Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@CrossExamined says : Listen to the full podcast here: https://crossexamined.org/9-things-that-science-will-never-explain/>> <<@Jazzfestn says : Actually there are TEN things! #10. What makes a WOMAN tick?! Bwa ha ha!>> <<@redfaux74 says : I definitely disagree. If God did not make everything in 6 days then the rest of the Bible is definitely in question. Jesus said in Matt 19 "He made them male and female IN THE BEGINNING". If Jesus was the Creator then He would know if it was 10 billion years later, after the beginning, or IN THE BEGINNING. If there was death before sin then the entire New Testament is a lie and we don't need a Savior. Jesus said "I am the Way, the TRUTH and the Life." Truth matters. Accepting a little atheist false science into our Bibles adds a lot of poison to what Jesus said. Period. Reject atheist false science totally. They need to have evidence for their claims or it is not science. Give them no credence without testable facts. No guesses permitted or it is not science.>> <<@fidenful says : The Bible was written by bronze age people, all they had was myth, fiction and supertition. Science tell us what we need to know about anything, thousands of years in the future science and technology will be like magic, to us those beings will look like Gods, they will be our evolved descendants.>> <<@timothyvenable3336 says : Sooo I probably missed something but that wasn’t 9 things lol>> <<@farquadminiman5685 says : Science literally is what it is because Christians beloved nature would follow God's laws.>> <<@paulowens8972 says : Jesus believed the first chapters of Genesis literally!>> <<@memastarful says : The soul has been given ears to hear what the mind can not understand>> <<@mountbrocken says : What are the 9 things?>> <<@Glorious716 says : ✝️❤️‍🔥🙏🏽>> <<@Matthew-rl3zf says : Question for SCOTT JENKINS (please do not reply if you are not Scott Jenkins): Before I give arguments against the validity of the Bible, I just want to hear some of your beliefs first. First, do you accept any of the presently accepted scientific models of the start of the universe, the formation of the solar system, or the evolution of life? Second, how old do you think the Earth and the Universe are? Third, do you believe that Genesis 1-11 is all historical, or do you believe some parts are metaphorical? Fourth, do you believe that the flood in Genesis was world wide, or just local?>> <<@Imaginathor-1k0 says : Can u explain what is spirit made up of? I've asked this so many times but still no amswer>> <<@elowin1691 says : uhhh, where are these 9 questions>> <<@the_homie_alfred says : 0:42 “they were in a pre-scientific era” no they weren’t. Today’s science is way more advanced, sure. Knowledge abounds. They were, however, plenty capable of using their brain. 1:49 “re-evaluate how they interpret the beginning chapter of Genesis” All it takes is a child to be able to comprehend that day 1 means day 1, day 2 means day 2, etc.>> <<@theoskeptomai2535 says : If _anyone_ has any questions concerning the position of atheism or would like to understand why a former evangelical Christian came to adopt such a position, I will gladly answer any questions you may have. Peace.>> <<@gerryquinn5578 says : Science doesn't tell us anything. Scientists do. History doesn't tell us anything, historians do.>> <<@b.g.3073 says : Please stop bashing science. Science is God's greatest gift to humanity for knowledge, and the Bible and Christianity in general are in perfect harmony with science. Videos and especially titles like these, your negative views in respect to evolution, etc. are what pushes academics away from the Faith.>> <<@briendoyle4680 says : @ee kay no gods (yours or anyones) will be proven here... rants are nonsense...>> <<@eekay5710 says : 'Meaningless! Meaningless! says the Teacher. Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless! Eccl 1:2>> <<@Science10s says : Because science explains it doesn't mean God's hand isn't still in it.>> <<@michaelkline6237 says : If the Bible and scientists disagree on anything, reinterpreting the clear teaching of Scripture should NEVER be an option. Instead we should look at real science and interpret it from a Scriptural perspective. I think you'll find it turns out to make more sense and to actually be right 10 times out of 10. Scientists have to change their models every time new information comes in, which happens about every 10 minutes. But the Bible has remained unchanged for centuries and still has never been proven wrong.>> <<@trevorkuun199 says : Is the person who said something about God been invisible, blind? If not then what about everything we can see? If so then what about all our other senses, including common?>> <<@Joeymuggz says : Isn’t essential for us to believe adam truly walked this earth for Roman’s 5 to be clearly understood?>> <<@chainsawsurgeon6108 says : And science still can't explain gravity,>> <<@proudpapaproductions-PapaBear says : Less the world forget - we have ocean navigation because of biblical study….. Matthew Fontaine Maury: "Pathfinder Of Sea" Psalms 8>> <<@tonyornelas9374 says : A lot of the science comes from the freemasons and they are Satanist at the high levels>> <<@Opinions567 says : There was science even back then and maths etc. Science is human understanding, for long humans have been trying to explain life>> <<@LeonardoTorresMusic says : So... you need to know science in order to know that the dead don't rise? It's not enough to uave observed this for thousands of years before Christ? Wouldn't it make sense that one could create a story about a resurrection to separate Jesus from other people? Is this supposed to convince Christians or Non-Christians?>> <<@wardog6488 says : So Christians believe what king James who btw was Gay & put together the book (The King James Bible) gave it to the unenlightened masses & they believe with out science & facts something they cant prove. Prove this deity you worship & you will see its not there. Just ask all those children raped & molested by the Catholics, where was god why didnt he protect them, Where was this deity after Americans aborted 60 million babies. The fact is religion is the great deception created by man that Christians worship.>> <<@mitchellcollins7370 says : Why would “science” being at odds with the Bible cause people to re-evaluate how they interpret the beginning chapters of Genesis?>> <<@SupremeSquiggly says : 9 things science will never explain but we can explain it if you believe in magic.>> <<@samppakoivula9977 says : This was clickbait video, how boring...>> <<@VirtualBilly says : In other words, “9 Things Science Never Needed to Explain” Goddamn fanatical wingnut.>> <<@TatteredBiblePodcast says : If science and the Bible contradict I'll pick the Bible every time no contest.>> <<@GhostBearCommander says : The issue with how folks (either religious or not) view Science today is that they see it as an immovable absolute standard. In many ways, among the Secular populace, it has become very much a kind of religion. The problem with that definition, however, is that it defeats the whole purpose of Science in the first place. Remember, Science is based upon observation, hypothesis, repeated experimentation with both positive and negative control groups on the side, and conclusions drawn based upon the repeated success or failure of these experiments. All of this must be backed up with demonstrable qualitative and mathematically quantitative evidence both observable and repeatable. This set of standards allows for further observation and experimentation to make room for new developments, further questions, and greater changes in progress. Science isn't static. It moves as our understanding does. The Secular thinkers of the world have taken to neutering it by turning it into an unquestionable dogma to which only they sympathize. Science was never meant to be turned into a replacement religion by the irreligious in an effort to answer the philosophical questions of life. Unfortunately, this has become the norm. The result of this irony is that the Secular man undermines the very standard he swears by. The world of Science has suffered greatly since the Atheistic community turned it into an elitist cult.>> <<@zeddicuszorrander3599 says : This argument sets him down a dangerous path: "I can't scientifically explain X. Therefore, God is interacting/communicating with me." 1. How does he know the devil didn't perform the miracle to trick him like so many times in the Old Testament. 2. Suppose he lives his life fueled by a miracle he thinks is from God. But it turns out the some years before his death, a scientific explanation is discovered. 3. If God wanted to communicate/interact with us, why wouldn't he do so clearly instead of Turek's way of "I can't explain it. Therefore, it's God. Make a life decision based around this miracle.">> <<@TheoHawk316 says : Science cannot explain theological and philosophical issues, nor can it find the answers to questions from those two things.>> <<@tonymaurice4157 says : Abiogenesis is the biggest embarrassment failure!>> <<@vuyosidinile8493 says : Did I miss the 9 things?>> <<@rockyp32 says : Sir i need help.... How do i share the gospel? doesnt it say in the bibel dont use earthly wisdom to prove the bible??? IT saays use the bible to prove its true... How can i do that?>> <<@williamhutcheson6511 says : I suppose one could be an atheist and believe the Resurrection. Just think of it non judgmentally as just another event in a universe consisting of quirky quarky events of no particular significance. That would avoid considering a common recurring theme in history and autobiography i.e. sudden change followed by slow growth. Happened with the Big Bang when the universe entered existence, when sperm enters egg, when Deity entered history, personal and planetary. My problem with atheism is that I cannot get my thinking mechanized enough and mathematized enough to be atheotized enough.>> <<@invincibleheart says : Amen!>> <<@100MWSmile says : 0:07 - 0:19 *How the world normally operates by natural law doesn't contradict the Bible. In fact, the Bible presupposes the world operates regularly by natural laws.* This is false. Nowhere in the Bible is it ever stated that the world operates regularly under some set of natural laws. To the contrary, in the alleged events described in the Bible, violation of natural laws are portrayed frequently, to the extent that one may argue that, from a biblical standpoint, such violations actually are not violations of any pre-established regular natural behaviors, but rather, the violations themselves are what is the norm. 0:19 - 0:42 *Otherwise, the people in the Bible would not claim that a resurrection was a miracle, a divine sign from God. They knew that people don't rise from the dead naturally. They knew that the regular order of things was that, when they die, they wouldn't rise from the dead. They knew that natural laws existed.* Did they? Because if I recall, the Bible has multiple resurrection stories including many individuals aside from Jesus. While resurrections were certainly uncommon, they also would not have been unheard of. Also, while I am certain that, if we take the text for granted, the people in these stories did consider resurrections to be a kind of miracle, I would advise to exercise caution here, because I am certain that their consideration of what a miracle is would have been very different of our considerations today. The English word "miracle" was borrowed from Old French, it having evolved from the Latin "miraculum," which evolved from the Proto-Italic "*smeiros," which evolved from Proto-Indo-European "*snei*," and in every iteration, the word has simply meant "wonderful, marvelous, awe-inspiring." So even the English word "miracle" was not always a description of the suspension of natural laws. Whatever the Hebrew/Ancient Greek equivalent was, it would have had an equally simpler and more innocent connotation, than what Frank is ascribing here. However, there is also the issue that there is no reason to take the biblical text for granted, undermining the entirety of the argument regardless. 0:52 - 0:59 *And so, when they saw something that was an exception to that, they said "Ah, this is a divine sign from God."* At no point in the stories are they ever shown providing a reason for why they think the happenings are divine signs from God. Given that many alleged "divine signs of God" were actually consequences of naturalistic phenomena that most Christians today would agree is a naturalistic phenomena, it demonstrates that they definitely were not calling things "miracles" on the basis of how natural they are. 1:04 - 1:18 *So there are some interpretations of scientific data about historical questions that are at odds with some biblical interpretations of those historical questions; for example, the origin of the universe, the origin of life, the origin of new life forms.* This is dishonest and misleading. While the scientific method does technically contain a concept of "data interpretation," it is nothing like what Frank is presenting it to be here, and certainly is not at all comparable to interpretation of texts as found in literature. These are incompatible uses of the word "interpretation," and Frank is equivocating between the two. Also, while we are at it, I should point out that there exists exactly no data on the origin of the universe, none. The origin of the universe is not something scientists can even hope to study currently, due to the fact that in order to be able to study it, a unification of quantum field theory and the general theory of relativity is necessary. I assume Frank is referring to the Big Bang theory here, but while the Big Bang theory does describe a very old universe that changed from state A to a very different state B, changes which could put the data at odds with the Bible, the theory never actually concerns itself with whether state A is the earliest state of the universe or not. We have no data, because it is not currently possible to study the origins of state A: we not only lack the technology for observation, we also lack the theoretical framework to formulate adequate hypotheses. 1:37 - 1:44 *And even if they are at odds, that doesn't necessarily mean that God doesn't exist, or that Jesus didn't rise from the dead.* Of course not, because the problem of the resurrection of Jesus is a completely separate problem of that of the origin story of the universe. No non-Christian is so unreasonable as to think that disproving the book of Genesis as unscientific implies Jesus did not resurrect from the dead. These are different claims that must be scrutinized and evaluated separately, as any two pair of claims must be. 1:44 - 2:02 *It might cause some people to re-evaluate how they interpret the beginning chapters of Genesis, but it wouldn't change whether or not God exists, or whether or not Jesus rose from the dead, the two essential truths of Christianity; or the two things that need to be true, I should say, for Christianity to be true.* The existence of God, and the resurrection of Jesus, are two claims that need to be proven before Christianity can be considered to be true, but they actually are not the only claims that need to be proven true. For example, it could be true that God exists, but is indifferent to our existence, with Christian theology being wrong about God, and that Jesus was resurrected by extraterrestrial advanced technology. So it is not sufficient to prove God exists and that Jesus resurrected: the Christian must also prove that the resurrection was performed directly by God. The Christian must also prove a few other things: among them, that the resurrection of Jesus is a fulfilment of Messianic prophecy, just for example.>> <<@sukruoosten says : science books will come en go laws will change ore be replaced GODS WORDS never change en are only ABSOLUTE the earth will burn up en yet HIS WILL/WORDS shall stand firm>> <<@supplantermusic9413 says : Jesus is Lord>> <<@Beyondrecognition0214 says : Just bought your book tactics, so far I finished chapter 1 but it's such a good read excited to read more>> <<@briendoyle4680 says : Amazing that these people are so proud to advertise their ignorance and lack of education, while still believing in impossible and illogical gods that they cannot explain or prove... The sciences are all peer-reviewed by objective experts in those same fields... --- The Bible is One, Single, Solitary book - and that is the total extent of your evidence to prove your god??? The bible book - a compendium of folk tales and fables!>> <<@briendoyle4680 says : Report religious sites OFTEN: Spam or misleading Misleading text -- The world must rid itself of stone-aged lies! For false information For Fake News For Child Abuse For Elderly Abuse Report ALL religious sites - Often!>> <<@dragonsigner says : The definition of science. Basically is HUMAN UNDERSTANDING. Understanding how something works..etc . that is nothing more and nothing less. And the Bible is clear on "lean not on your own understanding but in all your ways acknowledge God.">> <<@atheist3765 says : Who says? Prove that!>>