May God Bless this detective turned christian apologist. 🙏
@cthoadmin7458 Says:
But is there any reason to think the supernatural exists or ever could exist?
@ninajones1175 Says:
Due to some dabbling as a preteen, I was shown fairly quickly that there is a dark side. It took years to rid my life of it. I have to be careful not to think it’s demonic when it’s not.
The supernatural is very real.
@crz2366 Says:
That's it. They already start leaving any supernatural possibility or related thing, either before or after looking for other explanations. Maybe that's why they need to create absurd hypotheses, for example when it comes to Jesus (like Joseph of Arimathea moving Jesus' body, collective hallucination, Jesus fainting for 3 days, etc).
In the end, everyone has starting points, assumptions from which they start, compromises they need to make. As much as they may not admit it, atheists are no exception, they have a bias, and this is clear to me.
@JiraiyaSama86 Says:
This reminded me of why Ken Ham mentions that he always checks where they're starting from first. He can't really share until he knows where they are starting from.
@justingary5322 Says:
AMEN 🙏👊❤️
@Hamman1701 Says:
Does the supernatural come from nothing?
@talonyoung6160 Says:
There many different religions and even nonreligious individuals who have either natural extrasensory skills that this guy refers to as "supernatural", or through relaxation meditation training they develop what are obviously potential skills of a 6th sense that can be developed just like any skill potential where you diligently practice it.
But many religions, including Charismatic Christians say only THEY have the ONE TRUE God working through them. Their BIAS always says others with same supernatural skills are evil, demonic.
@yokhojota6792 Says:
Because if you don't, you allow a lot of stupid things be the explanation.
@charvaka9526 Says:
It is only uh "natural" to reject the supernatural at the outset given the thousands of years and millions of failures of the superN thesis.
@Skarlet-ju8sr Says:
I wish you had merch so I can walk around with patches or shirts with the evidence emblazoned all over or in select garments like should patches.
@JesusSavesJohn3verse16 Says:
That’s why the majority of scientific community will not accept The Bible, no matter how much empirical evidence (Historical, archaeological, biological, astronomical or otherwise)
Because it has supernatural elements from God
If the scientific method that’s applied, only uses natural processes, it is limited with it’s scope of knowledge
I believe that’s why the scientific community STILL has no answer for the origin + cause of the universe
Only guesses, which isn’t scientific
Everything has to have an origin point, and cause
So science itself actually confirms we need something, or someone, to exist outside of creation (Laws of nature) not bound by them, to bring the first atom into existence (which can’t create itself, according to science)
@lincwayne3435 Says:
The very universe is supernatural.
It came into being, therefore - you cannot apply any laws of physics / gravity / etc. to it's origin, because they only exist once there is a universe.
@jdotoz Says:
It's perfectly fair to start with a bias toward a natural explanation. The natural is normal in our experience and we should seek to rule out known natural explanations first. Where the modern skeptic goes wrong is in ruling out the paranormal and/or supernatural from the very beginning, even after exhausting all plausible natural causes.
@harveygitarista1600 Says:
Naturalism is not a middle ground for a skeptic.
@Gdroku Says:
That which is supernatural is only the natural not yet revealed or understood.
@bobtwista Says:
Unpopular opinion, but one I believe to be correct: “Science” that doesn’t rely on the scientific method is pseudoscience
LATEST COMMENTS