'Richard Dawkins was wrong' - Mary Harrington & Ed West on Christian converts | SpectatorTV
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 гру 2023
- Mary Harrington and Ed West join Spectator TV to discuss the recent rise in Christian converts. The New Atheists predicted that religion would fade from relevancy. As more TikTok influencers share posts about their conversion to Christianity, were the New Atheists wrong? And can you meme your way to becoming a believer?
// SUBSCRIBE TO THE SPECTATOR
Get 12 issues for £12, plus a free £20 Amazon voucher
www.spectator.co.uk/tvoffer
// FOLLOW US
/ spectator
/ officialspectator
/ the-spectator
/ spectator1828
/ thespectatormagazine
Theme song written and performed by Jon Barker © 2020 Jonathan Stewart Barker
Publisher Jonathan Stewart Barker 100%, administered by prsformusic.com
Recording © 2020 Jonathan Stewart Barker 100%, administered by ppl.com
The most rapid rise in Christianity is now taking place in Iran. China too has seen a massive increase in numbers since the 1960s.
Most churches in China are in rural regions where the populace is barely literate. Christianity is not and will not appeal to educated societies. Christianity is largely incompatible with the enquiring mind seeking genuine spirituality.
Dawkins did not say that a meme has benefits for anyone. Just that it replicates in human brains.
I'm a British ex-Muslim, 50 years old and I left the religion last year. Leaving Islam had nothing to do with Dawkins and more with the lack of well documented historical literature supporting the religion. I know many Muslims who don't believe in it but would rather remain in the closet to avoid the stigma.
"Muslims who don't believe" are apostates, and the Quran calls for their death. Be careful buddy.
The same used to be true for Christians in West. In fact in some Christian sects it still is
You should look at Jesus Christ. It is very well documented and the History is accurate.
I am surprised you haven't had your life or your health threatened in some way.
@@FEiSTYFEVER By whom? I don't know any religious Muslims. Plus I don't go around holding a placard saying I'm an ex-Muslim.
I am not a Christian however I think that the sermon on the mount as well as other aspects of Christianity are very important and why our society became so great.
was no Sermon on the Mount. Based on of the text in Matthew, it seems very unlikely that the Sermon was delivered impromptu on the side of a mountain or even a hill or anywhere else. The Sermon looks much more like a carefully crafted literary composition much like the Gettysburg Address. Matthew was evidently determined to portray Christ as a "wonderful man teaching wonderful things." He then made up the Sermon on the Mount for that purpose. There weren’t even any mountains there.
@@dbefore7165not only was the sermon on the mount fabricated - so was the dude in the sandles
@@dbefore7165 it may have been fabricated but it it all the same inspiring.
@@Slarti be inspired then, but dont take as factual
@@dbefore7165 Your reply sounds like literalist, fundamentalist thinking. A Rabbi taught from 'higher ground'. It is a symbol of it coming from on high. Even so, your response has no basis in evidence. It is your opinion.
My husband and I journeyed from Evangelicalism into the Anglican Church in North America about 10 years ago. He is now an Anglican priest and planted a church in Idaho. Our church is full of those who consider themselves “recovering evangelicals“. They long for a tradition that is much older than themselves, and they long for the historicity and the deep richness of a tradition like the Anglican expression of the Church.
Americans are prone charismatism…wash, rinse, repeat…
Evangelicals never did anything to me but, as a matter of personal taste, Charismatic forms of Christianity turns me off and prefer conservatism, so I, as a lapsed Catholic, look towards returning to Catholicism or turning to Eastern Orthodoxy.
P.S. Good luck with your church!
P.P.S. I am guessing you use the King James' Version of the Bible?
@@marlonmoncrieffe0728 Just go with the Bible and see where it leads you.
I'm not sure we should be picking a faith on aesthetics
@@shadowcolorado3668 if you preferred a pastor with a good speaking voice compared to a monotone delivery, that would be an aesthetic decision. If you preferred an organ to a praise band, that would be an aesthetic preference. So your comment doesn’t make sense to me. We make aesthetic decisions all the time. If I find a Christian tradition that makes even more beautiful the Gospel of Christ, then I would rather go with truth, beauty, and goodness every time.
Dawkins never denied that religion has social benefits. Just that the negatives outweigh the positives.
LOL and as usual he is wrong about the negative parts as well. when things are working everybody takes peace for granted
He is more focused on whether it is true. Hitchens focused more on the societal cost of religion. Dawkins concern was simply focused on whether it is actually true. His position is that there is no evidence to suggest it is and that his own field seems to suggest it is not true.
@@Scarletpimpanel73 Agreed. But Dawkins has often been accused of saying that religion is of no social or even evolutionary value. He always replied that it might well have both
it does have its "negatives". but i doubt its more than "positives". im curious to know what force of nature can bring people together internationally much like religion does...
@@amanialsoquar4945 Only in rich countries do people feel religion has more negatives than positives. African women, for instance, do not understand when people describe Christianity as inherently sexist. It is in many ways patriarchal, but so is African society as a whole. Knowing many African Christian men, I can see the deep respect they have for women, which is not always evident in many African societies. As for religious conflict, it is a problem, but the fact that nationalism has been probably the greatest cause of war in the last two centuries has not led many to question the existence of the nation state. Why should we treat religion differently?
Poor argument from Ed West
Using 'sort of' and 'kind of' way too much... to the point of irritation for me
He seems hungover or something… idk doesn’t seem all there especially next to Mary who is always very sharp and present
Dawkins is highly rational?! Please see his reaction to Covid for a debunking of this.😅
What about it ?
Nobody loves Hitch more than I do and there's no one I'd rather listen to speak than the Grand Master himself, but I think he overestimated human nature. His arguments for atheism are based on the pre-supposition that humans are innately wise and would replace God with art and literature. Sadly, most are nothing but slavering, blood thirsty primates only out to benefit themselves. We need religion. We will always need religion.
you do humans a diservice
@@dbefore7165 you obviously haven't met many people
You are wrong about Hitchens. He said over and over that we are apes and we cannot expect much of our ability to do the “right” thing.
@kennethmarshall306 he said we are apes to the extent of our religious beliefs, i.e. religious belief bears the "indelible stamp of our lowly origin" (adapting a quote from Darwin). But he never made the connection between our status as primates and what religion would most likely be replaced by if it were eradicated. He offered art, literature and science as alternatives. He didn't realise that primates basically eat, procreate and fight.
Christianity thrives most in those areas if the world where there is persecution. Here in the west it has been taken for granted and has therefore lost its mystique and reverence.
"The Church of Rainbow's expressivism is now increasingly, strongly US Imperial-coded."
I'm a scientist and was an atheist and a fan of Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and other scientistic ideologues back in the 2005-2010. I'm now a devout Christian (catholic) and look back at this period of my life and new atheism with shame. A deeper study of philosophy and science led me to the conclusion that Theism is the only rational worldview and Christianity is true. Christianity is also the root of western civilization values and provides the only real moral foundation by asserting that all men/women are of equal worth because we're all created in the image of God.
Very interesting. One has to be willing to look into "religion" honestly and (still harder) to be honest with themselves. Glad to see that you are willing to admit having had a change of heart. It seems the atheist community is rather unforgiving on this topic. And, if i can add one resource, EWTN.
I was an atheist my whole life until the past couple years. I still love and admire Hitchens but his life story actually tells us where that worldview leads. Consumptive, hollow, and dead. There is something more than the metaphysical claims of religion and we should look to the good of it.
There is nothing in science about gods. I am a scientist myself and was brought up as Christian. My own studies of the bible clearly showed me a book filled with false statements about the world we live in, and a morality that i find utterly immoral (the acceptance and promotion of slavery for example).
Believe what you like, but do mot claim that science in any way support Christianity. It doesn't, in fact that belief has never survived scrutiny by the scientific method.
@@Draugh39 I just wanted to share my experience, not to convince you or anyone else.
However, many scientific discoveries made during the 20th century were completely unexpected under the assumed materialistic/naturalistic/atheistic ontology and are much more easily reconcilible with a theistic metaphysics (e.g. Hubble's law and the implied temporal finitude of physical reality that underlies the big bang theory, the extreme fine-tuning of the constants of physics and initial conditions at the big bang for life to be possible, the fact that life is based on a system of symbolic representation with semantics (the genetic code) which, as all languages do, implies intentionality, quantum mechanics which rules out a material ontology with the wave function that pretty much corresponds to what Aristotle calls prime matter (as Heisenberg recognized explicitly)). These are well hidden and never discused issues in academia, and even more hidden to the general public.
Moreover, consciousness and the origin of life cannot be explained materialisticaly because they are phenomena involving irreducible and intrinsic intentionality/subjectivity that are qualitatively distinct from physical objects and third person narratives.
We experience a contingent physical reality. Science can only tell us how physical objects behave, not why there are physical objects or why they are the way they are rather than some other ways. Theism is the view that there is a reason why there is a physical reality at all rather than none, and why it is the way it is rather than some other way. Atheism is the view that this contingent physical reality exists and is the way it is for no reason at all and is thus an unintelligible brute fact. We're all free to interpret reality in one of those two ways. The world I've discovered scientifically and philosophically and my response to the raw experience of this world is simply not consistent with atheism's unintelligible brute fact but is perfectly consistent with theism.
There are of course many other (and probably better) reasons to believe in God than what we learned from science, like the fact that atheism/naturalism is self-refuting because it lacks a transcendent grounding for rationality and morality. It is after all a metaphysical issue, not a scientific issue. My advice is just make sure to approach the whole issue with an open mind before rejecting theism. As a famous quote (whose author is unclear) says: “The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you”
Atheism is simply a rejection of a notion of a super human being that created all this and that humans can decide morale judgement without made up stories. I am shocked by the regressive arguments on here - this is akin to growing up not believing in Santa and then going to bed on Christmas Eve on your 70th birthday and hoping he has delivered you presents. It is honestly an insult to any intelligence to believe in religion or have any expectation that prayer would ever have some kind of impact. It’s truly absurd to believe in science and religion. 🤯
I don’t think Ayan Hirsi Ali would claim that she was a Christian without the resurgence of influence of Islam, particularly the support she saw amongst young Americans for the 7th October massacre.
She's no more a Christian than I am though.
I remain a big fan of Ayaan, I also think you're probably correct. I see nothing especially wrong with this, she's been almost explicit, abt her utilitarian argument for Christian Atheism.
She is cashing in like Jordan Peterson. They share the same slush fund.
What is Christian Atheism, @@Jules-Was-an-AnCap?
Ali has explained, it is her opinion that the moral foundations of the west cannot be separated from Judeo-Christianity, and so therefore she has been a “practicing Christian” for decades…now she has just made it official.
Make of that what you will.
Mary is just brilliant
Below replacement value.
I've become a Christian because of the rise of islam.
That is the most stupid reason I have ever heard in my life.
You may as well say I am a Christian because I have a headache.
Muslims are apposed to this woke gender education, sadly the church of England isn't.
🤣🤣🤣 That'll show them
@@Steven_Rowe Wrong. Christianity is a hugely important institution. All the freedoms you enjoy in the West are directly attributed to Christianity. If you don't want to believe in God but want those freedoms, be a Christian. Go to church. Encourage others to do the same. And absorb the morality of the church. Otherwise Islam will usher the West into a new Dark Ages.
@@Steven_Rowe It isn't a good reason but neither is it stupid. Islam was invented as a propaganda weapon to use against the Christian Byzantine Empire. It took 700 years but they finally conquered Constantinople. And then slowly went on, all the way to gates of Vienna, with Rome in their sights.
Islam is violent at its core - read Surah 5:33 for example. It is also built of ignorance. Christianity should be against the woke agenda, but the Church of England has unfortunately adopted woke and ditched faith. The crying need is for the CoE to return to its roots. Sack the useless bishops.
@@Steven_Roweah but both groom children. So, they have that in common.
Of course they were wrong. Dawkins is a pseud.
I was a lifelong atheist.
Now i pray and attend church services
This is the worst Belle & Sebastian lyric I’ve ever heard.
Quitter
Cool story bro.
Christopher Hitchens had more conviction.
What an uplifting and moving story re your spiritual journey.
I was life long 'Black Magic Chocolate ' fan, now I prefer Galaxy.
I sometimes feel like I must be the only one who doesn’t need religion OR extreme political beliefs. I’m quite happy just thinking for myself. Presenting it as some sort of dichotomy is just bollocks.
Except, that’s not true. You’re not some neutral, distanced, romantic ‘hero’ who is unaffected by the existential questions posed by religion; your comment proves as much. It’s just a repetition of the same old response to religious feeling articulated in the 18th / 19th centuries. Religion is still playing your tune; you’ve just convinced yourself it isn’t.
All men are fundamentally religious. Even you.
@@lectorintellegat I take it from your comment that you’re a religious person. I’m not. All you did is contradict me; you provided no evidence for your assertions. That’s what religion is all about. :)
Er ... well ... either there is a god, or there isn't. You couldn't find a clearer case of a dichotomy, could you? Everything else is just trivial details.
@xanderlewis Exactly: but you've just flatly contradicted your own original comment.
I agree. All religion involves the belief that there is a supreme being out there, somewhere. That is simply not possible. Ergo, all religion is based upon a false premise.
He wasn't just wrong, he was almost insufferable in his arrogance.
He is not YET DEAD
@ ua-cam.com/video/x6Ul0thfc_Q/v-deo.html
I'm agnostic, but frankly after the heaping dollops of arrogance we've all had to put up with from various Churches throughout human history, Dawkins' abrasive style that refused to tread softly was refreshing. I'd say the real arrogance came from all the men in Church clothes we've had to deal with calling themselves the representatives of God on earth... But Dawkins is the arrogant one for calling them what they are? Self-appointed wizards telling the rest of us how to live, and telling people they go to Hell or deserve de/ ath if they don't follow that particular set of rules. Just take the arrogance of those who sought to punish that boy recently for scuffing that "holy book" here in the UK.
I'll never understand how Dawkins is called arrogant, rather than those people. I think believers can recognise the arrogance of holy men of OTHER religions to your own... Curiously there's a blindness to seeing it in your own religious leaders.
The chaos and hollowness of society, the corruption of institutions and the dryness of your own inner world will bring you back to the Living Water - the Way, the Truth and the Life. But if you love the desert, you are welcome to plod along......
Beautifully put.
Christianity is more rational than anything.. In the beginning was the Word (that is rationality, reason, logic, logos).
Words came late on
@@dbefore7165 Lol, clearly.
How you perceive rationality in that nonsense is breathtaking.
@@Tangerine229 ua-cam.com/video/U7AON-Fz9P0/v-deo.htmlsi=dbnu9fDx0ceRBLRb
@@dbefore7165 ua-cam.com/video/U7AON-Fz9P0/v-deo.htmlsi=dbnu9fDx0ceRBLRb
The west needs Christianity more than ever today given the worrying influx of other religions that wish to take over the west. I’m not religious but I can now see the benefits of Christianity.
Yes, let's all add self-delusion to our armoury.
The west don’t need crazy stories
No religion will set you free! They all want their pound of flesh.
Most people have no idea that their core moral beliefs come from Christianity eg all of us are equal ( in the sight of the Christian God) that’s just not true for the other faiths some worse than others. Lots of evidence of the inability to really enter in the mindset of other radically different cultures
@@alisonwren3624 Do you accept atheists?
Dawkins is a brilliant biologist whose ego and ultimately his arrogance pushed him out of his lane into a topic that he really knows very little about. I read the “The God Delusion” when I was first coming back to my faith because I wanted to truly understand arguments for and against religion and it only pushed me deeper to belief due to how many errors and how weak his arguments are due to how poor his understanding of theology (particularly Christian theology) is. Same goes for Hitchens and Harris I haven’t heard or read a single argument they ever made that would even make me begin to question my faith. The “new atheists” all unfortunately come/came off as people suffering from a superiority complex that have an axe to grind.
They admitted it was movements formed to act as a counterweight to extremism post 9/11z
In retrospect I think they strengthened Islam and weakened Christianity.
Way to go guys 👏👏👏
Well said.
I agree. Well put.
Your comment displays classic confirmation bias, and rounds o0ff, appropriately, with classic ad hominem statements. It is clear that no matter how well-argued an "anti-belief" book, might be, you would reject its arguments out of hand. You should get on well with the Muslim fundamentalists. Have fun.
nailed it.
At the center and heart of the gospel is the incarnation of God the Word in the perfect man Jesus Christ, and his redemptive work including his sacrificial substionary offering of himself for sin and sinners. The historical fact of his death by crucifixion and burial and being resurrected from the dead. Then his ascension into heaven and the pouring out of the gift of the Holy Spirit, of eternal life by the grace of God to all who repent of sin and believe the truth of the gospel.
11:23 Dawkins kept his credibility? Really? He was (is) one of the most vicious anti-religious people on the planet.
So what. Just because he doesn’t agree with you is no reason to vilify him. Why are you right and he’s wrong?
@@niguel4438 1. His cred among others (non-atheists) Did you watch the video? 2. No vilifying him. Just stating a fact.
9:55 "In the day-to-day trenches of adult life, there is actually no such thing as atheism. There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship." David Foster Wallace, 2005
It's been interesting to see how my own attitude has changed on the question of religion. I was raised in an evangelical Protestant family (my Dad was a lapsed Catholic, and didn't figure into my religious upbringing). I was raised in a denomination that believed that every word in the Bible was literally true, and if you're raised to believe that, and you then are confronted with verifiable errors of fact or other problems in the Bible... Well, as a result, I probably began to lose my faith in high school. The process was well underway in college, and I latched onto Deism, but by the time I finished grad school, and I had learned enough science to find religious explanations for the universe's and life's origin and evolution simply weren't needed to explain the world around us, even that was gone. As such, I found the New Atheist movement interesting and welcomed it. It seemed an untrammeled good, the idea of a world based on reason and rationality.
I find myself now in a curious position: I still have no religious faith. I still don't find the evidence for Christianity persuasive, and have no belief in Yahweh, or the concept of revealed religion. That said, I no longer see the decline of traditional religion as a positive. It looks increasingly to me like there is indeed a "God-shaped hole" in everyone's consciousness, and for most people, if traditional religion doesn't fill it, they will fill it with some ideology or other. And the real problem is worse: people seem to have a desperate psychological _need_ for something transcendent, something "divine" if you like. Traditional religions promised such miraculous fulfilment in the afterlife, and when people lose that belief in an afterlife, all too many _don't_ seem to lose that need for the magical, the sublime -- and this seems to lead too many people to follow ideologies that promise to bring about heaven right here on earth: a just social order -- something I don't believe it's possible to achieve, given the limitations of human nature. And yet for these secular True Believers, it just doesn't seem to matter, all the mountains of evidence we have from the 20th century about how much blood has been spilled by utopian visionaries, trying to force a "divine" ideal on creatures inherently _incapable_ of attaining it.
Ed West is incapable of stringing a sentence together without inserting "you know", "I mean", "sort of" or "kind of"
You don't get the benefits of religion without belief in God. That they can't understand this just blow my mind. If people actually believe there is no God, and we're just animals, who have come about through unguided processes, then that's the way people will live. There will be no human rights. And this is actually what people like Yuval Noah Harrari have actually said, (Yuval: Ideas like human rights, justice are just fictions). It's especially dangerous when those in power don't believe in God, because they become capable of any evils. And these are the ideas that you see more and more from the WEF types. The only reason we have these ideas of human rights is because people actually believe in God. They don't believe humans are mere animals, but that they are made in the image of God. Despite what the atheists will have you believe, because they live in these atheist bubbles, atheism is a very fringe ideology for humanity. The vast majority of humanity believes in God, and always have. That's why these ideas exist, because they live in societies where people do believe in God, and God help us if the majority of people lose belief in God. Convince humans they are animals and that is how they will treat each other. People in the west have become so Christianized that they can't tell themselves apart from the Christian ideals that have been passed down to them. This is why they think you can do it without belief in God, because they think those ideas are their own ideas. But they didn't create them. They were passed down to them. And those ideas didn't always exist. One example is the Germanic tribes (barbarians). This was a particularly different group for Christians to convert because they thought the idea that the poor and weak should be taken care of to be odious. You wouldn't have those ideals without Christianity. It completely changed the world.
Mary is wrong. The NAs didnt argue that society would get better without religion. They argued that it would get better without religious thinking. Even she admits wokeism and trans ideology is pseduo-religious so its a shame to see her use a strawman. Shes usually rather bright.
Jesus, the guy Christianity is based on and who claimed to be equal with God as his only begotten son, and then we killed him, warned us not to be like the pagans offering up endless repetitive prayers like the Romans and then the Roman Catholics. When i read that at 17, i left the RC church to make my own pilgrims progress with the New Testament as my guild. Sola Scriptura.
Having said that, I am sure you are very grateful to the Roman Catholic Church which goes back to Christ's appointed shepherd, Peter (Matthew 16:18), who provided the followers of Christ with the Canon of what we now call the New Testament and decided what Gospels were to be included and what documents, e.g. Paul's letters, were to be included. It is good to remember that between approximately AD 33 and AD 70, there wasn't any Gospel writing (Paul's letters c. 55 AD) to guide disciples but the teaching (magisterium) of the Church. It was the Roman Catholic Church in the context of this 'magisterium' and authority (Peter and subsequent popes) who decided what was to be included in the New Testament Canon - it was never Sola Scriptura - well for 1,500 years anyway. The New Testament canon was ratified under the auspices of the Church, see Councils of Cathage 393, 397, 419. With regard to 'repetitve prayers', I recall Paul who said 'Pray without ceasing (1Thess 5:17), I have no doubt that apostle followed Christ. I also recall the wonderful Psalm 1 regarding how blessed is the person who meditates on the law of the Lord 'day and night' - that is prayer also.
We are all on our pilgrim journey on this earth, and during this holy and blessed time of Advent, I wish you every joy as we all await to celebrate the feast of the Lord's birth - O come, O come, Emmanuel!
Please read the church fathers. It’s never too late.
The panelists seem to have forgotten or be unaware of how much larger a threat the Christian Right in the U.S. was in the '90s and into the aughts. In 2001, the Bush administration controversially banned federal funding to research using man-made stem-cells, which may have set cancer research back quite a few years. I remember worrying about this issue when I went to vote. The Christian Right may still exist but is far less powerful than they were a few decades ago. The right seems less unified than it was in the '90s and aughts probably because of Trump's influence. Another big difference between now and the '90s and aughts is that conservatives are now less bothered by gay rights than their predecessors. Despite their private beliefs against homosexuality, gay rights has become almost a non-issue for most Christian conservatives.
I don't see the connection between the New Atheists and transgenderism. Both Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins have vociferously opposed identity politics and transgender ideology. The late great Christopher Hitchens left us in 2008 but would likely have found the issues baffling and wrong-headed. He used to address audiences as, 'my brothers and sisters' and no doubt would have had no time for divisive identity politics. I don't follow Dan Dennett, the fourth member of the New Atheists, so I haven't heard about his support or contempt for either issue.
👍👍Hi. Thanks for this. Christianity and Christ-ness are separable qualities. The mystic pointing of Jesus that heaven is found in the heart... and that one can accomplish the cessation of suffering the interminable egos grasping for primacy over the natural spirit of wholeness in a self-revelationary process of inquiry... has been historically captured and codified by a doctrinal class of pseudo-spiritual elites. Ho hum...
New Discourses…have a watch.
this is incomprehensible psychobabble and does not resemble the gospels one bit.
Believing in fantasy because you can’t handle the truth seems like a failure of your character, along with treating others inhumanly without the threat of a supernatural authority to keep you in check.
...define 'humane'...define 'in check'...I suspect even you will need some supernatural authority to arrive at the definitions of those words that you infer.
@@therealmrfishpasteThe limbic system defines the good and bad effects of a behaviour. The supernatural is a token authority like the Mandate of Heaven in political authority. If you don’t have a supernatural authority then you might have community standards and local justice to control deviants. The definitions you’re looking for are outlined by community consensus and can be seen in all social animals.
Without an actual god morality is defined by high status individuals.
@@harper277 1. Define 'good' and 'bad'
2. "morality is defined by high status individuals."...Hitler was very high status...presumably that means the holocaust was morally right (at risk of invoking Godwin's law)
@@therealmrfishpaste definition of good and bad, good is what feels fuzzy and warm bad is painful and there is an inclination to avoid it. Like a Buddhist I define good and bad in terms of the absence or presence of suffering. If you believe suffering is good you express deviance and are part of a minority.
High status individuals can inflict tyranny, many religious and political movements attempt to counter this trend western culture is especially fond of the freedom narrative you might argue this is a Christian phenomenon but there are other political philosophies that champion individual autonomy and determination, you don5 need Christianity for that.
In the case of the holocaust the international community corrected the behaviour of the Nazis and most people oppose the genocide of targeted groups. As we know there are several psychological phenomena that influence people to participate in bad action. Zyclon B was invented because shooting slaves in the head was psychologically damaging to troops, further evidence that good is psychologically innate. The holocaust is good evidence for the non existence of God unless you believe the Allies had God on their side, Stalin and Mao did a lot worse in China and Russia largely unchecked. These events never persist for long as the behaviour is corrected. These episodes are common rooted in in-group out-group conflict manifesting as a cultural and moral panic, I’m concerned about the direction of the current culture wars, because I see the same cultural forces at work with the added complication of social media, this has never been seen before.
Thank you and have a very Happy Christmas
in Africa 6 million people get baptised every year .
I have observed people moving to, or back to Christianity largely treating it as an necessary accessory to their political beliefs.
Dawkins tried to argue 'nothing' exists as a third attempt by atheism to create a model of the universe, after steady state theory and multiverse theory failed on scientific and observable reasons.
So it must be YOUR god that did it?
@@StephenMason-rq9mz You claim it was atheist 'nothing' that did it. Which is more plausible? Either a god did it or your 'nothing' did it? You choose!
@@ministryofarguments5257 It was done by the Great God: Flazborg. He is constructed only of lime jelly.
@@thefigmaster3519 Jelly isn't nothing. Atheists believe a 'nothing' created the universe.
Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss wrote a book about it called 'A Universe from Nothing' Look it up.
It was the final nail in the coffin for atheism on scientific and intellectual levels, and we haven't heard much from atheist scientists Dawkins and Krauss since.
Krauss had a rape or sexual assault charge with one of his atheist fans, and his career as an astro-physicist was over after his stupid book. Same for Dawkins his career as a zoologist was over when he started preaching atheism, and his Simyoni Professorship chair taken away.
That's how atheism died, and now atheism is vapid and talks only about trans issues, how to find meaning in your life and what are alternatives to a Christian Christmas celebration. Other than that, atheism seems rather useless in 2023.
Funnily enough, Christian saints also had a deep experience of "nothingness", and found it positive. people like St. Catherine of Sienna, for example, to whom in profound contemplation God appeared to be saying: "You are she who is not, I am that which IS". Similar to Buddhist cosmology, where nothing exists independently of everything else, and every creature, every "thing", is transient and ephemeral. In Hinduism everything is a mirror whose character consists of the reflection in it of everything else. Shakespeare comes close too. But with all of this it's never the theory, but always the experience which matters.
Mary’s little laugh at the end! Love this.
I hope this really does grow into something.
If you want to believe, don't aim for the brain-no, pierce the heart. You don't see faith reflected in facts or scientific study or data necessarily, although of all of those can modulate faith in one way or another...no, faith finds its reflection, its food, its drink, its fruits, in poetry, art, music, and love. I have been wrestling with my lack-of-faith lately, and a lot of what is bringing me back towards faith and religion in general is poetry and a hunger to devote myself to something that dwarfs me, my own intellect, and my own short lifetime.
I was raised in the catholic church and today consider myself a recovering Catholic.
There are two words used by all monotheistic religions, faith and belief. It's very little that separate the two, but faith is blind & is offered on pure account. Belief on the other hand requires argument. The tora, bible & koran offer arguments for belief and billions accept on those scriptures , but I have to ask, how long ago was it all of them were written?.
The Koran, the latest is over 1,500 years old. Have we learned nothing in that time ?. All were written in an age when more than half the planets population were in slavery. That sounds like a very forward & enlightened time to me ? !!!.
I know this is not going to be a popular statement for some, but I'll say it anyway.
If you are religiously leaning than it just might be time to wake up and start thinking for yourself ?.
Interesting interview - not sure about politics replacing religion, given the massive politication of religion in the US with churches pursuing polical policies, and american groups groups, such as the National Conservatism conference, trying to bring that to the UK political scene.
Certainly the right in the US has co-opted religion into their politcal movement.
Dawkins (and the other new atheists) overestimated the public's capacity for secular rationality. I find that, no matter your view of religion, religion has social utility in constraining the excesses of human vice. Of course, doesn't work for everyone and it isn't perfect, but it works for a significant number of people for it to have enough utility to hold society together.
Great guests, thanks.
If neuroscientists are somewhere in the ballpark of correct, and that maybe only 15% of the population are classically "self-aware", seems like religion might be a good thing. Reins of control are important on an individual and societal level; "sacred" from the etymological "sacrifice". We're a species that has genetically marinated in religious thinking and organization for thousands if not tens or even hundreds of thousands of years. Can't simply appeal to reason and logic as a basis to encourage people on any metric or social requirement. It's in our collective bones, our literal DNA to relate to each other and our reality in a religious way and most minds need such encouragements and prodding.
Yeah you're probably right. Speaking of etymology, one of the etymologyical roots of religion is the sense "obligation" or "bond" from the Latin "religare" meaning "to bind", so clearly those who came before us recognized the functional, community-oriented realities of religion as well.
Atheism cannot explain who we are nor why we exist. The life of Jesus Christ is one of the best documented in Ancient History. Nobody can explain the growth of Christianity if it was not true. I encourage you to read the manuscripts of the gospels. As J.B Philips said "they have the ring of truth"
Apart from being written by barely literate farmers century’s after he died then mistranslated over generations.
Atheism doesn't pretend to explain who we are. It is simply a declaration that you are "not a theist" ( a theist being a person who believes in one or more personal god(s)). If you do not believe that you are an "a-theist".
The life of Jesus is not verified any better than that of "King Arthur", "Hercules" or any other mythological people that may or may not have existed.
The growth of Christianity is no faster than any other religion. It grew from (according to legend) about 5000 people to about 5 million in roughly 300 years. That is roughly 2.3% per year.
Then it became the state religion of the Roman empire. That is, you were FORCED to be a Christian. So that latter part had nothing about people being convinced to become Christians, the rich and powerful forced them to be that.
@@dbefore7165 I'm sorry - the gospels were written 20 to 30 years after Christ's death by eye witnesses using earlier documents as a basis for their accounts.
@@michelwharton6561 the gospels were likely not all written (in their entirety at least) before 80 AD.
I was taught Mark 64/65, Luke 60/62 and Matthew 60 to 70. John of course was later. But it is true there are differing opinions. We can still be confident in the truth of the gospels.
Religion is just horrible.
If your guests are going to comment on Dawkins, and indeed memes, it might be better to demonstrate a deep (deeper) understanding of evolution and his Dawkin's ideas. Fed up of seeing Dawkins rubbished without being understood. Address the ideas with intellectual integrity please.
I could never believe just for the sake of believing. I had to go on a journey and discover the real facts undergirding the faith I grew up in, and thank God, they're true. Apart from that I have experienced miracles. God is real.
Atheism will always be popular because fairy tales are merely extensions of the ego. As well as control/power structures.
Im Catholic and what was said in this interview about catholicism is total nonsense.
The great Gaullist and writer Malraux famously declared back in the 50s " Le 21 siècle sera religieux ou ne sera pas " HE WAS RIGHT. But God is still NOT GREAT😂🙂🙃
They have exported the religion to other poor countries. Never under estimate flat earthers.
There's no such thing as 'atheism'. One of the most telling evidences and traces of the Imago Dei in our broken nature is the fact that our cravings for worshiping will be either applied onto the one true God of Christianity, or on ourselves. And unfortunately culture tells us that the former is the case nowadays.
I find Dawkins so combative that any kind of reasonable conversation with him or those of his ilk is simply impossible. I think this very combativeness gives the lie to his claim of rationality. I think anyone who is interested in engaging constructively with atheist thought would be better off with someone like Alain de Botton or Ronald Dworkin.
The argument that atheism was just fashionable because people go by what their peer group thinks is a bit hm. Because surely this is also what religion as such is.
I was one of the first British soldiers to stand on the streets of N Ireland in 1969. The uneasy peace that prevails has followed the pattern of religious decline in the UK.
You might be right. But I think it has a lot to do with George W's so-called Global War on Terror. I think America forced the peace. It certainly came at the same time, and I assume it wasn't just coincidence.
Religion was incidental to the troubles.
40% of Northern Ireland was catholic so very mixed. It was just a way of saying pro Southern Ireland and revolution against Britain. The real motivation in the conflict was anger against the "British" and unifying Ireland. I was told when getting ready to do a tour of NI that lots of IRA were Marxist and not religious. The Irish are far more religious than the UK look at the stats. The peace is only there because the joint Parliament makes the Irish Republic feel they are in power and can control Northen Ireland long term. So no longer needs to fund the IRA and still gives them shelter in southern Ireland. The IRA think they have "won" with there political party made up of activists from the troubles.
Man suffers only because he takes seriously what the gods made for fun.
I was an athiest growing up and...... remain one, welcoming the decline in supernatural belief and organised religion.
As Brian's mother declared re her son,' he's not the messiah, he's a naughty boy'. And the lad himself said ' think for yourselves '.
You base your philosophy on Monty Python?
@@daddycool228
Socrates, Plato, Voltaire, David Hume , Thomas Paine, Bertie Russell, Orwell have also played their part. Thankyou for your comment .
@@iainrae6159 Well done you. And Merry Christmas
Religion is also supernatural since most of it can not be proven. And religios books were written 2000 years ago, any one with half a brain would not care with what they had to say. Sam Harris and Dawkins made that case, why would any sensible person care about ignorant people from 2000 years ago lol.
I thought christopher should have curbed his tongue with ‘religeon poisons everything’. For in reality alcohol and smoking poisoned christopher and he did not object to the poisoning of his body. Did he go around the world wishing for people not to be going through what he was going through? Could he have helped someone if he had?
mary's room wall paint color is fantastic
Woe is us if we have to choose between the competing absurdities of gender ideology and islamism
And the ultimate indoctrination is that people believe they HAVE to.
We are in the middle of an Islamic revival, btw. It’s the fasted growing religion at the moment
...Islam's key growth driver is childbirth, not conversion
Been an Atheist since birth, and until i see good evidence for a god, i shall remain as such. Dawkins said he was 6/7 Atheistic.
What's a 6/7 atheist?
its sad we need religion because some people are too stupid to become their own gods
Atheism was only ever carpetbaggerism ….
You could host a whole conference on this subject
12:53 I would say Christianity feels and looks that way or has the taste or aire of skeptical uniqueness because it's the only religion that treats each human being as having equal worth... Human being is worth the exact same in eyes of God... And each human being severed connection and separation from the metaphysical from the spiritual from the ethereal.. that nihilistic sense of inevitableness or dread that comes from a life relentlessly maddeningly religiously focused on the material...
That disconnectedness is a wound we can't fix... It's debilitating.. it causes us to harm ourselves, harm others around us, especially those we love... It's that feeling of a team of huskies trying to quench their thirst on a thimble of water...
All of the religions Make more sense to us because they make us work for our salvation. They make us put in effort in all kinds of benign and sadistically ridiculously insane ways... And even then pure unadulterated absolution sanctification justification is never on the table. It never was... They offer a chance at a lottery ticket that may give you a chance for some sort of meaningful progress or increase in purpose or happiness... But that makes sense to us because we have that whole. We have that debt. We have that disconnectedness that we feel every day and we know it's got to be paid for. It's got to be removed from your existence … It's got to be taken away from us. It has to be dealt with...
It's as if we've been running up a tab on a credit card for our entire lives. Some of us more than others... Some of us spend it begging hookers and doing blow... Others do it by stealing all the money from a church that they set up while making their congregation believe they're Jesus...
Regardless of how much we think we run up the tab... When we get a look at the bill and realize it's in a currency that we don't have... We have Monopoly money and the bill requires perfection... It requires what we would have been had we not been given free will... If we had not been given the choice to come to terms with this world on our own and not have it predetermined in a brainwashed cultish way..
This whole concept of each person as the transgress... Each and every Person is sinful.. each one of us racking up a tab that we can't pay...
And then having that tab wiped clean without us chipping in a fucking penny.... It's not just that. Damage that we've done to ourselves has been healed and restored... That disconnect from the metaphysical from the spiritual from the eternal is restored... The breaker has been fixed by believing that this is the state of things... This is your existence that God is real. God allowed us to make our decisions. We'd actually fucked it up then. He couldn't bear to let us mutilate and eat ourselves in an orgy of apocalypse... He paid the tab... Because he's the only one who could pay the tab... He's the only one who is capable of perfection... Universal all eternal perfection...
But this doesn't get mentioned a lot and it should.... The concept of each and every human being having an identical worth and value in the eyes of God... That is Christianity... That is not Islamic that is not Buddha. That is not Hinduism and it's not anything else... That concept of all men are created equal... So if every man is my brother every man is my equal. If Every man is in the same situation I've been... How can I treat him as property?... How can I say that I own him when I don't have the currency or the authority to claim another person's flesh as a wheelbarrow?...
Abolition slavery came out of Christianity... Not the Christianity of the 13 and 1400s of the perverted and corrupt and disgusting nature of the. Papal elite...
Came out of the Renaissance. The Reformation, the enlightenment... For the first time in human history, people could afford books... Could afford to own reading material... And the first book purchased or owned by almost every family who was moving in that direction.. of literacy and wisdom.. for the first time in human history you had a fast spectrum of a population learning. And understanding and wrestling and analyzing and critiquing things for themselves...
God could have put that in the Bible and used his hammer to prevent anyone from owning another person... He has the power... But that would make human beings robots... That would make you incapable of making certain decisions... No matter how awful and terrible... But it was also a gift because he patiently and lovingly I would say allowed us to wrestle and figure this out on our own, ... ... Humanity came to the realization through God's guidance that slavery was wrong slavery. Is it an abomination slavery must be eradicated.. full stop.... He gave us the freedom to figure that out on our own... To find moral clarity and to not just scream bitch and moan about how it happened and how it's wrong and how it's shit... Gave us the space and patience to have groups of people. Mobilize and convince and persuade and overturn public opinion... Change laws change societal norms and beliefs and common customs.... He allowed us the freedom to redeem a small aspect of our fallen human nature... So that we had the opportunity to understand in some very small way… effort and magnitude of what he did for us in an exponentially more impossible and meaningful and redeeming way..
He wanted us to understand that we're capable of being good when we're focused on something bigger and larger and infinitely more important than material existence... He let us get that sense of accomplishment and sense of pride in doing something good and just and virtuous... He allowed us to help and save and redeem each other...
Was it a light switch? Fuck no.. because it wasn't designed to be a light switch... We had to discover fire on our own... He didn't give us a fuckin pack of matches....
No other religion has that embedded in man's relationship to the metaphysical.... No other religion gifts each and every person salvation and absolution freely and with absolutely nothing asked from us except to believe that salvation is possible... That a relationship with the eternal is possible.. It's real… and you accept it....
That perhaps we've been filling up our gas tank with iced tea... Always bitching about how it never feels like our engine is running right...
And then your creator teaches you about gasoline. And fill up your tank with the good stuff… And it just feels correct... It just feels restored…
And then he tells you… almost in passing… that You won't have to fill up the tank again… it won't go dry for as long as you're alive… It's not like regular fuel.. the stuff that's consumed… this is living water… it will always be there …it will never run out…
Feels like even though you can't remember when it was better… You can't remember when it was perfect, but… know it was somehow… and life feels like what it was like when it was brand new... when life was running on the proper fuel… and performing exactly as intended… exactly what it was designed to do…. as it was created to do…
You don't get that kind of message… that kind of fulfillment and absolution from anything other than God, Christ and the Holy Spirit…
Ed looks like he had a really rough night and Mary...
This discussionis laughable. You have to be religious and now you have a smorgasborg to choose from!!!
Horse hockey! It's not religion itself that has benefits. it's people socializing peacefully, empathetically, while gathering for the pretext of religious worship. Of course people gathering in friendship and care, affirming one another's grace and worth, is beneficial to the psyche, which also benefits the body. But only someone simple-minded or blindly driven by an agenda wouldn't simultaneously see how such social interaction doesn't have to involve religion, with all it's demand for living in denial of basic reasoning and the utter lack of evidence for the validity of said religion's tenets/basis/assertions basic, whatsoever.
When western journalists talk on these issues just now, the zeitgeist buzz is to fixate on Islam and fundamentalist Christianity. Fundamentalists and atheist militants tend to be of a similar stamp: they both adopt a sort of almost autistic literalism which dictates their eventual stance. Transcendentalism not only doesn't enter into their thinking, but they can't even see its relevance or define it. It requires a sort of paradoxical thinking not unlike when quantum scientists try to determine the uncertainty principle. Yer average journalist just can't do it! It seems not 'rational' because their own rationalism is of a Victorian pre-Einstein vibtage. Dawkins, the late Christopher Hitchens, and I suspect (?) Ed here really belong in the 19th century, still debating that the archbishop of Canterbury is 60% water. These are old battles, long won. Analysis of where these forces will go in society won't produce optimistic projections until journalists stop treating the subject as though they were advertising agents using stats to predict popular trends.
I like Mary and Ed a lot, even though they're btw Classical Conservative and Medievalist contrarian, and I'm a US Liberal Centrist. Solid arguments for Christian Atheism (by any other name) largely echoing Ayaan. Less convincing argument for absorbing idiosyncratic, supernatural beliefs gradually in this cultural context, by osmosis.
Spectator TV: "...we're about to celebrate Christmas, which is, of course, a Christian celebration..." Hold on, there, Spectator. you've put Christ's name into it, but Christmas has always been a celebration of the winter solstice. It was celebrated long before Christianity was a thing, and it makes a lot of sense to assume early humans in the Northern Hemisphere celebrated the return of the Sun.
Yes.
At least Bertrand Russell was a highly intelligent, literate, atheist. Wrong, but always interesting. This new lot are more remedial than millenial.
In a letter to Bertie.
The enemy of all mankind, you are, full of the lust of enmity.
It is not the hatred of falsehood which inspires you. It is the
hatred of people, all people, of flesh and blood. It is a perverted, mental blood-lust. Why don't you own it.
Let us become strangers again, I think it is better.
D. H. Lawrence
He was a monster. Him and the rest of his cohorts at the Fabian Society of Freemason scum, one of the foulest evils that hell ever vomited forth.
Yes, a problem has been that someone who believes or beloved in the Christian god can believe in anything, and that it’s a hard sell to try to get an whitest to believe in a Christian god and the Christian dogma because it is at least as weird as the weird beliefs other people have adopted. In addition, there is almost nothing left of its sacred texts after l’extralégal and historical cortical analyses have done their work and since has explained the works differently than the sacred texts do, and you can’t just unlearn this.
...Once more but in ENGLISH please?
@@marlonmoncrieffe0728I admit something went wrong with the spellcheck. For whitest read atheist and for "l’extralégal and historical cortical analyses" read philological and historico-critical analyses. Basically, you cannot unlearn that religious sacred texts are written and re-written by humans and full of crap, and you cannot unlearn science.
Ha! It's the Nuts Magazine guy! Shouldn't he be compiling 10 best pulling techniques lists, or something like that?
"In the last days, people will have a form of godliness but will DENY ITS POWER" (2 Timothy 3:5)
Ed waffling through Classical Liberal cognitive dissonance…
I think that people like to believe in ‘something’ but don’t really know what that is. I personally do not have a belief in any god. I am happy and believe that when I die I will rot in the ground. Lots of people believe in spirits but I never have. I think people find comfort in the belief that death is a gateway to another life. All religions taken to extremes leads to terrible acts as there is a polarised world which leads to them and us.
Absence of god leads to even more terrible acts.
People need to believe in something because the truth is hard to live with, we are creatures of meaning in a meaningless world. Our primate brains can’t deal with that
You realise that modern atheism is motivated by socialism, right? That the motivation to destroy Christianity is a political one? That the funding of science intended to facilitate such things is politically motivated?
Them and us is the state of nature. Religion is just another form of identity that can be used for conflict. Take it away, there’s plenty more to rely on. (Family, nation, colour, tribe, etc). I am sorry to hear that you want to rot in the ground, but have at it by all means.
@@dbefore7165You cannot be a creature of meaning in a meaningless world, that is a contradiction. You would have to be utterly self contained for that to be true, outside of time and matter, ergo God himself. Now, if you are arguing that we are all part of God, minus his unfathomable intellect, I’m all ears…
@5:12: WRONG. Sorry 🙏. You are forgetting the very essence of all the Saints in the Orthodox Church from the 1st Century AC until today. There is nothing more personal in a relationship than to lay your life down for the love of someone else as in the Saints' lives because it was for the personal relationship they have with Christ (yes have and not had, because in Him we all like eternally). This is the very essence of Christianity: to have personal relationship with Christ and with one another. To love God more than you love yourself an to look very one another. This is the path of Theosis.
The new atheists were facile, they built up strawmen and took potshots at literalised biblical interpretation. The great shame of the church is that it took until the mid 2010s to react. Christians now have revived the great apologists: Aquinas, Lewis, Dostoevsky and the new appologists in Bishop Barron or John Lennox as well as Kantian philosophy. Instead of pontificating on memes, if you want to explain why the new atheist arguements are being steamrolled investigate the material being digested.
Yeah there's definitely been a kind of renaissance of theology and philosophy, especially on the internet. People are questioning many of the core, unspoken assumptions underlying much of our contemporary ideologies. Things like positivism, scientism, materialism are all being called to present their bona fides or else be cast into the trash. It's really quite radical. And it could be a force for a beautiful revival or a descent into chaos, maybe something in-between. Either way we live in surreal and exciting times.
If you are convinced by this ask yourself what new predictions about the physical world would you make based on your new, Christian world view that you wouldn't have made before, as a atheist. If there are no differences, you are just playing linguistic games with yourself
Perfectly put.
Ask yourself why logical positivism was abandoned due to incoherence.
@@courtilz1012 If you think my comment supports logical positivism then either you don't understand logical positivism or you don't understand my comment.
As an example Dawkins belief in macro evolution led him to think that 97% of DNA was junk. As a Christian I thought his idea was childish nonsense and I was right.
@thefigmaster3519 As far as I could be bothered to read it it is just another variant on Hume's fork and is pretty worthless
Easy attacking someone who is dead
Clickbait title.. Richard Dawkins isnt wrong at all .. I would be interested to hear what you actually want to argue but I ignore videos with clickbait titles . You must doubt your ability to get many to watch and that’s why you , as others , need to use clickbait titles 🤷♂️🤷♂️🙄
The point being made is that the demise of religion has not ushered in a new golden era of rationality.
...Did you write this comment without having watched the video first?
New atheism was pretty bigoted and full of anti-theist and anti-Islamic bigotry. And many of the new atheist fans rather ironically treated the thoughts and writings of people like Dawkins as protected religious ideas.
"If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied." 1 Corinthians 15:19.
The Bible/claims of Jesus are either all true, or it's all a big lie (written by dozens of authors over many centuries - strange).
God has written eternity on the heart of man. If there is not a question in your heart about the 'big' questions in life - origins, purpose, destiny - then you have put out that spark, that thirst that wants to know the Truth... very sad and empty place to be.
Ed West describes dawkins as "deeply rational". Bahahahahahaha...
Are you really serious, Ed?
I've seen numerous of dawkins' clips and my conclusion is that every single word that comes out of his mouth is driven only by an utmost hatred towards Christianity.
I love Mary .
cocaines one hell of a drug.
8:33 Funny to hear him talk of forgiveness in Christianity, when I think Christianity + Forgiveness in the context of how it actually played out in life, I think of that scene from 'There Will Be Blood' where Daniel Plainview gets "baptised" by the preacher Eli. Forgiveness... 😂 I can't help but feel quite a bit of incredulity when I hear people say Christianity gave that to people. So so much social coercion and wielding of social power against people to bend them into "sinners" who only the church (and its powerful men naturally) could absolve.
And like that scene (that whole film) perfectly shows, the capitalist goes through the charade of the baptism cynically, in order to get the social lubricant to allow him to crack America open and extract the oil, make his money, so the church and the oil men work hand-in-hand. Just the same as in the Middle East now.
atheism makes reason impossible and if death is the end whats your point
Ed looks overtired at the beginning
Christmas, as we call it today, is not a Christian celebration. Everyone knows that. Christians are welcome to attach their religion to it, of course. It’s beautiful. But Truth actually matters.
The Enlightenment principles we take for granted today, including secular humanism, were developed as a reaction to Christianity as it existed then. Modern Christians taking credit for The West is breathtakingly arrogant.
You are mischaracterizing the so-called new atheists. You probably wouldn’t be so agressive if Christopher Hitchens were sitting there with you now. As far as the woke ideology, we are just witnessing the birth of a new religion and need the Enlightenment principles again. You don’t get to blame the atheists.
No. We don’t need religion. Freedom of expression and tolerance might be a good start.
good luck with that.. go to speakers' corner and try convincing a few muslims to make a good start....
Ed? Where is your comb?
I have such a crush on Mary. 😍
Takes all sorts
The ordinary person in Britain who has abandoned religion, has likely never even listened to Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens.
Christianity has declined because it offers nothing attractive to the last few generations. They simply have no need of it and frankly, would be baffled by the stupidity of it.
This conversation intellectualises the subject (when applied to the masses), to a degree only recognised by these high minded speakers.
Islam is just an idiotic throwback to a world from which we matured several centuries ago.
This is all just a fun pastime for these speakers.
For most people, (and it is most people who count), this piece is just completely irrelevant.
Given that vast majority of people on the planet are religious and always have been, you comment "for most people, (and its most people who count), this piece is just completely irrelevant" is self-refuting and false. Nor is the truth of an assertion related to its relevance.
@@mrff5370The majority of people in Northern Europe (which includes UK) does not believe in a god.
Why would anyone believe something so monumentally stupid as there being a god?
Name me one good thing done by religion or a belief in god that can't be done without it.
The best countries to live in on this planet have the LEAST religion.
People stopped believing this nonsense because science has shown how incorrect it is, and we realised how IMMORAL it is.
The Truth can find those who look for the Truth. Very often people who don't have faith have never asked themselves the most fundamental questions: Who am I? What is the purpose of my existence? What will happen when I die?
You're an animal, and a result of sex.
Lots will happen when you die, it’s just that you won’t be involved in it.
In my opinion it is pointless arguing with them. Time and again they have shown me that they simply lack the imagination to consider genuinely abstract concepts. They can only understand things they can see and touch. Leave them be. I only argue with them because I love their silence when I point out they're going extinct because they can't bring themselves to have children.
@@PGHEngineer I think different people can turn to faith. They can be sometimes simple and down to earth or very intelligent and imaginative. Usually there is something that an unbeliever is not ready to give up for the sake of the truth. The desire to pick and choose what I like, what suits my personality.
@@PGHEngineer what a stupid comment.
“People pour into all sorts of bizarre cults”, says Mary. Like climate change.
I’m a returner. Having been in church very little since I left school and led a secular sort of life so far, I have found my way back to the Lord. And it has nothing whatsoever to do with my having had my “three score years and ten”.