Matt Dillahunty Vs Cliffe DEBATE Does the Bible Contradict Science?

#dillahunty #debate #genesis #christianity #science

[jasoncook]

The more science advances, the more the bible becomes less literal to Christians. LOL.

[keibro]

Cliffe is absolutely right. Genesis doesn’t contradict science because it’s purely mythological.

[shimon]

Two of every living thing in a wooden boat surviving harmoniously 😂😂😂

[nelsondashner]

Chapter 1 of Genesis absolutely does make claims about the order in which the universe came into being. That order does not match the order in which things actually came in being according to science. Therefore, chapter 1 of Genesis contradicts the findings of science. In this debate, Matt kept asking Cliff if the order of events was correct in Genesis. It doesn't matter that Cliff doesn't want to call that order "scientific". The Bible presents an order and that order is either right or wrong. That order either matches the scientific order or it doesn't. As usual, Cliff simply will not answer the question.

[elbestia]

that's actually correct: in Genesis there is no science and that's precisely what I tell people who claims that the Bible has science in it...

[prabhakaranjeyamohan]

The mental gymnastics is too strong here

[KasperKatje]

Sorry Cliffe, but no biological claims?

Doesn't Genesis claim god created cattle and wild animals separately? So no domestication by humans?

That contradicts biology.

[bigdomkook]

If genesis is supposed to be an account of the beginning of everything, it very much has scientific claims that contradict what we actually know.

[PannaCotta]

Yeah sure, when i read that people could live 900 years i can't say "it contraddict biology" cuz apparently biology is not a branch of science. Bro has tons of degrees in yappology

[iheardthatb]

Purely from a logical standpoint the order can't be correct. "Let there be light..." is the first thing created out of the void and then, later, the sun and stars. So, uh, yeah that doesn't work.

[Jason-ruvy]

Genesis attempts to comment on the natural world, which is within the purview of science.

One of Cliffes dumbest arguments all time right here.

[MrTrees]

Just destroys his whole argument with one question.

[bthearen]

Fine... now tell that to the rest of your fellow Christians. Then after you guys get this "which interpretation is right" settled, get back to us.

[jasi]

And the atheists are the angry ones. Lol

[ImTotallyNewWave]

People being alive for 800 years doesn't contradict science then?

[biglewthebigjew]

Genesis 2:5 says "Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up,  for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, " but in Genesis 1 we see that plants were created before man. So from this we can infer that the order of creation is not necessarily the order of occurrence. It is important to remember that (according to the Bible) God created all the plants but they didn't show up until the soil had been watered. Therefore, the universe reacts in the most logical way to God's command whatever that may be

[OrtusMallum]

Bro, Cliff, a talking
C'mon now....

[marcolorenti]

Ah, the good old "tHAt's a wROng intERprETatioN!" BS argument; they are more desperate each passing year...

[Khamzat-upzj]

Fact is it is outside of science scope to try describe the creation of universe. The best you can do is creating multiple theories that you will never be able to proof, and just label "science" on it to make you look smart and religious people stupid.

[kamiruken]

Lol, forget about medival view of the sky and earth taken from OT XDDDD