Biochemist: "I’m here to tell you that science and faith don’t conflict.”

[@aaron_johnson]

I'm really hoping this new direction for the channel is a success! Love what you're doing, Cameron, and I'm encouraged by your work.

[@pop6997]

Wonderful 2nd interview. Thank you so much Cam & Dr Sy - The Dr is such a likeable fella ❤

[@GeordieGames]

Great chat between two swell guys! Thanks!

[@TrevorJamesMusic]

Great interview, Cameron. Dr. Garte is a really engaging guest, too.. definitely enjoyed this.

[@Efesus67]

Cameron is melting into the background.

[@joelmontero9439]

Lol

[@jglow8337]

😂😂😂😂 You're killin' me!!!

[@crystalhopkins2976]

I don’t know if you will see this, but one tells why and the other tells you how. This was a relationship I learned about myself. Thank you for sharing!

[@lizdavies8030]

Great interview, i love this guy he reminds me of my lovely grandpa, but seriously some great signposts to books and groups too in this interview. I like your interview style you seem genuinely interestest, which some interviewers lack. This is great stuff.

[@jennymcgowin9140]

Terrific interview! Very inspiring!🙏🏼✝️❤️

[@newglof9558]

Awesome convo. Great topic. Look thick. Solid. Tight. Keep us all posted on your continued progress with any new arguments or evidence. Show us what you got man. Wanna see how freakin' huge, solid, thick and tight these convos can get. Thanks for the motivation.

[@Swo37]

Great interview! It shows that you worked on it a lot.

[@dianahumphries5906]

I love listening to Sy Garte. Thanks for doing this 😊

[@johnbrown4568]

Thank you for posting this interview.

[@VlogCity]

26:48 They did not, in fact, cut that out of the interview

[@kevincribby6256]

Thank you. I have waited so long.

[@businesselectronic]

How much I love this conversation ❤. Beautiful!!! Only God can provide those explanations. 😊

[@pierrelabounty9917]

You know if i wasnt a believer, id still be fascinated by his discussion on design in nature.

[@TheFranchfry]

Cameron, no outro on this video makes the ending much more powerful. Thank you.

[@mileswebster7651]

Great conversation! Fascinating! 👍🏽

[@eshel7]

One thing that came to mind recently was this: The body is made up of many cells, etc. and each have a purpose in order for our bodies to function. If cells talk to each other, we ourselves could seem like GD to them. I expanded on that and thought about the ever expanding universe and all that is in it was as HIS body and everything in it has a purpose for HIM as the total body. It might seem heretical to some this line of thinking, but to me it kind of makes sense in a way since we are mini versions of HIMSELF created in his image. I'm wondering if this could be the possible meaning of it. It kind of explains how we are all independent of each other and yet are also one.

[@devonm6187]

Exactly! Everything makes up the body of Christ. Not just on this physical level but also on the spiritual. Hear O Israel, the Lord is One. We re all One. I always reference how our bodies are made of many cells as well. Awesome!

[@eshel7]

@@devonm6187 We, including Yeshua exist inside of that body. What we see externally is existence as we know it. However Abba father (The ONE true Abba Father and GD) we cannot see what he does. His existence as he sees it is somewhat different. Our finite minds cannot fully comprehend it. While we may come to understand much more in the future, it will never be to the extent of THE Father of us all. Yeshua is our Father in similarity to the way the first Adam was.... Hope that makes sense. I think we really need to stop thinking in terms of a Trinity and that Yeshua is GD. There truly is only one and we are a small part of that One, but our existence is within. However that doesn't mean we should stop thinking of Yeshua in terms of his honor and glory. Just that it is not synonymous in that Yeshua and Abba are in a literal sense ONE in the same. The whole entirety of what is ABBA cannot exist in just one cell no matter how much power, etc. it is given to operate. Abba Himself is just too big! A box such as ours cannot contain Him in His entirety.

[@devonm6187]

@eshel7 I really like that perspective. I also really enjoy the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg. He doesn't think in terms of the trinity, but he does say that Jesus is God in the flesh. He mentions that God sees all of us as a single individual. Its interesting to think about. I had an experience with Christ 3 years back. It was an experience where I was One with all things. It wasn't really me but Christ in me and through all things. It lasted a good 15 minutes and was the most profound experience I've ever had. It was the reason I came to Christ

[@eshel7]

@@devonm6187 Wow thanks for sharing! I love that! In regards to Swedenborn, I'll have to look up sometime, but what you said brought me back to a teaching in Jewish thought where they say more or less , as I am going from memory, is that when Adam sinned his soul fractured and broke into untold number of pieces, it could be said that we come from those pieces, and that still pretty much shows the same thing I mention above. Could be wrong as I have lots I need to grow in understanding, but my thinking still always comes to Abba as the One just as Yeshua himself taught. He is the example of not taking a seat he doesn't belong. Borrowing from what he said in regards to seated positions. I see him as our elder (first fruit in authority and more) brother whom we will be like also in the future. The bride is just metaphorical language as in truth we are "from" not "are" one source. Yeshua is the First Fruit resurrected and we will be changed just like him minus his authority. We all will be gifted in various ways, but not have the authority or glory "given" by Abba to Yeshua. Basically we become sons and daughters of ABBA through Yeshua. The Torah says Abba doesn't give his Glory to anyone. Yeshua's glory is a glory "given" by Abba not the quite same as, but glory just the same. A picture of this would be for example: When in the Torah it mentions that some of what Moses had was given to 70+2 Elders. I forget exactly the scripture reference but there were 70 and then 2 who were left prophesying in the camp....

[@eshel7]

@@devonm6187 Oh forgive me for my long windedness lol, but I had to come back with what I should have thought of in the first place. Abba makes things so for a reason. Take for example John the Baptist followed by Yeshua. Many likely thought John the Baptist was Mashiach, but he said he was not that light but came to testify of that light who comes after me. I believe this is a small version to help us understand in a way and they were probably presented in this way for that purpose. In this point in time I (John) came (or was sent) first but am not the actual first. Think this was done this way for a reason.

[@bayreuth79]

Its true that there is no _a priori_ conflict between faith and reason or science; but there is a conflict between certain fundamentalist versions of faith and science (such as scientism).

[@SASQUATCH3]

We are the first self replicating sons of the lord. To create good we must know the difference between good and evil.

[@beverleypettit3577]

The sceptics will never be comvinced. Only God can help them along. I was one once... Pax Christi

[@steph1672]

@21:30 what are they talking about here? What story?

[@0animalproductworld558]

I was never against christianity or god. To this day, I still can’t figure out why people are against god unless they went through enough.

[@BH195829]

Love this Testimony… get it out on X and other platforms… amazing guest! 🙏 Thank you. 💕😊🌎

[@gges1605]

Unfortunately my brother made a similar comment to me seems to think that im too inteligent to be a believer, if i just looked into athieism and the other side of the argument then i would not believe, but on the contrary there have been a few things I have had to say well I dont understand that right now but I choose to accept Gods word and have been blessed to get to see some of those answer's that only strenghten my faith.

[@jonathansmith4712]

Thank you, Cameron! I would love to hear you interview Stacy Trasancos, Father Nicanor Austriaco, and Brother Guy Consolmagno on this topic of faith/Science too :) Also, if you plan on doing any more exorcist interviews, I’d love to hear Father John Szada. He’s the exorcist of my diocese. There are a few but not many interviews of him online. I’d love to see him on a bigger platform, like yours.

[@WhileSilent]

There is a lot of 'God of Gaps', but in the same way, there is also a lot of 'Science-in-time of gaps'. Any problem seems like it can be solved in time with science. Be it things where it doesn't even involve the study of process. Some people seem to think that science is becoming the only form of truth, forgetting that we have university departments on philosophy, psychology and history. Maybe call this Scientianity with denominations in naturalism, nihilism and relativism.

[@peacepipe6695]

The notion of evolutions 'missing link' is completely absurd. The WHOLE chain is missing.

[@pierrelabounty9917]

People do!

[@pierrelabounty9917]

​@peacepipe6695 Maybe they should take it , "as if " on simple belief.

[@SASQUATCH3]

Sir Isaac newton. quote ,a great body of men, will be risen at the end and demand an accurate interpretation of biblical texts.

[@monica5379]

What do you mean pls explain

[@illegalcommenter4300]

I'd be curious what "issues" kept him from becoming Catholic?

[@DRWH044]

I would like to know for sure, but from his statement I'm guessing it has to do with his 3 marriages. It would have to be investigated to find out if any of his marriages were valid. I assume he's still with his third wife. If it is determined that either of his first two marriages was valid, then it follows that he's living in adultery, so he would have to stop living with his current partner before he can receive any sacraments. That would also explain why he's not considering Catholicism any more.

[@illegalcommenter4300]

@@DRWH044 Hmm yeah that would make sense. He seems like a nice guy, but if that's true his problem seems to be with Jesus' prohibiton of divorce and remarriage, not the "bureaucracy of the Catholic church." When someone is baptized they are from then on responsible for living in accordance with Jesus' teachings, so for some whom it is known will immediately live in violation of his teachings, it is better to not be baptized until they have reformed their lives. That was one of the points of why you had catechumens in the bible, they needed moral and intellectual formation before being baptized

[@br.m]

Who would want to be Roman Catholic? Are you under the impression that Roman Catholicism is Christian?? They worship Mary and practice idolatry. They depart from scripture and lean on their own popes understanding. Same with Eastern Orthodoxy, both are backslidden pagan cults burning incense to the queen of heaven and thumbing the nose at Christ. Rome hasn't had anything to do with Christianity since we made the pope stop burning Christians in his furnace. Maybe that's why?

[@leenieledejo6849]

​@@illegalcommenter4300 "Catechumens in the Bible"??? Whaaaat??

[@SASQUATCH3]

Welcome to the end.❤

[@C-ip2sq]

What about Lazarus? He rose from the dead.

[@beanbrewer]

How can you say that YEC is a recent Christian invention when the gospel of Luke traces Jesus's lineage directly to Adam?

[@MrSeedi76]

A purely literal interpretation of the Bible is a recent invention. Not necessarily the YEC interpretation. He clearly said in the interview he thinks it's a valid interpretation. Besides, the genealogy isn't really concerned with how much time passed but with depicting Jesus as the second Adam. I think it's also a difference between the age of the earth and the age of the whole universe. The Bible doesn't state how much time passed before the first day was actually created by dividing darkness and light.

[@beanbrewer]

@@MrSeedi76 that's why it's called YEC and not YUC. The age of the universe is irrelevant to the biblical age of the earth. The Bible clearly states the ages of the people listed in Jesus's genealogy. So if Jesus's lineage is intended to be figurative but Jesus was real, let me ask you at which point does his genealogy switch from being figurative to literal?

[@MrSeedi76]

​​@@beanbrewersorry but I don't explain to you how the gospel writers saw the world or how ancient biographies work. Read the necessary books instead of asking questions along the lines of "new testament studies 101". Just FYI - I don't believe in literal inspiration. It's quite obvious that the genealogy in Luke disagrees with Matthew. So what's your question even supposed to mean? You think people can't come up with a fictitious genealogy to a real person? Why do you think the gospel writers didn't care about these contradictions? You think they simply lied? Here's a hint - that's not it. They are of a very, very different time with no concept of any of our modern understanding of history, logic, science, etc. They are fully in line however with other ancient biographies. The people who wrote them of course freely mixed legend with myth and history. Since you seem to be an atheist, I wonder why you're even concerned with these questions? You think you win an argument or have a "gotcha" moment 😂?

[@beanbrewer]

@@MrSeedi76 just asking because it shows inconsistencies in the Christian worldview. If every person in the lineage up until Jesus is mythological, then it would be more logically consistent to believe Jesus is mythological as well. Not to mention the fact that if Adam himself is a mythological figure, then the concept of sin would have generated from a myth. If sin is a myth, then there is no reason for Jesus (assuming for a moment that he's not also a myth) to die.

[@catholicguy1073]

@@beanbrewerthat’s a logical fallacy

[@andreaeatherton4470]

God bless yall

[@TheSpaniard-5337]

Good work Cameron! I've been wondering what is the logic and consistency we determine as christians what miraculous events we hold to be true in the Bible and which not? And how do we actually harmonize mainstream science and the Biblical stories? Is it just Genesis 1-11 we let science to determine reality but the resurrection is something we keep to ourselves? John Lennox says wisely how these are different kind of explanations of reality and I get that, in most cases this is probably true. However I've never been able to fit the 14,5 billion years in Genesis 1-11. In timeline numbers that would mean the rest of the Bible counts for 0,00000006% of time past. I'm an engineer and I just can't harmonize these two ideas. I'm not attacking against anybody, I just genuinely think that something is not right here

[@MrSeedi76]

I think it has been explained that the literal interpretation of the Bible is a relatively young idea. Based on Martin Luther who already rejected the catholic 4-fold sense of scripture and culminating in the 19th century in a purely literal reading. There are multiple interpretations of scripture. The evangelical literal interpretation isn't even the majority opinion in the grand scheme of things. But Americans think the world revolves around them and every Christian in the world believes the same as American fundamentalists.

[@fact-factcheck4680]

18:45

[@zachg8822]

It sounds like your body went into a self preservation mode. A psychological state that the mind is so so familiar with thru ancestral psychological evolution

[@marcomclaurin6713]

I'll demonstrate transmutation by electrical process of genetically superior creatures (seraphim) in my video 'Begining of understanding ' My channel is dedicated to giving examples of this

[@Kay89487]

I just adore this man. He is so smart and well spoken. How can one atheist not agree with his sayings fx? Thank you dr. Sy!

[@episteme1289]

10:46 surprise guest appearance by Seth Hart xD

[@beanbrewer]

TL;DR look at the trees turned into God of the gaps

[@theautodidacticlayman]

Have you ever thought about the difference between knowing that ___ and knowing how ___? For instance, I know that my truck can be driven around town, but I don’t know much about how it’s able to do that. See the difference?

[@beanbrewer]

@@theautodidacticlayman sure, so you don't know how God moves your truck. But how do you know that he moves your truck?

[@theautodidacticlayman]

@@beanbrewer The fact that trucks are contingent and contingent things require explanations outside themselves to explain their existence, and that chain of explanations can’t go on infinitely, so there must be a necessary being. Also the fine-tuning required for a universe that allows trucks to be made and to work as intended. Also the fact that we are conscious and able to freely decide to make things like trucks, while every other chemical reaction we’ve ever observed isn’t able to make the types of decisions required for that kind of creative process. Like when I turn the key in my truck, the gas in the engine doesn’t say “Should I combust now or later?” Chemicals just react, so if humans are just chemicals, it’s quite strange to see signs of deliberate activity such as a drug addict quitting their drug, or anything like neuroplasticity. Lots of things about trucks can make you go 🤔🤔🤔

[@beanbrewer]

@@theautodidacticlayman just a little push back on the contingency model: if everything we've ever observed is contingent, it would be logically consistent to believe that everything is contingent (rather than picturing the causal chain as laid out in a straight line, think more like chainmail). But accepting your contingency model, it's a leap to state that there must be a necessary being. Sure some Thing must be at the end in that model, but there is nothing that dictates it must be a being. With regard to chemical reactions, there is no evidence that our consciousness is the result of anything other than chemical reactions in the brain. That's why drugs (chemicals) affect our consciousness.

[@MrSeedi76]

​@@beanbrewerit was exactly the brain chemistry and the chicken and egg problem of what comes first, chemistry or states of consciousness, that led John C. Eccles to write his book, "The self and its brain".

[@theautodidacticlayman]

38:19 🤣💀👊🏻

[@Chris-tv1ev]

How old were Adam and Eve when they were created they were mature human beings yet only one day old Earth with the appearance of age

[@graysonhendrick47]

Francis collins? The Covid NIH guy? Makes me question this guy’s credibility now

[@gregrice1354]

Well God bless our recent new believer brother. His view might be a little expanded when he invests a decade or so learning the Gospel from Creation by the good apologists at Reasons To Believe, and then fill in the Jewish Perspective of 1st Century Jewish Believers with teachings from Christian Jew Foundation. I'm just guessing. 8 - D

[@zachg8822]

After reading Noah, the bible is not scientific NOR historical!!!

[@MrSeedi76]

You obviously didn't even listen to the interview...

[@catholicguy1073]

There’s many genres of literature within the Bible for Gods revelation to man.

[@zachg8822]

How can you revere the iron age schizophrenics? @@catholicguy1073

[@faithbranch246]

It was good, but y’all lost me at the magic stuff. Christians and magic, don’t mix.

[@ryansikora9524]

I think we are looking at evolution wrong. I think it's more so adaptation. God created everything he is the big bang. The earth is millions of years old and the book of genesis and other historical text prove that. And adam and eve were the first to eat of the forbidden fruit and when they did the earth changed from the garden of eden to the world we know today and that happened thousands of years ago and since then we've been adapting to the world for what it is now

[@WhileSilent]

I think you gotta be careful when deriving numbers from the bible. No where in the bible states anything scientific hence the reason the bible and science do not contradict. Secondly, with evolution, its true that many have different ideas about it. An important thing to note is that evolution is a process not an origin. Then, when talking about how it actually works, I would try watching how Dr. Sy Garte (the one interviewed in this youtube video) explains it kzbin.info/www/bejne/fqiadXptgZt6qdk

[@pierrelabounty9917]

So God went bang! Lol..Hard to pick up all these pieces. It would take a God outside the universe to do that. Like a kid with a box of toys, marbles, candy; lifts it up a spills it all out. Mom, help me pick up.

[@leongkhengneoh6581]

The theory with everything came from god is no evidence of god.

[@cazfreedomnow486]

màde me think of Whitney Houston for some reason given a gift from God stolen by Satàn.

[@brentchristian9392]

All wars are religious my friends war happens when some one or a group of people want something from you witch is material religion or killing like hitter cause you think a certain group people is better then everyone else. Is a world belief. Anytime you fight argue or come to agreement base in your belief is a religion. If you belive end anything. That is a religion mu friends. May god be with us and may his will be done and not our own in Jesus name amen

[@ms5158]

Fascinating as Sy is so rational and pragmatic on science but becomes a believer based on emotional trigger. I was expecting more scientific approach to validate multiple options rather than a free parking lot of a church. I was expecting more agnosticism on expressing religious dogma. There is whole branch of archeological-biblical science that suggest we should be careful in interpretations.

[@Whatsisface4]

What counts are the reasons behind beliefs. He's just talking about his beliefs, not the reasons for his beliefs. This video's title says "Atheist Scientist" as if that means something, but he's not giving any scientific reason to think God exists. Saying this or that points to God isn't a scientific reason, it's just his personal view which doesn't tell us very much.

[@Cobiernest]

Actually, he was called to talk about his belief in God so yeah thats what he's going to talk about. The problem is his reasons didn't lead him to believe in God, he first accepted the belief and then learnt theodicies and apologetics to make it make sense to him.

[@Tinesthia]

@@Cobiernest Kind of seems like having an experience that makes me believe I was abducted by aliens and then trying to post-hoc find evidence of extraterrestrials and try and “harmonize” it with science to make myself not feel like a complete loon.

[@MrSeedi76]

​​@@Tinesthianope, that's not "kind of" what it is. Why do people always come up with these ridiculous comparisons? What's next? "Why don't you believe Spiderman was real?" 😂

[@MrSeedi76]

He gave quite a lot of scientific reasons for why to believe. Maybe people should listen more carefully.

[@Whatsisface4]

@@MrSeedi76 By all means, quote one reason he gave or give a time stamp.

[@Elizabeth-mp6tr]

Dr. Sy Garte! Pray....about the answers you're trying to find! I love your mind, and I do believe you will be special to God to answer these questions! We always should ask why! Sy.... Im Catholic and Jesus came for sinners. We are all sinners. ...I dont know any Catholic Church in Canada (my country) that would reject someone from being baptized and becoming Catholic! One just needs to go to confession and to become Catholic one needs to take an introductory course before becoming Catholic to teach people about the "sacraments" ie., the Eucharist, Confession, Adoration, The Rosary, etc. We believe "one" baptism wherever someone is baptized. I hope you dont turn away from Catholics. In the Catholic Church we believe that it is complete! I hope you look into it more. God Bless

[@marionchase-kleeves8311]

PLEASE INVESTIGATE ZERO POINT ENERGY! It has been proven that time is slowing down, as is the speed of light

[@harrydavis6117]

2,000 yesrs later and this is the evidence for jesus. Kinda sad. Just let it go fellas

[@thespiritofhegel3487]

I knew a Faith once. I wouldn't have minded integrating with her.

[@Trialbyfire9]

So atheists don’t believe in miracles ? So the Big Bang isn’t their resurrection story lol

[@AWalkOnDirt]

My deconstruction came in two phases and the anti-scientific wing of Christianity got the ball rolling in phase one. I am from the south and just yesterday a college educated Christian friend made a statement so brazenly, scientifically wrong that I felt a strong emotional repulsion. I was STUNNED and religion was the only reason for the willful ignorance. Without doubt though questioning I can corner this scientist in the video to renounce basic, foundational scientific theory rendering him willfully ignorant. Or at the very least move him to a point where god is rendered without influence. For example, I can ask the simple question, “Does prayer work and if so please provide evidence, such as a study, to its effectiveness.” Or, “Do humans and chimps share a common ancestor and if not why did god design reality suggesting we do. Does this make god deceitful?” Or “If we accept the foundation aspects of evolution and the evidence binding all living things together, why should we ignore this evidence with humans? How does religion acquire the power to remove evidence from consideration?”

[@WhileSilent]

Im not a scientist but i'll try to piece out your questions. But first of all, I want to invite you to follow Jesus Christ not religion. -- Question 1: “Does prayer work and if so please provide evidence, such as a study, to its effectiveness.” I think it depends on what kind of study your looking for. Do you want mental health/psychology or some kind of prayer-miracle correlation? For psychology, there's plenty of studies you can see online such as 70% of 2000 adults with mental illness indicate prayer was helpful (Whitley R. 2019). For prayer-miracle correlation, I believe this becomes harder to 'study' assuming your dealing with a individual God that can say, no, slow, grow or go to any human prayer. -- Question 2: “Do humans and chimps share a common ancestor and if not why did god design reality suggesting we do. Does this make god deceitful?” Firstly, so what if humans and chimps share a common ancestor? I don't think it has anything to do with God creating humans in God's image. Be it humans coming from some ancient monkey or somewhere else, it doesn't change the fact that "a God" revealed himself to us humans. Maybe God also revealed himself to other animals but idk, we can't speak their language. Secondly, why does God be deceitful? There's a big misconception that Christianity (outside of any religion/denomination) somehow contradicts evolution/science. No where in the bible does it talk about scientific/process explanations. The bible is silent in that field. Now, just cause the bible is silent on that topic, it doesn't mean a no or a yes. -- Question 3: “If we accept the foundation aspects of evolution and the evidence binding all living things together, why should we ignore this evidence with humans? How does religion acquire the power to remove evidence from consideration?” This is like Questions 2. It seems you've got a problem with evolution and religion no? If everything else fails, please stop looking at religion. Religion can be one messy and chaotic place. Again I say, the bible and science to do not contradict each other. When in doubt, go straight to the Christian source: the bible. -- Final comments Religion is such a stumbling block for many smart people. As we grow up and gain more knowledge and experience more things. We start to question religion and see many outliers and rightly so. But I hope, the folly of hypocrites doesn't deter you from the real truth of Jesus Christ, a (maybe manic) person who claimed to best describe 'God', a possible intelligent powerful being behind our universe.

[@br.m]

Christianity has an anti-scientific wing? Actual Christianity? Literal science? Will you share the statement your friend made? Your comment was really difficult to read. I have a headache today so that might be part of it but I read this like 5 times and can barely make sense of it. Does prayer work? No. Do humans and chimps share a common ancestor? No. God didn't do that. God can appear deceitful to the deceitful minded. Please rephrase your last question it is word salad. But let me make it clear there is no "we". You can't talk me in to a corner with "ifs" What do you consider "foundation aspects of evolution". How do you want me to understand your intended definition of "evolution"? What evidence binding every living thing together?? You mean the fact that we and the animals and life on earth are all knit together using the dust of the earth? And all are full of the breath of God on loan to us? What evidence are you ignoring or rather what evidence are you questioning if we should ignore? In your imagination, which religion to you inquire about its alleged method to acquire power to remove so-called "evidence". Consideration of what? What do you consider "evidence"? Sir I can't even make sense of my own words and felt like an imbecile while trying to respond to you. Good luck. I pray that you will reply to us soon.

[@plumbersteve]

I like your username. I've experienced a bit of a deconstruction myself, although I consider mine a "reconstruction". Your story, and that of many others in your position, makes it sound like you're deprogramming after a cult experience. If you see religious thought as cultish, I can fully understand why you would want to completely eradicate it from your mind. But what if there was something worth holding onto and you just incinerated it with all the garbage? I'll tell you this...the points you're making are indicative that your philosophical roots are deeply planted in the post-enlightenment milieu. There is a lot of good that came from the scientific revolution, but there is a major drawback as well. We need to consider this when discussing religion. The downside to post-enlightenment/post-reformation thought is its "destructive discretization". In fact, if we're talking about cultish brainwashing, we might have to consider that all of humanity has been brainwashing itself for the last 500 years or so... What I mean by destructive discretization is that we isolate phenomena and reduce them to their physical, material, empirical essence. But we lose something when we do this like when we turn a beautiful sunrise into a JPG. Areas of similar color are combined into one average color. The gradient between the deep blue behind you and the pink or orange on the horizon in front of you is chopped up into discrete bands of solid colors. The bit depth may mean that it's beyond the human ability to see the difference but if you look at the hex code, you'll see that there is discrete separation between 29E778 and 29E779. Yet, if we imagine even MORE bit depth, we can see that there is an infinity of color between those two. But that's not REALLY the point...ya know? The point is that since the scientific revolution, we've thought of God as a discrete value, like the "greenish" hex colors above. We imagine God as "somewhere" but that "somewhere" is somewhere we don't have access to. And the scientific minded folks, like yourself, point out, rightfully, that we shouldn't maybe "believe" in a God that can't be seen, studied, or located. It makes sense... But up until Bacon and Martin Luther and Gutenberg, NOBODY believed that God was "somewhere" or that, with the right instrumentation, we could see, study, or locate him. So then what is "God"? What is "religion"? God is that on which you place the highest value. Religion is the behaviors that you engage in in recognition of (your) God. There are no atheists. There are just people who don't understand that this is and has always been the case. Does that mean you should be catholic or presbyterian or jewish or muslim or hindu? Nah...but maybe if you fully understand this definition of God and you grok what it means to be a person of "faith" you may find that the teachings and traditions of these ancient religions aren't actually ridiculous. The bible isn't a science book. It's the history of humanity. We might have something to learn from those who lived before us...after all, they lived long enough to procreate and now we're here.

[@robmessenger6895]

I make Atheists think twice by asking the following question...."Surely you are not stupid enough to think that lifeless hot rocks & soil in the early days of Earth - somehow over 4 billion years evolved and learnt how to bleed, breath, reproduce, think, laugh and love ... by just pure chance?" This sort of confident, brash approach puts them in the back foot from the get go - and when I then ask whether humans invented maths or discovered it? ... I'm then ready to deliver the coup de gra re fine tuning of natural laws as revealed by Big Bang Science - and then straight to the science on display in the Shroud of Turin - and make the observation that all the science of the Shroud proves is the world's first "selfie" by Jesus - whose physical resurrection, in a flash of light is recorded on a pice of linen. What confuses people often is the resurrection of Lazarus v resurrection of Jesus. People forget that our resurrected bodies will be like Jesus's not Lazarus - big difference!

[@truthseeker7867]

That’s silly. “Surely you are not stupid enough to thing that lifeless hit rocks & soil in the early days of Earth - somehow over 4 billion years evolved and learnt how to bleed, breath, reproduce, think, laugh and love… by just pure chance?” I am an atheist. No, I do not think that. I do not think rocks and soil “evolved”. I don’t know how abiogenesis happened. Evolution is the best and most well evidenced explanation for the variety of life on Earth. Where do you go from there?

[@newglof9558]

​@truthseeker7867 the presumption by atheists is that "it could've happened by chance therefore it did"

[@truthseeker7867]

@@newglof9558 that’s not true. That’s not what I’m presuming at all. Maybe instead of asserting what I believe, just ask me questions.

[@newglof9558]

​@@truthseeker7867the issue is you lot generally aren't truthful with what you believe.

[@truthseeker7867]

@@newglof9558 and now you go straight to poisoning the well. I could make a similar assertion “the problem with you lot is you aren’t truthful and make baseless assertions”. That is equally as silly as what you wrote.

[@1_Storyteller]

“The more we learn about science, the more we see pointers to God” Galileo said the more he learned about the stars, the more he could read the mind of God. I don’t remember Galileo’s quote, this is a paraphrase.

[@therick363]

The more I learn about scientific the more I see natural causes and events and zero gods.

[@JimmieFulton]

The speed of light is is the speed of causality. It takes 8 minutes for light to travel from the sun to the earth. Where does god ( no specific one in particular) live? If he hears our thoughts and prayers (clearly he doesn’t considering all the mass shootings of children going on), does god hear them in the past, or even within our lifetimes? If god got too close to a black hole, would he get sucked in? Has he already gotten sucked in 2000 years ago, and that’s why we don’t hear from him anymore? There are billions of stars in our single galaxy, and way more planets. There are billions of galaxies. Why does he care about our little spec of dust called earth over the trillions and trillions of others in the vast universe? Why did he bother creating billions of galaxies just so we can be grown like chia pets on this single planet? Does he visit those other galaxies? How long would it take for him to visit all of them. Or even one of them for that matter? If/when you find “the way god built the universe” the need for a god goes up in a puff of smoke. Because you’ll find that the answers in complexity theory, assembly theory, natural selection, abiogenesis, etc, which show that we are merely the consequences of the expenditure of energy building up complexity over gargantuan periods of time. No magic needed.

[@nicolesousa1836]

Imagine the SIMS became sentient.. we created them and we could change their environment and intervene in various ways. How would they know we were their creator and explain to them where we exist?

[@Kay89487]

We cant explain those things obviously.🙄 If we do, everything would be easier and atheism wouldnt exist. We do not know how God works. You cant possibly think that everything you just wrote is some kind of argument for non God existence. Are you serious?

[@nicolesousa1836]

@@Kay89487 its an analogy to help understand the concept of a being that it outside of space/time/matter (our universe) that created the universe and intervenes at times. Since we created teh SIMS we are the creator of the SIMS. We can obviously intervene. How would the SIMS know they had a creator and that was outside their SimVerse? Another way to think of it is like a crime scene. How do you know if something exists naturally or if it was created by intelligence and how do you know that an outside actor was involved versus chance? These are the type of questions you have to ask to help answer the question, is there a God.

[@Cmkrs34]

A dream as evidence 😂

[@iamllusion4395]

It’s personal evidence, nothing wrong with that

[@sandorrabe5745]

This dear man who is being interviewed; please please go read the holy Bible more than any discussion of scientific "proof" please you need to read the Gospel of Jesus Christ our Lord and saviour. There is still much to explore in Scripture that will be of enormous assistance when you resume looking at scientific facts later on. But first please study the Word of God because he made you and wants to teach you but you must first understand His way of speaking and you learn that speach through reading the Scripture, since He is the Author. Read the Bible brother.

[@mato8494]

Read a science Book bro !

[@KenMasters.]

@@mato8494 We do believe in science. Just not your false agenda-driven science.

[@mato8494]

@@KenMasters. explain - false agenda driven science !

[@beanbrewer]

Which gospel exactly do you believe will be "of enormous assistance" when looking at scientific facts? I.e. the gospel of Peter, gospel of Thomas, etc

[@KenMasters.]

@@beanbrewer The Bible does have scientific knowledge and is very good of assistance. It's not the one that often changes and retcons its standpoints like how Atheists do non-stop.

[@truthseeker7867]

Has this guy read the Bible? “No human has ever been resurrected unless they were god incarnate”. The Bible has multiple resurrections. Also, there are many other religions that claim resurrections.

[@truthseeker7867]

Two off the top of my head are Mithras and Lazarus. One Christian claim one non Christian claim. Why does the “within 100 years” part matter?

[@truthseeker7867]

For some reason my comment is not showing up. I’ll leave it here: If you want to have a discussion with me, it will be a two way conversation. You asked a question, I answered. I asked a question, you did not acknowledge it and just asked another one. Answer my first question and I will happily answer your 2nd question.

[@catholicguy1073]

There’s a fundamental difference between Jesus who was resurrected vs those who were resuscitated. Jesus body was fundamentally different than Lazarus for example who after being brought back from the dead lived a natural life and died. Vs Jesus who could walk through walls and appear in different places far apart from one another. So it’s not the same

[@WhileSilent]

Yes... you would need to define 'ressurection'. And, there a meme about Jesus being a copy cat of Horus. But please note, a Meme

[@DarrenGedye]

​@@truthseeker7867are you referring to the Indian Mithras or the Roman one? The earliest references to the Roman one to date are from 80-100 CE, so it seems more likely that they were influenced by Christianity and not the other way round.

[@Chris-tv1ev]

The Moon is moving away from the earth 1 inch a year 1.5 billion years ago the moon would be touching the earth 😊

[@AWalkOnDirt]

Just got done with the video and basically it’s god of the gaps where the supernatural is assumed and inserted in the gaps. This creates a willful and purposeful ignorance in things like human evolution. He endlessly conflates the supernatural with the natural. Also miracles make a chaotic reality yet he argues for a perfectly orderly reality.

[@nicolesousa1836]

If you see a book does that denote intelligence? DNA is the largest word ever written. An instruction on how to create a life. Saying that an intelligent being created those instructions is not a gap anymore than saying that some person wrote a book and that the letters didn't come from random blots of ink

[@JeffDoerr]

He endlessly conflates the supernatural with the natural? That's what zealots are doing now. Trying to use science to bolster their argument for the existence of God. Science is real. Religion is man made fantasy and fairytales. Read the book the God delusion by Richard Dawkins. The truth will set you free. 😮

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Atheist scientist decides the barbaric desert god Yahweh exists, even though he cannot find him or demonstrate his existence to anyone else. This happens all the time when folks get old and scared of death. I might do it myself.

[@WhileSilent]

Well, that's quite a judgmental perspective. Who are any of us to definitively determine someone else's beliefs, especially when it's such a deeply personal matter? People's beliefs can evolve for various reasons. And "barbaric DeSerRT god"? what is even that lmao

[@Mariaf12]

Its not just old people that turn to God. Christianity in young people is on the rise, especially those that need help

[@Sam-fp8zm]

The bible is a science textbook.

[@bradleywoods1817]

This is coming from a fellow christian... and I'm asking this out of slight concern... but your not serious right? A book containing some scientific truth is not a science textbook. I would be happy to explain the difference between a religious text and scientific one. Do you believe that God's intention for the Bible was to provide us scientific truths? I'm being genuine not facetious

[@Sam-fp8zm]

i am serious @@bradleywoods1817

[@euginrobinson]

We will all be good if we keep religion where it belongs, i.e. churches, temples, mosques, synagogues and gurudwaras, and in one's own personal sphere, and leave science alone. When someone tries to sidle up to science to seek validation for their faith I am forced to think that such an attempt stems from an inherent insecurity with regard to their religion. One must understand that there cannot be any merger between faith and science. They are two different streams that will and must never meet. Are you trying to seek validation for your religion which is built up on an unchangeable set of tenets and an unchangeable core doctrine from science with its ever shifting positions on the way the universe and everything in it work? One more thing, the universe in NOT fine tuned for life, rather life finds itself on a precarious balance in an extremely hostile universe.

[@samanthaannfuchsgruber]

I would highly recommend looking into Ian Barbour. He did great work on building a bridge between religion and science. Thank you for your input, but I discovered him some time ago and I believe his beliefs are extremely fascinating. Pax Christi. ✨💭

[@marlonfrometabarreto888]

I disagree. Science can prove or disprove some religious beliefs. For example, that the earth is not 6000 years old.

[@themadpolymath3430]

To me it's less of keep religion out of science, and more seeing science proving things my religion speaks about as true. If scientific data beings to prove a religon right, than maybe that is the truth. Science also helps reveal things that the Scripturea talk about that we wouldn't know the impact of until you understand the science behind it. For example when it says Jesus had water and blood come out when he was stabbed In the heart on the cross, learning human anatomy we now understand he died of a "broken heart". The impact of that verse isn't know until we know about the world more. It is a revealing

[@euginrobinson]

@@marlonfrometabarreto888 he he... true.... science more often than not disprove views held by religion for centuries.

[@buckarooben7635]

@euginrobinson I would expand what you stated to philosophy in general. It’s not logically consistent to only claim those with religious philosophies shouldn’t do so (though I doubt that’s the position you hold, it’s more likely just poor wording.)

[@jenna2431]

Proving once again, that Christianity's shameless emotional manipulation can appeal to someone. Congrats.

[@kazumakiryu157]

How has this video done this?

[@MrSeedi76]

@jenna2431 Another proof that atheists seem to care an awful lot about this thing they don't believe in. Why even comment?

[@kazumakiryu157]

@@MrSeedi76 oh yeah! If they're worldview is truly that there is no ultimate meaning and the human race will eventually meet it's inevitable end, in the form of the death of the universe, then why care what some people believe in?

[@johnrivers5135]

A xazz. Xbq