Ricky Gervais And Stephen Go Head To Head On Religion
Вставка
- Опубліковано 20 вер 2024
- * ROAD TO 550,000 SUBSCRIPTIONS **
to Donate using Paypal!: www.paypal.com...
Cashapp: $mrlboyd
Patreon - / mrlboyd
FOLLOW ME: / mrlboyd
CLICK THE BELL! 🔔
CONTACT ME
➡️ / mrlboyd
➡️ / mrlboyd
➡️ / malagaphotography
➡️ Snapchat: MrLboyd
ricky gervais,
ricky gervais golden globes,
ricky gervais reaction,
ricky gervais show,
ricky gervais supernature,
ricky gervais stand up,
ricky gervais golden globes 2020,
ricky gervais transphobic,
ricky gervais johnny depp,
ricky gervais netflix,
ricky gervais stephen colbert,
ricky gervais podcast,
ricky gervais mel gibson,
ricky gervais atheist,
ricky gervais afterlife,
ricky gervais animals,
ricky gervais and steve carell,
ricky gervais and johnny depp,
ricky gervais and elmo,
ricky gervais and karl pilkington,
ricky gervais atheism,
ricky gervais animals full show,
ricky gervais aids joke,
afterlife ricky gervais,
absolutely mental ricky gervais,
alan carr ricky gervais,
after work reactions ricky gervais show,
andrew schulz ricky gervais,
all ricky gervais golden globes,
animals ricky gervais,
animated ricky gervais show,
armageddon ricky gervais,
academy awards ricky gervais,
ricky gervais bloopers,
ricky gervais best moments,
ricky gervais bible,
ricky gervais best jokes,
ricky gervais boxing,
ricky gervais band,
ricky gervais best golden globes,
ricky gervais backlash,
ricky gervais brucey boy,
ricky gervais best stand up,
best of ricky gervais,
best of ricky gervais golden globes,
bill burr ricky gervais,
ben shapiro ricky gervais,
best of ricky gervais show,
big bang theory ricky gervais,
bloopers ricky gervais,
ben stiller ricky gervais,
brett cooper ricky gervais,
bafta ricky gervais,
ricky gervais conan,
ricky gervais cat,
ricky gervais cancer patient,
ricky gervais comedy,
ricky gervais colbert,
ricky gervais cancel culture,
ricky gervais craig ferguson,
ricky gervais caitlyn,
ricky gervais cats joke,
ricky gervais chris rock,
chris rock jerry seinfeld ricky gervais louis ck,
conan ricky gervais,
craig ferguson ricky gervais,
chris rock ricky gervais,
carl pinkleton ricky gervais,
comedians in cars getting coffee ricky gervais,
colbert ricky gervais,
curb your enthusiasm ricky gervais,
celebrities on ricky gervais,
comedy ricky gervais,
ricky gervais dog jobs,
ricky gervais david bowie,
ricky gervais david blaine,
ricky gervais dogs,
ricky gervais derek,
ricky gervais david letterman,
ricky gervais daughter joke,
ricky gervais do you believe in heaven,
ricky gervais destroys hollywood,
ricky gervais dave chappelle,
david blaine ricky gervais,
derek ricky gervais,
david bowie ricky gervais,
deadly sirius ricky gervais,
derek ricky gervais funny moments,
david letterman ricky gervais,
devon davinci ricky gervais,
david earl ricky gervais,
daniel radcliffe ricky gervais,
depp ricky gervais,
ricky gervais elmo,
ricky gervais ellen,
ricky gervais extras,
ricky gervais emmy,
ricky gervais english lesson,
ricky gervais elmo interview,
ricky gervais epstein golden globes tom hanks,
ricky gervais elmo outtakes,
ricky gervais epstein,
ricky gervais elmo lullaby,
elmo ricky gervais,
extras ricky gervais,
ellen ricky gervais,
english with ricky gervais,
elmo lullaby ricky gervais,
emmy ricky gervais,
equality street ricky gervais,
extras ricky gervais full episode,
every ricky gervais golden globes,
emmy awards ricky gervais,
ricky gervais fat people,
ricky gervais funny moments,
ricky gervais full show,
ricky gervais oscars,
ricky gervais outtakes,
ricky gervais on religion,
ricky gervais office,
I'm atheist and I sat and had a very long conversation with one of my sons friends dad's one day, he's very religious and towards the end of the conversation he asked me if an angle came down and could show me proof of God would I believe it. I obviously said well yes because I'd then have proof. I then asked him the question if an alien race came to earth and could show him irrefutable proof there is no god and the big bag is how the universe started and could show him what was before our universe would he believe it. He said "no I'd think it was a demand sent by Satan himself to take me away from god" see atheist can change what they believe based on facts but religious people will always use religious to claim to be right
This is also very well demonstrated in the debate between creationist Ken Ham and science promotor Bill Nye.
At the end of the debate there were questions from the audience and one member asked: "If anything, what could convince you your position is wrong" (or something in that line).
Bill Nye simply said "Show me good evidence and I'll adjust my views". Ken Ham said "I am a young Earth creationist and that is what i'll remain. And there is nothing you can show me that could convince me otherwise".
@@brabbelbeest yep and they then call atheists brainwashed 😂
Also an atheist, but be wary of the broad brush. There are plenty of theists who readily admit they'd abandon their theism if they were convinced it wasn't true or likely. There are plenty of atheists who say nothing could convince them of the supernatural. These seem to be the smaller groups, but just be wary of the broad brush.
Agree with the sentiment but lol you are 14
@@kevinskoplin I'm 14? 🤣 what are you talking about?
Always makes me laugh when people say Ricky pushes his atheism on people yet the majority of the time he's asked about it. This interview being a prime example.
he doesnt push it on people he jjust explained it because he was asked
All he does is talk about atheism, because he has clearly left comedy behind, as a career. That's what he's known for, now. Kinda sad.
I remember when Penn Gillette was a cutting edge magician/comedian. Now he's just an angry theist. But this is the path that atheists choose -- push your religious agenda on everyone while claiming that you hate when people push their religion on others. Paint yourself as victim. Complain.
Repeat. And repeat........and then claim that other people are putting you in a box, rather than yourself. 🙄🙄🙄
@@OneThousandHomoDJs The entire premisse is wrong here. First thing, no Atheist every pushes anything. You aks them about their belives and then get angry that they don't share your sentiments. Pushing would mean that they deliberately tell you they are atheists even though it wasn't solicited. That's what christians do though. Even coming to your door uninvited. Second, how can atheists even push their religion? You did understand what atheism is right? It's the non-believing in religion. How can someone push a religion if they don't beleive in religon. All atheists are fine with everyone believing in what they want. But religios people like you, constantly ask them about their believes and then get angry about it. You are just further alienating people from your religion with this kind of toxic mentality. Just let people belive what they want to believe. If you can't handle their belives, don't ask them about it.
@Lottie Dah He actually defended Ricky. Not sure what you are so irrirated about.
@@OneThousandHomoDJs How exactly can an atheist push a religious agenda, you do realize how stupid that sounds right?
Ricky Gervais was asked why he was atheist and he said "there are 3 major religions on earth, yet depending on where you are born you will practice one of 3 of those faiths. So depending where you were born you can automatically have the wrong religion and be damned to hell just by being born in the wrong area?" 🤯
Trouble is Stephen belittles the "debate" but constantly making jokes, coz he knows he cannot justify his position.
Exactly this! People banging on about how it’s a reasonable debate but Stephen throws in a stupid remark to try and get a laugh because that’s his job and he’s the host on his show ..
Gervais is class 👌🏼
Or... Because he's a comedian hosting a comedian on his comedy show.
Nah, Stephen is cool with that. He's making jokes because it's entertainment and he's sitting in front of a comedian. He still values the conversation.
Also, and that's the coolest thing considering he's a devout Christian, at the end he says "come back to discuss something EVEN MORE important".
I disagree. Stephen is an intelligent man just like Ricky, and he is well aware of the arguments. But it is a late night comedy show, so he has his part to play. Your argument here is rather reductive.
@@ContentMadame fuck, the host is a comedian? Hope he did not take classes, he should be refunded
"prove there is no god" - I dont have to, prove there is. YOU say there is, ergo, prove it. My whole beef with all religion, good I stopped paying for that shit at 20, when I started to.... think.
The last thing Gervais said is a mic drop of an argument. Logic at it's finest. Well, even science can get it wrong but gets it right eventually as technology improves. Science improves, religious claims remains unchanged. When it was written is to take it's word for... Words from 1000+ years ago. A lot has changed and happened since you know :P
Tim Minchin phrased it in one of his songs as "science adjust it's views based on what's observed, while faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved". That is sooo good ^^
That 1000+ year old book has more of a grasp on Today times than
Modern Technology
@@edoe5915 That book that endorses slavery, Genocide & the subjugation of women?
@@edoe5915 How so? that punishing people for their parents misdeeds is Just (adam and eve) or that slavery is just fine? What exactly does that book get soo right? Dont forget the genocide btw. God looves that.
The problem is that science never has and never will be able to chime in on the existence of God. Using science to answer such a question is like using a metal detector to find wood. It's just not the right tool to get the job done you want done. Having said that, science can challenge particular God related creation claims of the religious, such as the claim made by some believers who claim that the universe is 6,000 years old.
ricky won as soon as he said " the question isn't why but how" it was a bait question and ricky opened up the conversation straight away.
plus Colbert said, "You only believe that because you've been told that." Oh, so you read the bible out the womb, or did someone else tell you?
@@ahardcorejedi2968 I think that's the point Colbert made, you simply go by authority too. Which is a fair point, but Gervais countered that intelligently.
Funny thing is that there is a lot of religiousness left in atheist or otherwise non religious thinking and therefore language. "Grateful", to whom? "Why" to describe causal relationships, mechanisms. Even bioligists who acknowledge evolution are full of it. They often speak terms like mother nature had a goal, every genetic feature of an animal has to have a purpose. Female peacocks select males with a big tail because it's a sign of health and strength and will therefore give them better offspring. No they don't, a peacock isn't very much of a thinker, they just fancy big tails and whether that's an evolutionary advantage or disadvantage they don't know and we don't know. We just know that it didn't make them go extinct.
'Why' when it's not referring to a person's motive is loaded with a religion like way of thinking, that some entity had a purpose like it was human.
@@DenUitvreter lmao what. I haven't met a single biologist who said "mother nature had a goal". Cus something religious people and idiots don't understand is thag not everything has an answer to the why. Earth was created after the big bang. There's no why to it it just was. Nope you are wrong. Beautiful tails just attract other peacocks just like certain physical traits make you attracted to your significant other. And peacocks aren't much of a thinker? Wtf is that for bullshit. Peacocks aren't humans and they mainly go by instinct. Which is something ingrained into a creature because its ancestors did it for millions of years. The universe isn't controlled by anything except for the laws of physics chemistry and biology. Everything since the start of the universe is random. Not pre planned not going by script. It just happened. The why is irrelevant anyway its the how.
@@stephenponnet462 I guess I didn't express myself clearly enough. What I'm saying is that in our language, our reasoning and our explaining are full of traces of religious 'logic'. Thinking in terms of purpose, why instead of how, ideas like things are right, how they are supposed to be, how they are meant.
Gervais does it himself. The really atheistic answer would be 'no, I'm not grateful, I'm happy or lucky, there's nothing to be grafeful to.
It's so rare you can witness a conversation like this where both people completely disagree but also keep constant respect for each other. And they both accepted from the start they weren't trying to change the other person's mind, just share their views. Usually it goes that the athiests act pretentious and mock the christians while the christians judge and shame the athiests
The only reason Ricky behaved is because he was on Stephen's show. Ricky's primary worldview is to hate everyone, which makes his comedy A LOT less funny.
Adults who have imaginary toys are fine. But if you bring that toy up in public or try to force me to play with that toy then I will mock you mercilessly for your nonsensical views. We put a man on the moon yet people still follow a Stone Age belief system
@@fiverx2159 And that's what religious people say about you.......so how are you different'better? That's the problem with atheism -- it's a religion with hardcore adherents, but their believers "don't believe" in religion, so what they're forcing down everyone's throat is just their opinion, yet it's the theists who are closed-minded.
🙄🙄🙄🙄
Atheists are more religious than any Jew, Christian, or Muslim I have ever met.
Stephen still was being pretty aggressive to be honest. Shit he even started with the "you concede the debate bullshit"
That's because Stephen is a liberal Christian who acknowledges the validity of other worldviews. Most formal debates (which this isn't) involve more fundamentalist proponents. Colbert's goal isn't to "destroy" Gervais, but merely to expose his audience to different perspectives.
Stephen panicked and threw a wild joke out at the end to diffuse, respect 😂
I also consider myself an atheist/agnostic. The best conversations I've had on the subject has been with preachers. The people who get angry are the ones who really aren't that secure in their beliefs. If you counter their "because it's what I believe" with facts, they blow a gasket.
“In 3 persons” was a reference to the Trinity. The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Amen brotha!
And that is the Wackiest Concept in Christianity ..... 99% of Christians can't explain it nor understand it! Jesus IS Not God's Son. Jesus is an Aspect of God ( an idea taken from other older religions ).
@@jamesalexander5623 Yeah , except he was a real person even if you take out the religion and god and all that. I agree with your 99% of Christians don't understand or can explain the whole trinity thing . Problem comes from a lot of Christians humanizing god . The whole father thing is just the closest thing for us to explain a very small part of god. Fathers love their children but there is tough love and letting your kid make mistakes part and then fixing them themselves unless its out of their control . That is the only part I can say I genuinely understand .
See, this type of conversation happens only when the persons involved have REAL UNDERSTANDINGS of their beliefs and WHY they hold them.
They can see the opposite point of view and not only UNDERSTAND the logic behind their beliefs, but to also ACCEPT the possibility that their view could be equally correct, without their reasoning being completely destroyed by simple questions.
A public, open and free debate is where ideas are exposed to the world and to its audiences. W.o the demagoguery and propaganda.
The merits and the logic of ideas and the values of them.
An important part of The Freedom of Protest.
Ricky is a very clever man
The Goosebumps Tee gets a like before I even watch the video
Goosebumps > Are You Afraid of the Dark
@@vegasviking86 Submitted for the approval of the No Complaints Society, I call this reaction: "Atheism Is Myth-Understood."
Absolutely love Ricky, if you haven't seen it, check out his film The Invention of Lying, it's quite something. You also have to react to Ricky Gervais's stand up bit, Noah's Ark, it's hilarious and brilliant!
I have great respect for Ricky and appreciate his level of intellect and belief.
@Matt - I'm not so sure about that. I've watched a number of his debates and religious discussions, and find he is the real deal. I'm not sure you can bluff your way through university without some thought of your own, regardless of how well read he may be. If you claim ownership of your thoughts, even if they have been owned or shared by others, is fine by me.
Ricky doesn't have a belief...he has facts...
The problem people have discussing such matters with different personal views, is they feel the other person is threatening their belief. If you truly believe in a religion, I would think you would have such an inner peace. No one can take that away from you. I have met only a handful of people like that, and the way they speak without preaching is appreciated.
I've got an atheist group on fb. Once in a while a religious person comes in to either save us or try to prove us wrong. Kinda rude imo. I would never join a religious group to tell em they're wrong. If they still continue after I said this, then that person becomes nothing more than a bit of entertainment for the group. I can count the ones we had a normal adult conversation with on one hand.
I just love watching this debate again and again. Such good points made. And good questions. In a calm and smart respectful environment.
What points did Stephen make?
@@yew2oob954 he just made jokes the whole time
@@yew2oob954 i'd love to know, cuz all i heard was desparation.
Remember when people in America could sit down and discuss their differences rather than excluding themselves from people with opposite opinions?
You’d think that by now religious people would unite in their quest to prove religion right …
Its interesting how when Ricky says he is a atheist and the crowd start clapping, Stephen put his hand up to try and quiet them.
Stephen ducked, weaved and changed the question after every point Ricky made 🤣
It really isn't a debate. It never is.
Because the atheist bases their arguments on reality and the theist just talks about what they'd like to be real.
This should be the norm but it is the exception.
Thank you. I always, always get a lift from your podcasts and reviews. It is a wonderful blend of honesty and kindness. Two thing in short supply, In my opion. So...Thanks.
You should watch Stephen Fry being interviewed on Irish TV a few years ago.
We never need to agree with each other. Just understand each other.
Well I’d say agreements are very important in life- kinda the entire backbone of society… and when it comes to religions (or lack there of) if we all agreed we would be able to build a world which was best suited for practicing beliefs. There are times which disagreement are actually beneficial or neutral.
@@connoryoung8951 I'd prefer a world best suited for seeking truths, while the religious people do their own stuff away from progress and understanding.
The conversation worked because neither got offended, defensive or aggressive.
Ricky is funny and logical and doesn't really get offended.
Both are funny and logical men. Stephen is a brilliant host that shows a genuine respect for whatever his guest's point of view is.
@@NicholasBalanta Maybe both are funny but only one is logical.
One has a legitimate reason not to believe the other does not.
Ricky's show After Life is one of the best shows I've ever watched!
Stephens just trying to make ricky seem stupid because he knows he's got a point 😆 love Ricky for not rising to it
stephen smacks of desperation. ricky is using logic, and is thinking around stephen's bait.
Love them both . No crazy ranting just different views .
The difference being that Gervais views are based on scientific evidence colberts are not!
Riscky was on point, there's over 3000 religions and beliefs on this planet and countless of variations of those, so it's really egoistic to say your religion is the one and only... there's just couple religions that happend to spread more during the history and pushed and forced other religions convert.
If you want good debates about religion, search for Stephen Fry ! He actually nearly entered a anglican seminary, only problem he doesn't believe in god.
When I saw the title of this video I thought for a moment he means Stephen Fry, but my brain couldn't wrap around why he'd need to debate Ricky when they're so similar in their views.
And it's not like either of them 'won' they just expressed their opinion and accepted the others even if they disagreed.
STEPHEN SEEMS REALLY ANGRY
Shouldn't this be called " Stephen talks over everyone who disagrees with him " ?
Three persons in One God-The Father,The Son and The Holy Spirit is part of Catholic doctrine. Stephen Colbert & Anderson Cooper sat down for a lengthy talk about grief and many other things. It was priceless.
Colbert doesn't fall into this problem here because he doesn't go beyond the basic belief in a creator for the purposes of debate (though I'm aware he's a devout Catholic) but part of the issue with debating religious people on religion is that almost immediately, they want to jump to their own personal beliefs. A Christian immediately wants to go to Jesus, a Muslim immediately wants to go to the sayings of Muhammed etc.
But in order to have a debate on the existence of God you first have to establish the basic argument which is that the universe had a creator. That's the first and most important hurdle. You can't talk about the intentions or actions of the creator until you establish that a creator exists at all, without appointing any characteristics to that creator. For example, if there is a creator, it could be a kid in his bedroom playing a cosmic version of the Sims. Not exactly omnipotent and in that argument, the creator is just running a program and doesn't need to know how the program actually works in order to run it.
A creator doesn't need to be divine, it doesn't need to be perfect or even have a conscious will. A creator requires only one trait - the ability to create a universe and even then you're still left with the question of where did the creator come from? The whole "it's eternal" answer is a cop out and it's a theological answer. It's an answer based on the premise that the creator has to be perfect and all powerful. But a creator doesn't have to be those things and theists are so insistent in jumping to their own theology that they often completely skip over the absolute fundamental claims of creation they need to show is plausible before they can even get close to arguing about Jesus.
The onus is on religious people to first prove their God exists and they can’t, it’s that simple.
That’s why I always ask them the same question and they can never answer.
‘Prove to me your God exists’….oh wait, you can’t!
I then tell them God is Santa Claus for grownups!
only 27% of us northern euros think there is a god. rickys views are pretty standard here in uk
Stepehn frys arguement on why the catholic church is not a force for good is a great one.
I loved this. And your reaction was also so level headed. Amazing video and reaction
Ah you done it already , just mentioned this in another video of yours, the gentlemanly behaviour on a difficult subject is so rare.
Late to the party, but if you want to heart two people debating this, who are both passionate and intelligent, Jordan Peterson Vs. Stephen Fry is a spectacular debate. Jordan is a Christian, and Stephen is an outspoken atheist. It was a joy to watch.
Stephen fry vs the Catholic Church is the best argument on faith vs atheism
"Science adjusts its views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved."
-- Tim Minchin, Storm
Well Ricky won that. Pretty easily
"come back and debate something more important" was very mature of stephen colbert
I wish there was more of this level of educated friendly legit conversation and debate about these topics, because there’s no negative.
i saw this. i watch colbert on those few times he's actually there. ricky has the better argument.
The challenge isn't debating but making laws based on your beliefs.
In addition, if you don't have to be right in your debate. The goal of the debate isn't to win but change someone's position or thinking in even the smallest increment. Finally, when the debate is over, it is over and you go about your life. No hard feelings.
Without getting angry is a stretch Stephen was getting agressive when the good points was coming in.
Civilized discourses like this always remind me of the legend - Daryl Davis. 💪✌
Such a good debate. Bothe men hear each other out with full respect and no anger at all.
except for when stephen jokes about ricky getting bunged by satan. that's pretty passive aggressive, don't you think?
But remember, until 15-20 years ago, this type of conversation was perfectly possible, I had lots of it.
30 years ago I couldn’t bring a fantasy book to elementary school because there was magic and magic comes from the devil.
Some areas of the world where nuts since the beginning 🤣🤣🤣
Ricky nails it as always on religion I often wonder how the world would be without religion’s
Considering the incredible damage that theocracy has done to the world any time it's forced into law, it would definitely be a better place
i think quite different. without the history of people attaching gods to nature we may have made discovery's faster and we would probably be more advanced. but i think religion was an inevitable byproduct of people trying to figure out the world around us. and it just stuck
Better... It would be better
Logic is a hard pill to swallow for believers
I don't care what makes people happy but if reading a book that talks about talking snakes and a bush that is on fire that talks to people is what you like that's what you like
I love the way you reflected on it. That were my thoughts exactly! :)
Does "devout" give one any special privileges, a platinum card for something , ability to cut a queue, a quick and painless death, a nice mother in law, anything?
As starting as the sidekick of John Steward he did pretty well. I like the guy in what he does.
I dislike when people use the "You're placing your faith in science/scientists" argument. No, because science is able to be proven and/or replicated.
I love Ricky Gervais. He make such good points. As an atheist it is nice to listen to a conversation rather than a shouting game. People can agree to disagree but that is Very rare these days..
Colbert's own ego is the only god he worships.
I am very much an agnostic atheist/nordic heathen myself. But one thing I've been very interested in concerning the nature of evolution, cosmology and consciousness, is the possibility of a nascent and emerging "God"(as intelligent life propagates troughout the galaxy), eventually blooming from/consisting of the total sum of consciousness in our physical universe.
As opposed to most religious doctrine, where "God(s)" is already an absolute.
Would make more sense to me personally atleast, in regards to how I experience the world, life and humanity.
Buuut, dont have billions or trillions of years to prove it, so pretty much just a fun theory for my part :p
Being told that you're a sinner and you're going to be punished and burn in hell for eternity is toxic behaviour and that's why I'm an athiest.
Colbert is doing the always sunny Mac defense holy shit
The host didn’t allow his guest to explain without interrupting.
Graham Norton does the opposite and makes sure his guests are the stars of the show.
The American style of chat shows,the HOST is the star.
Hard to get used to.
Honestly I think the whole thing where people just are so impressed by people not screaming at each other is ridiculous. We're so busy sucking Gervais and Colbert for not screaming and calling each other names that we don't actually say anything about the content of the discussion. It's the death of conversation.
That is the absolute minimum. Congrats. And there was clearly something to talk about considering it wasn't a good debate at all. Colbert was arguing in bad faith throughout
Ricky Gervais and similar people tend to reify "science". Colbert asked "is there a demiurge that started everything", and Gervais says "outside science and nature, I don't believe so." But science is the activity of scientists. It's the pursuit of knowledge about the world, not the object of knowledge. Science does not regulate the world, it describes the world.
There are more of these conversations between them on this topic. I believe this is a relatively short one, look for longer interviews where they go a bit deeper. I LOVE it, respectful disagreement, civil discourse.
Love this.
Give his film The Invention of Lying a watch.
This is what discussion without malice looks like. Neither took offense to the other despite each saying hurtful things. But those things only hurt from 9ne perspective and they need to relay information to each other.
What if our Universe is just a Science Project in a High School Biology Class in some other Universe?
"Ricky Gervais - The Unbelievers Interview" is a 10 minute piece in which Ricky explains his views thoroughly, and really well.
Why must any individual press their belief in something on another, when they have no interest in said belief ?
I think we as individuals search for like minded individuals to further support our own beliefs. And then push our thoughts on those who rebuke them to the extreme.
Humanity is tribal and I honestly do not believe it will ever change.
Have a great day.
Amazing debate? Are you kidding? Stephen seems to me like he's never read any of the criticism against his position. Ever. How is arguing that believing people like Stephen Hawking is having Faith(!) (yes, big F) in him? As if that is canonically raising him into something other than a primate. Smug, unenlightened thinking like that defines the religious types, i find.
Ricky is a national treasure and a genius. Logical debates were common once until some people thought their imaginations and feelings were superior to facts. Let's hope a light goes on in their heads soon. I love your reactions and presentation. There is a glut of Ricky Gervais material that l hope you will explore.
He's literally quoting phrases verbatim uttered by Dawkins, Hitchens et al in 2007. That doesn't make it less true and he can be funny but calling him a genius is quite the stretch.
It's good they are able to debate without getting angry at each other because so much of that happens in our culture already. However believing a complete fantasy is indeed toxic because of all falsehoods you have to believe to hold such a belief up.
Bro. Love the goosebumps shirt! Amazing
Please react to Tim Minchin's 9 minute beat poem called 'Storm' !! It's also on the topic of debating religion and hilarious wherever you stand.
That has to be the best T-shirt I have ever seen!
There’s a play by Cormac McCarthy (The Road, No Country For Old Men) that was made into a movie by Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L Jackson-it’s called The Sunset Limited and it’s a more in depth version of this argument. An INCREDIBLE piece of work. The entire thing used to be up on UA-cam but it’s awesome and you should check it out
Wow, two entirely different levels. Ricky > Stephen
@3:25 "In three persons" is a reference to the so called Holy Trinity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, derived from the Catholic religion. I'm convinced that this is the creation and work of man. Nothing more than religious mythology, of which, each previous civilization has had their mythological gods and stories.
i think that you are absolutely wonderful
Gotta love Ricky & Stephen...Still boggles my mind that Stephen once played one of the Ambiguously Gay Duo 🤣😂😂🤣😂
Colbert’s blind spot. He can’t see his own delusion
This debate is the same one that's been happening for hundreds of years. I take your point about being able to have the discussion in a respectful manner, and I agree with that. Honestly though, Colbert's arguments are quite feeble. Bringing the trinity into it, just highlights the absurdity. The existence of a god would be amazingly easy to prove if a god actually existed. If it were proved, then I would accept it the same way I accept that 2 + 2 = 4. Yet the religious never manage to produce anything even remotely approaching proof.
I mean, "the existence of a god would be amazingly easy to prove if a god actually existed" makes absolutely no sense.
Why would it be amazingly easy to prove? Lots of things exist that were incredibly difficult to prove, and there's an unknown amount of things that exists which we haven't proven yet (and maybe never will). That argument is just as invalid as when religious people tell you to prove that there isn't a god.
@@tensemurm5924 No I'm afraid not. Your inability to imagine why it would be easy for an omnipotent god to provide sufficient empirical evidence for its own existence, has literally nothing to do with the validity of that statement. We're talking about an all-powerful being that could provide every piece of currently unknown data to fully explain its existence. You could literally check the data, so yeah... super simple to prove, if such a being existed.
@@dmwalker24 Playing devil's advocate, no pun intended, one could say a God would be under no obligation to appear to humans and tell them everything they wanted to know. Christianity in particular has built in its own fail-safe, somewhat conveniently, that even if God did appear and said he was God, you aren't allowed to test him to see if he's telling the truth (I haven't read the bible since I was a child, but I think that was the story about Abraham and his son).
@@dmwalker24 You said it would be easy for a god to provide sufficient evidence, but how do you know such a god would WANT to?
Isn't part of the point about our time on earth that it is a test (from a religion standpoint)?
Having that obvious evidence could defeat the purpose of the test. And clearly an omnipotent god would be able to exist without providing empirical evidence to humans, should it so choose.
I'm not even religious, but your argument doesn't make sense.
@@tensemurm5924 Well first, I just said it could provide it. I don't think it exists, so I wasn't even considering what it wanted. The narrative one often hears from the religious about testing humanity, and maintaining the validity of that test, are absolute gibberish. Their god can do anything, and knows everything. Just that eliminates the need for the test. First, god already knows how all future tests will play out, and second, if god wanted a different outcome, just a snap of the fingers, and it gets any outcome it wants. Those justifications of the religious make absolutely no sense from the perspective of an omnipotent god.
It's not a debate, but my favorite video on why I don't really subscribe to religion is found in a video entitled Stephen Fry on God.
It annoys that ‘every time’ Ricky appears on Colbert to promote a movie or series Stephen ALWAYS brings up God. He can’t stand that Ricky is an atheist just like millions of people around the world yet Stephen just can’t let it go. I wish Ricky would ask Stephen how he feel about priests sexually abusing young children and the Catholic Church covering it up for centuries considering he’s a devout Catholic!!!
Are you the guy that does the cantina talk with kevin smith?
This was a conversation for a bit, then satan was introduced 😂 which in religious terms means it’s heated now
great job... love the civil debate
I would argue about Stephen Colbert being extremely religious or devote and his defense of the lefts ideology.
"The left's ideology" and religion generally are not mutually exclusive propositions. The left's ideology is only exclusive of the right's whacko evangelical beliefs. Stephen is a devout Catholic, and your argument is based on your own inherent bias that your belief system is the only one that's true to religion, when in fact, the right's whacko evangelical beliefs are just that - whacko, and not based in anything Christ ever said. I don't say "whacko" as an insult, simply as a descriptor for "out there beyond the pale of what protestantism generally recognizes." And yes, I'll happily debate all of that with you, if you can keep the discussion as civil as Stephen and Ricky just did theirs. ;) My own background, for the record: I was raised Methodist, though I am now lapsed by choice; I don't need a building to have a personal relationship with God; and I'm a Democrat - a social liberal, but a true fiscal conservative, in the sense that I want everyone to have what they need to survive and thrive (not necessarily what they want), but I don't want the country going into outrageous amounts of debt to pay for it when there are other things that could be done instead. Your move, if you're interested. ;)
@@TheAlmaward Funny how the Catholic Church doesn't see it from your point of view. Nancy & Co. Have to Priest shop to take communion. Blahahahaha
@@jthomas7904 That's not the Catholic Church; that's a few evangelical whacko (same definition of whacko, btw) Catholic priests and bishops. The Pope has repeatedly said that anyone in the faith, of whatever political persasion, may partake of communion. Next? :)
@@TheAlmaward Ahhh... get things right now.
The pope vehemently said he never denied Communion to anyone, adding that while he doesn’t know if Catholics who support abortion rights ever asked him for Communion, he has “never refused them the Eucharist, since the time I was a priest.”
The pontiff was clear on his anti-abortion stance, saying that the embryo is “a human life” and that “abortion is homicide.” He praised Catholic activism against abortion, because abortion “is a bit as if daily murder was accepted,” he said.
Next?:)
Healthy conversation is rare these days.
Great video, and reaction, I've never seen this, and I love both Ricky and Stephen! Totally agree, what a great debate, with points made, and no one trying to rip the others head off.
I will say, that I'll have to respectfully disagree, as I did once before, there is a distinction between an atheist and agnostic. I understand what you said about them believing similar, and for the most part that's true, but I do know some die hard atheists that no way no how believe there's even a tiny chance there could be another life form or being out there. You're born, you live, then you die, your body decomposes in the soil and eventually your molecules get returned to the cosmos. To where I believe that it's possible something we can't even fathom had a hand in creating us or the universe, or that our universe is a single electron in a multi universe size combustion engine or something. I just know it's not any of the man made nonsense created here on earth.
Big if. You can debate anything, IF one of the ideologies isn't absolutely toxic.
Agnostic simply means you do not deny there's a god/higher power, however you haven't been proven that there is one (or more).
In that case, you'll find it interesting that many people who deem themselves religious are actually Agnostic at the same time.