Germany was not one of the most "civilized". It was Europe at that time. The phrase 'civilized' is Darwinian in origin. There are people from all parts of the world who are highly moral, not just so-called advanced nations. - " Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord" Psalm 33:12.....

Look up Magnus Hirschfeld and tell me how civilized Berlin was. Erwin Gohrbandt, Ludwig Levy-Lenz, The research they did was before Hitler took over in the 1930's. What you'll find is not for the faint of heart. Or just look up the Herschfeld Institute. Sexual reasignment surgery.

Good men will do good things. Evil men will do evil things. But to get a good man to do evil things requires religion.

​@@jonathanrussell1140 you don't need a "religion" to do evil. Human beings are inherently evil. They just need an excuse for it. Whatever scapegoat they choose, it is still that person committing the evil act. One day Jesus will come back and put an end to all of this mess. We can be sure of that. God bless 🙏🙏🙏✝️🕊️

@@jonathanrussell1140 what he said

​@@newcreationinchrist1423​ I prefer to see the good in people. I give them the benefit of the doubt. We are a social animal. We are capable of both good and evil. Our history reveals this. It depends which side we choose to feed. You don't need a religion to do good. After his "resurrection", didn't Jesus say he would be back within the lifetime of some of his disciples? In the immortal words of David Byrne... I'm still waiting... I'm still waiting... Empty words.

​@@Romans1soldier...was vacuous.

Only the real God, i.e., the Father of God the Son, Jesus Christ.

Hitler thought so too. That’s why he had Darwin’s book banned

👍🏻

Thanks I'll check that out

🎯

​@loricalass4068 *As crazy as this sounds, it's absolutely true and I have proof, all history books, encyclopedias, dictionaries, concordances and bibles have been magically changed and so have all of the ancient manuscripts that they were written from.*

@@residuejunkie4321 I’m sorry, but I don’t think your responses are based on real research with things like archaeology and history. I only have time to deal with your belief that the Bible has been magically changed. In 1947 in the desert in the cliffs near the Dead Sea 2,000 year old ancient scrolls were found in pottery jars. These have since been called the dead sea scrolls, and they turned out to contain the entire book of Isaiah from the Bible, and at least a fragment or much more from every other book in the old Testament. They have been analyzed innumerable times by numerable people with various religions or no religion. Nobody is saying they’re fake. And what do they show? That the Bible has not been changed as you and the Muslims are claiming. The scrolls were found to match almost perfectly with what was being read in synagogues and churches at that time. Contrary to what some believe, the Bible has not been translated from one translation to another translation to another translation. If a language other than Hebrew or Greek is being used, they go to the originals. For example, someone who has trying to translate the Bible in French is not going to go to a Spanish Bible to get his data. He’s going to go to the original documents. Which have been preserved in many ways. Not just in the dead sea scrolls. History and archaeology very strongly support the Bible. The more time goes by, the more support it has. For example, just one of many, people used to say that there was no such person asPontius Pilate. Then they found his actual name with his actual title and the actual place where the Bible says he should be. Things like that happen all the time. Yes, translations can make some errors. But we have the original documents to go back to! And not just for the old testament. Learn to dig deep and research. You will be amazed at what you find if you do so. Most of all, pray to the Lord for light. He wants you to be blessed by what is in the Bible. Oh, here is one more truth that shows the Bible is not just made up. But this post is so long that I will put it in a P.S.

@@residuejunkie4321 P.S. The shroud of Turin, a linen burial shroud having the faint image of a crucified man on it, is the most scientifically studied artifact on the planet. It has been analyzed for hundreds of thousands of hours by scientists in various disciplines who have been published in very reputable peer-reviewed scientific journals. You may have heard that the Shroud was proven to be a medieval forgery based on some carbon 14 testing in the 1980s. But in the video called Jesus and the Shroud of Turin on the Jesus Documentary channel, you can see the very inventor of carbon 14 dating saying that the sample they took for testing was invalid due to contamination. In addition, the lab testing only involved one sample and accurate DNA testing requires 7. Also that one sample came from an edge on the cloth which was frequently handled down through time. As I said, it is the most scientifically studied artifact on the entire planet. (And by the way, all over the net you can see people saying that the shroud was created by Leonardo da Vinci. Leonardo da Vinci wasn’t born until 100 years after the shroud was on display!) Historians agree that the details of the Shroud match exactly what the New Testament describes in terms of the crucifixion and burial, and practices of the Jews at that time. Botanists state that pollen samples found on the Shroud are indigenous to Jerusalem and certainly not the western world. Ditto particles of marble found on the feet area of the man on the shroud which are no way found in Europe, but come from sites in Jerusalem. The blood on it is real blood and hematologists state that the reason the blood is red is because it has so much bilirubin in it. Bilirubin is what pours into the blood under cases of extreme torture. There is no paint or other medium found on the Shroud which could account for the presence of its image. Yet somehow a medieval artist was supposedly able to produce it without paint or any other known medium? There is so much that can be said about the Shroud, and if you really want to honestly look at it I suggest the vid mentioned above, plus one by Brian Cray. But think of this. We are being told that a medieval forger somehow painted a picture that is extremely faint, but that with the invention of modern day photography revealed that the image on the Shroud is a negative and that the reverse, positive, image shows extremely amazing details which no medieval forger would’ve even known about. Anyone can take a picture of anything from a piece of linen, or anywhere else, and then look at the negative and see if you get the same types of results as can be seen with the photographic positive and negative images of the Shroud of Turin. When have we ever seen the negative of a photograph producing far, far more exquisite details than the original picture itself? With modern technology we have found that the shroud has x-ray qualities showing dentition and bones. How is a Medieval forger going to be able to include that? No one is worshiping the shroud. But it is mentioned in the book of John. If the Lord left it for us, and I certainly believe that he did, then while it may not be necessary at all for faith - though it has been an instrument leading to faith for some - we all can use extra strengthening of our understanding of Scriptures such as this provides.

​@@residuejunkie4321History is written by accumulation of evidences and the majority of manuscripts. We don't judge history by the exception but by the rule. Meaning if there will always be inaccuracies but that does not mean we throw out the majority of truth. We formulate a view from manuscripts, letters, documents, ancient scrolls and papyrus, Archaeology, authors, scribes, writers etc etc. Just like using the Scientific Method: data compilation to prove a hypothesis.

agreed. They are only equal in value to God. Equality beyond that doesn't exist.

yea, intelligence is very clearly inherited. It is debatable if it is from the mother, as women tend to be largely in the centre of the bell curve of the population, vs men who have a lot more stupid, and a lot more highly intelligent. So they completely lost me on this one too.

I think it's less straightforward in humans because we a such social creatures so much of what we consider intelligence is in fact product of careful unbringing and socialisation. You can take the brightest child and put them in bad environment and their potential for intelligence will never show. You take a mediocre child and give them the right education and home environment that supports that and you will get much brighter child. Our measures of intelligence are really biased towards literate children and adults. They should really be called measures of good education not intelligence.

​@@darid17 not really true. Rural Chinese for example were largely illiterate but averaged around 106. You could push the test maybe 10% either way, but many studies have shown IQ is relatively immutable. Twins raised in different family groups tend to test the same IQ, though if abused or whatever they can end up with poorer outcomes with the same IQ