God: Fact or Fiction? The Skeptic’s Journey Part 7

[@britanykunzler6547]

Beautiful testimony! God really does change lives.

[@ChristianityEngaged]

@Britany Kunzler, thank you and yes He does! God bless!

[@cr7069]

BMore evolution is not a fact! It is a theory. May you see the truth and stop being deceived.

[@cr7069]

BMore there is no arguing with your ignorance. Good day!

[@cr7069]

BMore I said your ignorance. Obviously you have a hard time reading as well. You have to do research and stop being so oblivious to your own ignorance. Again, good day. I don’t go back and forth with ignorance and name calling.

[@JB-zc5fg]

I loved what he said, "I believe it's a bigger leap of faith to place your confidence in a constantly changing and unproven scientific theories, than to believe in God."

[@jamesdean9315]

god is good god blessed

[@kandijgarcia4400]

Wonderful series 🙏❤️ thank you

[@ChristianityEngaged]

So glad you liked it! Blessings!

[@angelgracesarino4302]

Glory to God!

[@lorivattes2187]

He accepted got in his life. He said it himself.

[@Harrisonmego]

Keep doing what you're doing man! God bless!

[@ChristianityEngaged]

@Tombstone, thank you for the encouraging word. God bless!

[@Lilpoppa05]

I believe in god he literally existed forever he never been non existent

[@JamesRichardWiley]

I believe the flying spaghetti monster that hides in the clouds has never been nonexistent.

[@niathetortilla5899]

@@JamesRichardWiley Why do i see you replying to every comment?. Like stfu

[@Harrisonmego]

@@JamesRichardWiley wow, you're such a cool kid. Did you click on a religious video just to discredit it?

[@gracenelson4882]

Not sure why theists think the Universe has some obligation to make sense to them and think that what science cannot explain is proof of a god existing. "it's unknown therefore god", You study science enough to conclude there is a god and hold it to standards of evidence that you don't follow when it comes to proving your god exists.

[@gracenelson4882]

@Evan Sharpless "I don't think that just because science can't explain it is proof of God existing. I believe that there was no big bang. I believe there is a god. All the inspiring things from the bible are powerful." (And that''s fine just understand it's not enough to warrant belief in atheists) There is no real proof of "The Big Bang" but in the bible there is some proof (That's simply telling me you reject the substrate on which the Big Bang theory was formed. Theories could be wrong but not the observable facts they derive from but it does not matter if you believe it or not, or if it all was totally false, atheism is not contingent on scientific theories. I disagree that it is anything in the Bible that could serve as compelling evidence for the existence of god. The Bible merely talks about extraordinary evidence that strangely cannot be observed in modern times) Also one kid that talked to me said "I hate the people that say "Oh Jesus did it"." . That really made me mad because I just don't think anyone should trash on people's religons. ( I would not condone an atheist interrupting a conversation Christians/thesis are having towards what they believe with no reference being made to atheists but Christians must understand if you dangle your god or what you believe about a god in an atheist's face, by making reference to them in relation to what you believe and your god it then becomes subject to scrutiny or insults depending on the manner you do it. Many Christians and Muslims are upset with atheists as if atheists owe it to them to validate what they want to believe about their gods.)

[@gracenelson4882]

@Evan Sharpless It's all about respect and that goes both ways.

[@kycool8684]

That’s not what happened, he looked at the evidence, I assume you mean the God in the gaps fallacy, but that is when you don’t look at evidence and conclude that the lack of evidence means God. He looked at the evidence, and found that the more logical option is a god. For all things need a designer if they begin, and even most Atheistic scientists say that the universe began.

[@gracenelson4882]

@@kycool8684 That's still the god of the gaps fallacy. You are attempting to replace proof with logic. Simply because the earth had a beginning does not prove that a god was responsible for it's beginning and is merely conjecture.

[@kycool8684]

Grace Nelson no it’s not the god of the gaps fallacy by definition , and yes, logic is evidence, given as the laws of logic run the universe as well, so

[@isaacbaker7580]

How did god predict the future about pandemics and rumors of wars and riots

[@fallenkings4217]

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Sprit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know then because they are spiritual discerned.

[@evertonb3031]

Sir science let you down because you search for answers were there is non we know only what we should and religion is faith believe without proof .. believing in god doesn’t cure sickness but science does.

[@HAGGISWOOMAN]

This would be great if it wasn’t clear to me that this is the same guy from beginning to end with a great makeup artist who “ages” him every 15 years! I came here seeking answers and all I got was more deception

[@ChristianityEngaged]

Hello, this is the founder of Christianity Engaged, David Erhart. The Skeptic's Journey is a true story of a real-life person's conversion to Christianity over long period of time. this individual is highly unique, extremely intellectual, and data driven. I interviewed this person on multiple occasions and collaborated with them on all 7 scripts in this series. The central figure in this story wants to remain anonymous so we hired a paid actor and never tried to hide this fact. We did hire a film makeup artist to age him in the last episode. We thought it would be a nice touch. We never intended to deceive anyone and didn't expect any viewer to think we actually waited 15 years in between videos 6 and 7. God bless!

[@thisperson6655]

Who says Jesus is God? What about other atheists that believed a different religion?

[@ChristianityEngaged]

Jesus and the New Testament authors claim Jesus is God. Anyone (atheist or not) is free to believe what they want, but truth is truth. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that whoever believes in him will not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."

[@unwmk]

Amen my brother!

[@mtbee9641]

Interesting how you combine the word 'faith' as used in religion where it means to accept things without evidence and the word 'faith' meaning 'trust' that something is correct. By using two different meanings of the same word it confuses your argument. Or was that intentional? This person also does not appear to have actually studied Biological Science as it is overwhelming in favor of Biological Evolution and Abiogenesis. I would be interested to know what his alternative explanation of all the evidence used to support Evolution would be. I mean of course a scientific explanation derived from the evidence itself and not an assertion based on mythology. "constantly changing and unproven theories" This is a good example of misrepresenting the facts. Our understanding through Science is not 'constantly changing' it is modified as new information becomes available. it's how we got from wondering what the lights are in the sky to knowing that we orbit a sun that is part of entire galaxy. Theories of course are our best understanding of the world around us that fits all the evidence. It is the highest order of understanding in Science. 'Proof' is used for mathematics. It is of course equally possible to be a good person and have a happy family life, as I do, without believing in the supernatural. If that helps you be happy that's up to you, but it is not the only way to have a happy family life. Finally please don't equate believing in god as an alternative to Science. Many Scientist do belief in the supernatural and many do not. Any god's existence should not be dependent on what Science finds out about how the world is. If ancient texts are wrong about what they claim then that is a fact. Texts should be changed to reflect reality and old ideas not maintained if they are shown to be wrong.

[@ChristianityEngaged]

@Mtb9: Thank you for your comments and I apologize for the delay in replying. I reached out to the individual whom the Skeptic’s Journey story is based on and he DID study biology in depth. He does believe in the basic theory of Evolution (survival of the fittest, and how organisms and animals adapt to their environment), but he does not believe in Abiogenesis (evolution of living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances), or how the original theory has been expanded to try to claim the entire chain from the primordial soup to man. I would encourage you to check out studies on the number of biologists and other scientists that believe in God (most studies are over 50%). The link below is to a fairly recent survey that says 62% of Physicists, Chemists, and Biologists believe in God. The article says that the number for Biologists who believe in God is 59%. And that list includes some of the most famous biologists of all time (Gregor Mendel, Louis Pasteur, Joseph Lister, and many others). www.livescience.com/379-scientists-belief-god-varies-starkly-discipline.html So, even if you don’t believe the skeptic in our series, it is a fact that the majority of scientists believe in God, and do not see a contradiction in that. Science and God are not incompatible. IF you have time, check out our video “Does Christianity Oppose Science”. You might be amazed at the stats on Nobel prize winners in Science that believe in God! Finally, on an individual level, look up Francis Collins, the head of the Human Genome project, and one of the world’s leading authorities on Human DNA, and hear his thoughts on his belief in God. May God bless you in your Journey.

[@mtbee9641]

@Christianity Engaged Thanks for the reply. "how the original theory has been expanded to try to claim the entire chain from the primordial soup to man". That 'was' the original theory. Charles Darwin did not have a fraction of the information that supports Evolution that we have today, yet that is what the evidence still indicates. I would love to hear an alternative idea based on the evidence. "number of biologists and other scientists that believe in God". You are again doing what I remarked on in my comment. There are many religions that accept Evolution. Believing in an unknown 'god' does not have to mean you disagree with the biological Science. It's why people can still be scientists yet believe in the supernatural. As you say Francis Collins is a good example. The fact remains though that Abiogenesis and Evolution are the ONLY scientific theories of how life arose on Earth and developed. When anyone can present an alternative theory, developed from the evidence and not an ‘idea’ from ancient texts, then it will be considered. So far this hasn't happened. There have been various claims made but nothing that is supported by evidence. I still don't believe in any gods as there is zero evidence to indicate that any man-made god is real. In fact the world makes so much more sense if there is no god. Wishful thinking and hoping that a god exists, for whatever reason, may help people with their lives, but this doesn't make the claim true.

[@ChristianityEngaged]

@@mtbee9641 Thanks again for your thoughts. Here are a few things to consider: Charles Darwin’s book did not discuss the original beginnings of life on earth. He studied only complex creatures (tortoises, iguanas, finches, sea lions) and the least complex creatures he studied were barnacles, earthworms, and various plants. He never even hypothesized about the beginning of life on earth, only how these complex creatures adapt and change and possibly form new species. His theory has been exploded backward, by many other atheist scientists, into what it is today. Fyi - Many people don’t even know the full title of the book, (Richard Dawkins did not), which is: “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life”. He did not extend the theory beyond that in the title. Here is a great reference to the full book. www.gutenberg.org/files/1228/1228-h/1228-h.htm Also, you say that “Abiogenesis and Evolution are the only scientific explanations of how life arose on Earth”. Well, they are not the only theories. Just the only ones by the minority atheist scientists. As I said, more than 50% of all scientists (biologists included) believe in God. And an even larger percentage of Nobel prize winning scientists believe in God, and over 50% are Christian, meaning they believe in the Bible and in Jesus. They (and I) , believe in a God that created this world that we see and study, even with all of its confusing discoveries. And just to be clear, I do believe in the original theory of Evolution, as do many of these scientists, but do not believe in the expansion of that theory which attempts to explain the origin of life. Let’s stop arguing about Evolution for a moment. Can I ask you two things: One, can you give the following paragraph some thought, and two, would you be willing to take the complete journey of the skeptic, and look at the other side for a moment, with an open mind. 1) So, you believe in Abiogenesis, which is defined as the “the original creation of LIVING organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances”. Basically “something from nothing”. It’s very interesting to me that there is a major similarity between that theory of the origin of life, and the theories of the origin of the universe. The best atheist scientists (cosmologists, etc. ) and all of their predominant theories, share a basic theme. Either Matter or Time or both came into existence at some undefined point. Namely “something from nothing”. I would say that it takes as much or more faith to believe in “something from nothing” in both the origin of the universe and life itself, than it does to believe there is a God that created this from nothing. And I especially believe that because of the things discussed in the rest of The Skeptic’s Journey series. There is evidence to support the Bible’s claims. Two, I encourage you to study the other side, with an open mind. Can I ask you to watch the entire “skeptics journey” series, from 1 to 7, and listen to the other side of the debate? Investigate the Bible and the history of Jesus. You may want to reference A Case for Christ written by Lee Strobel. And then, do all the research you want. Again, please, with an open mind. Fyi - the research and documents behind those videos are either referenced in the video , or are available on the website, as a place to start. And most of all, watch number 7, the conclusion. At the very least, even if this never convinces you, you will see there is a lot of “evidence” for this side, and we can respect each other’s views. It has been fun communicating with you. I will pray for you on your Journey. God bless!

[@mtbee9641]

@@ChristianityEngaged First , I have the book so I know what it contains. True Darwin did not hypothesize on the beginnings of life. That is Abiogenesis. His theory did cover how life evolved over time from whatever it's earliest beginnings were but obviously he couldn't cover everything in the book just some of the evidence which indicates life evolves. Nobody has yet come up with a better explanation for the evidence. "Well, they are not the only theories." So what other theories do you propose that are supported by the evidence? "the only ones by the minority atheist scientist" No. Evolution is the core for all Biologists regardless of their beliefs in any gods. As I say there is no other theory. "I do believe in the original theory of Evolution". It basically hasn't changed. There are a few things Darwin got wrong but Science has since refined the theory with ample evidence to show it is true. "Basically “something from nothing”. That phrase is typically used (incorrectly) to refer to the big bang. Abiogenesis does not say something came from nothing. Scientists have already shown how RNA can form from the basic components. DNA is believed to have come from a modification of RNA, after all it contains the same components. All of life's functions are chemical reactions so it makes perfect sense that Life arose from chemistry. We don't have all the details yet but it is accepted as abiogenesis happened in some way. I have listened to many theists arguing for their imagined gods' existence. I have read many books but they all lack one fundamental thing - evidence for the extraordinary claims in them. I can accept a preacher existed, lived, learnt the religious history of the time and convinced followers that he was 'special'. He may even have believed he was the son of god. There have been many people who have been charismatic leaders who formed cults and been followed by others (eg Jonestown). With no confirmation of the extraordinary events that are claimed, the bible is just a book of claimed, unsupported stories. I think the same of the Quran. If you want I would be happy to discuss any of the biblical claims but I certainly don't know of any that are supported by evidence. I might look at the other videos in the series as I jumped in on this last one. I keep an open mind but there needs to be something to support any claims being made. Thanks.

[@mtbee9641]

@@ChristianityEngaged As you suggested I watched the previous episodes and left comments on a few. It is quite amazing that christians do not apply the same standard of evidence to the bible that they demand from Science. The entire series is a god of the gaps argument. The person who supposedly studied both sides did not do avery good job understanding the scientific explanations. Even if you accept that jesus existed and some of the things he did were true (none can be shown to be true today, you just have to believe the stories... or not), how does this support some imagined 'god'? God is simply a placeholder for 'I don't know'. Inserting a god explains absolutely nothing. What I saw in the first 6 parts was what I expected to see. There is never anything new.

[@DFrenky]

We don't understand how the entire universe works, therefore science is completely wrong about everything?

[@ChristianityEngaged]

Daniel Frenkel this was part 7 of a 7-part series based on a true testimony. If you watch videos 1 through 6 you will have a better understanding of the points summarized at the beginning of this video. He never claimed science is completely wrong about everything. He claimed to be disappointed with the lack of answers and in the end, decided to believe in God, a decision that changed his life. Take care.

[@Sam-vc8hy]

I won't pretend to know everything about God, but I think that science has definite truth, such as DNA, atoms, and some others, but not everything is correct, such as, if science is completely true, where did the big bang come from? What was before it, so fact, God is real.

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@Sam-vc8hy The Big Bang Theory came from a mathematical model. And no, gods are not real.

[@novumlumen1451]

@@theoskeptomai2535 any proof? Of course not. You have no reason to state this as a fact if you dont have evidence to back it up

[@theoskeptomai2535]

@@novumlumen1451 You theists are a joke. You never provide evidence for your claims, yet request that atheists do so. How pathetic. And I like how you have already proclaimed "Of course not" BEFORE I have a chance to respond. Well I WILL provide evidence that demonstrates BBT is a mathematic model, that god(s) are not real, and that you are an idiot. First, the Big Bang Theory is a mathematical model developed from two known and established facts. The first fact is 1964 Bell Lab recording of Cosmic Microwave Background that reveals an evenly spread 'residue' of radiation throughout our universe caused by entropic factors congruent to and explained by Newton's Second Law of Thermodynamics. This entropy proves that the universe had a greater singularity and complexity in its past than it has presently. The second fact is Huble's 1925 discovery of red shift dopler effect occurring when observing other galaxies. This red shift proves that our universe is currently expanding and at an accelerated rate. Additionally, the farther away galactic bodies are from us (or any point of reference) the faster the rate of acceleration of this expansion (Hubble's Law) These two facts are *_direct_* evidence that the universe is 1) presently expanding at an accelerated rate, and 2) that the universe had more singularity (and thus, less differentiabililty) in the past. Then there is the *_implied or theoretical_* evidence based on these two discoveries and first proposed by Georges Lemaitre in 1927. He theorized that if a universe were currently expanding it could be reasoned that by extrapolating backward ('rewinding the cosmic clock') using established laws of physics, you could predict the time when the universe came to a singularity. The mathematical model states, logically, that if the universe is current expanding now that it must have been more compact the further you go back in time. At some point the classic Newtonian laws of physics breaks down at an unobserved point that is assumed to be a singularity of unfathomably dense energy. It is important to understand that this is a mathematically inferred hypothesis and *_not_* an actual observation. There is *_no demonstrable evidence_* that the universe began at this point. Nor does this Theory claim such. Only that a unfathomably rapid expansion is theorized to have occurred at this point known as the inflationary epoch. Nor is there any evidence that our universe was created from nothing. At the moment of rapid inflation, there was still the same amount of energy we have today. There just was no matter. Alan Guth, a theoretic physicist and cosmologist and one of the pioneers of cosmic inflation, postulates there were likely equal amounts of energy and dark energy for some zero effects but the same potential energy none the less. "While we can understand how the universe we see came to be, it's possible that the Big Bang was not the first inflationary period the universe experienced. I have recently come in favor to believe we live in a cosmos that goes through regular cycles of inflation and deflation, and that we just happen to be living in one of these phases." Alan Guth, PhD, Professor Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, "Extremely Big Eyes on the Early Universe", Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics Symposium, 25 Mar 2019, Kashiwa, Japan. There is no reasonable justification to claim the universe began at the Big Bang, or that it was created by an unsubstiated mythological deity. Second, all real phenomena occupy a specific and particular space at any given point in time. The Abrahamic god is characterized as being omnipresent, and therefore NOT limited to a particular space at any particular point in time. Third, an idiot is defined as an utter foolish or senseless person; lacking in comprehension. The fact that you could not comprehend the evidence substantiating my first two claims, provides evidence demonstrating my third claim.

[@guy1235575]

And what makes your god the right one? Let me guess it’s because the Bible says he’s the right one..... guess what every other religious book says, that their religion is right. Just because you can’t disprove something doesn’t make it true.

[@ChristianityEngaged]

@TimTim Hawthorne, we agree on your last statement. Our inability to scientifically prove something doesn't make it true or false, it just makes if unproven. However, we believe there is reasonable evidence for God's existence and will cover this in future videos. Your first question is quite deep but I would encourage you to look into the life, claims, miracles, impact, death, resurrection, and followers of Jesus. He is the difference. You can compare him to any other religious leader or author and no one else even comes close. Take care.

[@louisezammiello]

What a powerful testimony of how Jesus can transform your life! Thank you for sharing your story.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

If Jesus was in charge there would be no need for transformation. Everything would be perfect because Jesus is perfect and all powerful.

[@NewCreationInChrist896]

I seen a few atheist on KZbin they always appear to be very intelligent so much so they are unable to humble themselves to understand and accept what faith is. They never appear to have read the Bible and what they have read they appear as if they’re a defending non-belief. Believing in Christ is humbling yourself like a child is to his or her father, under not equal or above. Romans 10:17; 2Corinthians 4:4

[@ChristianityEngaged]

@Lisa Love Ministries, great verses! Thank you for the comment and God bless!

[@abe5062]

Great video! It is very inspiring. There is nothing more important than the search for truth. God bless your ministry! Thanks for sharing this amazing journey.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Believers become non believers. Non believers become believers. If any of these gods ever existed as people like to claim there would be no need for religion