the world wouldn't exist in the first place because the atheist view of "nothing happened to nothing and it created everything" is scientifically impossible.
What most people don't know is that Sir Isaac Newton wrote more on theology than any other subject. If I remember correctly some of his thoughts were a little wacky but hey he was monumental to calculus.
"A little wacky" is an understatement. The man shoved a dagger in his eye to get at his own optic nerve in his investigations of light. While his methodology was a little more refined than that summary...even the idea makes me nauseous. Brilliant but crazy.
Newton spent the last years of his life devoted to discovering the "music of the spheres", the sounds that planets made as they moved, which strikes me as a poor use of his time. OTOH, pondering the similarities between a falling apple and an orbiting moon also seems like a stretch, and that one worked out pretty well 😉. I'm not gonna tell a proven genius how to best use his time.
To put things in perspective, science and Chriatinaity used to collide with each other but now, we understand that they do not collide but actually, work together. Science doesn't disprove God, science explains God's creation.
People like to say that religion goes against the scientific method, and then they either ignore that or stick to it. Little do the people that stick to it (many atheists) realize who came up with the scientific method. Great video!
"Little do the people that stick to it (many atheists) realize who came up with the scientific method." Probably Aristotle ... So, what was your point again? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_history_of_the_scientific_method Just looking at history alone, disputes the claim that the scientific method came from Christianity ... the claim is laughable at best ...
@@salud1541 First of, you are wrong again. Aristotel was not a theist, but a deist at best. And even if I'd grant you that he was a theist ... so what? Obviously people 1000, 2000, 3000 and more years ago had believes in supernatural deities or deity like figures ... Nobody denies that ... literally nobody ... So obviously someone in a believe that Ra is literally the sun, discovering something that we know to be true, isn't something special at all ... You make the glaring mistake, to credit the believe as well, instead of just the person who discovered something ... It is 100% arbitrary and makes no sense at all. You can say "people with facial hair discovered this stuff and came up with this stuff", then look at te depictions of those people and hey, correct. What gives us this random correlation, that proves literally nothing? Exactly, nothing ... The very same happens to the believe in any deity, as long as it isn't the sole reason for the discovery ... it is 100% irrelevant and arbitrary ... Do you understand, that the personal belief plays absolutely no role in any of that and that pointing that out, yhat yoy somehow credit your belief with that, is dishonest? I kinda doubt that, but maybe you actually understand and learn ... or you don't and stay ignorant ...
@@BestAnimeFreak I’m not saying that scientific revelations come exclusively to theists. All I’m saying is that theists can have scientific minds and are worthy of credit for their scientific studies and discoveries. That’s it.
@@salud1541 "All I’m saying is that theists can have scientific minds and are worthy of credit for their scientific studies and discoveries." I do not disagree with that. If that was your first comment, you worded it weirdly, hence I do agree with that (this is the 50% where I agree with the video). The other 50%, that science comes from theism (or Christianity specifically) is where I completely disagree with, because it simply is not true.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
The man from that Twitter account still argues to this day that those founders didn't base their scientific discovery off their faith or religion itself. The lack of awareness this man has is astounding.
Better late than never to the party. Wasn’t notified despite having notifications enabled for some reason - but this is still, as always, a great video, Tim.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Why wonder? Pre-flood descriptions, Sodom and Gomorrah, the end of Judges, much of Ecclesiastes, Romans 1, and the Revelation according to Christ. (To be fair many atrocities were committed in the name of advancing the kingdom of Christ however I do not think that the leaders of the time that help instigate those things were necessarily following God's command, and the vast majority of those acts were committed before the common man had access to the scriptures.) I think God paints a pretty good picture of what people do when they universally deny His authority.
@@Gammagreen A good picture? You mean life and thrive? As can be observed right now? We have approximately one billion Christians on this planet ... and that means 7 billion people who are not ... I don't see the world going to shit, while the last majority of people don't believe in your deity ... The most religious countries are in general even on the bad end in that regard ...
@@BestAnimeFreak I disagree with your premise that the vast majority of people are free to act and do what is "right in their own eyes." (From Judges) . Most of the most influential countries still have constraining constitutions that were constructed and maintained by those who believed/believe in "my God". I believe that as time progresses those documents will be eroded beyond their ability to protect us from ourselves. I know, from talking to many, there is a belief that without the archaic documents there would be a universal push towards bettering humanity. However, understand that I have a view that humans, left to their own devices, are destructive by nature. Individuals can be productive and create wonders, but as a race we tend towards the negative. I have seen nothing in my life to convince myself that this is not true, however, it is something that must be true in order for humanity to pursue a more utopian society while not believing in higher morals.
*Fun Fact:* they found clay documents in Jordan, made from men recording constellations nightly, that recorded fire falling on Sodom and Gomorrah..when you reverse the time according to the constellation documentation, it matches within the date set in the Bible Just thought I'd share *=)* great as always Brother Tim! God bless all my Brother's and Sister's out there 💜💜💜
Thank you for this video!! I’m gonna rewatch and take notes! That was a awesome way to explain these questions you get asked that make witnessing turn weird and your experience turns out to be discouraging.
Really dope, thank you Mr. B. A bit of criticism: because "modern" science has historical origin in Europe, I hope that folks don't believe that Africa (where the christianity was present throughout the continent), Asia, South America, etc. weren't making scientific contributions as well. In fact, it can be argued that some of Europe's scientific innovation was rooted in the discoveries of these other continents including birthing practices, mathematics, war tactics and some astronomy. I'm not saying that European christians weren't crucial participants in the world of scientific discovery. Rather that other ethnic groups (even of other religious faiths) made significant contributions as well.
I agree with this wholly. A good example of this is Copernicus, whose calculations about the heliocentric nature of our solar system were the refined forms of a Muslim scientist's calculations on this very matter.
@@thomasecker9405 Right. I wonder if it could even be argued that while christianity fuels discovery and innovation, that a big reason for Europe's impact in science, etc. is cross-cultural influence. A lot of people, products and ideas from a lot of different cultures have gone to and through Europe over time. These discoveries weren't likely made in a vaccuum.
Good point, a notable example being the Baghdad House of Wisdom under the Abbasid Caliphate. This was the largest research institute in the world at it's time and it was sponsored by the Caliphate (essentially a Muslim theocracy). Regardless of it's mostly Muslim leadership, members of all three Abrahamic religions worked, debated, and studied there. Because these three religions, while different, have very similar views of God and the universe, I would argue that this further advances Mr B.'s point that the ideals held by Christians (which also happen to be shared by Jewish and Islamic people) were very important at encouraging scientific discovery throughout history.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
@@mitchellc4 Hi,brother or sister in Christ! I like how you are trying to preach the gospel but I think the gospel was actually Jesus came into the world to die on the cross our of God's love for the wages of our sin and whoever believes in Him is saved John 3:16-18 Please don't let this discourage yiu because spreading the gospel is good! God bless
@@mckayla6668 Hello The gospel is the gospel of the kingdom Which includes the essential death and resurrection of the king as first importance Matt 4 23 And he went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and preaching the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every infirmity among the people. Matt 24 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. Acts 8 12 But when they believed Philip as he preached the gospel of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Acts 28 30 For two whole years Paul lived in his own rented place and welcomed everyone who came to him. 31 He continued to preach about the kingdom of God and to teach boldly and freely about the Lord Jesus, the Messiah.
@Richard Fox which have become part of the culture and lasted this long because Christians don't. And these bad arguments keep many away from God. So a very wonderful initiative from him. God bless him ❤
Hearing that studying astronomy was considered an act of worship by those that first studied the stars is breathtakingly beautiful and uplifting. It is confirmation that marveling at God’s creation is another way to marvel in thought of him. Thank you brother and those included in the production of this channel. I love you brothers and sisters and it is wonderful the work you are doing.
@@leandronc I think we can rationally be certain that most Atheist's who have a problem with Christianity, have an emotional problem with it, not intelectuall.
@@leandronc 'Jesus copied Horus'. This shows your lack of knowledge. This is not true at all. Inspiring philosophy debunked this myth really well....this is an internet myth that have no evidence to back it up. If you really dig deep into the egyption mythology about Horus...there is nothing that is similar to the story and life of Jesus Christ. It is embarassing to use this kind of argumentation.
@@leandronc And Constantine did not create the divinity of Jesus Christ. The divinity of Jesus is already believed by the early Christians even before Christianity spread into the Roman Empire. The divinity of Jesus Christ is central to the Christian faith and it is at the core of Christianity.
@@jonathanhauhnar8434 Sounds like you are disagreeing with me, but we're 100% in agreement, bro. I'm citing these 2 claims as examples of trivially debunked, but still widely believed falsehoods within atheist circles. Read my reply again.
Science requires that the core assumption of induction, that the future will resemble the past, be justified. An unchanging God who holds the laws of universe constant justifies this assumption. There is no other conceivable justification. Therefore faith in an unchanging God is implied by induction, and therefore by science.
@@VirtualBilly My explanation that I invented to explain a mystery actually explains the mystery… what a coincidence. But please ignore the inconvenient fact that my explanation is even more mysterious than the mystery that it is supposed to explain… and that there is zero evidence that it’s true.😂
"Why do plants crave electrolytes? Well it's because they crave them." What a fancy pants circular argument you have here, but you haven't proved your premise, so your conclusion is irrelevant. Even if it were, you wouldn't be any closer to proving that your particular God was the "unchanging god" you've referenced. If your God was unchanging, then we'd still be allowed to take slaves from "the tribes that surround us". Christians love to play the "that's the Old Testament!" card, while simultaneously asserting that their God is unchanging when it becomes convenient.
Your bald teacher doesn’t even address that Catholic Church actively discouraged scientific progress. Galileo’s trial is the best example, but another example is the index of prohibited books (which prohibited to print many scientific books, like Copernicus’s or Galileo’s) it was harmful to the spread of scientific texts, it harmed also philosophers, (Giordano Bruno, who wasn’t atheist, he in fact believed in God, he was pantheistic and in response to his believes was burnt by pope Clement VIII; another example is Macchiavelli, his political essay was not given the imprimatur by the church, it couldn’t be printed) and it harmed also literature, as some authors censured themselves in order not to be accused and maybe even burnt by the church, as in the case of Torquato Tasso. All of this censorship happened in the centuries of scientific revolution. Yes, the fathers of science believed in god, but it doesn’t mean it was their faith to lead them to their discoveries and, as a matter of fact, they were often seen as heretics and censured by the church. Christianity actively discouraged (or in some cases processed) scientists, so faith surely didn’t play an endorsing part on scientific revolution, scientist tried to reconcile their desire to discover with the intolerant faith of their times, that’s why they ascribed their work as god’s will, not because they were actually spurred by christendom.
@@simonenicolas sorry that you wasted your time. Literally NOTHING you said changes the facts nor is it even relevant. The Catholic Church is not Christian and the medieval Catholic Church was as anti-Christian as any religion on the planet. Either way it was CHRISTIANS who believed in God that founded the scientific method as a way to understand God‘s creation. It’s also the Bible that is the first source in all of human history to declare that the earth was round centuries before the Greeks even mentioned it. Checkmate goodbye.
@@i-primeproductions1517 tell me now the passage in the bible were it is stated that the earth is round, I’m serious, it would be helpful if you did that. Also my point was to highlight that historically the church tried to destroy scientific revolution. It’s quite speculative to say that, for example, if not for Newton’s faith he wouldn’t have been the father of physics, totally lacking of any proof, just bending history in favour of your ideology, meanwhile it’s a matter of fact that a major part of Christendom tried to suppress scientific revolution as they saw it against their faith. On one hand we SPECULATE that a specific interpretation of Christian values led to scientific progress, on the other hand we KNOW that an interpretation of Christian values (shared by the Church) led to repression of science (or at least they tried).
@@simonenicolas again, the Catholic Church is not “Christiandom” and his points is 100% valid. If you don’t recognize the reality of what he is saying and there’s no point in discussing anything any further. Also, I don’t waste my time throwing a bone to people that aren’t genuine or honest. Do your own research if you want and I don’t care if you don’t. I’ve learned not to waste too much time with people that refuse to acknowledge the truth
@@i-primeproductions1517 I’m serious. Let’s not talk about scientific revolution, you clearly have your own view that I think it’s nonsense but that’s ok. I’m reading the bible, doing my own research, and, I’m serious, if what you told me about round earth is real, that would be a pretty incredible thing, can you tell me what is the passage?
A few years back I had a long conversation with an atheist and at the end of the the conversation he said that "religion stopped science", I asked him what was he talking about and his response was that if we didn't have Christianity we would have had flushing toilets a lot sooner 😂🤣🤣🤣🤣
I'm sorry, but through this whole video, I am imagining someone like Richard Dawkins stomping his feet around the room, pulling his hair, shouting "No No No!!" while he's watching this video. 😂😂
As an atheist, not at all. Yeah alot of early scientists were Christians or Muslims and religions has give a lot to culture. But none of this means religion is true, only that it was useful in the pass.
@@tedidk8639 It also does not mean atheism is true either so I am not sure what your point is. Red pen was simply refuting a typical, sad, pointless argument that is quite often repeated by either ignorant or deceptive atheists.
I love the video, but I could watch your standard introduction to Red Pen Logic with Mr. B. all day long. It is so cleverly edited! (Okay, I might be exaggerating just a smidge about how long I would watch the introduction, but I love your videos and your presentation just the same.)
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM! Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21 Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Glad you are back, Mr. B. It's been a while. I hope you will post more videos when you can. By the way, we need another challenge that you can give to The Bible Thinker. Or how about a video where both of you dissect a tweet, a post, or a claim going back and forth?
Newton said that believing in the Trinity is the worst sin a Christian can commit. So apparently he no longer counts, even if he was the smartest Christian who ever lived.😂
The concept of universities started in the middle ages with the church educating their clergy into priest and bishops. Which later developed into ALL the other specialized classes we have today. So yep nothing to do with science......
And public schools started the same way - Sadly, both have fallen pretty far and resemble indoctrination camps more than places of proper education nowadays
This isn't even taking into account the effect Christian thinkers have had on the humanities: Paul, Origen, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas (and many more!) have all contributed immensely to the worlds of theology, philosophy, logic, ethics, political theory, biblical exegesis, textual criticism, etc.
Mr. B is historically correct. Though I think it might be a little more accurate to say that Judeo-Christian monotheism gave rise to science. Uniquely Christian doctrines like the Incarnation and the Trinity don't seem to be essential to science, but belief in a rational Mind behind the physical world does seem to be essential. Isaac Newton, for example, was not at all a Christian by the standards of theological orthodoxy, but he was a monotheist. I would not be surprised if ALL of the great scientists of the 16th-18th centuries were theists of one stripe or another, even if not all were Christians. In any case, godFreeWorld is just flat-out wrong.
Science is always built on a religion. Any religion must provide a complete and coherent understanding of the world around us. It provides the laws of reason and the rules of evidence for everything else. Notice how science has been going since it has been bent into the mold of secularism. Biology is now 'a state of mind.'
As a Christian, science is the study of God's intelligent design. Part of the reason we can tell that Christianity is true is because we can use scientific methods and evidence to prove biblical events. I love that I was born when I was; there is just so much scientific proof of my faith out there!
Atheists are so proud of the big bang but I think you forgot to inform them that the one who developed it was a Roman Catholic priest called Goerges lemaitre.
Imagine if we continued living under the petty squabbles of "gods" of other religions. Nature wouldn't be ruled by laws, but by the arbitrary whims of "divine" beings, and we would continue making sacrifices to favor material outcomes with little to no certainty, and when a sacrifice "fails", the sacrifice only gets bigger.
I really like this video and agree with it entirely. I loved all the specifics and enjoy hearing again about the lives and faith of history’s great thinkers. However, I feel like it is missing a critical philosophical assertion that underlies the original tweet. I have heard atheists in debates say that the very concept of faith is counter to reason and science because it is a belief without evidence. (I disagree and believe this argument relies on an erroneous definition of faith) I would like to have seen this underlying assertion undermined because as long as it exists the atheist might argue, “So what they had all these things going for them? They would have been better without faith. Even if they shared the beliefs common at the time they were moving away from a paradigm defined by faith by their very act of reasoning.”
I would argue that the dialectic required for science was codified and unified by the scholarly theological debates of Christian (and Jewish and Islamic) over the preceding centuries. Moving from biblical data/evidence to observational evidence is in some ways rotation of the same methodologies into a new space. Traditions without a unified and universal scriptural underpinnings would not necessarily develop the same type of dialectic approach to knowledge. Although the initial dialectic in the west was adapted from the Hellenic Greek and Roman traditions of debate and discourse. See Greek symposia and Romans diner parties for how they developed their dialectic approaches.
The way I have always seen and explained Science and the first Scientists: "People who believed in The Creator, looking at the Creation in Awe and hoping that by Observing Creation they can grow closer to & understand better The Creator." It is only in the last century or so that it shifted from people Seeking God to people Seeking Self.
The funny thing is is that faith is seen in science. Dark matter is a good example. Not being witnessed, but being believed in due to evidence. Einstein had faith in the existence of black holes without them being proven in his time as well.
A lot of people do not know this, but the habit of biblical literalism being applied to science, is a relatively modern act. The church fathers and medieval priests understood the narrative purpose of the Bible, and how it was not to be read as a science book.
This is where I agree. There is no reason for a science vs. religion thing. Both can be compatible, depending on your faith ... A catholic has obviously less problems to combine their faith with scientific findings, while a creationist and Bible literallist actively needs to deny science. Those people are the main cause, why many people think that it is a science vs. Religion thing ... If you are not a creationist nutjob, then there is no problem with that.
@@BestAnimeFreak Did I miss something? Since when are Catholics not Creationists? I think you're confusing your terms. They try to reconcile evolution with the biblical account, that's probably what you mean. Still, you don't need to be a "creationist nutjob" to have issues with the Neo-Darwinian Synthesis. There are very good reasons to contend with it. And there are many brands of "creationist", some who agree with evolution and some who don't. Some who disagree with it still hold to an old earth, and some don't. So you're painting with WAY too large a brush here.
@@SeraphsWitness A creationist as I use it, is defined to be a person who believes in a literal 6 day creation, as they believe the Bible to be accurate to the last word. If that is 6k years or millions of years ago doesn't matter (as the Bible doesn't specify it and young earth creationists simpy dabble in random genealogy). That also means to deny evolution, as God clearly created all living beings himself and evolution is not needed and we certainly did not 'evolve from filthy monkey men' ... Or how else science deniers would say that ... They way you define creationist though is a different one. Just because the Catholic church accepts all scientific theories as what they are (fact), doesn't mean they don't believe that God didn't do any of that. They still believe that God created the universe and everything. Which you then would attribute to them being creationists. Because they believe in a creator God. That is simply not the definition of creaionist I use ... And did you know that nobody talks about "Neo-Darwinian Evolution" or "Synthesis", except for people who are unable to accept or comprehend the theory of evolution? It's "Neo-Darwinian" is certainly a buzz word that informs me, when a person uses it, they deny at least some parts of the theory of evolution. And if they know what a scientific theory is, is always a coin toss ... with a weighted coin ... So, do you at least know what a scientific theory is?
@@BestAnimeFreak well I'm simply pointing out that you're using the term "creationist" too narrowly. Every Christian, properly speaking, is some form of creationist. What you meant is a literal 6-day creationist. That's fine. "The definition I use", in your terms. Just pointing out that that's rather imprecise and can be misleading. As long as you're aware. I find it strange that I'm scolded for correcting your imprecise language, then your very next critique is about a (very precise) phrase I used. So let's talk about that. yes, the neo-darwinian synthesis refers specially to the modern discovery of the cell (Cell Theory) and DNA, something Darwin had no inkling of. So the modern theory of evolution is significantly more developed than Darwin's theory proper, since he had not worked out the supposed methodology of new information forming in the genome. He really had no robust concept of a genome to begin with. So the neo-darwinian synthesis "solves" that issue by proposing random mutation in DNA sequences as the methodology for injecting new information into the genome. Though that hasn't been demonstrated technically, though not for lack of effort in fruitfly experiments. That's why we use the phrase "neo-darwinism", since the modern theory shares only the broadest commonalities with Darwin's actual theory. So yes, I do know a bit about the topic. There's really no need to talk down to me. We're both adults presumably. If you disagree, disagree on logical and scientific grounds, not pedantic linguistic insults.
@@BestAnimeFreak You know, I can really and deeply relate with what you say, and I think that the main issue many atheists online have with Christianity is this feeling that it's opposed to science because of creationist fundamentalists and literalists. I'd like to share a testimony: About a month ago I was having an argument with an atheist about the topic of a biologist joining Christianity from an atheist background. At a certain point, in a clear attempt to mock me, he said something like "Imagine believing in a dude who created the universe in six days". After reading that, I informed him that I am Catholic and believe in the theory of evolution. And all of a sudden he completely changed, like pulling a switch. He explained me that literalists are a huge issue in the US and that we European Christians in his opinion are open to science and much more reasonable as we don't take the Bible literally. He was very friendly after that. From this, I learnt 3 things: 1 American literalists are destroying our reputation 2 Most atheists don't hate Christianity itself, they are just against this anti-scientific interpretation 3 The stereotypes are hard to get rid of.
Not sure dominate is the best word of choice. Christianity is about truth and consent, it doesn't dominate, it liberates. I'm sure ur just using a figure of speech but it's the net after all, and any other religion "dominating" has a completely different context. See Islam for example.
This will not be the case. If it goes bad, Islam will do that in the near to far future ... If it goes good, religion just dwindles out of existence, without any religion taking over again ... Christianity rising on top though, is heavily unlikely.
He tried to respond to this over Twitter and it was stupid... he didn’t understand you meant modern science ex. The scientific method, most of the fields we have today, and most of the laws we have today come from Christians.
Hey, I agree. A fool would be silenced by his arguments. Someone who isn't a fool is not and will counter his argument, with better evidence and things he missed out on.
@@BestAnimeFreak Nope. I'm referring to the worse type of fool, the type that's irredeemable, they type for which there's no cure. I'm talking about the educated, knowledgeable fool. This type of fool rejects reality because his biases are so rooted in his being that the only way he can get rid of them and accept facts is if he dies and reincarnates. This type of fool doesn't know that you can accept historical facts and still remain an atheist. Don't confuse being a fool with being uneducateed. The educated fool is the worse of all. And this type abounds greatly.
@@elmontro "I'm talking about the educated, knowledgeable fool." Oh, so you mean the kind of 'fool' that is actually not a fool, but is titled as a fool, because they are above your fallacious arguments and therefor don't follow your fallacious reasoning to your personal deity? "This type of fool rejects reality" Wait ... so you are talking about most anti-science theists rights now? "This type of fool doesn't know that you can accept historical facts and still remain an atheist." Now you completely lost me ... considering that the historical facts are not in favor for theism ...
Why not go back further? Mankind was smart from the start. If building an ark isn't science, if learning agriculture isn't science, than what is? I think many ppl make the mistake of trying to put science in some corner, but since you can't do that to God nor science, there is a great harmony to be found.
@@arcguardian science isn’t engineering it really is a bunch of foolish intellectualizing in the end In reality technology progresses because that’s just what humans do is build off eatchother intuitively The person who created the microchip couldnt have done it without the person who harnessed electricity and that person would have never been able to get an education if that one person never invented the wheel You see the process of techne (Greek for technological wisdom) is an eternal principality and something humans have done since before even inheriting the Holy Spirit
@@arcguardian everyone knows that it’s just so taken for granted that people now think that science (a philosophy on knowledge) is how technology progresses but that is not how technology progresses at all. Scientific and philosophical systems can only steer the direction of how technology evolves but technology evolves one way or another just as it did before science was ever a term
@@arcguardian Talking about accepting science and then arguing that we build the arc? Saying the flood is not a myth, but took place? Contrary to the science? Okay ... I'm not sure if you are a creationist or just a very mistaken "normal theist" ... but the flood story did not take place. It could not have happened, at all ... it is 100% fictional and made up ...
Ask atheists about their faith in a natural origin of life. Ask for the link to the peer reviewed publication of the process of abiogenesis being demonstrated. The atheists, naturalists “gap” in their ideology they’ve labeled abiogenesis. Dr. James Tour has a 13 video series on utube that explains quite well that “gap” isn’t going to get closed anytime soon. Especially by anything a primordial soup can or could..
Ted Idk No, you are ignorant of the research that in the very least the chemistry required for the basic components of living cells (amino acids, lipids, nucleic acids and carbohydrates to form in any natural scenario is very very unlikely. And for them to arrange themselves in the more complex parts of cells, the bi layer cell membrane(lipids) Dna, rna, mrna (nucleic acids sugars) amino acids (proteins) is ridiculously impossible in a primordial soup. Dr. James Tour has posted 13 videos on utube to help you understand.
@@tedidk8639 so we’re supposed to accept the evolution theory as true even though we don’t know the origin of life? That’s called faith The two are linked. The origin is crucial.
@@justonetime6179 The theory of evolution explains why we see animals evolve, why they sometimes features that are useless, and why some animals seem so similar and ect. It explains the now. We don't know exactly how life started, but who is to say that life can't come from non living things? Especially since scientists have been getting closer and closer from creating living cells from scratch?
Hey Mr B. I was worried about you, I even looked for you on twitter, you just went silent for a while and I just hoped you were alright. Don't ever do that again, even though you don't have a video to post just say Hi! 🤷🏾♂️
Hey, I really appreciate this thoughtful comment. Sorry I dropped off for a bit. I had a couple rough weeks with my anxiety so things got very delayed. I hope I didn’t worry anyone. ❤️
“But Galileo was persecuted for his belief in the heliocentric solar system!” True. Relatively. He wasn’t tortured, just threatened, and was convicted of suspicion of heresy within a day of his trial beginning, and faced an extremely light sentence - one day in prison, and “villa arrest” for the rest of his (short, he was old and frail) life. Does this condemn Christianity? No, absolutely not. Christ’s church is ultimately led on Earth by men - fallible, prone to error and ego, especially one so high and exalted as the Pope. I have conducted a serious analysis for the astronomical evidence in Scripture (because it’s an “angels dancing on the head of a pin” issue, meaning a complete distraction and waste of time), but it seems like the Church was committing some form of eisegesis in this.
I always enjoy studying science like biology physics and chemistry , and one of my atheist friend asked me why do I like science so much if it disapproves Christianity at the time I didn't have an answer so I just replied with its fun to see what people say to disprove the bible but now I know why I enjoy science so much
Let us take science back. I worship God through my works and my studies. When I was an atheist, the world was a different place...I saw no reason for it. Now it is beautiful to observe.
Trueee, when i haven't fully accepted Him yet, everything looks like just a thing kind of a lirtle just the way they are, but now i see it in a different way and a little more special thaan before because i know it won't be possible without God
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Yes... let’s take science back! I’m working on becoming a research scientist, and possibly a college professor.
@@protoketer4554 Awesome! Keep up the good work. 👍🏻
Sooo true same for me tho!
Christian scientists were among the founders of genetics, thermodynamics, calculus, set theory, classical mechanics, electromagnetism, modern chemistry, microbiology, quantum mechanics, etc.
Adding onto that, In the 20th century, 72.5% of Nobel Prize winners in Chemistry identified themselves as Christians, and 65.3% of Nobel Prize winners in Physics identified themselves as Christians.
And that’s just Christianity, I bet if you look at theists, the percent will be even bigger
@@vaskaventi6840 Can you cite a source? I'd really like to have that handy.
@@ZTAudio First, here is a Wikipedia article on the issue: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_Nobel_laureates
And here is a commonly cited source for that stat: Baruch A. Shalev, 100 Years of Nobel Prizes (2003), Atlantic Publishers & Distributors, p. 57: between 1901 and 2000 reveals that 654 Laureates belong to 28 different religions. Most (65.4%) have identified Christianity in its various forms as their religious preference.
@@vaskaventi6840 Excellent, thanks.
Shut up Akatsuki.
I'm a scientist and Christian. God created the universe, the laws of physics, life.. . Science explains how God's creation works. It does not explain who orchestrated the creation.
Add the fact that the big bang is impossible and may even has a negative chance of happening since when you don't have anything to start with, how will you start then? It defies the laws of physics
Meanwhile, the possiblities of someone, Who is a God, and lives outside time, therefore no start nor end, and lives outside the physical world, then very probably, God does exist.
@@lorenslorens1707 whether the big bang happened or not (I'm not a physicist - and we didn't learn about it in physics when I was at school) I believe God made it happen. No other answer that I have heard is as good as, "there is a being outside time and space and our undestanding' - all other answers result in, "yes but where did that come from" or "how did that happen". God answers those questions.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Which field are you in?
@@sphagbog LoL. (Actually just a chuckle)
God is the best answer I've heard so far so...
God did it.
I don't know so... God 🐍🍎🤦🤪😇
"according to history, a God-free world would be..."
Me: A non-existent world.
Me: Exactly the world that we observe.
Or hell.
screwed
the earth would be hurtling through space at 1000 mph and nobody would be in charge
Any evidence that for that?
Someone is going to mention Galileo getting arrested by the church, but that's because he insulted the Pope not because of what his theory on what the universe was.
I think he did not just say that Sun was the center of solar system, he also claimed that the Sun was the center of the universe. If the Church fully endorsed that, history will view them as terrible for science. It’s a lose-lose situation for them.
If it was just because of the theory, why did Kepler not receive the same treatment, despite being a little bit earlier in heliocentric model?
Anyway, I do not have primary sources on this, so take everything I say with a grain of salt, lol.
@@aldrichemrys Galileo’s arrogance played into this. At the time it was a wash as to which model was better supported by the observational data. Galileo’s insistence on heliocentrism had him at odds not just with the church but with many of his fellow scientists.
@@nathanaelculver5308 There was an article published anonymously by Pope Urban VII, who was actually a friend of Galileo up to this point. Galileo wrote a reply that was, well, somewhat savage in its dissection of the Pope's views. It pretty much called him an idiot. So Galileo was ordered not to write about heliocentricism. He could have moved out of Italy and published anything he wanted, but he stuck around and wrote another book critical of geocentricism. So he was punished by having to stay in his house and write his most important book.
Further, if one is going to hold that the Church was punishing Galileo solely for his heliocentrism, one has to ask why Copernicus and Nicholas of Cusa were not also condemned. The latter proposed a cosmology much more radical than simple heliocentrism: an infinite universe.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
And what’s more, science is just one of numerous academic disciplines that carries tremendous Christian influence. Great work, Mr. B! 👊
Using this comment to get top. One correction. Ethiopia is one of the first christian nations. And yet was stopped from developing through famine and war there are more factors that play into this. Also I would argue that science most biggest jumps were only possible through inhuman unchristian colonialism and capitalism oriented abominations that layed the foundation of development.
Edit: This is does not take away from good works from these individuals ofcourse. All the glory to God.
@@user-mp7yz2qt2t Since you are willing to make a counterargument, we'll be happy for you to support your claims in detail to show them as being overwhelmingly more plausible and a more suitable explanation than what people like Johannes Kepler or Isaac Newton claimed as the inspiration for their own foundational contributions. Now if you cannot do so for each and every foundation scientist then please understand why your claim will be rejected...due to lack of supporting evidence. Your move 🙂
I'll also note that your objection seems to start with a non-sequitur since you bring up Ethiopia but then suggest that it didn't develop due to wars and other hardships, which does nothing to discount the examples provided in the video. See my comment above regarding the second half of yours. It's also difficult to see how the ill-gotten gains you alluded to are the real reasons rather than Christian theological and philosophical presuppositions for the founders of modern science. Had Ethiopia not had the hardships it did, then perhaps it might also have been the birthplace of modern science. I have no problem with that, and I doubt others do either, but again the position is that Christian philosophy was the inspiration... you even hint at that yourself at first. Hopefully you'll come up with a truly mindblowing explanation to support your claims, but at this point I must confess my skepticism and doubts.
@@thoughtfulpilgrim1521 You misunderstood. Its not a counter argument. My bad, I should have worded it better. (Still need to better my english) I'm only stating that there are multiple factors that come into play. I gave the example of Ethiopia (My etnicity), which is literally the second to establish Christianity through their king in 330 AD, after Armenia in 301 AD. Both not particulary known for scientific discoveries letalone riches as foundation.
The foundation the west had to truely go through enlightment (Illuminati) after establishing Capitalism with disregard for human life within their own nations and against other nations through colonialism.
This all was only a counterargument towards the particular notion madr in this video regarding the developing of so called christian nations disregarding the very first christian nations that did not develop to that extent.
Even today when were using our smartphone, lets say to preach the Gospel, we cannot disregard the suffering and afflictions of humans in the winning of the raw meterials. Does that anull the christians good works? Certainly not.
This does not take away the good works and role of true christianity in growing their nations. After all God uses both good and allows evil to establish his kingdom since the beginning.
@@user-mp7yz2qt2t I agree. Warlords didn't care at all what your faith, IQ or research project was. So we must be wise with our resources and recognize the threats. The modern warlords are the godless social justice mobs.
I am also a Christian and I study science. I am so amazed with God's creation every time I study science 🤩🤩🤩
4 people as of the time of this post put their fingers in their ears and shouted "LA LA LA LA LA LA!" while watching this video.
Blaise Pascal, mathmatician and physicist, was also a committed Christian.
And there is a unit for pressure named for him too. One especially can't say "he was just a Christian because everyone else was in his culture." His Pensees are a work of apologetics. If writing an apologetics work doesn't demonstrate that you are a committed Christian on a personal level, I don't know what does
Thanks for bringing up Pascal!
That’s who I thought of too!
I, a former atheist, accepted the Bible as Gods Work and Gods Word because I studied science first. From science (chemistry) I learned how to also study the Bible properly
Strange but true!
I am also a Chemist!
I'm an atheist so could you explain to me how you arrived at that conclusion? I see nothing good in atheism, no morals, no free will or consciousness, no logical consistency, no nothing. However, I just can't wrap my head around stuff like miracles happening. My mind just doesn't seem to be capable of doing that. I can accept that there's a necessary existence and all that stuff from reasoning but I just can't bring myself to believe in miracles
@William Wallis Thanks. I'm still thinking how to establish God as a personal being. I will investigate Christianity itself soon enough. If I realise that I would've accepted the historical accounts if they had been about anything other than the resurrection (like eating an apple or something), then I would know that logic leads that way and I should follow it instead of what I feel like.
@@Dev-zr8si
Hi Dev. Thanks for your comment.
isn’t the fact that you and I exist a phenomenal miracle in the first place, regardless if you believe in a creator or in the big bang? If the big bang is your creator, to me that is quite a miracle. To me that is a much bigger miracle that that an eternal being made us. Because the big bang is “something out of nothing and then out of chaos”. And in my university study I learned that thát is an impossibility. Just a thought. 😉.
@@Dev-zr8si It's interesting that you propose yourself to be an atheist, while stating the same confusion about atheism, like many theists do ...
Is it possible that you just realized recently that you don't believe in a god, but are still stuck on a false definition of atheism?
Please dont forget modern scientist, Raymond Damadian, the inventer of the MRI. I met him in 2016 at the creation museum. He deplores evolution.
So he is smart and dumb at the same time, fascinating.
@@ramigilneas9274 So you are generalizing and mocking him at the same time, fascinating
@@onethdasanayake3689
How am I generalizing?
Denying the evidence for evolution is like being a flat earther… it’s as dumb as it gets.
But if he can still invent stuff like an MRI while being very ignorant in other scientific fields then he is demonstrably smart and dumb at the same time.
Even Nobel laureates can be imbeciles in fields that are unrelated to their area of expertise.😂
@@ramigilneas9274 your arguing on the premise that evolution is fact, it is still a theory and will always be that.
Before you say it... it doesn't matter most scientists believe in evolution because 100 years ago most scientists believed in eugenics but that's no longer considered fact is it. It's not even an accepted theory anymore.
Think about it, if that "fact" changed, how long until your "fact" changes? And if a fact can change it was never a fact.
@@realchristianmusicchannele9532
Well, 100 years ago all of those scientists who supported eugenics were also Christians, so that’s a pretty dumb argument.
The problem is that you don’t seem to understand what a scientific theory is.
Evolution started as a hypothesis… and after it has been proven to be true it became a theory.
A scientific theory is more that just a fact, it’s a collection of verifiable facts and mechanisms that explain how those facts are connected.
Today most Christians no longer take the stories of the Bible literally and no longer believe that Adam and Eve or the garden of Eden existed at all… so this means that the Genesis account was always just a myth.😉
God-free World must have been writing out of his brain-free head! 😆
Actually, it's _god_ Free World. Looks to me as if he _deliberately_ left the 'g' as a lower-case letter because he knows Christians always capitalize God out of respect for Him.
Now, I'm not saying anti-theists are petty, but if the shoe fits....
Atheist: You know the greatest minds in history believed in science.
Theist: You know they were all Christians, right?
Atheist: That’s just because they didn’t understand science.
I’m not entirely sure who you’ve cast as the protagonist in what you’ve just said
@@Tyler-Hoskins in context it's not the atheist, because they are arguing in circles. The fact the atheist can't square Christians not only practicing science but being forerunners in science, shows their narrowmindedness on the matter. It's their problem to solve but rep pen logic still makes the issue as clear as day.
@@arcguardian that’s what I was wondering. But I’m easily confused as you can tell 😂
LOL 😂
I'd just consider this to be a strawmen.
I am a Christian and I worked as a CNC machine operator for many years and I used science daily. And everyday I saw the Lord in it.
I have never thought of studying creation as worship material of God, but I completely agree with it. That, at least for me, honestly motivates to be more engaged with learning things simply because I'm learning how God's creation works. Wow, I am genuinely in awe of that perspective!
All these scientists didn't say "well now I know more about the natural world, guess I don't need God now", they instead thought "Now I know more about the natural world God created." It was part of the gift God gave us, the rational minds and the ability to study, understand and make use of the world.
Frances also created the most important invention: Bacon.
Alright, maybe not. But it did sound good.
That was his cousin Roger. Okay, no, it wasn't.
Mmmmm...bacon.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
@@mitchellc4 .....is he bringing any bacon???
@@Hawks438 There will be a lot of fish. That we do know and I love fish.
Good video. Anti-theism is deleterious to the human brain.
ARCS 😂
And gene pool, good thing they tend to select out.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
@@mitchellc4 Stop spamming bro.
Evidence?
I loved it. Tim, you have the most amazing way of using humor to teach. Atheists must build their argument upon the existence of God otherwise they have nothing to argue against and no way to argue against it. Sometimes it can be humorous, but many times it's sad.
Yes, atheists have to argue against God ... because this is 100% of what atheism is ... the disbelieve or rejection of belief in God.
If no person on earth would belief in God, atheism would not exist ...
It is like people play chess (theists) vs. the people who don't (arheists) ...
There is no word for it, but if there were, the word for people who don't would vanish the moment, when chess vanishes ...
So yes, to argue against God, one has to argue against God ... good observation >.>
Great points. We also wouldn’t have modern musical notation if not for Guido, a devout 11 century monk who began the earliest form of it in order to pass down worship chants. And not to mention all the brilliant composers who later used their art as worship to God: Mendelssohn, Bach, Bruckner, Handel, and so forth. Some of the most incredible, beautiful, and practical discoveries of the world were made in pursuit of glorifying God. A “God-free” world would indeed be ignorant, lawless, and lacking in beauty.
Without GOD the world wouldn't exist in the first place because the atheist view of "nothing happened to nothing and it created everything" is scientifically impossible.
Agreed on so many levels...
What most people don't know is that Sir Isaac Newton wrote more on theology than any other subject. If I remember correctly some of his thoughts were a little wacky but hey he was monumental to calculus.
"A little wacky" is an understatement. The man shoved a dagger in his eye to get at his own optic nerve in his investigations of light. While his methodology was a little more refined than that summary...even the idea makes me nauseous. Brilliant but crazy.
Newton spent the last years of his life devoted to discovering the "music of the spheres", the sounds that planets made as they moved, which strikes me as a poor use of his time.
OTOH, pondering the similarities between a falling apple and an orbiting moon also seems like a stretch, and that one worked out pretty well 😉.
I'm not gonna tell a proven genius how to best use his time.
To put things in perspective, science and Chriatinaity used to collide with each other but now, we understand that they do not collide but actually, work together. Science doesn't disprove God, science explains God's creation.
People like to say that religion goes against the scientific method, and then they either ignore that or stick to it. Little do the people that stick to it (many atheists) realize who came up with the scientific method. Great video!
"Little do the people that stick to it (many atheists) realize who came up with the scientific method."
Probably Aristotle ... So, what was your point again?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_history_of_the_scientific_method
Just looking at history alone, disputes the claim that the scientific method came from Christianity ... the claim is laughable at best ...
@@BestAnimeFreak Even if it was Aristotle then the scientific method was still thought of by a theist.
@@salud1541 First of, you are wrong again.
Aristotel was not a theist, but a deist at best.
And even if I'd grant you that he was a theist ... so what?
Obviously people 1000, 2000, 3000 and more years ago had believes in supernatural deities or deity like figures ...
Nobody denies that ... literally nobody ...
So obviously someone in a believe that Ra is literally the sun, discovering something that we know to be true, isn't something special at all ...
You make the glaring mistake, to credit the believe as well, instead of just the person who discovered something ...
It is 100% arbitrary and makes no sense at all.
You can say "people with facial hair discovered this stuff and came up with this stuff", then look at te depictions of those people and hey, correct.
What gives us this random correlation, that proves literally nothing?
Exactly, nothing ...
The very same happens to the believe in any deity, as long as it isn't the sole reason for the discovery ... it is 100% irrelevant and arbitrary ...
Do you understand, that the personal belief plays absolutely no role in any of that and that pointing that out, yhat yoy somehow credit your belief with that, is dishonest?
I kinda doubt that, but maybe you actually understand and learn ... or you don't and stay ignorant ...
@@BestAnimeFreak I’m not saying that scientific revelations come exclusively to theists. All I’m saying is that theists can have scientific minds and are worthy of credit for their scientific studies and discoveries. That’s it.
@@salud1541 "All I’m saying is that theists can have scientific minds and are worthy of credit for their scientific studies and discoveries." I do not disagree with that. If that was your first comment, you worded it weirdly, hence I do agree with that (this is the 50% where I agree with the video). The other 50%, that science comes from theism (or Christianity specifically) is where I completely disagree with, because it simply is not true.
I love your videos, Mr. B!! Each and every video you post is full of constant entertainment. Thank you for all of the amazing work!!!!
When it comes to today's Atheists and ":Progressives " , dealing with facts and logic it's wrong and illogical .
BTW.. We need more videos, Mr B !!
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
I was missing your videos a lot! Please do not stop uploading.
God bless you!
104 Likes on that Tweet? They have some Un-liking to do..!
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Belief in a rational, creative God lead to science. Science leads us back to belief in a rational, creative God.
The man from that Twitter account still argues to this day that those founders didn't base their scientific discovery off their faith or religion itself.
The lack of awareness this man has is astounding.
Better late than never to the party. Wasn’t notified despite having notifications enabled for some reason - but this is still, as always, a great video, Tim.
I'd hate to see what the world would be like today without Christianity... *SHUDDERS*
A bunch of pagan tribes or something. Thankfully Christ has delivered us from the pagan worships of our ancestors.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Why wonder? Pre-flood descriptions, Sodom and Gomorrah, the end of Judges, much of Ecclesiastes, Romans 1, and the Revelation according to Christ.
(To be fair many atrocities were committed in the name of advancing the kingdom of Christ however I do not think that the leaders of the time that help instigate those things were necessarily following God's command, and the vast majority of those acts were committed before the common man had access to the scriptures.)
I think God paints a pretty good picture of what people do when they universally deny His authority.
@@Gammagreen A good picture? You mean life and thrive?
As can be observed right now?
We have approximately one billion Christians on this planet ... and that means 7 billion people who are not ...
I don't see the world going to shit, while the last majority of people don't believe in your deity ...
The most religious countries are in general even on the bad end in that regard ...
@@BestAnimeFreak I disagree with your premise that the vast majority of people are free to act and do what is "right in their own eyes." (From Judges) . Most of the most influential countries still have constraining constitutions that were constructed and maintained by those who believed/believe in "my God".
I believe that as time progresses those documents will be eroded beyond their ability to protect us from ourselves. I know, from talking to many, there is a belief that without the archaic documents there would be a universal push towards bettering humanity. However, understand that I have a view that humans, left to their own devices, are destructive by nature. Individuals can be productive and create wonders, but as a race we tend towards the negative. I have seen nothing in my life to convince myself that this is not true, however, it is something that must be true in order for humanity to pursue a more utopian society while not believing in higher morals.
*Fun Fact:* they found clay documents in Jordan, made from men recording constellations nightly, that recorded fire falling on Sodom and Gomorrah..when you reverse the time according to the constellation documentation, it matches within the date set in the Bible
Just thought I'd share *=)* great as always Brother Tim! God bless all my Brother's and Sister's out there 💜💜💜
Can you provide the source? It would nice to have.
Yeah, I'd like to see the source as well
@@realchristianmusicchannele9532 ya, I'm gonna have to break up pieces of the info to "make it stick" in the comments
@@B33nj4m1n ya, I'm gonna have to break up pieces of the info to "make it stick" in the comments
Search engine type...
I was hoping it was Spider-Man. Great stuff as always B!
Awesome video Mr. B keep up the great content! You’re channel is a blessing and inspires to think deeper. Appreciate you.
Thank you for this video!! I’m gonna rewatch and take notes! That was a awesome way to explain these questions you get asked that make witnessing turn weird and your experience turns out to be discouraging.
Really dope, thank you Mr. B. A bit of criticism: because "modern" science has historical origin in Europe, I hope that folks don't believe that Africa (where the christianity was present throughout the continent), Asia, South America, etc. weren't making scientific contributions as well. In fact, it can be argued that some of Europe's scientific innovation was rooted in the discoveries of these other continents including birthing practices, mathematics, war tactics and some astronomy.
I'm not saying that European christians weren't crucial participants in the world of scientific discovery. Rather that other ethnic groups (even of other religious faiths) made significant contributions as well.
I agree with this wholly. A good example of this is Copernicus, whose calculations about the heliocentric nature of our solar system were the refined forms of a Muslim scientist's calculations on this very matter.
@@thomasecker9405 Right. I wonder if it could even be argued that while christianity fuels discovery and innovation, that a big reason for Europe's impact in science, etc. is cross-cultural influence. A lot of people, products and ideas from a lot of different cultures have gone to and through Europe over time. These discoveries weren't likely made in a vaccuum.
@@JH-tc7wb Of course they weren't.
Good point, a notable example being the Baghdad House of Wisdom under the Abbasid Caliphate. This was the largest research institute in the world at it's time and it was sponsored by the Caliphate (essentially a Muslim theocracy). Regardless of it's mostly Muslim leadership, members of all three Abrahamic religions worked, debated, and studied there. Because these three religions, while different, have very similar views of God and the universe, I would argue that this further advances Mr B.'s point that the ideals held by Christians (which also happen to be shared by Jewish and Islamic people) were very important at encouraging scientific discovery throughout history.
Asian and parts of North Africa were part of the Roman empire
Most of science came from people who accepted God.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
@@mitchellc4 Hi,brother or sister in Christ!
I like how you are trying to preach the gospel but I think the gospel was actually Jesus came into the world to die on the cross our of God's love for the wages of our sin and whoever believes in Him is saved
John 3:16-18
Please don't let this discourage yiu because spreading the gospel is good!
God bless
@@mckayla6668
Hello
The gospel is the gospel of the kingdom
Which includes the essential death and resurrection of the king as first importance
Matt 4
23 And he went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and preaching the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every infirmity among the people.
Matt 24
14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Acts 8
12 But when they believed Philip as he preached the gospel of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Acts 28
30 For two whole years Paul lived in his own rented place and welcomed everyone who came to him.
31 He continued to preach about the kingdom of God and to teach boldly and freely about the Lord Jesus, the Messiah.
@@mitchellc4 Amen!❤️
I love your channel so much! It really needs to be more popular! You make me laugh so much and you make perfect sense. God bless!
Love it! Amen, praise God forever.
I think day is going bad and BOOM Mr. B uploads
Glad I stumbled upon your channel. Keep it up! It's great content!
You're so cool and chill with these arguments!
Countering bad arguments with the truth. It's impossible to love God and not admire his creation. Happy to subscribe for more truth ❤️
@Richard Fox which have become part of the culture and lasted this long because Christians don't. And these bad arguments keep many away from God. So a very wonderful initiative from him. God bless him ❤
Hearing that studying astronomy was considered an act of worship by those that first studied the stars is breathtakingly beautiful and uplifting.
It is confirmation that marveling at God’s creation is another way to marvel in thought of him.
Thank you brother and those included in the production of this channel. I love you brothers and sisters and it is wonderful the work you are doing.
@Red Pen Logic
The most hilarious thing about this claim from the atheists is that takes about 20 seconds of research to find out the opposite.
Same with the "Jesus copied Horus" thing or "Constantine created Jesus's divinity", but they still proudly propagate these myths. It's sad, really.
@@leandronc I think we can rationally be certain that most Atheist's who have a problem with Christianity, have an emotional problem with it, not intelectuall.
@@leandronc 'Jesus copied Horus'. This shows your lack of knowledge. This is not true at all. Inspiring philosophy debunked this myth really well....this is an internet myth that have no evidence to back it up. If you really dig deep into the egyption mythology about Horus...there is nothing that is similar to the story and life of Jesus Christ.
It is embarassing to use this kind of argumentation.
@@leandronc And Constantine did not create the divinity of Jesus Christ. The divinity of Jesus is already believed by the early Christians even before Christianity spread into the Roman Empire.
The divinity of Jesus Christ is central to the Christian faith and it is at the core of Christianity.
@@jonathanhauhnar8434 Sounds like you are disagreeing with me, but we're 100% in agreement, bro. I'm citing these 2 claims as examples of trivially debunked, but still widely believed falsehoods within atheist circles. Read my reply again.
Yes TIM!!! Keep going !!!
Science requires that the core assumption of induction, that the future will resemble the past, be justified. An unchanging God who holds the laws of universe constant justifies this assumption. There is no other conceivable justification. Therefore faith in an unchanging God is implied by induction, and therefore by science.
lol The classic christianite argument: “I can’t conceive, therefore it’s impossible.”
@@VirtualBilly
My explanation that I invented to explain a mystery actually explains the mystery… what a coincidence.
But please ignore the inconvenient fact that my explanation is even more mysterious than the mystery that it is supposed to explain… and that there is zero evidence that it’s true.😂
"Why do plants crave electrolytes? Well it's because they crave them." What a fancy pants circular argument you have here, but you haven't proved your premise, so your conclusion is irrelevant. Even if it were, you wouldn't be any closer to proving that your particular God was the "unchanging god" you've referenced. If your God was unchanging, then we'd still be allowed to take slaves from "the tribes that surround us". Christians love to play the "that's the Old Testament!" card, while simultaneously asserting that their God is unchanging when it becomes convenient.
@@VirtualBilly Is that a new metal? Christianite?
@@sagittariusa581 and is it like Kryptonite (green) that weakens Christians from Christon?
Love you Mr. B!
I consider the information in this video, good information!
This is EPIC. It’s hard to have a conversation or debate with any atheist where they actually have accurate information on history and science
Your bald teacher doesn’t even address that Catholic Church actively discouraged scientific progress.
Galileo’s trial is the best example, but another example is the index of prohibited books (which prohibited to print many scientific books, like Copernicus’s or Galileo’s) it was harmful to the spread of scientific texts, it harmed also philosophers, (Giordano Bruno, who wasn’t atheist, he in fact believed in God, he was pantheistic and in response to his believes was burnt by pope Clement VIII; another example is Macchiavelli, his political essay was not given the imprimatur by the church, it couldn’t be printed) and it harmed also literature, as some authors censured themselves in order not to be accused and maybe even burnt by the church, as in the case of Torquato Tasso.
All of this censorship happened in the centuries of scientific revolution. Yes, the fathers of science believed in god, but it doesn’t mean it was their faith to lead them to their discoveries and, as a matter of fact, they were often seen as heretics and censured by the church. Christianity actively discouraged (or in some cases processed) scientists, so faith surely didn’t play an endorsing part on scientific revolution, scientist tried to reconcile their desire to discover with the intolerant faith of their times, that’s why they ascribed their work as god’s will, not because they were actually spurred by christendom.
@@simonenicolas sorry that you wasted your time. Literally NOTHING you said changes the facts nor is it even relevant. The Catholic Church is not Christian and the medieval Catholic Church was as anti-Christian as any religion on the planet. Either way it was CHRISTIANS who believed in God that founded the scientific method as a way to understand God‘s creation. It’s also the Bible that is the first source in all of human history to declare that the earth was round centuries before the Greeks even mentioned it. Checkmate goodbye.
@@i-primeproductions1517 tell me now the passage in the bible were it is stated that the earth is round, I’m serious, it would be helpful if you did that. Also my point was to highlight that historically the church tried to destroy scientific revolution. It’s quite speculative to say that, for example, if not for Newton’s faith he wouldn’t have been the father of physics, totally lacking of any proof, just bending history in favour of your ideology, meanwhile it’s a matter of fact that a major part of Christendom tried to suppress scientific revolution as they saw it against their faith. On one hand we SPECULATE that a specific interpretation of Christian values led to scientific progress, on the other hand we KNOW that an interpretation of Christian values (shared by the Church) led to repression of science (or at least they tried).
@@simonenicolas again, the Catholic Church is not “Christiandom” and his points is 100% valid. If you don’t recognize the reality of what he is saying and there’s no point in discussing anything any further. Also, I don’t waste my time throwing a bone to people that aren’t genuine or honest. Do your own research if you want and I don’t care if you don’t. I’ve learned not to waste too much time with people that refuse to acknowledge the truth
@@i-primeproductions1517 I’m serious. Let’s not talk about scientific revolution, you clearly have your own view that I think it’s nonsense but that’s ok. I’m reading the bible, doing my own research, and, I’m serious, if what you told me about round earth is real, that would be a pretty incredible thing, can you tell me what is the passage?
This information is really awesome! God blessed you with amazing inteligence mr red pen logic guy. Keep it up!
A few years back I had a long conversation with an atheist and at the end of the the conversation he said that "religion stopped science", I asked him what was he talking about and his response was that if we didn't have Christianity we would have had flushing toilets a lot sooner 😂🤣🤣🤣🤣
I'm sorry, but through this whole video, I am imagining someone like Richard Dawkins stomping his feet around the room, pulling his hair, shouting "No No No!!" while he's watching this video. 😂😂
Same
The mob: OOOOOOOHHHH!!!!!!!!!😎😎
As an atheist, not at all. Yeah alot of early scientists were Christians or Muslims and religions has give a lot to culture. But none of this means religion is true, only that it was useful in the pass.
@@tedidk8639 It also does not mean atheism is true either so I am not sure what your point is. Red pen was simply refuting a typical, sad, pointless argument that is quite often repeated by either ignorant or deceptive atheists.
@@bassmanjr100
My point was that most atheist I know would not be shouting at this. I semi agree with the video actually.
I love the video, but I could watch your standard introduction to Red Pen Logic with Mr. B. all day long. It is so cleverly edited! (Okay, I might be exaggerating just a smidge about how long I would watch the introduction, but I love your videos and your presentation just the same.)
"Where is Mr. B's beard? Is it safe?"
- Darth Vader.
The gospel is the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM!
Jesus is going to return and set up the kingdom of God ON THE EARTH! God’s government ON THE EARTH! The Messiah will resurrect his people! The destiny of the Messiah and his people is to be ON THE EARTH! The renewed restored earth! God also dwelling with them! Rev 21
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
Glad you are back, Mr. B. It's been a while. I hope you will post more videos when you can. By the way, we need another challenge that you can give to The Bible Thinker. Or how about a video where both of you dissect a tweet, a post, or a claim going back and forth?
I guess Isaac Neuton was too obvious to make the list.
He's considered a heretic, or at least as one later in his life.
Newton said that believing in the Trinity is the worst sin a Christian can commit.
So apparently he no longer counts, even if he was the smartest Christian who ever lived.😂
He's back with another great video 😱😱😱!!!
The concept of universities started in the middle ages with the church educating their clergy into priest and bishops. Which later developed into ALL the other specialized classes we have today. So yep nothing to do with science......
And public schools started the same way - Sadly, both have fallen pretty far and resemble indoctrination camps more than places of proper education nowadays
That was so well done and educational thank you so much 😊
This isn't even taking into account the effect Christian thinkers have had on the humanities: Paul, Origen, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas (and many more!) have all contributed immensely to the worlds of theology, philosophy, logic, ethics, political theory, biblical exegesis, textual criticism, etc.
Science-worshippers don't care about any field except science. Everything else is subservient.
I love your videos!!! Thank you and God bless you.
Mr. B is historically correct. Though I think it might be a little more accurate to say that Judeo-Christian monotheism gave rise to science. Uniquely Christian doctrines like the Incarnation and the Trinity don't seem to be essential to science, but belief in a rational Mind behind the physical world does seem to be essential. Isaac Newton, for example, was not at all a Christian by the standards of theological orthodoxy, but he was a monotheist. I would not be surprised if ALL of the great scientists of the 16th-18th centuries were theists of one stripe or another, even if not all were Christians. In any case, godFreeWorld is just flat-out wrong.
And along those same lines, the works of Muslim scholars in the area of mathematics in particular cannot be understated.
Right on!
Science is always built on a religion. Any religion must provide a complete and coherent understanding of the world around us. It provides the laws of reason and the rules of evidence for everything else. Notice how science has been going since it has been bent into the mold of secularism. Biology is now 'a state of mind.'
Atheism contradicts itself both in defense of it and they're ability to do science.
As a Christian, science is the study of God's intelligent design. Part of the reason we can tell that Christianity is true is because we can use scientific methods and evidence to prove biblical events. I love that I was born when I was; there is just so much scientific proof of my faith out there!
Atheists are so proud of the big bang but I think you forgot to inform them that the one who developed it was a Roman Catholic priest called Goerges lemaitre.
I enjoy the heck out of your channel.
Mmmm...bacon. Also nice to see Tom Holland make an appearance.
Imagine if we continued living under the petty squabbles of "gods" of other religions. Nature wouldn't be ruled by laws, but by the arbitrary whims of "divine" beings, and we would continue making sacrifices to favor material outcomes with little to no certainty, and when a sacrifice "fails", the sacrifice only gets bigger.
I really like this video and agree with it entirely. I loved all the specifics and enjoy hearing again about the lives and faith of history’s great thinkers. However, I feel like it is missing a critical philosophical assertion that underlies the original tweet. I have heard atheists in debates say that the very concept of faith is counter to reason and science because it is a belief without evidence. (I disagree and believe this argument relies on an erroneous definition of faith) I would like to have seen this underlying assertion undermined because as long as it exists the atheist might argue, “So what they had all these things going for them? They would have been better without faith. Even if they shared the beliefs common at the time they were moving away from a paradigm defined by faith by their very act of reasoning.”
Btw love your videos! Thank you for everything you do!
I would argue that the dialectic required for science was codified and unified by the scholarly theological debates of Christian (and Jewish and Islamic) over the preceding centuries. Moving from biblical data/evidence to observational evidence is in some ways rotation of the same methodologies into a new space.
Traditions without a unified and universal scriptural underpinnings would not necessarily develop the same type of dialectic approach to knowledge.
Although the initial dialectic in the west was adapted from the Hellenic Greek and Roman traditions of debate and discourse. See Greek symposia and Romans diner parties for how they developed their dialectic approaches.
The way I have always seen and explained Science and the first Scientists: "People who believed in The Creator, looking at the Creation in Awe and hoping that by Observing Creation they can grow closer to & understand better The Creator." It is only in the last century or so that it shifted from people Seeking God to people Seeking Self.
A history about development of universities and the influence of the church would be great!
The funny thing is is that faith is seen in science. Dark matter is a good example. Not being witnessed, but being believed in due to evidence. Einstein had faith in the existence of black holes without them being proven in his time as well.
A lot of people do not know this, but the habit of biblical literalism being applied to science, is a relatively modern act. The church fathers and medieval priests understood the narrative purpose of the Bible, and how it was not to be read as a science book.
Thank you
I was brought up to use science to see and understand the wonders of God's creation. Thanks 'Uncle Bob"
Love it! Thanks for this! And not to mention, the Big Bang Theory came from a Catholic Priest. No problem with believing both faith and science.
This is where I agree.
There is no reason for a science vs. religion thing.
Both can be compatible, depending on your faith ...
A catholic has obviously less problems to combine their faith with scientific findings, while a creationist and Bible literallist actively needs to deny science.
Those people are the main cause, why many people think that it is a science vs. Religion thing ...
If you are not a creationist nutjob, then there is no problem with that.
@@BestAnimeFreak Did I miss something? Since when are Catholics not Creationists? I think you're confusing your terms. They try to reconcile evolution with the biblical account, that's probably what you mean.
Still, you don't need to be a "creationist nutjob" to have issues with the Neo-Darwinian Synthesis. There are very good reasons to contend with it. And there are many brands of "creationist", some who agree with evolution and some who don't. Some who disagree with it still hold to an old earth, and some don't.
So you're painting with WAY too large a brush here.
@@SeraphsWitness A creationist as I use it, is defined to be a person who believes in a literal 6 day creation, as they believe the Bible to be accurate to the last word.
If that is 6k years or millions of years ago doesn't matter (as the Bible doesn't specify it and young earth creationists simpy dabble in random genealogy).
That also means to deny evolution, as God clearly created all living beings himself and evolution is not needed and we certainly did not 'evolve from filthy monkey men' ...
Or how else science deniers would say that ...
They way you define creationist though is a different one.
Just because the Catholic church accepts all scientific theories as what they are (fact), doesn't mean they don't believe that God didn't do any of that.
They still believe that God created the universe and everything.
Which you then would attribute to them being creationists. Because they believe in a creator God.
That is simply not the definition of creaionist I use ...
And did you know that nobody talks about "Neo-Darwinian Evolution" or "Synthesis", except for people who are unable to accept or comprehend the theory of evolution?
It's "Neo-Darwinian" is certainly a buzz word that informs me, when a person uses it, they deny at least some parts of the theory of evolution.
And if they know what a scientific theory is, is always a coin toss ... with a weighted coin ...
So, do you at least know what a scientific theory is?
@@BestAnimeFreak well I'm simply pointing out that you're using the term "creationist" too narrowly. Every Christian, properly speaking, is some form of creationist. What you meant is a literal 6-day creationist. That's fine. "The definition I use", in your terms. Just pointing out that that's rather imprecise and can be misleading. As long as you're aware.
I find it strange that I'm scolded for correcting your imprecise language, then your very next critique is about a (very precise) phrase I used. So let's talk about that.
yes, the neo-darwinian synthesis refers specially to the modern discovery of the cell (Cell Theory) and DNA, something Darwin had no inkling of. So the modern theory of evolution is significantly more developed than Darwin's theory proper, since he had not worked out the supposed methodology of new information forming in the genome. He really had no robust concept of a genome to begin with. So the neo-darwinian synthesis "solves" that issue by proposing random mutation in DNA sequences as the methodology for injecting new information into the genome. Though that hasn't been demonstrated technically, though not for lack of effort in fruitfly experiments. That's why we use the phrase "neo-darwinism", since the modern theory shares only the broadest commonalities with Darwin's actual theory.
So yes, I do know a bit about the topic. There's really no need to talk down to me. We're both adults presumably. If you disagree, disagree on logical and scientific grounds, not pedantic linguistic insults.
@@BestAnimeFreak You know, I can really and deeply relate with what you say, and I think that the main issue many atheists online have with Christianity is this feeling that it's opposed to science because of creationist fundamentalists and literalists.
I'd like to share a testimony:
About a month ago I was having an argument with an atheist about the topic of a biologist joining Christianity from an atheist background. At a certain point, in a clear attempt to mock me, he said something like "Imagine believing in a dude who created the universe in six days". After reading that, I informed him that I am Catholic and believe in the theory of evolution. And all of a sudden he completely changed, like pulling a switch. He explained me that literalists are a huge issue in the US and that we European Christians in his opinion are open to science and much more reasonable as we don't take the Bible literally. He was very friendly after that.
From this, I learnt 3 things:
1 American literalists are destroying our reputation
2 Most atheists don't hate Christianity itself, they are just against this anti-scientific interpretation
3 The stereotypes are hard to get rid of.
James Tour speaks beautiful about science and Christianity
I hope and pray, Christianity will rise and dominate again in Europe and in the West, as well as the whole world.
Not sure dominate is the best word of choice. Christianity is about truth and consent, it doesn't dominate, it liberates. I'm sure ur just using a figure of speech but it's the net after all, and any other religion "dominating" has a completely different context. See Islam for example.
This will not be the case.
If it goes bad, Islam will do that in the near to far future ...
If it goes good, religion just dwindles out of existence, without any religion taking over again ...
Christianity rising on top though, is heavily unlikely.
Both Tom Hollands "happen" to be British? Coincidence... INCONCEIVABLE!!
Oh I love this one Red Pen Logic. If only more Christians would dig deeper into these issues.
I love this guy. He does such excellent research, and he makes theology fun as well as informative.
He tried to respond to this over Twitter and it was stupid... he didn’t understand you meant modern science ex. The scientific method, most of the fields we have today, and most of the laws we have today come from Christians.
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge,
But fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Proverbs 1:7
Pascal's Wager, Pascal's Triangle, Pascal (Unit of pressure).
Well, pascals wager is a fallacy ... so I'm not sure why you list it up with the others ...
Hi Mr. Clean! Sorry, I had to. ✌😁
Luv ya Mr. B!
You didn't mention Sir Isaac Newton and MANY others. That's MAN-EE others. So, yes, Christianity IS responsible for modern science.
And that's how you silence the fool. Good job!
Hey, I agree.
A fool would be silenced by his arguments.
Someone who isn't a fool is not and will counter his argument, with better evidence and things he missed out on.
@@BestAnimeFreak Nope. I'm referring to the worse type of fool, the type that's irredeemable, they type for which there's no cure. I'm talking about the educated, knowledgeable fool. This type of fool rejects reality because his biases are so rooted in his being that the only way he can get rid of them and accept facts is if he dies and reincarnates. This type of fool doesn't know that you can accept historical facts and still remain an atheist. Don't confuse being a fool with being uneducateed. The educated fool is the worse of all. And this type abounds greatly.
@@elmontro "I'm talking about the educated, knowledgeable fool." Oh, so you mean the kind of 'fool' that is actually not a fool, but is titled as a fool, because they are above your fallacious arguments and therefor don't follow your fallacious reasoning to your personal deity? "This type of fool rejects reality" Wait ... so you are talking about most anti-science theists rights now? "This type of fool doesn't know that you can accept historical facts and still remain an atheist." Now you completely lost me ... considering that the historical facts are not in favor for theism ...
The wise King Solomon from the Bible might be the first scientist because he's studied the world.
Why not go back further? Mankind was smart from the start. If building an ark isn't science, if learning agriculture isn't science, than what is? I think many ppl make the mistake of trying to put science in some corner, but since you can't do that to God nor science, there is a great harmony to be found.
@@arcguardian science isn’t engineering it really is a bunch of foolish intellectualizing in the end
In reality technology progresses because that’s just what humans do is build off eatchother intuitively
The person who created the microchip couldnt have done it without the person who harnessed electricity and that person would have never been able to get an education if that one person never invented the wheel
You see the process of techne (Greek for technological wisdom) is an eternal principality and something humans have done since before even inheriting the Holy Spirit
@@off6848 not sure about ur comment, I do agree we build off of knowledge from others and the past, but who didn't know that?
@@arcguardian everyone knows that it’s just so taken for granted that people now think that science (a philosophy on knowledge) is how technology progresses but that is not how technology progresses at all.
Scientific and philosophical systems can only steer the direction of how technology evolves but technology evolves one way or another just as it did before science was ever a term
@@arcguardian Talking about accepting science and then arguing that we build the arc? Saying the flood is not a myth, but took place? Contrary to the science?
Okay ...
I'm not sure if you are a creationist or just a very mistaken "normal theist" ... but the flood story did not take place.
It could not have happened, at all ... it is 100% fictional and made up ...
Your face-game is a GOD-given gift!
Ask atheists about their faith in a natural origin of life. Ask for the link to the peer reviewed publication of the process of abiogenesis being demonstrated. The atheists, naturalists “gap” in their ideology they’ve labeled abiogenesis. Dr. James Tour has a 13 video series on utube that explains quite well that “gap” isn’t going to get closed anytime soon. Especially by anything a primordial soup can or could..
So because we are not sure how life began there must be a supernatural god? That would be a argument from ignorance.
Ted Idk No, you are ignorant of the research that in the very least the chemistry required for the basic components of living cells (amino acids, lipids, nucleic acids and carbohydrates to form in any natural scenario is very very unlikely. And for them to arrange themselves in the more complex parts of cells, the bi layer cell membrane(lipids) Dna, rna, mrna (nucleic acids sugars) amino acids (proteins) is ridiculously impossible in a primordial soup. Dr. James Tour has posted 13 videos on utube to help you understand.
@@tedidk8639 so we’re supposed to accept the evolution theory as true even though we don’t know the origin of life? That’s called faith
The two are linked. The origin is crucial.
@@vernonchitlen8958
What the likelihood of DNA forming in a primordial soup?
@@justonetime6179
The theory of evolution explains why we see animals evolve, why they sometimes features that are useless, and why some animals seem so similar and ect. It explains the now. We don't know exactly how life started, but who is to say that life can't come from non living things? Especially since scientists have been getting closer and closer from creating living cells from scratch?
Brilliant Video! Thanks.
Hey Mr B. I was worried about you, I even looked for you on twitter, you just went silent for a while and I just hoped you were alright. Don't ever do that again, even though you don't have a video to post just say Hi! 🤷🏾♂️
Hey, I really appreciate this thoughtful comment. Sorry I dropped off for a bit. I had a couple rough weeks with my anxiety so things got very delayed. I hope I didn’t worry anyone. ❤️
@@RedPenLogic "I hope my anxiety didn’t worry anyone.”
I see what you did there :)
@@RedPenLogic I have anxiety too... take your time! 💗
I’m a Christian who wants to study science. The world is quite literally so interesting, who wouldn’t want to study it?
Wahoo! Go Tom Holland!!! 🇳🇱
Props. This led me to look at your channel and sub. Will share 👍
David Wood @Acts17apologetics has a great video on Christians and Science.
“But Galileo was persecuted for his belief in the heliocentric solar system!”
True. Relatively. He wasn’t tortured, just threatened, and was convicted of suspicion of heresy within a day of his trial beginning, and faced an extremely light sentence - one day in prison, and “villa arrest” for the rest of his (short, he was old and frail) life. Does this condemn Christianity?
No, absolutely not. Christ’s church is ultimately led on Earth by men - fallible, prone to error and ego, especially one so high and exalted as the Pope. I have conducted a serious analysis for the astronomical evidence in Scripture (because it’s an “angels dancing on the head of a pin” issue, meaning a complete distraction and waste of time), but it seems like the Church was committing some form of eisegesis in this.
Comment for the Al Gore Rhythm
Haha that made me chuckle 😆
Algore had no rhythm.
I always enjoy studying science like biology physics and chemistry , and one of my atheist friend asked me why do I like science so much if it disapproves Christianity at the time I didn't have an answer so I just replied with its fun to see what people say to disprove the bible but now I know why I enjoy science so much