I realise that you're not addressing atheists like me, but I feel I should respond anyway. 1) This is an equivocation fallacy. For instance, if I say that I have 'faith' in the scientific method this is hyperbole; what I mean is 'trust' (based on plentiful experience) not faith in the religious sense. 2) & 9) Science does not explain everything, and some things may not be explicable; but as human knowledge expands, the explanations are always unguided natural forces, never divine intervention. So far, all natural phenomena that humans have explored operate without any need for a god. 3) This is just an argument from incredulity; you don't understand evolution, so you disbelieve it and say that it's 'overstated'. You have access to more knowledge than nearly all the humans that have ever lived, but you prefer to remain ignorant. There are excellent resources freely available that explain scientific theories - including evolution - to any level of expertise, especially aimed at non-scientists. 4) I long to be young, fit, attractive and wealthy; other people long for fame and success, still others for a god. This is called wishful thinking. 5) - 8) The Old Testament contains factual geographical and historical elements, but it mainly consists of myths and legends. The Gospels were written anonymously, decades after the events, don't even claim to be first-hand accounts or history, and can't have been written by the illiterate disciples. 'The Bible says' is not a persuasive argument. 10) This is just an argument from popularity, another logical fallacy. The number of people that believe a proposition bears no relation to its truth.
Thank you for your polite and well thought-out comment. Regarding #3, I have enjoyed reading the evidence for macro evolution for many years. I have yet to find any that is conclusive. There is often an illogical leap between "this is what we observe" to "this is what must have happened." Regarding #5-8, I encourage you to explore why the Bible is actually quite reliable given your objections, as all of these have been written about extensively. Regarding #10, I fully agree (I thought I mentioned that in the video, but perhaps i did not). Again, thank you for your comment. Blessings to you.
@@GraceBaptistNokomis Just by using the term macro evolution you betray your willful ignorance; the process is called (by scientists, not creationists) speciation, and there's plenty of evidence for it. As for the Bible, I have read quite widely on its history and origins, and I stand by what I said, which represents the academic consensus as I understand it.
The moment you try to differentiate "micro" from "macro" evolution, is the moment I know you don't understand evolution. These small changes over multiple generations are what causes the larger scale differences. There is just evolution.
Hey, thanks for the comment. If I understand you correctly, that everything we believe has a degree of faith to it, then I agree. That was the point I was making in the video. Blessings to you.
"Protected" was probably a poor choice of words. Maybe that God "preserved" them from extinction, which was a very real possibility at many times in history.
@@biblesergeant1043 Read Richard Carrier, Richard Dawkins ( The God delusion) Karen Armstrong ( God) ?, or are you listening to the backwoods preacher man.
> faith in science i dont have faith in science. i follow its principles as the most rational way to understand the universe (which INCLUDES the question of: if theres a god-like creature out there!). its worked really, really well so far without having to invoke a supernatural god that the bible or other texts claim. there might be a god-like creature that exists - and lots of scientists believe in a god as well - just it wouldnt be anything that resembles the abrahamic religions that people have faith in like jesus or mohammed. *is there evidence that the bible is true?* No there isnt. also please dont talk about how evolution, sorry, MACRO evolution, does not have evidence (only conjectures or ideas) - it is a scientific THEORY with experimental proof. Yes, we DO know this for certain 3:13. if you say this, your opinions on science and the scientific method in general come into question. is this a video for people who have already converted? or are you trying to convert people as an evangelist? if the latter, this is not a way to achieve anything. you're (literally) preaching to the choir.
Thank you for your reasonable comment. This video is for those who are exploring the possibilities, and are looking for hope in life. What is the proof that macro evolution has taken place? I certainly acknowledge that there are things that could be understood as evidence of macro evolution, but I haven't seen hard-fast proof of it. Blessings to you.
@@GraceBaptistNokomis blessings to you, too. im definitely open to a higher being. i turned 30 the other month and even though its an arbitrary milestone it made me curious of the creation of the universe. there IS so much out there
I totally agree. And even if there is a perfectly logical scientific reason for everything being the way that it is (and I think that's likely the case), the questions of "why" and "how did this possibly happen, despite being quite unlikely" still lead me in the direction of faith in God.
@@GraceBaptistNokomis Which god though? There are 3000+ gods in religion and not one has been proven to exist outside of man made books, but they all need human beings to spread their oh so important message. How can you tell the difference between a god that doesn't talk or reveal themselves and one that doesn't exist?
@GraceBaptistNokomis Anyone who chooses to preach a gods existence is a con man. If you read the Bible, you yourself know that yhwh is a fictional character in a historical fictional book.
If you are compelled by any of these, you are very gullible.
I realise that you're not addressing atheists like me, but I feel I should respond anyway.
1) This is an equivocation fallacy. For instance, if I say that I have 'faith' in the scientific method this is hyperbole; what I mean is 'trust' (based on plentiful experience) not faith in the religious sense.
2) & 9) Science does not explain everything, and some things may not be explicable; but as human knowledge expands, the explanations are always unguided natural forces, never divine intervention. So far, all natural phenomena that humans have explored operate without any need for a god.
3) This is just an argument from incredulity; you don't understand evolution, so you disbelieve it and say that it's 'overstated'. You have access to more knowledge than nearly all the humans that have ever lived, but you prefer to remain ignorant. There are excellent resources freely available that explain scientific theories - including evolution - to any level of expertise, especially aimed at non-scientists.
4) I long to be young, fit, attractive and wealthy; other people long for fame and success, still others for a god. This is called wishful thinking.
5) - 8) The Old Testament contains factual geographical and historical elements, but it mainly consists of myths and legends. The Gospels were written anonymously, decades after the events, don't even claim to be first-hand accounts or history, and can't have been written by the illiterate disciples. 'The Bible says' is not a persuasive argument.
10) This is just an argument from popularity, another logical fallacy. The number of people that believe a proposition bears no relation to its truth.
Thank you for your polite and well thought-out comment. Regarding #3, I have enjoyed reading the evidence for macro evolution for many years. I have yet to find any that is conclusive. There is often an illogical leap between "this is what we observe" to "this is what must have happened." Regarding #5-8, I encourage you to explore why the Bible is actually quite reliable given your objections, as all of these have been written about extensively. Regarding #10, I fully agree (I thought I mentioned that in the video, but perhaps i did not). Again, thank you for your comment. Blessings to you.
@@GraceBaptistNokomis Just by using the term macro evolution you betray your willful ignorance; the process is called (by scientists, not creationists) speciation, and there's plenty of evidence for it. As for the Bible, I have read quite widely on its history and origins, and I stand by what I said, which represents the academic consensus as I understand it.
The moment you try to differentiate "micro" from "macro" evolution, is the moment I know you don't understand evolution. These small changes over multiple generations are what causes the larger scale differences. There is just evolution.
Amen!!!
What you really have is an imaginary god character.
Psalm 137:9
There's nothing a person can't believe based on faith. That's where you go wrong,
Hey, thanks for the comment. If I understand you correctly, that everything we believe has a degree of faith to it, then I agree. That was the point I was making in the video. Blessings to you.
@@GraceBaptistNokomis If there was evidence, faith wouldn't be needed. Faith is the excuse people give for believing something without evidence.
Imagine thinking that God somehow favoured or "protected" the Jews given the holocaust ...
"Protected" was probably a poor choice of words. Maybe that God "preserved" them from extinction, which was a very real possibility at many times in history.
There is nothing rational about a belief in a god
Raise your arms. God is at the other side of the universe: 13,8 mln LIGHTYEARS far away.
18,8 BILLION lightyears away. So wait for the wonder.
@@fado792 You are a little short. The visible universe is 93 light years across.
@@biblesergeant1043 Read Richard Carrier, Richard Dawkins ( The God delusion) Karen Armstrong ( God) ?, or are you listening to the backwoods preacher man.
Rationality isn't all it's trumped to be.
> faith in science
i dont have faith in science. i follow its principles as the most rational way to understand the universe (which INCLUDES the question of: if theres a god-like creature out there!). its worked really, really well so far without having to invoke a supernatural god that the bible or other texts claim.
there might be a god-like creature that exists - and lots of scientists believe in a god as well - just it wouldnt be anything that resembles the abrahamic religions that people have faith in like jesus or mohammed. *is there evidence that the bible is true?* No there isnt.
also please dont talk about how evolution, sorry, MACRO evolution, does not have evidence (only conjectures or ideas) - it is a scientific THEORY with experimental proof. Yes, we DO know this for certain 3:13. if you say this, your opinions on science and the scientific method in general come into question.
is this a video for people who have already converted? or are you trying to convert people as an evangelist? if the latter, this is not a way to achieve anything. you're (literally) preaching to the choir.
Thank you for your reasonable comment. This video is for those who are exploring the possibilities, and are looking for hope in life.
What is the proof that macro evolution has taken place? I certainly acknowledge that there are things that could be understood as evidence of macro evolution, but I haven't seen hard-fast proof of it.
Blessings to you.
@@GraceBaptistNokomis blessings to you, too. im definitely open to a higher being. i turned 30 the other month and even though its an arbitrary milestone it made me curious of the creation of the universe.
there IS so much out there
I totally agree. And even if there is a perfectly logical scientific reason for everything being the way that it is (and I think that's likely the case), the questions of "why" and "how did this possibly happen, despite being quite unlikely" still lead me in the direction of faith in God.
@@GraceBaptistNokomis Which god though? There are 3000+ gods in religion and not one has been proven to exist outside of man made books, but they all need human beings to spread their oh so important message. How can you tell the difference between a god that doesn't talk or reveal themselves and one that doesn't exist?
@GraceBaptistNokomis
Anyone who chooses to preach a gods existence is a con man.
If you read the Bible, you yourself know that yhwh is a fictional character in a historical fictional book.
Faith doesn't point to truth. You can literally believe anything with Faith.
That's true. We must put our faith in what is true, not merely what we hope to be true.
@@GraceBaptistNokomis why use faith at all?
Faith is trust. I trust God because he's proven Himself faithful to me.