Where Does Morality Come From? Rogan/Dawkins | Doug Wilson
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- In this episode of Doug Reacts, Pastor Doug Wilson responds to a video of Joe Rogan and Richard Dawkins in which they address the question, "Where does morality come from?"
Enjoying this video? Check out Doug's book "Refuting the New Atheists" today!
canonpress.com...
Doug Reacts is an apologetics reaction series presented by Canon Press.
Enjoying this video? Check out Doug's book "Refuting the New Atheists" today!
canonpress.com/products/refuting-the-new-atheists/
Are you a creationist? Of course you don’t have to answer. I’m just curious.
@@gatolf2 most Reformed Christians are also young earth creationists because it's what the Bible plainly teaches, and many ministries over the last half century have done great work to expose the false naturalistic assumptions of secular scientists
Another Encore with Mr "People Burgers" PLS.
@@horrificpleasantry9474 I agree. But I’ve seen many good apologists that still believe the old earth. I’m a YEC.
Stupid question are your books available on kobo format?
I can’t get enough of these brother.
It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard?
My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men.
And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.
@@Lombokstrait1 this isn't a good argument. You have simply assumed that you're correct that God doesn't exist. But you haven't proven it, so your claim about Biblical morality being subjective doesn't logically follow. It's a bare assertion/begging the question fallacy
@@horrificpleasantry9474 It is a great argument. Because it is true. The bible is not divine. All religions are created by man. I can prove it by pointing out that the bible is a mess. It has false prophecies, contradictions, superstitious blather. It is poorly written. Boring. Redundant. Long winded.
An all knowing, all powerful god (if it existed) would've inspired a much better book.
The stories are piss poor too.
@@Lombokstrait1 So, when society decides that it is ok to throw homosexuals off of buildings as happens in strict fundamentalist Islamic countries, that’s ok because their society agrees it’s ok?
Of, to bring it to the democratic west, let’s say an American state puts the question on a ballot and 70% of the voters agree that abortions are morally wrong and then the state passes legislation banning abortions as morally wrong, you would favour such a practice? You would agree then that abortions are morally wrong because the majority says so? Then, in time the will of the people changes and they decide abortions are morally acceptable, and they therefore become morally acceptable? Then, after more time, the will of the people changes again and abortions are once again banned. Do you honestly believe that in such a scenario abortions could go from morally wrong, to morally good and then back to morally wrong again? Would you be willing to agree to whatever the fickle masses tell you is morally right and wrong?
What if society decided that disabled people should be euthanized? For the greater good and to spare them further suffering, of course.
@@Lombokstrait1 gotta stop you right there. Atheism is false so none of your comments matter.
Is it annoying when people just assume you're wrong/they're right without proving it?
"We're in a fog, driving down the road. We have no idea where we're going, but we're making good time!" 😂
Ahh Doug, love it.
That was awesome.
I used to be a pragmatist “love all serve all” kind of person, I started listening to Joe Rogan’s podcast years ago, I had an ah-ha moment when I realized Joe was a pragmatist, I realized how pragmatists put themselves as referee and worse on a pedestal that they aren’t morally capable of making moral judgements. I also realized then that I would have to quit being a pragmatist in order to follow Christ.
Same
You would lose your sanity to be indoctrinated.*
I think you're correct insofar as his stated beliefs. However, we should also judge by his actions. Pragmatists can only sit on the fence for so long before God wobbles the fence and we're made to jump on one side or the other.
1:40 “The issue isn’t that Christians think you’re immoral”
We know Doug. And God only knows how many times Dawkins has been corrected on this and yet he still spews his nonsense.
That's not true. Often when you let somebody know you're atheist They believe simply with this statement you are a immoral.
It's incredible how this man who has written books, given speeches, and so forth, who can be verifiably respected as an expert, falls to the most simple of arguments. It's incredible. The fear of the Lord is truly the beginning of wisdom
The rejection of bullshit is the beginning of wisdom.
@@arthura.2587 Boy you sound like you really know a lot.
@@SummumBonum. about the extent of ur voluminous vocabulary obviously... what say ye?
@@mitchelll3879 I can't make sense of your comment.
@@SummumBonum. Thought you did something 🤡
Someone tell me if they think I'm missing the mark here... what I got out of the British guys rambling is that morality is decided by elitists who know best for us plebs.
That's what it sounds like to me, basically the G7, G8, G20, United Nations etc come together and announce the new morality for the next 12 months.
Can we start referring to him only as British athiest guy now? Like how Neil Degrasse Tyson is sometimes called black science man
I laughed so hard when Rogan asked Dawkins, "Where do you think morality comes from?" and he said, "Well... we don't really know BUT... we know it's real." Like, bro, your saying the same thing you accuse the Christians of saying haha
Rogan seems to have every man and his dog on the podcast… apart from a Christian apologist.
Rogan's still so steeped in Christianity that he doesn't recognize how literally out of the world it is.
He had Seth Dillon from the Babylon Bee on, and Seth was able to talk about why abortion is evil.
During these; I often find myself just saying....."git em, Doug"!😁❤️
This guy believes in something in the air that makes morality. But not a God who implemented morality in our conscious. Very interesting.
It's called ignorance
If your morality contradicts anothers, then who's it correct? And if they are implanted by the same being, then why are they different, shouldnt they be universal? And if an individual can decide for themseleves what is moral, then aren't you only as moral as you are immoral in anothers eyes, and visca versa?
Excuse me where does he says that? look most humans dont like pain we dont need a God telling us to avoid it, most humans feel empathy too wich makes us want to avoid the suffering of others this behavior can be seen in humans whom never heard about Jesus and even other species, that's how evolution builds social species, but I know you will reject that because christians dont like reading about evolution because it doesnt make them feel warm and fuzzy inside like the idea of seeing grandma in heaven someday.
@@enmanuelsan Thats a sweeping generalization. You might be referring to creationist, but the biggest Christian churches on the planet; Catholic and Orthodox have no problem with evolution, it doesnt do away with God at all. If you look at the practices of the ancient world, the Jews stand out as different because God gave them His moral law at Mount Sinai. That is where the modren and western world was born. This is why I would argue, it isnt implanted generally but only after a person is born again. And that law is referenced in constitutions around the world and if you look at what happens when we abandon those values in the modern world such as with Nazi Germany or the USSR, the results speak for themselves. So clearly if left to our own devices we get it wrong and cant decide on a universal morality.
@@enmanuelsan 9:45 ✌️
"I have hidden it from the wise and revealed it unto babes"! You just gotta love hyper intellectuals trying to explain away the existence of the living God.
“Hyper intellectuals”?
@@GeorgeEH In their own minds.
@@GeorgeEH LMBO
@@MichaelJones-xz8mm Dawkins, sure. Joe? - no. He regularly tells people that he’s an intellectual chimp that knows nothing.
Professing to be wise they became fools
My posh English voice makes people think my empty philosophy has value
Lol, I've never understood that. When he said "debates in government" to help determine morality I just about lost it. That's the kind of stuff trolls say
I'm English and I agree. His theories are very airy fairy.
@@MrCharlieC23 do we get all the rejected Brits here In America? Like when Britain emptied its prisons and started sending criminals here by the boatload and we had to start firing on them to get them to stop?
@@scottwall8419 I guess you get a bit of everything there considering you are a land of immigrants - and that's with no disrespect.
😂yes
Doug's laughs and giggles is one of the best things about his response. And of course, By What Standard?
It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard?
My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men.
And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.
@@Lombokstrait1 but “democracy and society” don’t exist everywhere. Most nations aren’t a democracy. Most undeveloped nations aren’t an organized “society”. There is no “collective” essentially outside of the western nations in many nations
Yea xDDDD
@@Goldni8372 most non western countries are the ones that are most dominated by religion. What does that tell you?
@@zeek8918 all societies are dominated by religion. If you can't see that covid cult and woke-ism are manifesting as state religions then you're just in stubborn denial.
It blows my mind that people think Dawkins is a deep thinker.
No kidding.
No, a foolish thinker
"UA-cam videos teach you nothing..."
Me: But Doug, what about-
"...except this one."
Me: Phew, that was a close one.
Dawkins has his feet firmly planted in mid-air.
It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard?
My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men.
And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.
@@Lombokstrait1 you're literally restating the things Dawkins said in the video which Wilson just dis assembled 😂
@@dianeenyi2849 No I'm not. I'm stating it quite differently. And I dismantled Doug's argument. Can you read?
@@dianeenyi2849 Charlie commits a fallacy by assuming what he needs to prove: that God doesn't exist. Then he concludes from this that our morality is subjective. The conclusion doesn't follow
@@Lombokstrait1 you would have a point if your assumption were true, but it's not. Pretty glaring error
By Dawkins’s moral paradigm, ‘immoral’ means little more than ‘out of fashion’.
Doug Wilson is brilliant, fearless as possible today, and incredibly prolific.
Pastor, please don't let your incredible gifts lead to any loss of humility or compassion for lost souls. I need you to stay out front stating what I believe but can't put into words as you can and do. THANK-YOU!
Our morality comes from dinner party chatter....
Underrated comment
I never have heard an atheist explain their basis for an objective morality. They usually say they have one, and eventually concede “morality is subjective”. Which is the entire point. Relative morality is no morality. If morality can change based on society or whatever changing measurement, then nothing is actually good or bad, just not preferred at the current time.
I like the way you put this. Thanks!
So true and couldn't agree more. I can relate to similar experience when talking with Atheists. They always resort to “morality is subjective” near the end of the conversation. Oddly enough this is the same argument pedophiles give when convicted.
For me, as a humanist - morality is rooted in human well-being. Of course I will have a subjective view of what constitutes human well-being, but that is no different from Christians saying that the nature of God is their standard, but they all have a subjective view of what that nature is. So both sides have an absolute standard, but a subjective view of what that absolute standard constitutes. By what standard? By that standard.
@@Faust2Dr well being? So what is your objective standard of well being? And which well being law and where does the source of well being come from? Did well being law exist before humans existed? To some it’s their well being to destroy the weak person, you know survival of the fittest. When we say it is God, God has written right and wrong through inspiration of the Holy Spirit in the Bible, which both Christian, Jews and Muslim accept the Old Testament as Gods word, we just have different interpretations of the Old Testament. You have nothing to point to.
@@Faust2Dr Thank you for sharing. My only disagreement would be that in Christianity there is a basis for objective morality to exist.
Atheism provides no basis for even the existence of an objective morality, because it’s materialist at its core. Morality is immaterial. So “morality” goes no further than the opinion of an evolved fish. There is no objective standard to misinterpret as “wrong” in that worldview.
Humans may misinterpret Gods standard, but the standard is objective and outside of man. Any Godless worldview provides no basis for even the existence of objective morality. Human flourishing is just a preferred set of values, but does not contain any basis for it to actually be good or bad, just preferred by some. And not preferred by many who would say human flourishing is actually bad.
Dawkins is such a intellectual hypocrite. Cant take atheist seriously at all
Exactly. "Morality is determined by dinner party conversation, judges and conversations and debates in government" so its determined by rich people, powerful people and corrupt people, got it. If I had to choose one group to not determine morality or would be 100 state senators lol. What a crazy thing for people to think is a good idea
@@scottwall8419 I know and trusting atheist on what is moral when they profess morals dont exist while all the while saying things are immoral.... mental diahreah is taking place lol
@Kenny Bugh not proven to you is the only truthful statement you can honestly make in this instance. I'm thoroughly convinced
@Kenny Bugh things yet to be proven doesnt follow it isnt true. Agnosticism is But if god does exist then yes moral absolutes cab exist. If atheism is true there is no such thing simply human convention. So you can disagree with theist all day. However atheism doesnt starred being a moral system just because you dont believe in god. Humans are ultimately meaningless in atheism which means morals are not real. Only human opinion and human opinion varies and disagrees with one another. No standard of morals in atheism.
@Kenny Bugh we are intellectually consistent. Dawkins admits morals aren't real yet judges things to be immoral. INTELLECTUAL HYPOCRISY
Christian worldview: feet planted firmly on The Rock.
Atheistic worldview: feet planted firmly in the air and waving around aimlessly and, often, angrily.
Firmly planted in cheese and wine parties
@@nancyf5777 Pantheism is anti-scientific. The Creator and the created are separate things.
1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. The universe has a cause.
4. That cause is God.
God is, by definition, the uncaused, eternal, necessary Cause of the universe.
Often angrily? Who do you think makes up 99% of prison inmates? I'll give you a clue, it isn't atheists.
@@hectorespinoza3446 On your atheistic worldview, is anger objectively bad? By what standard do you, based on your atheism, consider people who are in prison objectively bad? There are many innocent people in prison: should they be angry?
@@justin10292000 No emotion is outright bad, all emotions are normal. I base my standards on what society as a collective deems bad. Although murder and rape have always been bad...unless you're religious. Of course someone unrightfully incarcerated should be upset/angry.
BTW, I would argue our morality is not any better than the ancients:
Idolatry (love of money and material things) - Check
Human Sacrifice (eg. Abortion) - Check
Slavery (still happens in many parts of the world) - Check
Hatred & Intolerance of Others - Check check check
So even Dawkins original premise, we live in an age of superior morality, I would respectfully and highly disagree.
"you're a slave to whom you obey." We have slavery everywhere. Especially considering that biblical slaves were given equal rights to citizens when it came to bodily harm, they could marry, they were given free food and housing AND a daily wage, debt cancellation, and guaranteed work for a 6 year contract term. Like modern employment but much better in principle.
Facts! But slavery still exists in the West though. It's given different labels: prison, porn industries, prostitution, taxes etc
so the guy is basicly saying that you get a decades morals from what the people of that decade says and writes, but he does not awnser where the people get them from in the first place...
So let me get this right…..they believe right and wrong and good and evil are objective terms but reject the only “thing” that could give us a fixed standard of morality. They’re so inconsistent with their logic.
That "thing" can perhaps give a standard, but then morality is arbitrary, not objective
It's amazing how ignorant Dawkins is of epistemology. That he would generate morality from the ether, woe. He could in no way say why, grounded, that today's morality is better than the pillaging and terror of the vikings. I guess back then they had worse cheese parties would be his argument.
No today is better because they have Kool-aid hair.
This is a case of someone who is absolutely very intelligent - no doubt about that, shown to be an absolute stupid idiot at the same exact time. "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools". This is that case if there ever was one!
@@joeadrian2860 It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard?
My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men.
And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.
@Kenny Bugh um no. It would if the bible were legitimate. The is the trap door to Doug's thought process.
The bible is man made. Nothing will change that.
@Kenny Bugh Yes. I like Dawkins. Thanks for clarifying.
Why do you keep asking by what standard? Well by our own standard obviously. Everything we label as being better or worse directly translates to what we like more or dislike more. It's nothing more than our preferences that change over time, and we call it morality. No different than us mostly preferring Rock in the 80s and today we prefer Pop. Nothing special about it.
Watching a "genius" struggle to speak his ideas, only to appear to make stuff up, makes me laugh, considering he calls it a delusion.
What exactly makes this guy a genius? Every time I hear him speak on things like this he sounds like a buffoon.
In all of my viewings of Richard Dawkins, he is exceptionally good at describing God, and then saying “no that’s not God, that’s something else.”
Love it Doug! Thank you for this! Can't believe a few years back, before I found Christ, that I used to listen to people like Joe and Richard all the time and believe the insanity they spew. I think listening to Joe for long enough, even in my pot induced hypnotic trance, I started to realize all the blatant contradictions, and that he changed his mind daily depending on who his guest was.
I can relate, I used to think atheists like this used to have good points but now I just laugh at how stupid they are, pretty much every professional philosopher just laughs at people like Dawkins and the sad thing is other laymen believe them because of Dawkins scientific credentials
So that’s the new thing “ when I was an Atheist”???
Doug is not being much more sane. He says atheist can be moral while he watches two men explain their idolatry and hatred for Christ. The Western church has rejected Christ when the adopted the lie of freedom of Religion.
Jesus endorsed Slavery disgusting and worse than an idiot for those who worship him!!!!😮😮😮
As soon as this video showed up in my feed, my immediate thought was: How long will it take DW to introduce the phrase "by what standard?" ANS: 2:22. (The over/under was 1:40).
Because RD walked right into it.
@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 that's a straw man if I ever saw one. We *never* said that we can meet that moral standard. The word of God says that we *can't* meet that standard. And *that* is the entire reason we need Jesus. And while we rely *entirely* on Jesus for our salvation when we stand before God after we die, we are still called to follow in Christ's example while we are here on earth. We are saved by faith, changed by Christ, and our faith is then completed by an outward change of actions caused by a change of motivations, which was caused by a change of heart. "You will know them by their fruit." But we never claimed to be perfect, nor will we be until after we die, which is when God completes His work in us.
In years gone by, or ancestors, wider than we by half, called Dawkins 'something in the air' by the more accurate term 'the spirit of the age' and it's one of those things the apostle Paul called a Principality.
Thank you for these! I wish we could get Doug on Rogans podcast! Even though I realize we can't "argue" someone into believing, it would still be interesting to see how he would react to someone who can speak on these topics. Thanks again!
It has been a long standing myth that Dawkins is at all smart. This myth largely due to his aristocratic British accent, I think.
He's done a lot for clarifying evolutionary theory but then there's dunning -kruger
He's smart and well educated. I can understand why you feel intimidated.
Also; he's upper middle class, not aristocrat. His background and generation shouldn't be used against us.
So why is he also a renowned writer? He writes in a British accent?
He's obviously done a lot for biology but when it comes to history and philosophy he's woefully inadequate
@@JoshMcSwain Gonna take the craziest, wildest swing in the dark here. Are you religious?
These conversations are so interesting to me. They do everything they can to avoid giving God the credit. They dance around the Truth and try to justify their inconsistencies. It’s God, Joe. It’s always been God.
Their argument would be its progress by the standard that its most conducive to human flourishing. Sam Harris made that argument in effort to ground morality. But William Lane Craig dismantled it.
Exactly. The reason it doesn't work is because one must ask, what defines human flourishing? Aka, by what standard do you label something as human flourishing? And why is human flourishing a good thing? It's just pushing the argument down another rung but you still haven't reached the ground you're resting on yet.
@@jeremyedgar7123 yeah the environmentalists literally don't care about human flourishing at all
I’m a Catholic. I’m suspicious of anything Protestant. Yet, I’m very glad to have found you.
I’m the same with Chesterton lol
that's why Paul said that, the fight is not against flesh and blood but against the principalities, and powers in the AIR kakaka he's god is in the AIR. Incredible...
To Dawkins credit, I think he pronounced “progress” correctly because he’s British and that’s how they say it. Lol
Proper English language, unlike the improper American English
I'm sure Rogan and Dawkins won't mind if in 10 years, that is if its culturally acceptable, for me to push them off 10 story buildings.
It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard?
My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men.
And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.
@@Lombokstrait1 Your religion is just as man made as anyone else's. What makes you so godlike?
@Kenny Bugh Yes. He has a "religion". The dictionary definition of religion is a belief system, and just because he doesnt honor a "God" outside of himself, means he has declared himself the arbiter of right and wrong and all morality, and by default has become His own "God". Lol
@Kenny Bugh Lol. Atheists are their own "God's" by default. To say otherwise is a fools errand. I wouldn't be ashamed to say that if I was in that camp. Stand up for what you believe, and don't be ashamed of it.
@Kenny Bugh You are the one who's making the "straw man arguement". And obviously, we will have to agree to disagree. You will never change my worldview, and most likely, I will never change yours. That we should be able to agree upon.
Frank Peretti gave a talk years ago where he said there are only two Religions in the world. Either God is God or man is god.
I'm continually surprised how so many conversations like this one between Rogan and Dawkins can summarized by Peretti's statement.
Their talk reminds me of the banquet gibberish in That Hideous Strength.
Imagine if Dawkins could read the following without presuppositions and pride and accept that what God is saying might just be true? Imagine if all men like him could read it and trust that what God is saying is true. Here’s what I’m referring to:
““For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways,” says the Lord. “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts.”
Isaiah 55:8-9 NKJV
Please never trademark the term "by what standard"™️.
I hear only excuses from Dawkins not good solid answers.
This was a bloodbath!
By what standard? Is THE showstopper
“Hahahaha human sacrifices. How barbaric. How outdated.”
-pro choice atheist.
So let me get this straight, Dawkins admittedly says that morals change from one century to another? Then what business does he have condemning and showing disdain for a moral system 35 centuries ago? The arrogance of this man is quite entertaining.
It’s fun to hear that fusty, crusty accent say such foolish things. But, still, I watch for the belly laughs Pastor Doug. Go for that Harrison guy next!
Harris. Sam Harris.
The only thing that I agree with Dorkins in this video was his pronunciation of the word 'progress'.
The only thing that I disagree with Doug in this video was his pronunciation of the word 'progress'.
"A gestation pool for morality" you hit the nail on the head. These videos need to be required in every public school curriculum. A lesson in post modern thought and reasoning.
Amen brother! may God bless you for this! :) When there is rejection of God this is what you get from those who reject God: trying to reason without reason, trying to come up with an 'objective truth' or 'objective morality' when there is none. up is down, down could be up, and there is no really anything except well organized molecules bumping into one another endlessly and reacting, trying to come up with 'good morality' when there is no goodness lol!
It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard?
My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men.
And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.
@@Lombokstrait1 You just made a logical fallacy, Renfro. It is called 'strawman fallacy'. Christians do NOT claim that we MADE UP religion, we claim we know the truth. Jesus Christ is the foundation of truth. It's either that you find the truth or then you invent the truth either on your own or according to the collective means such as democracy.
Jesus said: 'I am the way, the TRUTH, the life, no one comes unto the Father except through me'. When we talk about morality and goodness, we talk about God. God IS Good! He is the moral standard. We did NOT come up with that, we, that is born again christians, claim and believe that God Himself used humans to reveal His will to us in the Bible. We've been created into the image of God and because God is reason, logic and truth, we can also reason, use logic and find truth - Jesus.
If By democratic means we would decide what's right and what is wrong then today murder could be right, tomorrow wrong. It would be just a matter of opinion. and hey, who decides if it would be the majority deciding that it would be right or wrong? why not minority? who says we must follow the scientists' views on what is right or wrong? who decides? Yet again, all about subjective morality.
But absolute morality does exist and that absolute morality(goodness) is God almighty. You can know Him too by the things that have been created by Him. When you look at nature, history, read the BIble in its context, you can see this God truly exists.
If God does not exist then everything goes bro. He does but, as romans 1 says, people suppress the truth(of God's Word) in unrighteousness(wickedness). They wanna live in their wickedness, like stealing all day long, than humbling themselves and trusting in Jesus Christ for their salvation and source of truth. As Jesus(who is truth) said: whosoever is of the truth hears me(Jesus).
God bless
Can you please make a reaction playlist (and also a debate one)? I’m new to this channel but I often times find myself watching these video of yours!
I hope Joe Rogan sees this video but unfortunately he only wants to see what he wants to see and will only talk to the people he wants to talk to
We're in the fog, we're driving down the road, we don't know where we are going but we're making good time. 😂 haha classic
It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard?
My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men.
And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.
@@Lombokstrait1 a fool says in his heart there is no God
@@SMNR777 They (the men who wrote the bible) put that in there to coerce people into believing your religion.
@@Lombokstrait1 God inspired those men to write those things whether they behaved perfectly in God's eyes is up for debate
@@Lombokstrait1 I don't think that w ord means what you think it means. Also, anyone reading should be able to notice that Charlie begs the question by assuming what he needs to prove. Everything he says afterwards is arbitrary
Richard Dawkins is excellent at creating strawman, and excellent at making caricatures of the positions and statements of others.
Rogan is so over his head on this topic he had to at least try and sound semi-intelligent...he said a big word... "Superior".
Such a rube.
To say that the bible is immoral to a standard they can't define or where it comes from is just an opinion. And if you're opinion says something is bad and people agree with it and take is as fact then your the very thing you don't believe in. Richard Dawkins wants to be God and not to be governed by a holy God who decreed everything in the universe. That's why he doesn't want to be believe in God because then he would have to acknowledge an authority above himself.
Is Yaweh's standard not another opinion? What makes it truly 'right'?
@@bepisboy291 Yahweh ordained all Truth and morality therefore it's no opinion heade it right because he is the sovereign God of the universe.
would be interesting to Douglas actually get to go onto Rogan to see how Rogan would respond. Rogan doesnt ever get theists on, just atheists like shermer, dawkins, Neil Degrasse
Atheists should not enter into a battle of wits and reason with brother Doug. Just want to thank you for all your work standing against all these militant atheists Doug! I have learned so much from you and your arguments have filled my intellectual tool box which have proved very useful while witnessing to these lost “FOOLS”. Your work with Christopher Hitchens was just awesome. The way you debated him while showing the love of Christ was unreal! 🙏💪👍. Christopher rarely debated someone who could match his quick wit, humour and quick thinking. You absolutely did and I believe it really spoke to him. I was very saddened by his death and his condemnation to Hell for eternity. I prayed that he would repent. What a warrior for Christ he would have been! ☹️
Man, I love Doug. I chuckled along with him at the absurdity of these atheistic arguments from these intelligent FOOLS!
I cannot be Godly, Christlike, without the presence of the HOLY SPIRIT actively changing my 💔 of stone to a 💗 of flesh. My 🧠 cannot be renewed into the 🧠 of The SON YESHUA HAMASHIACH. It is not about being in line with some form of morality, ethics, law abiding virtuous idea of secular goodness. The righteousness of the LORD is HIS SON YESHUA HAMASHIACH . The HOLY SPIRIT is the one who gives us the wherewithal to fellowship, and follow the SON YESHUA HAMASHIACH. People are speaking as if we are is regenerated, sanctify entirely. That is a grave delusion. 🙏✝️🕯🛐🤲. One should not be dumbfounded by Richard Dawkins, or Joe Rogan discussion as if they are talking the truth of the LOGOS of IMMANUEL. We need to ask the SON YESHUA HAMASHIACH to slay our proclivity for indignation, to remove the remnant of our self righteousness 🙄 .
God is a supernatural God, but Reformed teaching has already thrown THAT God under the bus.
There is the Spirit of God for the rest of us, and He convicts the world of sin, as He wishes.
You can't start generalizing about morality to atheists. You are not supposed to.
Richard Dawkins and his followers are JUST saying, "God is an evil person! I'm a MORE moral person than Him."
Now, not ALL atheists are Stalins or Maos or what have you, but they are STILL sinners, and sin runs from holiness.
I was convicted of sin by the HOLY scriptures. Works every time! The sinner can't hide from his sin. Adam? Eve?
Jesus told us to be baptised in His name, receive the Spirit and spread the Kingdom of God as the Spirit leads.
When you refuse the power of the Spirit, you have NOTHING left but moral arguments, therefore the world remains lost.
But judgment is coming VERY soon. Believers and atheists need to KNOW this. It's just like Jesus said it would be.
Richard Dawkins has written that evil doesn't exist. But I'll bet he locks his house, car and office doors when he leaves. Godless fools speak like that. Their pride manifests as rebellion against God and his word. Psalms 14:1-3, Romans 1:18-22, Romans 3:10-18
Dawkins’ supreme authority is his own feelings.
Without an external, objective moral standard, then he cannot explain WHY stoning adulterers , or slavery is objectively W. R. O. N. G.
I’d like to hear him explain to a Viking raider or Arab slave-trader why their activities are immoral. Or why it is immoral to conduct a genocide against a minority if the majority benefits. Ultimately, all such arguments boil down to feelings, or endless attempts to quantify subjective perceptions of “harm” or “public good”.
Please do a response to Matt Dillahunty!!
I'm genuinely curious - you kept asking "by what standard", but it's probably the similar standard that you are using, right? Since I cannot see how could you say that you are using Bible as a standard, because people have been using Bible as a "standard" for quite some time and derived massively different morality from it. When people are reading Bible today, they are constantly deciding which part of Bible they are going to take literally, which part are they going to take metaphorically and which part they are going to simply ignore (huge parts of the Old testament especially). So they are clearly using some sort of moral standard to decide which part to take literally, metaphorically or just to ignore it - in this case they are definitely not relying on morality from Bible, since it's the Bible that they are morally cherry picking. So what is this standard that you are using to decide to ignore some parts of the Bible or take it metaphorically that people historically would've taken literally.
The wicked, in the haughtiness of his countenance, does not seek Him.
All his thoughts are, “There is no God.”
- Psalm 10:4
The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God,”
They are corrupt, and have committed abominable injustice;
There is no one who does good.
God has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men
To see if there is anyone who understands,
Who seeks after God.
Every one of them has turned aside; together they have become corrupt;
There is no one who does good, not even one.
- Psalm 53:1-3
The Human condition truly attests to the truthfulness of Scripture.
It is either God or evolved. I've discussed now a few times in my own vids. You can be good without God. And you can be evil with God in your life. All religious wars have proven this. But does this battle of good vs non good come from a God vs the proverbial devil? Or dark force or whatever you want to call it. The argument can be given that it must come from a higher being and the argument can be given that it doesn't necessarily have to. As all atheists aren't in prison. Either way this argument can't be won by either side. Cheers,DCF
No offense to anyone that reads this and believes in The God of the Bible (or any other religion for that matter) but it’s very difficult to see if you are wrong when you’re in a biased position. Do your research guys and you’ll realize the more you dig, the more holes you’ll find in something that has been taught to us before we could even read.
Could say the same to you, having actually done said digging
@@horrificpleasantry9474 you didn't do any digging.
@@remix4098 You came all the way here to say nothing productive? Waste of my time, and I find it very ironic.
Doug nailed it in the first minute. A leader MUST believe in a higher power or else said leader believes he/she is that higher power.
That's right. It's why the US Constitution is a demonic document. It denies God and his Anointed and makes 'We the People' God.
"If there is no god above the president, then the president is god." Referring to Sleepy Joe, we assume.
But consider the previous president. A conspiracy theorist named Wayne Allyn Root described him, "the greatest President for Jews and for Israel in the history of the world," that "the Jewish people in Israel love him like he's the King of Israel" and even that "They love him like he is the second coming of God."
Alot of Wilson's theology, stinks like an open sewer, however, as someone who believes in God, he is a great advocate for God. In the debates, of apologists, vs Hitchens, Mr. Wilson, in my opinion, did a better job, than even WLC, but not good enough, even though it appeared he got under Hitchens skin. His response videos, are great. Hilarious, that Dawkins pontificates immorality, while insisting on being just a random, carbon based lifeform.
Interesting. So constantly reworking and redefining morality is pointless if you dont believe in god? So all atheists should live evil, immoral lives because they don't believe in the afterlife? I have been enjoying Doug's videos but this one is annoying. Like Dawkins says, we derive morality through debate and communication, not from a preacher who pretends that he can speak to "god". Christians take for granted that they know right/wrong. Atheists and non-believers know they may be wrong but are constantly searching for the truth
Mr. Dawkins should perhaps study more history and understand what you get when you don't get your morality from anywhere. Hope he has some awareness of Nazi Germany, Mao's China, and Soviet Russa. It always amazes me when these atheists make moralistic arguments for the evils present in Christians while completely ignoring the endless evils present in non-Christians. The difference is that the Christians have an explanation for where the evil comes from and how best to remedy it.
“We are simply claiming…they (atheists) can’t give us a reason for it (moral behavior)” How about we are all human beings/living creatures and it behooves us to be good to each other, otherwise society is impossible? No good?
These "moral emanations in the air" seem to greatly resemble farts. 😂
I wonder if anyone in history’s natural speaking voice has ever sounded as comically villianesque as Richard Dawkins’.
D. Willy's laugh gets me ertime 😂
I’ll try to avoid the ad hominem… I’ll just say this: I really have no clue why Dawkins is considered intelligent, cognitive, or even sincere. His dissonance is staggering. If he were just spitballing or examining his thoughts I wouldn’t be so critical. He espouses his uttering to be fact. He deserves any ridicule he gets. I have to pray about people like him all the time… about my thoughts and my gentleness to them. I lose patience way to easily. Forgive me Jesus. I post this as I weep…
White beard man- not so wise. If some stuff in Bible and Quran are immoral, and he said at what stander we say it’s immoral, then one can argue what Nazis did is also not immoral. What standard do you use to judge them?. Religious books suppose to be for all times, from some being who suppose to be Omniscient, did not know that his words will be scrutinized in every century. BS.
Why can’t Dawkins just admit that western civilization exists under a Judeo Christian framework that has evolved over the centuries that has allowed mankind to flourish? He could then make the argument that God does not exist, but we should keep this framework?
We have our moral’s from empathy and discussion with eatchother not religion. I’m not saying there is no good moral’s from religion but just because there Are many god morals doesn’t mean it comes from it. Its in our nature. look have many different beliefs people has had troughout human history. Not only in gods so why would morals come from one of them. Saying morals come from religion is also saying it comes from The Vikings as WELL because they had their religion, not only The Vikings only one example
I don't get your question: "by what standard" I mean, if it's the bible for you than it would be the standards of the people who wrote it. It's derived from humans, and you can claim a higher authority as much as you like, for me it doesn't change the fact that you derive your morality from humans that lived a couple if millennia ago and that there would be no difference if you would get it from humans from today.
Based on what? Based on the same thing, but the thing you probably won't admit. Humans.
Honesty is the anchor point for all morality and D.W. can't even get that one down. How is this person going to tell anyone about morality and be taken seriously?
I must say I would trust any of the "four horsemen", before I would ever trust any religious person. Lying to oneself and others is the first prerequisite of being religious, suspension of judgement to rely on faith. Forget that!
So wrong on many fronts Doug. Morality comes from reason, and the US Constitution is simply the legal counterpart of that marvelous thing called the human brain. The US is not a theocracy... At least not yet, not if there's still the spirit to fight as in '76.
The reason we have morals is human decency, we do the right thing simply because its what we want to do, it is a conscious choice. If you're asking for a reason, This is most likely primitive. Roughly 150,000 years ago, our hunter gatherer ancestors, they would rely on each other and get food, clothes, shelter, fire in return, working together and ultimately forming tribes. so we would try do the right things for others because they'd do the same for us. Not being scared of going to an imaginary place called hell lmao
It's interesting that Dawkins doesn't bring morals back to the beginning. Why do morals exist if all we are is animated matter? How did we become animated and how did that matter know what to do? How did matter know what life and death was so that life was preserved? Where did intellect come from? I think the existence of a just and loving God explain these questions clearly.
He thinks he sounds important, but he's not saying anything that gets anywhere.
"Rogan / Dawkins" - just think about the academia-infotainment-sopho-stoner continuum that allows that match-up even the faintest possibility of being realized, much less the two of them huddling together in the hush of a dim room discussing the deeper things of their reality. All of the sudden, "flying spaghetti monster" seems not just plausible, not just probable, but oh! the sweet relief of it!
There was a libertarian candidate for president running in 2020 that was simular to Rand Paul, he was prolife too. I could vote for him.
Enter into a debate with someone who starts quoting other people and or talking about what other humans did in history and you mnow you are well on your way to defeating your opponent in debate.
I've only just noticed how much Dawkins looks like D A Carson, separated at birth?
Joe Rohan should have pastor Doug Wilson on...
I am a Christian, but I've just gotta say; were i an atheist I would have no difficulty demonstrating objective morality. I'm just fascinated that I haven't heard an atheist give a satisfying answer yet.
Admission of an inability to account for morality versus Creating an account for morality . hmm.
"Something in the air." What!? I thought the cool atheists didn't believe in anything that couldn't be empirically shown.
I think it's hilarious and disgusting the look of pride on the face of an imbecile when he thinks he is making a good point, but any thinking person can see he is just relishing in his delusions not even considering the facts of the matter. The difference between Dawkins and Wilson is that Dawkins cares about the facts even if he doesn't get everything right. However, Wilson cares only about parroting specific arguments that make him feel good. Lord have mercy..
I would watch Joe Rogan if it wasn't for all his blasphemy. I agree with him on many political topics, but can't stand all the GD this, GD that. I don't align with any man, no politician, I must be based in Christ.
Progress in terms of human suffering, delusional thinking. In almost every way.