I will be on tour of North America, UK & EU talking about my latest book, religion, life on earth and beyond. I will be joined on stage by a range of friends and foes on stage. The events will include a Q&A and a limited meet-and-greet. You can get your tickets here: richarddawkinstour.com/
Many questions of you sir have not yet been answered correctly to satisfy you. I believe in God, in fact i know that God exists 💯 sir. And this is not a belief anymore but a knowing. I have a bunch of evidences to prove the existence of God. I in fact i have started to write a small book to answer the complicated questions you have asked, but I'm financially tight as well as time. So i can't to that. I believe i can give you the most satisfying answers to many complicated questions you may be having about God sir. I'm the kind of person who no one can convince me without evidences. I'm more scientific by birth, when the time came where i have to surrander to God and believe in him. There are some incidents 23 years ago that no one on earth can shake my belief in Jesus, not even Einstein if he says God doesn't exist then he was wrong. I'm from India, i would be please to answer all your complicated questions.. Thank you Instagram: jrwahlang
Come to Salt Lake City, Please. You could sell out night after night here as our religious culture has created a LOT of controversy and questions and many of us have turned to you.
It would have been nice if you were coming to Africa too. You are an eye-opener. Africa could use a voice like yours to help free us from the shackles of religion. We are literally in jail as a people. A jail built upon the foundations of religion.
They have a billion interpetation of the same data. "God didn't do it, he gave us free will to act good in the face of evil" "God works in mysterious ways, even if it seems bads, really it's for much higher purpose that is hidden to us" "This world is a test from god" "God gave us a guide to live good life, Not dictate it" And it goes on, Basically the data is intetpeted however is conventient at a moment, Or if they are strictly subsribed to a specific view.
He's either able to intervene and chooses not to with many monstrous consequences - therefore unworthy of worship, or He's un-able to intervene - therefore unworthy of worship.
حسنا ،لنفترض أن كلامك صحيح ،لكن إذا لم تعبد الله فماذا سيفعل بك ؟💀🔥🌋 لن تستطيع مقاومته فهو كلي القوة والقدرة والعظمة ،ثم إن المسيحية ليست الدين الوحيد في العالم إبحث في ديانات أخرى
@@سالم-ن1ر Yes, like you said let's assume what I said is true. Pretty funny how the muslims, christians, and jews all pretend to grovel to the same sky daddy (yahweh), but still fight eachother bitterly over nonsense. In all of mankind's religions combined, there are thousands of made-up gods. You, simp, do not believe in any of those thousands of imaginary gods except for 1. And honest people like me simply don't believe in 1 more god than you.
Other than his views are misled, he has a lot of anger towards religions and rightly so. Historically, some of the religious, in their elevated statuses, have carried out atrocities. However, those human beings who are responsible for carrying out those historical atrocities, operated outside of biblical doctrines in so much that they (the catholics) have been taught that they supercede scriptural doctrine. This is not a thing of God, rather than a thing of man.
Thanking a god who kills its own creation, for saving one individual out of hundreds of thousands of those who perished from disasters, epidemics, pandemics, and atrocities demonstrates the selfishness in survival, not any love of the god who could not even save Abel from his brother Cain with just four people in the whole world and who 'heard' the cry of Abel's blood after the first murder of the world, but didn't hear his actual cry while being killed, when even that first murder itself was caused by the god's preference of meat as the 'sacrifice' or 'offering' in comparison with the best crops of vegetables! It must be asked where they got the idea of 'offering' or 'sacrifices' all of a sudden out of the blue, to begin with, with just four people in the whole world! What a god that could not save just one individual from being killed because of this god liking Abel's sacrifice and not that of Cain regardless of the best offering he could have offered, according to the Bible story! After all, why we had to wait until this 21st century to experience the best of human endurance if such an omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent god entity existed all along, who seem to have dropped the idea of animal sacrifices, the negligence or refusal of which used to be punishable by 'hell'!
If God can't make a perfect world, then what's his heaven like? False advertising? If he can make a heaven, why the song and dance on this rock? Religion falls apart when interrogated.
Man was ejected from that world by man's own disregard for obedience. Can't follow a simple rule, no way you can follow 10 of them, certainly could never keep 613 rules.... and most cannot keep a revised more simplified version of the 10 reduced down to 2. You wouldn't understand what I was meaning here because you haven't read. It isn't gibberish to those that have, but you'll mock it as so. No, not a prophet, I've just encountered your kind my entire life.
"I wouldn't go out of your way to listen to this interview unless it's to remind yourself what an empty, vacuous, non-subject theology is." Haha, that is pure Dawkins! RD pretty much expressed this weariness of the entire topic in a recent interview with Alex O'Connor, where he sat in wonder that Alex still wants to debate it. I must admit, I oscillate in waves: sometimes the utter futility of it overcomes my whole being (as when listening to this interview), but then I somehow find myself returning for more punishment....for my sins, I guess.
I think you should have called this, "The Apologist". He has wrapped his around so tight that reason has slipped out. This child was saved by god but those others died because of nature... what? Can your god save children or not?
To tilt his head so far to the right when he talks is the only way his brain can cope with what he says - otherwise it would shut down. That's evolution.
Theology is not vacuous. In the western world, modern science & universities developed out of a Christian-Theological worldview (according to Noah Efron & Tom Holland). Also, both Desmond Tutu & Martin Luther King Jr. (both were theologians) received the Nobel Peace Prize. In regard to Alister McGrath ("the nice theologian"), he has three earned doctorates (molecular biophysics, theology & intellectual history). Finally, I admire Richard Dawkins. He is a courageous & brilliant person. I often agree with him. Live Long & Prosper🖖
Very good exchange. As an atheist I've come to terms with the crux of this matter. I regard Stephen Jay Gould as having summed the differences up nicely. He points out that science and theology are two separate "Magisteria"...what he calls NOMA---"Non-Overlapping MAgisteria". One becomes a believer or a non-believer after a lifetime of evidence & reason but, ultimately, based upon some intuitive hunch that is detached from empiricism.
Why was this video cut short as you confronted him with the best argument he didn’t get to answer - you ask softball questions and when you do give a harder hit - that’s cut from the video
33:00 I had this same indignant reaction just last week when my 7-year-old daughter (who attends a school with a saint in the name, but which stresses that they respect all the major religions) told me that her classmate, who is the son of the local pastor, had a free exemption for the following day of school because the class were going to learn about Buddhism. Why? My daughter confirmed the next day that the children did not DO Buddhism (i.e. they did not sit crossed-legged and meditate on the Holy Om or anything). As with Dawkins, I just feel that every child should be educated about these ideas and so be able to make a fully informed choice when the time comes. (Btw, I was quite recently teaching the English language to a small class in the UK that included a 17-year old Algerian Muslim who was about to embark on a university degree in London. One day, the word 'evolution' popped into the conversation. The lad asked what the word meant, and I (assisted by a couple of other students) gave the basic monkey-to-man explanation, expecting the penny to soon drop. Instead, he just increasingly looked at us as if we were all stark raving mad. It wasn't that he was having trouble finding the right word match; it was that he had simply never heard of the concept and so had no word for it in his entire mother vocabulary bank. I was shocked at the time, but I guess this is quite normal.)
@@TheDavidlloydjones It is a useful reminder to observe that the god virus is coursing through Rev Bent Neck's crooked jugular and afflicting his bent brain.
For the sake of the non existent Gaaaahhhhd I m so with you auturgicflosculator. I know we shouldn't criticise or mock people for personal quirks they can't help, but the disconcerting way he cocks his head to one side and the really affected, stiff, almost automaton way he speaks and the half condescending, half psychotic eyes - uuugh {he shudders} - and all those were things during the first part I really had to try to manage ASIDES from (or in addition to) the sheer horseshit that was bubbling out his slightly creepy mouth means that I too, will not be staying for longer than his cringeworthy attempt to answer the question about the tsunami (and even then only as far as the first couple of words after Prof Dawkins drilled down about the one child saved out of ten thousand victims). I think I would have had to smash my phone screen in to dissipate the irritation at the sheer intensity of codswallop otherwise heard and don't feel the price would have been worth it!!!
Alistair could have said something like "God has no hands but the hands of mankind" and only those that listen/believe in God would hear his instructions. Instead he painted himself into a corner.
So Dawkings has his own ten commandments: Do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you. In all things, strive to cause no harm. Treat your fellow human beings, your fellow living things, and the world in general with love, honesty, faithfulness and respect. Do not overlook evil or shrink from administering justice, but always be ready to forgive wrongdoing freely admitted and honestly regretted. Live life with a sense of joy and wonder. Always seek to be learning something new. Test all things; always check your ideas against the facts, and be ready to discard even a cherished belief if it does not conform to them. Never seek to censor or cut yourself off from dissent; always respect the right of others to disagree with you. Form independent opinions on the basis of your own reason and experience; do not allow yourself to be led blindly by others. Question everything.
If the passengers who managed to fight the pilot in one plane were instruments of God, weren't the more successful pilots in other planes also instruments of God?
@@ViktorFulop Yes, I guess so. That's why it's better to think with your own brain and not to be a puppet in numerous power hungy gods' never ending games.
I used to be a radio show host. I would never do 2 unprofessional things Dawkins did here… 1) Insult my guest with a preamble wraparound preceding an interview like, “Don’t go out of your way to view this episode..” 2) Insult a topic I covered and call it “empty and vacuous”. If Dawkins feels this way, he should not bother do the interview and be a phony to his guest. Period.
I am a great admirer of Richard Dawkins and his ability to apply logic in the face of what are basically vendors of myths and irrationality. However I would be very interested to see how he would react to sitting a vipassana course (10 days of meditation 10 hours a day, simply observing self) or perhaps a large dose of ego dissolving psychedelic. Ken Wilbur talked about the “pre/trans fallacy”, the confusion between pre-rational belief systems (Christianity, Islam, new age philosophies) and the trans-rational which is that understanding of (unity) consciousness that comes when our everyday reliance on conceptual thinking is dropped. Anyway, just a thought 😊
You were INCREDIBLY GENEROUS when you said "sometimes GOD intervenes and other times GOD does not intervene. Of all the tragedy and suffering I would say GOD EXTREMELY RARELY intervenes of ever yet they attribute credit to GOD any time something is good .. they say "GOD IS GOOD"... I say what a load !
Rev Bent Neck asked DikkiDawk what made him angry about superstition, and the rev received a coherent response. It could have been a sensible discussion if only Bent-Neck didn't bend sentences into convoluted bloviation.
I appreciated the point that ideology itself tends to drive us towards cruelty, not just faith or the lack-thereof. Even if religion itself was gone tomorrow, I'd imagine a myriad of new ideological and anti-scientific views would emerge. Humans crave meaning, and without a vehicle to instill that they will find it in anything for both good and ill. A culture should actively examine its purpose, and its goals and enshrine them to the highest guiding principles. We can have secular meaning as many atheists do find it more than those who do not, but it does require us to take ourselves seriously and not live passively.
Dawkins opining on compassion is priceless. Rather like an alcoholic lecturing on sobriety. Beating up religious zealots and deconstructing their arguments is child's play. Not much "bang for your buck", if you've paid to hear him speak.
Typical supernatural non-answers, reasons and justifications; just as easily applies to batman,rupert the bear et al. Dawkins incredible straight face wins.....
Genius at play ❤ This idiot 6:29 is a scary guy And a lying one at that. Making money by lying to children for a living. Get Out Stay Safe Stay Free. No god's seen or heard in my foxhole for 45yrs after 28yrs in the RAF. PTSD is my constant companion. Thx Zeus ✔️
I would like to see Prof. Dawkins have discussions with JEWISH Biblical Scholars such as Rabbi Michael Skobac, Rabbi Tovia Singer and Prof. Amy-Jill Levine.
Why would a God create an Earth that was constantly changing - tectonic plates, volcanos and earthquakes? Why didn't he just keep it simple? My channel suggests why these events occur.
I watched part one and heeded your warning for part 2; so - just to comment quickly regarding the entire topics generally (2 points) -- and not watching the 2nd part 1. I actually don't have an issue with considering a God that might have evolved into something complicated - perhaps as even the first thing to do so -- there still remains the mystery and only one mystery (that is the ultimate I suppose -- which is : Did something come from nothing or has something always been there and what are all the consequences from either?) 2. also Why do bad things happen to good or innocents, and to varying degrees? the Answer : freedom -- and freedom of choice (which we cannot have true love without) and you might rebut with well why then does God interfere in some situations and not others?? -- again, if God is super complicated perhaps he (or it) can in a fair (and sometimes perhaps merciful way) without disrupting freedom (the "butterfly-effect" per se) - and also ultimately if we're to experience everlasting life (a dimension beyond time per se - hence more built on principles as Paul might say) would suffering (significant as it might seem) not be worth a lesson for eternity and one that could only be learnt in a dimension limited via time? Think about it Edit : and the reason for Jesus is that God's Not a hypocrite and does need to experience the same things we do mostly and also to show us the way (as we are also spiritually evolving too) or at least a way that's realistic even how much effort it might be to be disciplined -- i.e. even if we cannot fully believe in ourselves we might find it easier to believe in someone else and / or also that anything's possible -- yes Anything! Even everlasting life and Jesus, and salvation etc.
1. The problem I see with the first-cause argument is the theist clinging to a hope that eventually god has to be found somewhere. “God did it" is an easy conclusion, but it's really nothing more than a magical or supernatural assertion. Philosophical arguments for God are non-falsifiable and with them, you'd have to accept that with a supernatural cause, ANYTHING could be possible. It's taking some giant leaps from first-cause, to a god, to it's only one particular god and we must worship it. 2. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're assuming there is a god and only one in particular who has granted this life in preparation for eternal life, and that eternal life is only possible if a person accepts Christ as their personal savior. And you also conclude that it is the best answer out of all that is possible. IMO, this reward/punishment type of arrangement is not compatible with free will, rather I see it more like extortion... "do this my way, or else you'll be sorry". The typical Christian response to this is you can opt-in for God's love by choice, but it really isn't a choice if the god is the ultimate power and he'll either destroy you or cause you to be tortured for all eternity if you don't "choose" to love and worship him. (Reminds me of the jealous jilted lover in "Fatal Attraction.") Theists are unwilling to imagine, or accept, any cause other than their god, which I think is selective and limited thinking. It certainly isn't credible or verifiable evidence for any god, nor is it a sound reason for me to accept and worship one. Think about it.
@@ga6589 A response and some other thoughts : It's not that Christ is the Only way - however for 99.999999999999999 (to infinity and beyond) probably the only way for most -- with the capabilities we have, e.g. most people cannot even keep New Years resolutions yet unlock the mysteries of life everlasting on their own -- to your other point - I'm not sure about the forever torture of "hell" as (as some interpret) just not existing, or as it being literal or figuratively something else like burning in regret or (there's a few different interpretations and theories), I'm open minded and admittingly don't know. Basically anything's possible -- so to deny Christ is to deny yourself in a way (as like the golden rule), forgive as you want to be forgiven for example, even the faith of a mustard seed is still something to consider.
@@drumsofspace What credible and verifiable evidence do you have to prove your claim that Christ is the ONLY way for 99.99999999....% of people? Furthermore, even if Jesus was a person who lived at one time and taught people to follow the Golden Rule, that does not mean it was unique to his teachings. There's no reason for me to believe that the source of the Golden Rule is a supernatural one, least of all the god of Bible who murdered nearly every person on the planet, including innocent children and babies. I call that genocide and is the work of a psychopath. I do not need to believe in God or a savior in order to treat people the way I want to be treated or follow Hippocrates words, "First, do no harm." If you need a god in order to be a good person, you're nothing more than a bad person on a leash and whatever good things you do have no meaning.
It doesn’t make sense to me to talk about an atheistic worldview just like it doesn’t make sense to talk about a lack of belief in Santa worldview. You cannot build an entire worldview simply from not believing in the existence of an entity. Atheists may have a naturalistic worldview, but this isn’t necessarily the case. Please feel free to challenge anything I’ve said. I’m eager to hear your opinions.
I just checked out evolutionary tree of all religion and claims that Christianity, Judaism and Islam all originate from middle eastern shamanism from 14 500 years ago.
In this discussion, we are subjected to the age-old problem of why there is suffering. If God exists, either he can't help us or he's evil. And seemingly there the discussion ends. The rest of it is basically just words and empty suggestions about celebrating the good and giving thanks and why we don't know the answer. Dawkins says the answer is that there is no God and the other chap says there is a God but we don't know why the problem of evil exists. And neither side is able to move from that position. But in my mind there is an answer in which both God and suffering can coexist. First of all, why should God exist? Do we need him? I don't know about you but introspection is where the answer lies. You cannot look for the answer outside of yourself because then we fall into the materialistic trap which demands "evidence" for his existence as if a thing which is clearly cast as non-materialistic should be subject to the same rules that we ourselves have devised. It is an absurd stance to demand evidence for this type of thing. The best you'll get is a fog of argument and counterargument. But introspection requires no evidence. If you feel inside that God exists, nothing anyone can say will change that moment. You may change your mind later but that moment remains forever, it is fixed and frozen. For those who are inwardly convinced, there is no need for evidence. So let's say God is a personal thing and if collectively we acknowledge his existence and his attributes through the use of language, then he exists without question. You cannot change that stance no matter what happens later. I'm not talking about religion. I'm talking about that inward, irrevocable and impenetrable conviction. But even those who are convinced in this way, the looming problem of suffering is still there. So what is the answer? The answer is that it's a game. Life is a game. Its author may be God with a big G or one with a small g but either way it is a game. It has ALL the characteristics of a game. It has rules, it has challenges, it has those who play it well and those who play it badly and it ALWAYS comes to an end at some point. And one other every important aspect of all games is that you play voluntarily. Nothing else can account for the coexistence of God and suffering. If you don't believe there is such a thing as God, you will forever be asking for evidence and you will find none. Why? Because tell me one game you've played in which the author is also playing? He remains hidden, aloof and that makes perfect sense to me.
@davefordham14 if I did that, then said "now it's your turn" you still wouldn't answer the question. You must be scientifically illiterate (not surprisingly) because if I didn't have a brain, I wouldn't be able to type anything. Now it's your turn, so now you can answer my question.
I do enjoy the “ex-atheist” labels the deluded give themselves. It presupposes that We are all born pre-brainwashed with our own specific (and convenient) invisible friend.
@@peterrauth118 My point was that being without a pretend friend is a default position, pre-brainwashed. Even the word “atheist” is presuppositional in that it indicates that someone lacks belief in one specific celestial sky wizard from tens of thousands of possible candidates.
@@wearemany73 Is it a default position though? Someone, or several someones in several places around the world at various times, a few millenia ago, came up with the notion of god or gods in the first place, as I guess, to try to explain reality. All of us as children ask the question; "why am I here, where did we come from?". Superficially, it would seem logical to assume that someone/something created us and the rest of what we can see. So I'm not convinced that the default position of mankind is to assume that there is no creator. That is not to say that I subscribe to that view - now that I'm an adult.
@@wearemany73 Science is the realm of observable natural phenomena given meaning through applied mathematics. The nature of reality and being is an abstract, and outside of the scope of scientific endeavour, and thus falls within the realm of philosophy (metaphysics/ontology) and pure mathematics. Dawkins did agree a number of years ago that our universe might be a simulation. If that is the case, then whose simulation? A simulation does after all have a function and purpose, and by definition is not reality itself, but a representation of one or multiple properties of a "bigger"reality, and therefore a subset of that bigger reality. Kurt Gödel posited, "that if the universe is created rationally it must have creator and there must be an after-life". Gödel was a man Einstein admired, and someon who solved a number of Einstein's field equations.. Proving that the universe is created rationally is no small task. One might start by trying to identify a pattern in a transcendental number. But even with quantum super computers and AI this could literally take eons. Unlike mathematical proofs, scientific theories are not immutable, e.g Einstein's Relativity replacing Newtonian universal gravitation. So deciding whether or not there is a "creative hand" behind all that we see is work in progress.
When Richard Dawkins can explain consciousness; (the hard problem for philosophers), intelligence, mind, electricities, electromagnetism and magnetism, life or its origin, I would be inclined to assume he knows what he is talking about. Baring that I can only assume he knows as much about consciousness as he does about magnetism. There is no evidence that consciousness emerges with quantum events or that it is elemental. The problem for atheists is that if consciousness is fundamental, then there must be a Self who is its originator, or more likely it is without origin being its own Self. Consciousness or Self has been referred to as God in all cultures, the source and origin of intelligence, human intelligence and all else. This challenges the Darwinian story of randomness without consciousness, mind, or prototype, all being elemental and random with no known prototypes to evolve to defies logic. We should fear the elements if they have such power, what will they likely do next? Obviously from an intellectual perspective this is impossible. Consciousness being fundamental to intelligence and causal meets the test of logic. The reality has been known as there being fourteen versions of the human in a universal cycle, all uniquely human, corresponding to a uniquely human prototype. It is past time for this evolutionary nonsense of human evolution from a prior species to end. There was no evolution from a prior or different species. All versions of the human were human, corresponding to a human prototype.
"Y'know, the thing about a shark, he's got lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes... When he comes at ya he doesn't seem to be livin'... until he bites ya... and those black eyes roll over wide and then... ya hear that terrible high-pitch screamin'... The ocean turns red, and in spite of all the poundin' and the hollerin', they all come in... they rip ya to pieces." - Quint from Jaws
If the god of the bible really wanted to make his only son suffer for our sins he would have given him a Cervical Spine like the one he gave to that poor Ex-Atheist Christian Theologian.
Atrocities have been committed in the name of religion. How has it been the same for atheists? I never heard of the Atheist crusades or atheist inquisition. Religion is on the decline except for the zealots.
Dawkins : “these people have courage , I can’t really understand this I can’t see how someone could have courage , this requires much intense study for me to understand how faith gives someone such courage to risk their life, it’s quite interesting.”
Isn’t it amazing how religious people line of argument always rely on some rather supernatural and misterios capacity to, as it were, read God’s mind and wishes!
If god has all/most of power, why should god share all to humanity? If nature have all/most power, why can't it save it self (from evil & sufferings) ?
Observation: Dawkins has a behavior that is inconsistent with his position and that is he tends to say what God should have done rather than realize he, as a human, particularly a human that doesnt believe in God, has not the capacity to understand all of the gears behind the scenes so-to-speak, and why they turn how they turn. Ill point out that it was written that Gods ways are higher than our ways and we are not capable of understanding why tragedy happens. No doubt there is suffering that occurs from it. Also there is no doubt there is suffering in the face of a tragedy with or without a belief in God, so this seems to boil down suffering alone or suffering not alone. In this life there is suffering. A truth from the writings of the Buddha, i believe. Dawkins lacks the ability to humble himself and realize that all things are according to a plan that was put into motion at the beginning of whatever 'time' is. To square the dilemma of belief vs nonbelief to its most primitive form is simply error. They are not equal. One closes a door and the other opens a door. If I was to close such a heavy door i would hope to be more aware of which side of the door it was that i stood at before closing it.
The gentleman is talking straight up Gibberish ... he has no idea what a God is thinking neither do anyone else ... this invisible creator is invisible 😅😅😅😅😅 😢😢😢😢😢
Where was the universe? The capacity of the humane mind? Very very difficult idea to grasp. So, he outright said, since we don't understand it, godidit. No argument or reason at all, none. Just god did it because I can't understand nor explain it.
Theology, the Christianity of the Intellect, indeed, in this age, Intellectual Agreement with Scripture, allows many to take Titles in God's name, but live contrary to His teachings, Jesus calls them Wolves, its how they scaled the Church walls. Sorry if they put you off and helped you remain Atheist. But Atheism is strange also, is it real? If you throw an atheist from a plane at ten thousand feet, is he a man of Prayer by the time he reaches the Ground?
Come on Dr Dawkins, you can do better than this. You've cherry picked a pretty poor discourse partner and parroted all your old arguments again, then had the audacity to describe theology as a "non-subject". You're picking at very low hanging fruit here. Let's hear something with meat on it.
Understandably, the wife of the flight Ninja needed to make sense of the tragedy created by religious fanaticism and, for a change, make her god better than the other murdering god.
I see Richard hasn't managed to deconstruct his arrogance, yet...Calling Alister and his ilk 'vacuous' demonstrates such...It's also ironic as it's Richard who is lacking something, not Alister...Chill, i know it's just an atheist echo chamber in ere, which i am more than happy to see 'flourish'...
The consistency of the Christian's message is that anything that is good or life-giving comes from God and anything that is bad or death-giving is just the natural way of the world. In this way God gets all the glory for the good and none of the blame for the bad and the Christian faith goes on giving God all the glory for everything that's good and none of the blame for anything that's bad.
Putting my god hat on I see no reason why a god could think it best for the world to play out ts natural conclusions but still take pity and save someone here and there or atleast throw them an encouraging word to see if they can save themselves
But why does an all powerful creator need humans to do his job? He created d world out of nothing right? I feel sorry 4 what religion has done to this planet 😭😭😭
so many religions both now and in the past...lucky dip .I get all my celestial knowledge from NASA( space agency) they seem to know their business and are reliable and factual ..plus they do not request tithes, which i like..amen
I will be on tour of North America, UK & EU talking about my latest book, religion, life on earth and beyond. I will be joined on stage by a range of friends and foes on stage. The events will include a Q&A and a limited meet-and-greet. You can get your tickets here: richarddawkinstour.com/
Also, Richard, do not be in my personal data, do not use my personal data for psyops. Stay out of my personal data. Period.
I've got a crick in my neck.
Many questions of you sir have not yet been answered correctly to satisfy you.
I believe in God, in fact i know that God exists 💯 sir. And this is not a belief anymore but a knowing. I have a bunch of evidences to prove the existence of God. I in fact i have started to write a small book to answer the complicated questions you have asked, but I'm financially tight as well as time. So i can't to that.
I believe i can give you the most satisfying answers to many complicated questions you may be having about God sir.
I'm the kind of person who no one can convince me without evidences. I'm more scientific by birth, when the time came where i have to surrander to God and believe in him.
There are some incidents 23 years ago that no one on earth can shake my belief in Jesus, not even Einstein if he says God doesn't exist then he was wrong.
I'm from India, i would be please to answer all your complicated questions..
Thank you
Instagram: jrwahlang
Come to Salt Lake City, Please. You could sell out night after night here as our religious culture has created a LOT of controversy and questions and many of us have turned to you.
It would have been nice if you were coming to Africa too. You are an eye-opener. Africa could use a voice like yours to help free us from the shackles of religion. We are literally in jail as a people. A jail built upon the foundations of religion.
It's hilarious when people thank god for saving them from a disaster god caused in the first place.
They have a billion interpetation of the same data.
"God didn't do it, he gave us free will to act good in the face of evil"
"God works in mysterious ways, even if it seems bads, really it's for much higher purpose that is hidden to us"
"This world is a test from god"
"God gave us a guide to live good life, Not dictate it"
And it goes on, Basically the data is intetpeted however is conventient at a moment, Or if they are strictly subsribed to a specific view.
@@JonathanTBE very true
god has billions of other galaxies & planets to watch over..disasters slip through from time to time ..amen
@@johnpro2847 ah, he is not all knowing, that makes more sense. So much for the sparrow and the hair on our heads etc.
@@johnpro2847😄, nice one.
Oh this guy is talking such nonsense! Thank you Richard for keeping up the fight against stupidity like this👏🇿🇦
..... I don't think I would have been able to withstand all that Gibberish .
This guy is speaking complete Gibberish 😂😂😂😂😂
Love Richards practical critical thinking!
He's either able to intervene and chooses not to with many monstrous consequences - therefore unworthy of worship, or He's un-able to intervene - therefore unworthy of worship.
حسنا ،لنفترض أن كلامك صحيح ،لكن إذا لم تعبد الله فماذا سيفعل بك ؟💀🔥🌋 لن تستطيع مقاومته فهو كلي القوة والقدرة والعظمة ،ثم إن المسيحية ليست الدين الوحيد في العالم إبحث في ديانات أخرى
@@سالم-ن1ر Yes, like you said let's assume what I said is true. Pretty funny how the muslims, christians, and jews all pretend to grovel to the same sky daddy (yahweh), but still fight eachother bitterly over nonsense. In all of mankind's religions combined, there are thousands of made-up gods. You, simp, do not believe in any of those thousands of imaginary gods except for 1. And honest people like me simply don't believe in 1 more god than you.
Theists have such convoluted thinking. Dawkins IS the man!!
Other than his views are misled, he has a lot of anger towards religions and rightly so. Historically, some of the religious, in their elevated statuses, have carried out atrocities. However, those human beings who are responsible for carrying out those historical atrocities, operated outside of biblical doctrines in so much that they (the catholics) have been taught that they supercede scriptural doctrine. This is not a thing of God, rather than a thing of man.
Mcgrath literally looks insane
7:26 Doesn't he ?
*is
thats actually just incest.
Video only, audio only, both... Same impression yeah😂
he is...his ideas are nonsensical which makes him insane by definition (he is spooky as well)
Thanking a god who kills its own creation, for saving one individual out of hundreds of thousands of those who perished from disasters, epidemics, pandemics, and atrocities demonstrates the selfishness in survival, not any love of the god who could not even save Abel from his brother Cain with just four people in the whole world and who 'heard' the cry of Abel's blood after the first murder of the world, but didn't hear his actual cry while being killed, when even that first murder itself was caused by the god's preference of meat as the 'sacrifice' or 'offering' in comparison with the best crops of vegetables! It must be asked where they got the idea of 'offering' or 'sacrifices' all of a sudden out of the blue, to begin with, with just four people in the whole world! What a god that could not save just one individual from being killed because of this god liking Abel's sacrifice and not that of Cain regardless of the best offering he could have offered, according to the Bible story! After all, why we had to wait until this 21st century to experience the best of human endurance if such an omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent god entity existed all along, who seem to have dropped the idea of animal sacrifices, the negligence or refusal of which used to be punishable by 'hell'!
Very well written.
الأسباب العاطفية ليست كافية لنفي فكرة وجود الله يا صديقي ،ثم إن المسيحية ليست الدين الوحيد في العالم أبحث في ديانات أخرى
Richard, you are so respectful and wise, this man cannot even follow along!
I am a temporary biological event
Existing in an indifferent universe
I revel in my insignificance
Very well said
If God can't make a perfect world, then what's his heaven like? False advertising?
If he can make a heaven, why the song and dance on this rock?
Religion falls apart when interrogated.
Absolutely true
Man was ejected from that world by man's own disregard for obedience. Can't follow a simple rule, no way you can follow 10 of them, certainly could never keep 613 rules.... and most cannot keep a revised more simplified version of the 10 reduced down to 2. You wouldn't understand what I was meaning here because you haven't read. It isn't gibberish to those that have, but you'll mock it as so. No, not a prophet, I've just encountered your kind my entire life.
On the one hand Richard Dawkins dignified this utter BS by participation alone but on the other hand it is so necessary to expose and demolish it.
Ten thousand people dead is the way things are, one child survived, hand of god.
ROFL🤣🤣🤣🤣
you've stated it absolutely correctly and precisely!
Why this kind of discussion are not happening now?😢
"I wouldn't go out of your way to listen to this interview unless it's to remind yourself what an empty, vacuous, non-subject theology is." Haha, that is pure Dawkins! RD pretty much expressed this weariness of the entire topic in a recent interview with Alex O'Connor, where he sat in wonder that Alex still wants to debate it. I must admit, I oscillate in waves: sometimes the utter futility of it overcomes my whole being (as when listening to this interview), but then I somehow find myself returning for more punishment....for my sins, I guess.
Thank you, Dear Mr. Dawkins. God bless you.
I'm supposed to save these for Spotify but I get so excited
It is good to listen my questions from the mouth of other persons. Thank you mr dawkins.
I think you should have called this, "The Apologist". He has wrapped his around so tight that reason has slipped out. This child was saved by god but those others died because of nature... what? Can your god save children or not?
To tilt his head so far to the right when he talks is the only way his brain can cope with what he says - otherwise it would shut down. That's evolution.
Excellent. Such a valuable critique. You should run for some committee that judges important things.
@@timgregory2296 I do. I'm chair of the tilty head "could be Jesus" recovery program. Do you need help?
Theology is not vacuous. In the western world, modern science & universities developed out of a Christian-Theological worldview (according to Noah Efron & Tom Holland). Also, both Desmond Tutu & Martin Luther King Jr. (both were theologians) received the Nobel Peace Prize. In regard to Alister McGrath ("the nice theologian"), he has three earned doctorates (molecular biophysics, theology & intellectual history). Finally, I admire Richard Dawkins. He is a courageous & brilliant person. I often agree with him. Live Long & Prosper🖖
An opportunist.
Why is the theologian tilting his head so hard to the right side? Looks like a bad case of wryneck.
I can't wait for October to see you in London
to be fair, dawkins could have picked an opponent who wasn't as pompous and crooked necked. too easy.
Yes. But he's too cowardly to pick someone who is his intellectual superior, say Roger Penrose for example.
@@peterrauth118 Is Penrose a theist?
@@peterrauth118actually, Penrose is an atheist.
@@peterrauth118do you even know what you're saying?
@@davidstaffell Here's irony for you; normally I wouldn't reply to such a lame comment
Awareness is known by awareness alone, is the sole irreducible axiom of reality. To put forth a syllable to the contrary is but to concede.
Interesting how unbalanced rationale can put a strain on the neck.
34:35
It doesn't seem to be a mistake that this final word comes from Dawkins with the rebuttal. But there you have it.
Very good exchange. As an atheist I've come to terms with the crux of this matter. I regard Stephen Jay Gould as having summed the differences up nicely. He points out that science and theology are two separate "Magisteria"...what he calls NOMA---"Non-Overlapping MAgisteria". One becomes a believer or a non-believer after a lifetime of evidence & reason but, ultimately, based upon some intuitive hunch that is detached from empiricism.
Why was this video cut short as you confronted him with the best argument he didn’t get to answer - you ask softball questions and when you do give a harder hit - that’s cut from the video
33:00 I had this same indignant reaction just last week when my 7-year-old daughter (who attends a school with a saint in the name, but which stresses that they respect all the major religions) told me that her classmate, who is the son of the local pastor, had a free exemption for the following day of school because the class were going to learn about Buddhism. Why? My daughter confirmed the next day that the children did not DO Buddhism (i.e. they did not sit crossed-legged and meditate on the Holy Om or anything). As with Dawkins, I just feel that every child should be educated about these ideas and so be able to make a fully informed choice when the time comes.
(Btw, I was quite recently teaching the English language to a small class in the UK that included a 17-year old Algerian Muslim who was about to embark on a university degree in London. One day, the word 'evolution' popped into the conversation. The lad asked what the word meant, and I (assisted by a couple of other students) gave the basic monkey-to-man explanation, expecting the penny to soon drop. Instead, he just increasingly looked at us as if we were all stark raving mad. It wasn't that he was having trouble finding the right word match; it was that he had simply never heard of the concept and so had no word for it in his entire mother vocabulary bank. I was shocked at the time, but I guess this is quite normal.)
Is that Mr.Bean? Now I know why he rarely spoke.
I have so many questions as I watch the interview, but my biggest question is, why his head tilted?
The first one was good comedy, but I think I'll pass on more of this silliness.
Outta here, and unsubscribed. Bore-ring.
@@TheDavidlloydjones
It is a useful reminder to observe that the god virus is coursing through Rev Bent Neck's crooked jugular and afflicting his bent brain.
For the sake of the non existent Gaaaahhhhd I m so with you auturgicflosculator. I know we shouldn't criticise or mock people for personal quirks they can't help, but the disconcerting way he cocks his head to one side and the really affected, stiff, almost automaton way he speaks and the half condescending, half psychotic eyes - uuugh {he shudders} - and all those were things during the first part I really had to try to manage ASIDES from (or in addition to) the sheer horseshit that was bubbling out his slightly creepy mouth means that I too, will not be staying for longer than his cringeworthy attempt to answer the question about the tsunami (and even then only as far as the first couple of words after Prof Dawkins drilled down about the one child saved out of ten thousand victims).
I think I would have had to smash my phone screen in to dissipate the irritation at the sheer intensity of codswallop otherwise heard and don't feel the price would have been worth it!!!
As The Wizard of Silly, Jester Moon 🌙, I am with you 😂😂
@@TheDavidlloydjones I would not unsubscribe because one topic disinterests me, but I wish you well.
Alistair could have said something like "God has no hands but the hands of mankind" and only those that listen/believe in God would hear his instructions. Instead he painted himself into a corner.
Would love to know what god is thinking when a child is being abused by priests.
Hopefully the same thing he was thinking when he had Moses destroy the midianties and ammelkites because they were practicing child sacrifice.
Saying you’re an ex atheist is like saying you’re an ex round earther ,it doesn’t make any sense to me !
Unfortunately, religions never Will disapear... Neither theologist
There is only one religion, in fact.
@@estevetrias huh
So Dawkings has his own ten commandments:
Do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you.
In all things, strive to cause no harm.
Treat your fellow human beings, your fellow living things, and the world in general with love, honesty, faithfulness and respect.
Do not overlook evil or shrink from administering justice, but always be ready to forgive wrongdoing freely admitted and honestly regretted.
Live life with a sense of joy and wonder.
Always seek to be learning something new.
Test all things; always check your ideas against the facts, and be ready to discard even a cherished belief if it does not conform to them.
Never seek to censor or cut yourself off from dissent; always respect the right of others to disagree with you.
Form independent opinions on the basis of your own reason and experience; do not allow yourself to be led blindly by others.
Question everything.
Hopefully people will understand that I only gave a like to thank the authors for their work.
I hate it when an ad pops up. 😒
I pay 15$ Canadian per month for UA-cam Premium - no ads on my PC and phone...none. I love it.
@@winstonsmith2235 i use brave browser and pay absolutely nothing
If the passengers who managed to fight the pilot in one plane were instruments of God, weren't the more successful pilots in other planes also instruments of God?
They were instruments of a different god.
@@ViktorFulop Yes, I guess so. That's why it's better to think with your own brain and not to be a puppet in numerous power hungy gods' never ending games.
psychopathy at its finest
Contradictory convoluted cobblers aside, the arrogant body language does him no favours.
proving god is hard enough..then making that god a christian god is a real stretch..amen
I used to be a radio show host. I would never do 2 unprofessional things Dawkins did here…
1) Insult my guest with a preamble wraparound preceding an interview like, “Don’t go out of your way to view this episode..”
2) Insult a topic I covered and call it “empty and vacuous”.
If Dawkins feels this way, he should not bother do the interview and be a phony to his guest. Period.
I am a great admirer of Richard Dawkins and his ability to apply logic in the face of what are basically vendors of myths and irrationality. However I would be very interested to see how he would react to sitting a vipassana course (10 days of meditation 10 hours a day, simply observing self) or perhaps a large dose of ego dissolving psychedelic. Ken Wilbur talked about the “pre/trans fallacy”, the confusion between pre-rational belief systems (Christianity, Islam, new age philosophies) and the trans-rational which is that understanding of (unity) consciousness that comes when our everyday reliance on conceptual thinking is dropped. Anyway, just a thought 😊
You were INCREDIBLY GENEROUS when you said "sometimes GOD intervenes and other times GOD does not intervene. Of all the tragedy and suffering I would say GOD EXTREMELY RARELY intervenes of ever yet they attribute credit to GOD any time something is good .. they say "GOD IS GOOD"... I say what a load !
The monologue from 30:30 minutes should be shown in schools.
McGrath is in serious need of an orthopedic hat.
Rev Bent Neck asked DikkiDawk what made him angry about superstition, and the rev received a coherent response.
It could have been a sensible discussion if only Bent-Neck didn't bend sentences into convoluted bloviation.
Perhaps a head to fit it on.
His eyes 👀 👹😬😱. The way he stares at Dawkins.
I appreciated the point that ideology itself tends to drive us towards cruelty, not just faith or the lack-thereof. Even if religion itself was gone tomorrow, I'd imagine a myriad of new ideological and anti-scientific views would emerge.
Humans crave meaning, and without a vehicle to instill that they will find it in anything for both good and ill. A culture should actively examine its purpose, and its goals and enshrine them to the highest guiding principles. We can have secular meaning as many atheists do find it more than those who do not, but it does require us to take ourselves seriously and not live passively.
Is the guy talking to Richard for real?😢
Dawkins opining on compassion is priceless. Rather like an alcoholic lecturing on sobriety.
Beating up religious zealots and deconstructing their arguments is child's play. Not much "bang for your buck", if you've paid to hear him speak.
Typical supernatural non-answers, reasons and justifications; just as easily applies to batman,rupert the bear et al. Dawkins incredible straight face wins.....
Genius at play ❤
This idiot
6:29 is a scary guy
And a lying one at that.
Making money by lying to children for a living.
Get Out
Stay Safe
Stay Free.
No god's seen or heard in my foxhole for 45yrs after 28yrs in the RAF.
PTSD is my constant companion. Thx Zeus ✔️
I would like to see Prof. Dawkins have discussions with JEWISH Biblical Scholars such as
Rabbi Michael Skobac, Rabbi Tovia Singer and Prof. Amy-Jill Levine.
Questioning Jews on their lies and BS is anti-semitic and not allowed.
Why would a God create an Earth that was constantly changing - tectonic plates, volcanos and earthquakes? Why didn't he just keep it simple? My channel suggests why these events occur.
McGrath made the point that the Bible describes a God who enters into suffering and death. I feel that I can trust a God like that.
I watched part one and heeded your warning for part 2; so - just to comment quickly regarding the entire topics generally (2 points) -- and not watching the 2nd part
1. I actually don't have an issue with considering a God that might have evolved into something complicated - perhaps as even the first thing to do so -- there still remains the mystery and only one mystery (that is the ultimate I suppose -- which is : Did something come from nothing or has something always been there and what are all the consequences from either?)
2. also Why do bad things happen to good or innocents, and to varying degrees? the Answer : freedom -- and freedom of choice (which we cannot have true love without) and you might rebut with well why then does God interfere in some situations and not others?? -- again, if God is super complicated perhaps he (or it) can in a fair (and sometimes perhaps merciful way) without disrupting freedom (the "butterfly-effect" per se) - and also ultimately if we're to experience everlasting life (a dimension beyond time per se - hence more built on principles as Paul might say) would suffering (significant as it might seem) not be worth a lesson for eternity and one that could only be learnt in a dimension limited via time?
Think about it
Edit : and the reason for Jesus is that God's Not a hypocrite and does need to experience the same things we do mostly and also to show us the way (as we are also spiritually evolving too) or at least a way that's realistic even how much effort it might be to be disciplined -- i.e. even if we cannot fully believe in ourselves we might find it easier to believe in someone else and / or also that anything's possible -- yes Anything! Even everlasting life and Jesus, and salvation etc.
1. The problem I see with the first-cause argument is the theist clinging to a hope that eventually god has to be found somewhere. “God did it" is an easy conclusion, but it's really nothing more than a magical or supernatural assertion. Philosophical arguments for God are non-falsifiable and with them, you'd have to accept that with a supernatural cause, ANYTHING could be possible. It's taking some giant leaps from first-cause, to a god, to it's only one particular god and we must worship it.
2. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're assuming there is a god and only one in particular who has granted this life in preparation for eternal life, and that eternal life is only possible if a person accepts Christ as their personal savior. And you also conclude that it is the best answer out of all that is possible. IMO, this reward/punishment type of arrangement is not compatible with free will, rather I see it more like extortion... "do this my way, or else you'll be sorry". The typical Christian response to this is you can opt-in for God's love by choice, but it really isn't a choice if the god is the ultimate power and he'll either destroy you or cause you to be tortured for all eternity if you don't "choose" to love and worship him. (Reminds me of the jealous jilted lover in "Fatal Attraction.")
Theists are unwilling to imagine, or accept, any cause other than their god, which I think is selective and limited thinking. It certainly isn't credible or verifiable evidence for any god, nor is it a sound reason for me to accept and worship one. Think about it.
@@ga6589
A response and some other thoughts :
It's not that Christ is the Only way - however for 99.999999999999999 (to infinity and beyond) probably the only way for most -- with the capabilities we have, e.g. most people cannot even keep New Years resolutions yet unlock the mysteries of life everlasting on their own --
to your other point - I'm not sure about the forever torture of "hell" as (as some interpret) just not existing, or as it being literal or figuratively something else like burning in regret or (there's a few different interpretations and theories), I'm open minded and admittingly don't know.
Basically anything's possible -- so to deny Christ is to deny yourself in a way (as like the golden rule), forgive as you want to be forgiven for example, even the faith of a mustard seed is still something to consider.
@@drumsofspace What credible and verifiable evidence do you have to prove your claim that Christ is the ONLY way for 99.99999999....% of people? Furthermore, even if Jesus was a person who lived at one time and taught people to follow the Golden Rule, that does not mean it was unique to his teachings. There's no reason for me to believe that the source of the Golden Rule is a supernatural one, least of all the god of Bible who murdered nearly every person on the planet, including innocent children and babies. I call that genocide and is the work of a psychopath.
I do not need to believe in God or a savior in order to treat people the way I want to be treated or follow Hippocrates words, "First, do no harm." If you need a god in order to be a good person, you're nothing more than a bad person on a leash and whatever good things you do have no meaning.
Sorry Richard but I can't cop more of pompous, superior, say nothing, egotistical McGrath. 13 mins was all I could stand in video 1 hehehehe
It doesn’t make sense to me to talk about an atheistic worldview just like it doesn’t make sense to talk about a lack of belief in Santa worldview. You cannot build an entire worldview simply from not believing in the existence of an entity. Atheists may have a naturalistic worldview, but this isn’t necessarily the case.
Please feel free to challenge anything I’ve said. I’m eager to hear your opinions.
I just checked out evolutionary tree of all religion and claims that Christianity, Judaism and Islam all originate from middle eastern shamanism from 14 500 years ago.
In this discussion, we are subjected to the age-old problem of why there is suffering. If God exists, either he can't help us or he's evil. And seemingly there the discussion ends. The rest of it is basically just words and empty suggestions about celebrating the good and giving thanks and why we don't know the answer. Dawkins says the answer is that there is no God and the other chap says there is a God but we don't know why the problem of evil exists. And neither side is able to move from that position. But in my mind there is an answer in which both God and suffering can coexist.
First of all, why should God exist? Do we need him? I don't know about you but introspection is where the answer lies. You cannot look for the answer outside of yourself because then we fall into the materialistic trap which demands "evidence" for his existence as if a thing which is clearly cast as non-materialistic should be subject to the same rules that we ourselves have devised. It is an absurd stance to demand evidence for this type of thing. The best you'll get is a fog of argument and counterargument. But introspection requires no evidence. If you feel inside that God exists, nothing anyone can say will change that moment. You may change your mind later but that moment remains forever, it is fixed and frozen. For those who are inwardly convinced, there is no need for evidence. So let's say God is a personal thing and if collectively we acknowledge his existence and his attributes through the use of language, then he exists without question. You cannot change that stance no matter what happens later. I'm not talking about religion. I'm talking about that inward, irrevocable and impenetrable conviction.
But even those who are convinced in this way, the looming problem of suffering is still there. So what is the answer? The answer is that it's a game. Life is a game. Its author may be God with a big G or one with a small g but either way it is a game. It has ALL the characteristics of a game. It has rules, it has challenges, it has those who play it well and those who play it badly and it ALWAYS comes to an end at some point. And one other every important aspect of all games is that you play voluntarily. Nothing else can account for the coexistence of God and suffering. If you don't believe there is such a thing as God, you will forever be asking for evidence and you will find none. Why? Because tell me one game you've played in which the author is also playing? He remains hidden, aloof and that makes perfect sense to me.
Prove it's the christian god and not Baal.
@@publiozinj4882 Prove you have a brain.
@davefordham14 if I did that, then said "now it's your turn" you still wouldn't answer the question. You must be scientifically illiterate (not surprisingly) because if I didn't have a brain, I wouldn't be able to type anything. Now it's your turn, so now you can answer my question.
I do enjoy the “ex-atheist” labels the deluded give themselves. It presupposes that We are all born pre-brainwashed with our own specific (and convenient) invisible friend.
How so? By definition and "Ex-Atheist" didn't believe in a god in the first place.
@@peterrauth118 My point was that being without a pretend friend is a default position, pre-brainwashed. Even the word “atheist” is presuppositional in that it indicates that someone lacks belief in one specific celestial sky wizard from tens of thousands of possible candidates.
@@wearemany73 Is it a default position though? Someone, or several someones in several places around the world at various times, a few millenia ago, came up with the notion of god or gods in the first place, as I guess, to try to explain reality. All of us as children ask the question; "why am I here, where did we come from?". Superficially, it would seem logical to assume that someone/something created us and the rest of what we can see. So I'm not convinced that the default position of mankind is to assume that there is no creator. That is not to say that I subscribe to that view - now that I'm an adult.
@@peterrauth118 …well, you do you I guess, we each decipher evidence differently and I’ve decided that science explains the nature of reality. 👍
@@wearemany73 Science is the realm of observable natural phenomena given meaning through applied mathematics. The nature of reality and being is an abstract, and outside of the scope of scientific endeavour, and thus falls within the realm of philosophy (metaphysics/ontology) and pure mathematics.
Dawkins did agree a number of years ago that our universe might be a simulation. If that is the case, then whose simulation? A simulation does after all have a function and purpose, and by definition is not reality itself, but a representation of one or multiple properties of a "bigger"reality, and therefore a subset of that bigger reality.
Kurt Gödel posited, "that if the universe is created rationally it must have creator and there must be an after-life". Gödel was a man Einstein admired, and someon who solved a number of Einstein's field equations..
Proving that the universe is created rationally is no small task. One might start by trying to identify a pattern in a transcendental number. But even with quantum super computers and AI this could literally take eons.
Unlike mathematical proofs, scientific theories are not immutable, e.g Einstein's Relativity replacing Newtonian universal gravitation. So deciding whether or not there is a "creative hand" behind all that we see is work in progress.
When Richard Dawkins can explain consciousness; (the hard problem for philosophers), intelligence, mind, electricities, electromagnetism and magnetism, life or its origin, I would be inclined to assume he knows what he is talking about. Baring that I can only assume he knows as much about consciousness as he does about magnetism.
There is no evidence that consciousness emerges with quantum events or that it is elemental. The problem for atheists is that if consciousness is fundamental, then there must be a Self who is its originator, or more likely it is without origin being its own Self. Consciousness or Self has been referred to as God in all cultures, the source and origin of intelligence, human intelligence and all else.
This challenges the Darwinian story of randomness without consciousness, mind, or prototype, all being elemental and random with no known prototypes to evolve to defies logic. We should fear the elements if they have such power, what will they likely do next? Obviously from an intellectual perspective this is impossible. Consciousness being fundamental to intelligence and causal meets the test of logic.
The reality has been known as there being fourteen versions of the human in a universal cycle, all uniquely human, corresponding to a uniquely human prototype. It is past time for this evolutionary nonsense of human evolution from a prior species to end. There was no evolution from a prior or different species. All versions of the human were human, corresponding to a human prototype.
"Y'know, the thing about a shark, he's got lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes... When he comes at ya he doesn't seem to be livin'... until he bites ya... and those black eyes roll over wide and then... ya hear that terrible high-pitch screamin'... The ocean turns red, and in spite of all the poundin' and the hollerin', they all come in... they rip ya to pieces."
- Quint from Jaws
If the god of the bible really wanted to make his only son suffer for our sins he would have given him a Cervical Spine like the one he gave to that poor Ex-Atheist Christian Theologian.
Atrocities have been committed in the name of religion. How has it been the same for atheists? I never heard of the Atheist crusades or atheist inquisition. Religion is on the decline except for the zealots.
yes us vs them! good people vs bad people!
Theology is all the proof you need that there is no "revealed truth".
Dawkins : “these people have courage , I can’t really understand this I can’t see how someone could have courage , this requires much intense study for me to understand how faith gives someone such courage to risk their life, it’s quite interesting.”
Of course he can't understand, any more than he can understand why someone would give their life for any ideal.
@@peterrauth118 yeah he needs to take some psychedelics and meditate or something he talks out of his 🍑so much
I heard that they will not let you enter the gates of heaven if you are mentally ill, so I keep my faith to myself, otherwise they may not let me in.
Isn’t it amazing how religious people line of argument always rely on some rather supernatural and misterios capacity to, as it were, read God’s mind and wishes!
If god has all/most of power, why should god share all to humanity?
If nature have all/most power, why can't it save it self (from evil & sufferings) ?
The truth is in his eyes. Never trust anyone with eyeballs that big and crazy.
I never knew a man lean so far to the right. My neck would be sore.
28:00 I have "spirituality"! It's just completely atheistic! 🙄
At least the bloke wasn't mean-spirited and didn't start spewing hellfire, damnation and tarnation at dear old Richard.
Is them ex-leprechaunist too?
I’ll be frightened to meet Macgrath in a desolated alley … gee, a witch doctor with a scholar degree
Observation: Dawkins has a behavior that is inconsistent with his position and that is he tends to say what God should have done rather than realize he, as a human, particularly a human that doesnt believe in God, has not the capacity to understand all of the gears behind the scenes so-to-speak, and why they turn how they turn. Ill point out that it was written that Gods ways are higher than our ways and we are not capable of understanding why tragedy happens. No doubt there is suffering that occurs from it. Also there is no doubt there is suffering in the face of a tragedy with or without a belief in God, so this seems to boil down suffering alone or suffering not alone. In this life there is suffering. A truth from the writings of the Buddha, i believe. Dawkins lacks the ability to humble himself and realize that all things are according to a plan that was put into motion at the beginning of whatever 'time' is. To square the dilemma of belief vs nonbelief to its most primitive form is simply error. They are not equal. One closes a door and the other opens a door. If I was to close such a heavy door i would hope to be more aware of which side of the door it was that i stood at before closing it.
Religious cults have lots of bull-dunk answers.
If god really wanted his only son to suffer for our sins he would have given him a schizophrenic mother like the one he gave to me.
It's a bit disappointing that that dude haven't even tried.
Christianity was heavily influenced by Gnosticism, Mithraism and Zoroastrianism.
The gentleman is talking straight up Gibberish ... he has no idea what a God is thinking neither do anyone else ... this invisible creator is invisible 😅😅😅😅😅 😢😢😢😢😢
And non existent
@@classybree2241 🎯
Dingo scientists are just as dogmatic.
Where was the universe? The capacity of the humane mind? Very very difficult idea to grasp. So, he outright said, since we don't understand it, godidit. No argument or reason at all, none. Just god did it because I can't understand nor explain it.
The theological argument doesn't make any sense to me at all
Theology, the Christianity of the Intellect, indeed, in this age, Intellectual Agreement with Scripture, allows many to take Titles in God's name, but live contrary to His teachings, Jesus calls them Wolves, its how they scaled the Church walls. Sorry if they put you off and helped you remain Atheist. But Atheism is strange also, is it real? If you throw an atheist from a plane at ten thousand feet, is he a man of Prayer by the time he reaches the Ground?
and if he does, does it make any difference? i don't know if reacting certain death proves anything here.
Don't debate students but with a actual teacher 😂 when you have heart ache u go to doctor not pharmacy 😊
To borrow a phrase from Billy Madison, everyone is dumber for having listened to the interviewee.
Come on Dr Dawkins, you can do better than this. You've cherry picked a pretty poor discourse partner and parroted all your old arguments again, then had the audacity to describe theology as a "non-subject". You're picking at very low hanging fruit here. Let's hear something with meat on it.
Understandably, the wife of the flight Ninja needed to make sense of the tragedy created by religious fanaticism and, for a change, make her god better than the other murdering god.
I see Richard hasn't managed to deconstruct his arrogance, yet...Calling Alister and his ilk 'vacuous' demonstrates such...It's also ironic as it's Richard who is lacking something, not Alister...Chill, i know it's just an atheist echo chamber in ere, which i am more than happy to see 'flourish'...
The consistency of the Christian's message is that anything that is good or life-giving comes from God and anything that is bad or death-giving is just the natural way of the world. In this way God gets all the glory for the good and none of the blame for the bad and the Christian faith goes on giving God all the glory for everything that's good and none of the blame for anything that's bad.
Putting my god hat on
I see no reason why a god could think it best for the world to play out ts natural conclusions
but still take pity and save someone here and there
or atleast throw them an encouraging word to see if they can save themselves
God didn't lose his only son.
3God Thoughts
II simply can't listen to Alister McGrath
But why does an all powerful creator need humans to do his job? He created d world out of nothing right? I feel sorry 4 what religion has done to this planet 😭😭😭
so many religions both now and in the past...lucky dip .I get all my celestial knowledge from NASA( space agency) they seem to know their business and are reliable and factual ..plus they do not request tithes, which i like..amen
Masons took their time with this upload.