It is by fear of loss, that man is motivated to change his/her mind,and is governed. A law is there for the law Breakers. Not for the law abiding individual. Structure gives order. Ignorance gives excuse to crime.
If we had met Jesus in his day .... experienced his grace, heard his truth-telling, witnessed his murder & resurrection.... I think you & I would have been convinced that he really was the Son of Heaven. The disciples didn't need faith like WE need faith; they simply wrote what they heard & saw before their very eyes. The invitation extended to us is simply to trust that what the disciples wrote & died for is indeed true..... and absolutely relevant to us today. Faith = TRUST ... plain & simple.
Well, Paul, how empty must your life be if you need some deity and it's promise / illusion / reality (does not matter which) of a reward (while on earth or in an afterlife) to give it meaning. You can not prove the existence of your god and I can not disprove it. But I will not arrange my life and certainly not demand from others to arrange theirs on the strange and contradictory demands in a bronze age book, which origins are dubious at best just because it contains a promise to play the harp in the clouds if I follow it along with the threat of a devil gnawing on my genitalia while roasting in an eternal flame if I do not. That approach seems to be transactional. I prefer to do the right thing without expecting some kind of return and/or to avoid punishment; to me that is a much nobler approach and inherently devoid of hopelessness or despair.
How empty would Dawkins life be without said deity who he does not believe in yet has afforded him his career and fortune from giving lectures interviews selling books teaching classes about about a God that doesn’t exist I wish I could build a life and fortune off deny the existence of Santa clause but I can’t because Santa actually doesn’t exist. Where would Dawkins be without this God he doesn’t believe in does anyone actually care for his work outside of the fact he’s an atheist, how many Dawkins books or papers have you read that had nothing to do with God, seems the man is nothing without these made God he denies.
@@lemnisgate8809 He is not profiting off of "this God he does not believe in yet," because that would amount to profiting off of nothing. Professor Dawkins is profiting from educating the masses on the insanity of this fiction.
@ he is absolutely profiting from it if you think not you’re just as delusional as he is 🤣🤣🤣. Unlike Dawkins the gospel has actually spread to the masses while Dawkins little speeches speak only to a tiny subset of people his impact on the world is minuscule when he dies it will be like he never existed.
@@lemnisgate8809 Why do you feel the need to insult me and Dr. Dawkins. I am sharing MY approach to life and I did not even talk about him. Furthermore he is a scientist and arrives at results based on evolutionary anthropology which interests and reaches anyone who understands how science works. Are you disputing evolution claiming creationism is at work?
@ Insulting you is fun because you decided to reply inadequately perhaps that was a bit mean I’ve been going back and forward with imbeciles you seem to have gotten caught up in the crossfire, forgive me, Dawkins on the other hand I could care less about him than he does about me. I’m not speaking for or against creationism or evolution I find the entire argument laughable because creationism isn’t biblical despite what some Christian’s and atheists think, the Christian or atheist that reads genesis and think it’s literally about the creation of the universe clearly has no idea what the text is about, imagine two people arguing about a topic that’s not even in the book they are debating over it’s the height of stupidity.
Comments are great We all get a chance to see how diverse are our thoughts and opinions and how diversely we respond to difference whether with disdain or an openness and respect. Makes you think the Tower of Babel wasn't just some crazy irrelevant useless myth and there is such a thing as Truth that we humans continue to search for
When we take a look around the WORLD in which we live in , SUN , MOON , STARS , the beauty of the world , OUR LOVED ones , every creature you can think of , and atheists still think we just happened , never ceases to amaze me 🙏
@@fredconnor9150 The Universe is beautiful, and whether it came from God, by accident, from an explosion or from aliens, does not change the fact that it is beautiful.
I can't get enough of dear Mr Dawkins . He's been a guiding beacon of light for me for many years . To see evolution one has to look at the results over vast time scales . If you look at a worm and a human one thinks they are not related because they look so different. It's the mostly little mutations over millions of years that transform a worm into an ape . The universe also looks like it doesn't change from day to day but it does if you have the right instruments to measure the change.
Science reveals evidence the human cell is ireducibly complex. It only functions in its complete form. Will not work if added too or subtracted from. That fact destroys evolution and Dawkins.
@mattorr2256 are you sure as you say fact upon fact, was Dawkins there at creation did God discuss how He was going to redeem mankind from with you or Dawkins. No it is not fact upon fact it is Dawkins 's opinion and you adopted Dawkins opinion as fact. Wow that is real intellectual.
@TomHensley-g1n Dawkins preachings , if you want to call it that , brings peace of mind and acceptance of the reality of the human condition. Religious preachings about scripture and doctrine brings fear ,guilt and shame to the people who believe this but do not follow it's teachings. I'm not afraid of Richard Dawkins but preachers scare the hell out of my ,pardon the pun .
Nothing bone headed about it. Just look around you. An accident, no chance, something from nothing, no chance. And before someone says, where did God come from. He has to exist outside of time otherwise he would have been part of creation, instead of the creator. It's the atheist which needs to open their minds. It's they who are the boneheads.
@@kevinedwards2282 Your mental gymnastics attempting to "explain" your delusion reminds me of the churches' models to "explain" earth still existing in the middle of our solar system after the invention of the telescope. You really have to google those attempts: Ridiculous, pathetic and it took them only 350 years to admit they were wrong and apologize to Galileo (in 1992). I suppose you have another 3 1/2 centuries to wake up and could still beat their timeline.
@@maylingng4107 So! You require evidence. There was an apostle by the name of Thomas, doubting Thomas. You carry on looking.....But you have already made up your mind, haven't you! You wouldn't even know where to start looking in the first place. The wrong attitude.
Einstein, Hawking, and many other scientists have used the term "God" as a metaphor many times and then had to explain themselves. This metaphorical use of "God" is an unfortunate rhetorical practice. Every time it is used this way it sets up theists to claim these persons as fellow believers. Post hoc, this verbal habit has made me very annoyed with Einstein and some others. It amazes me that they didn't foresee how their words would be exploited.
This was fun to hear while I roll spliffs to take to a Xmas party that I'm going to just for the food and fiesta. I have to agree that religion is a delusion.
Why do you choose to wake up everyday to this world of pain and suffering if one day you will meet the inevitable end of nothingness. Why go through all the pain if at the end your life all your toiling and hard work will produce vanity? That is the dilemma of atheism. You are living for nothing and just suffering along the way. Sorry if I sound bleak or rude, just poking holes.
@Rafael765LT Life is meaningless, but you can still give it meaning. And why not go through it with a smile? We will die anyway, might as well live the best we can.
The God of the Old Testament, Yahweh, was an imaginary entity used by an ancient tribe of people to give themselves the belief that they could overcome any adverse circumstances they would encounter, and prevail in any battles or conflicts they would have to fight to either survive against attacks or when seeking to acquire territories. Look at it in the context of the time, other tribal peoples the world over also held such beliefs and created similar imaginary entities. Fast forward into the 20th and 21st centuries and we have had the benefit of science, technology, neurology and psychology to deepen and widen our understanding of reality, ourselves and the universe we live in. But there is still an infinite amount to learn. For example what has emerged in the 21st century - the principle of quantum physics and mechanics - is beginning to show us that there seems to be another dimension to existence, i.e. consciousness, and this may actually reveal the existence of a super/collective consciousness which we and everything else is a part of, and that just might be what the ancients were trying to understand as 'God'.
@@marchess286 I don't recall Yahweh in the OT ever instructing the tribe who worshiped the imaginary deity to do that - precisely the opposite. If you are referring to the man who lived in the 1st century (up to AD 33) then yes he said those words, but only to then be humiliated, tortured and killed by those who still worshipped the imaginary Yahweh.
@@marchess286 166 million years ago a giant dinosaur walked across a lagoon leaving its footprints to fossilize and be discovered 166 million years later by archaeologists. To even begin to think that humans - not even atoms in comparison to the earth's history, let alone the wider cosmos and universe - have a personal 'God' different to any other human who talks to them as described in a primitive book is simply delusional and self-defeating.
Ummm... Actually, quantum physics emerged in the early part of the 20th century, around the 1920s. It was the understanding of it that led to transistors, lasers, atomic energy and more.
The problem with the god or no god argument. is that to question philosophically one does not need to ask that question but to learn what is involved in the art of observation..
(/--)/ This is an artistic proof of a created universe. When you paint a shadow it's the opposite color of the object that made the shadow. Nobody knew what the opposite color of white was so the artists avoided painting white on white. The opposite color of white is baby blue and baby pink. The first artist to figure it out was Norman Rockwell. I was the second artist to figure it out. I saw it in the corner of a white room. The lighting was perfect to see it. Pigments have different rules than light. It took them thousands of years to get all the pigments they have now.
It seems to me that Richard has given more credence to religion, than anyone before that have preceded him in that endeavour…perhaps that what his purpose has been…? Most of the earlier and medieval people attempted to justify religion with mystical stories and pseudo magic, which encouraged speculation and mistrust as being concocted by charlatans and liars, whereas Richard challenged those conclusions and explanations with demands for scientific corroborating evidence…. This has encouraged people to look for ways of augmenting the beliefs, wanted to preserve, with explanations beyond what they had been told by holy men, and scriptures… Such as the function of consciousness and perception and other scientific ventures, and in many cases, they found conclusions that offered explanations, of some reasonable value…?
I am an Evolutionist and I firmly believe in God, without any doubt. I have 4 Advanced degrees in Medicine, Science (Advanced Genetics & Marine Biology), Astronomy and Evolution (Paleontology). I did my Thesis on Australopithecus Afarensis (early hominid species found on the plains of Africa), 3 Million year old fossil, under the World-renowned Paleo-Anthropologist, Professor Phillip Tobias (WITS University, Johannesburg). I have personally been on my hands and knees digging for fossils at the Sterkfontein Caves (South Africa), a UNESCO World Heritage site. I firmly believe that the Universe began from a Big Bang 13,8 Billion years ago, and that the Earth is more than 4,5 Billion years old and that the earliest fossil discovered is that of a multicellular organism in Western Australia dated at 4 Billion years. I am a Scientist, a Medical Dr, an Evolutionist and a Creationist. There is absolutely NO DOUBT that a Supreme Creator Originated this entire Universe from non-existence into matter in 10 to power -33 of a second). Every human being, monotheist, polytheist, pantheist, agnostic and atheists will all stand in front of the Supreme Creator on the Day of Judgement, without ANY DOUBT whatsoever. My sad observation is that many Atheists are kind, honourable and intelligent people. Some Evolutionists are fond of quoting the Bible (new age Earth which they fondly mock) (I have great respect for Christians and creationists, but lets admit that the Bible DOES have many errors): Have they ever read the Quran, the FINAL Divine Scripture? If not, please put it on your bucket list. I would love to see the face of an atheist (especially Charles Darwin and Professor Richard Dawkins) when he/she is standing face-to-face in front of God. Wow. That will be a Kodak moment. Question to my dear Atheists & Agnostics: is there the SLIGHTEST, MICROSCOPIC POSSIBILITY that you are wrong in your understanding? How much time did you REALLY spend on seeking the TRUTH about God, or are you simply a fan of atheists like the esteemed Professor Dawkins? Will you follow him to his inevitable doom, or do you have your own brain? See you on the other side (Guaranteed), Warmest regards, Dr Ahmed Adam, South Africa
@@DrAhmedAdam Atheists do not claim to know the truth. We are just giving out perspective, and we might be wrong. But, Sir, you might be wrong about your perspective as well. As a scientist you have to be open to a variety of views and accept that nothing can be proven with certainty.
"There is absolutely NO DOUBT that a Supreme Creator Originated this entire Universe from non-existence into matter" IN YOUR MIND. "Every human being, .....will all stand in front of the Supreme Creator on the Day of Judgement, without ANY DOUBT whatsoever" IN YOUR MIND. "the Quran, (is) the FINAL Divine Scripture" IN YOUR MIND. My question is: WhatTF makes what YOU happen to think correct for others? I happen to think differently, but I don't go around insisting that I am right and threatening you with "inevitable doom" on the "(Guaranteed)" "other side". I am not that arrogant.
@@alanthompson8515 Yes, I was with him until he suddenly declared that God did it in 10^-33 seconds "without doubt". (Though he gave us a hint about his illogical mind when he mentioned that he is a Creationist.) There was no logic, no justification, but simply a blind expression of faith. I don't know whether he also believes in fairies and Santa Claus, but I wouldn't be surprised.
He actually knows an awful lot about what's written in the Bible. His only claim about God is that the whole idea seems very unlikely. What sort of independently verifiable facts would you expect?
Is it to be Kristallnacht again? Is that what we should take from this excoriating critique of 'religion' and the Old Testament in particular, but not confined to that? Never mind that uncountable millions draw comfort from their faith and use it to guide them in their lives. Who do you think you are to tell any one how to feel and believe?
@DanielRochester800 Logic and evidence? That shows that like Dawkins you're just spewing something you heard someone else say. Don't even waste my time with such weak and inaccurate defenses.
@@wholiddleolme476 I genuinely believe in what I say, and I'll say once again that science will always be a better tool for understanding nature than religion because it relies on logic and evidence. Religion relies on imagination.
@DanielRochester800so what about evolution theories? there's some pretty good imagination going on there! Opps sorry, did i miss something, have evolutionary scientists discovered how life got started from nonliving matter?
@DanielRochester800 "I genuinely believe in what I say," Sure, you can believe whatever you like, that's the beauty of Freewill, but believing something doesn't make it so. " and I'll say once again that science will always be a better tool for understanding nature than religion because it relies on logic and evidence." Stating the same thing again? That's beginning to sound rather religious and dogmatic to me, sure does sound like you are beginning to throw 'logic and evidence' out the window in favor of a belief system! "Religion relies on imagination." Of coarse you do realize that even if you are answering this with a pen and paper , that someone imagined that pen and paper. That the pc or phone you are using was first IMAGINED by someone before it became a reality, you do know that right? Hmmm, it's starting to appear that 'science' is the result of people's imaginations rather than logic. I don't think you've thought this through very well, have you! You are aware that Darwin was not a scientist, and all his claims were not the result of evidence, but rather his own imagination . As for Dawkins, well he's just a parrot, desperately attempting to squawk his way into the Royal Society, but he lacks some attributes to become a member: A belief in the supernatural and most importantly being a high ranking Freemason. Both of which his mentor Charlie Darwin held!
( ; ﾟДﾟ) We need to popularize the idea of getting God married. Getting God married is a good use of someone's time. You are supposed to make the environment intelligent so no God is needed. We fixed the video and audio for the best experience possible. Cameras are supernatural and all of them captured 3D that not a gimmick. The audio loud don't make violence so has depth. Nobody has to buy anything for it to work.
My thinking is the same as the Dalai Lama don't settle for less than logic and experience... there is truth in other religions... I think Dawkins is a dork.
I wonder why there is so much effort among the strongly opinioned credentialed class to prove that there is no God? Do they hope to take His place? What is the motivation?
We do not wish anything or anyone to take God's place. That's the point: we should not adore or be subservient to anyone. We are born free and should think freely.
@ I completely agree. Thus I support those of faith to enjoy that freedom. I’m tired of the endless attacks on people of faith. Intellectualism is its own religion and, in my opinion, overrated as a problem solver because it seems to be entwined with a lack of humbleness.
@@4XLibelle The new atheists tend to be very arrogant, that is true. But I do not see attacks on religion as being arrogant. It is merely an ideological dispute.
@DanielRochester800 Yes, it is a dispute. Which is why it’s puzzling to me for people of faith to engage in a dispute for which there is no possible resolution. There is a need among so many to somehow prove the existence of God. To me that’s silly as it is faith. Any proof just removes faith, and all the practical wonder that comes with it.
@@4XLibelle We are not attempting to disprove God, no one can disprove anything. We simply believe that religion corrupts the human mind and our independence, that's all. On the other hand, there are may who perceive religion as a positive. It is purely ideological.
God can't be proven, of course. But there is absolutely no evidence to support him. Scientific explanations, on the other hand, are backed up by evidence.
Well science gets lots of things wrong. And its built on a number of suppositions. One is science can explain everything. Another is that scientific evidence is independent. I cant prove the first is wrong but firmly believe it to be so. The second is flawed which Quantum theory shows. Enanglement is one the most proven facts in science. Particles separated by any distance communicate instantaneously in some way. That is a scientific fact. Besides this all forces act at a distance. And the origin or place of conciousness is completely unkown to science. The brain may think. But that is not conciousness. When your not thinking you are still conciously aware. Again I cant prove anything scientifically here but there are experiential proofs of experience which leave no doubt. BTW. I do not believe in a creator God.
@@Papa-fv1rn The lack of evidence and logical reasons to believe in the Christian God points to him not existing, not to him existing. The Bible is not a source of evidence.
@DanielRochester800 Yes, that's true. But about how many things do we say, "It's unequivocally false", simply because we don't see evidence of it? We never do. I just think it's a logical mistake to insist on the truth of something either way, when there is, as you correctly say, no evidence.
@@Papa-fv1rn No, God being true is not unequivocally false. It is still possible. However, in my view, all reasoning points to there not being a God. I am not certain that God is not real, and no one can never be certain, in the same way we can never be certain that a teapot isn't orbiting the Earth right now.
Dawkins does not categorically assert that God doesn't exist. He merely says that there's no evidence for one. Furthermore he once said no-one can be 100% sure that no God exists, but that it seems highly unlikely.
@@kevinholling9645 It is! And I believe in God. Just in case you misunderstood me. The Atheist can be quite venomous in their approach. This is not a discussion. This is an argument, mainly from the side of the Atheist, why? How do we learn anything by arguing.
！Σ(×_×;)! Consciousness is the particle and wave double slit experiment. The cones and rods of your eyes preserve the particle and wave duality so your vision don't look like a flat screen television. It's supposed to be a violation of physics but it is the only exception in the whole universe.
How much money does Dawkins make for these lectures? He claims to know so much and like all humans, knows so little. We do not really know with experimental evidence now the Universe was created. Is there a god, who knows. ? I remain an agnostic!
"How much money does Dawkins make for these lectures?" - not as much as the Pope makes for his lectures. I agree that there is no experimental evidence as to how the universe was created. However, that's absolutely no justification to conclude that it must therefore have been created using magic by an old man in the sky. It's perfectly acceptable to admit that there are a lot of things that 'we don't know'. However, that list is gradually reducing as science discovers more and more.
@donaldwatson6621 Faith is exclusively a religious concept, it's the excuse you use when you have no good reason for your beliefs. If you had a good reason, you'd give that reason instead of just saying it's faith. You are being deliberately dishonest about atheists or you are just stupid, which one is it?
@@donaldwatson6621 " ... the universe, time, matter, and energy created it's self." That's not what atheists say. They just say that there's no evidence that God created those things. That's all. Even Dawkins admits that it's impossible to be 100% sure that God doesn't exist. He merely claims that it seems highly unlikely that everything was somehow created by some form of supernatural being using magic. "Beyond reasonable doubt", I think, is the correct phrase here. One possibility is that the universe has always existed in some form or other (even before the Big Bang). To me, that's much more likely than the idea that God has always existed.
@@Rob-fc9wg Faith is confidence or trust in a person, thing, or concept.[1] In the context of religion, faith is "belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion".[2] According to the Merriam-Webster's Dictionary, faith has multiple definitions, including "something that is believed especially with strong conviction", "complete trust", "belief and trust in and loyalty to God", as well as "a firm belief in something for which there is no proof".[3] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith The atheist who wants to justify an assertion of the “non-existence of God” is committed inevitably to defining what the word “God” means. It is here, precisely, that the trouble begins. The atheist must rely at least on a nominal definition of what is intended by “God”, and this definition often turns out to be arbitrary. Such is the argument of Jean-Luc Marion, who observes that the death of God, asserted by Nietzsche, is no more than the death of a particular idol that has come to stand for God. In each case of such proofs, one must always ask whether it is the true God, the revealed God, who is at stake in the question. As for negative theism or the assertive and militant type of atheism we have observed in exponents such as Dawkins, the question is always to determine whether such an atheism - grounded on an implicit, but often arbitrary, definition of God - does not border on theological naïveté. In a word, the God about whom it is possible to prove non-existence on the basis of a definition that is always dogmatic or hazardous can easily be suspected of not being the true God - granted, of course, that God exists. www.abc.net.au/religion/atheism,-faith,-and-experience/13476384 The above is a good read; faith is not limited to religion. You may note I have refrained from calling names, using any epithets, or calling into question your honesty. I have good reason to believe in God the Father and his risen Son, Jesus Christ. Although I came to Christ late in life and lived on the "other side," I would not go back to my pre-Christ ways for anything.
!!( ; ﾛ)ﾟ ﾟ The universe was created in 1976. It is too hot to make a universe at the time of the big bang. It can be created at anytime. God is slow and easy. A human can do a lot with their lifespan. I got the hunk. God got the chunk. Everyone else can have the rest. That is song spirit of ''76 by The Alarm.
Never found anything Dawkins or the likes of him say convincing or worth pondering. He's probably 80 plus now so its safe to say he's going to find out pretty soon whether there is a God or not.
@DanielRochester800 Of course you do. And you do not care to racism, to misogeny, to murderous imperialism, nothing. Religion, though hideous on itself, pales in the face of you guys. Who on Earth could have imagined that atheism would turn out to be far worse than religion! 🤮😱😭😭😭😭
@@peterm7915 Well as it was filmed nearly 20 years ago I'm not surprised 🤣 However it's still factual and counts today... Unlike the nonsense he's speaking out against, that's actual old news but worse. Ancient fake news 🤣
No disrespect to Richard Dawkins, but as psalm 14:1 says " the senseless one says in thier heart there is no JEHOVAH GOD, or as yhe king james version says " the fool hath said there is no God, and all the evolutionists and one who mock and deny JEHOVAH GODS existence, are going to find out very soon, especially as we are living in the last days foretold in the bible 💯
@DanielRochester800 be careful what you wish for, I have nothing to fear because I KNOW who I believe in, but you and your likes are like the wind, believing in others.
At least Professor Dawkins is passionate about what he talks about. I believe he genuinely wishes to overthrow the yoke of the despotic, tyrannical God.
Disappointingly childish. One who attempts to judge God clearly does not understand what God is. Dawkins's arrogant words demonstrate his own delusions.
Sorry man, unconvincing. The more horrific superlatives you're throwing, the more I'm convinced of someting else. An astonishing arrogance showing itself off.
When Richard Dawkins, or any other believer in his creed of neo-Darwinism, can explain to me how the ideas of Charles Darwin may even address, let alone satisfactorily account for, the life cycle of a butterfly I shall be impressed.
Take an Entomology course at a university. You’ll learn all about metamorphosis of the caterpillar to the butterfly and all the other wonderful processes that go on during the amazing transformation
@@mattorr2256 The processes during the transformation are defensible only if you embrace levels of IMPROBABILITY which have to be described as astronomical. Yes the spinnerets to weave the cocoon COULD have come about by accidents. Not very likely though, is it? Natural selection? Survival of the Fittest? Why not just mate with another caterpillar? Or reproduce by yourself like an aphid?
Whatever you studied demands levels of improbability which are ASTRONOMICAL. I mean, the spinnerets which spin the cocoon MAY have arisen by accidents. But it's not very likely, is it? Why not just mate with another caterpillar or reproduce by yourself, like an aphid? Here ́s a simple a nd comprehensive critique for you. (I hasten to add I do NOT AGREE that the ́J ́ shape of the pupa spells the initial of ́Jesus ́!!) th-cam.com/video/r272qTTGSJQ/w-d-xo.html
lol. Has anyone ever found themselves in trouble with the supposed white bearded man in the sky? No. Never ever in history has anyone seen this god do anything to anyone for anything. Your comment is a very typical one of Christian evangelists and apologists though
Stupid comment. Ignorant. Childish. Limiting. Small. Simple. Lame. Dumb. Mindless drivel. Half-witted ishkabibble.. In other words. Not much goes on upstairs for you does it??
💥If you think this was "brutal", wait until the KING of kings returns in the clouds of heaven in great power and glory to reply to Dawkins. You ain't seen brutal yet!
Yea ok. He was supposed to already cone back numerous times and never does. Stop with that shit. He even promised with one of the times and where was he???? “He’s coming you’ll see!” Nope! Never ever will we see such a stupid act that’s written poorly and believed by so many ignorant people
Dawkins definition of “religion” isn’t biblical, it’s made made traditions, one can believe in God without these made made traditions. Religion as defined by the Bible “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.” James 1:27 KJV The latter confuses quite a many because they do not properly define “the world” one is to keep himself unspotted from. Even with that I’m sure no one should have any qualms about visiting the fatherless and widows in their affliction, yet even this has a Bible context man has largely ignored. Dawkins is childish his understanding of God is infantile the man lumps all cultures ideas of God into one making them all the so-called creator, I’m sorry but his entire presentation is well just stupid.
It's not a matter of tradition; it's a matter of cult. Religion is a cult, and like any cult, it manipulates its followers to blindly obey some prophet, or else face damnation.
@ excuse me but what makes you think the Bible is about you, the Bible is speaking to a certain people that agreed to be in a covenant relationship with him with certain rules laws and regulations to follow, you’ve made the same such agreement yet without consent by being born in whatever country you were born in, you’ve agreed to follows its rules regulations and laws under threat of penalty you’ve also agreed to go to war for said country and allow deliver your own children up to war, yet God is the monster don’t make me laugh, bunch of blind hypocrites who don’t know their rear ends from a hole in the ground think to part their lips against God, what a joke.
Quoting any scripture from your book is useless and futile. It doesn’t mean to represent a fact or facts. It’s the contrary actually. More likely they are made up and fantastical superstitions
@DanielRochester800plus one their main cars to get more blind followers is to indoctrinate kids before they can think for themselves. If they can accomplish this, then the dismantling of that kids heavily engrained beliefs are damn near impossible
Thanks for the honesty Mr Dawkins and the description of the vile, imaginary xtian “god”, luckily just as imaginary as all the other claimed deities. 🇬🇧🇪🇺
@@paulburger2963 a god is not detectable in any way since a god is supposed to "exist" "out of space and out of time". Whatever that means because it is a complete abstract, absurd and contradictory concept. Something can not exist for zero seconds because then it does not exist. And neither can something "exist" " out of space" because something that exists takes space itself! So, that's very suspicious isn't it because that is exactly the same characteristic of something that does not exist in reality!
The Athiest concept on a Creator, is flawed, this is the reason for their false stance. Is Dawkins going to tell me that the lecturn he is standing at, created itself? Or the stage he is standing on, created itself! He will get to know the answer in the next life.
@bazpearce9993 I disagree with your opinion. Let me elaborate. You exist. I exist. The whole Universe exists AND is being Sustained and has evolved over time. As, we too have evolved. Now, you need to ponder this; Nothing can come into existence by itself. Let's take as an example , the first Atom, or the first Photon. Where did it come from? Out of what? Something brought this whole Universe into existence. Whatever "IT" is, that is my Creator. But as Quantum Mechanics is showing, the Past, Present and Future can exist all at the same time. Whatever Created the Universe, is, by its Nature. outside of Time! The Creator/ Creature Force That brought the Universe into existence, must be, by its very nature, untreated. So my " God" has always Existed and when the Universe starts its Cycle of death and rebirth ( See Roger Penrose) , My Creator will still exist. Ponder the Anthropic Principle! There are at least 70 fundamentals of Nsture, that are SO FINELY TUNED that had any one of them been different by a fraction of a fraction of a billionth of a percent, we would not have a Universe, nor life in it! The example given is: ROLLING A DICE TIMES ,AND ON THE VERY FIRST THROW, EACH TIME, GETTING A " 6." This sounds impossible, but this is exactly the odds when you look at the Universe. ( See the video on TH-cam, proving God with a Dice). Now in order to negate the Anthropic principle, the likes of yourself and Dawkins come up with THE MULTIVERSE THEORY. How preposterous is this!!! NOW, not only do we not know how our Universe came into existence AND to negate a Creator, some Scientists tell us there are actually countless Universes and we happen to live in one that supports life!!! 😂😂😂😂. The Quran: " We have Created the Universe from NOTHING and verily, it is We who are expanding It." " We will show them Our Signs, in the Universe, in the furthest horizons and within themselves, until it becomes manifest that this is the TRUTH. " " We have not Created the Universe and everything in it, in idle sport, everything has a PURPOSE." " We have Created the Sun and the Moon to measure time, each swimming in an orbit, the Sun too has its own orbit." ( The fact that our Sun has its own orbit, it Rotates about a Star called Vega, has only recently been discovered.). " We have created all life from water." " We have got all life out from the water." " We have created two bodies of water, one sweet and palatable, the other salty, it is not permissible for them to mix as We have created a barrier between them." ( This barrier is the Halocline barrier). Bro, PONDER YOUR EXISTENCE, DID YOU ASK TO COME INTO THIS WORLD OR WAS YOUR SOUL, BROUGHT HERE??
@@user-k229 "So my " God" has always Existed and when the Universe starts its Cycle of death and rebirth ( See Roger Penrose) , My Creator will still exist." Have you ever considered that energy could have always existed, since it cannot be created or destroyed? My point is that we need not invent some great invisible man telling us what to do to explain the origins of existence.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. No one is greater than God, and no one can Love you the way God does. Jesus beared God's wrath for the sins of mankind so that he may redeem his creation. And here comes the last point Arius was considered a heretic because he said that Jesus was created(which would make his sacrafice meaningless) whereas the bible says he existed for eternity with God. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Lasty what is Dawkins talking about (4:19 - 4:44). He just made up all these faul dirty names and applied them to God. May he have mercy on your soul because that's not very intellectual or honest just spiteful and disrespectful. Isn't he a scientist, boasting about evididence and such, show me the evidence of what you say is true? God's Word will prove you're a liar.
Merry Christmas! Though I only say so as a politeness within the cultural context in which I was raised. I read the bible regularly though I am not a believer. The God of the Old Testament as Dawkins here describes seems pretty accurate. While reading through the first 5 books of OT, I was left feeling extremely turned off by the entire Christian enterprise. Still, Merry Christmas, because the message everyone is meant to aspire to at this time of year is still a laudable one.
@@XinwylFumudaiski Marry Christmas to you also and to everyone else. We celebrate today the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. Notice how just like Dawkins you didn't really say anything just a chain of words that are meant to mean something but not based on anything. Show me from the book, that you say you read, that God is who you and him proclaim to be. Give me an event or something that shows He is those things Dawkins say He is not your opinions.
@@bazpearce9993 How does one think for themselfs beside being presented the evidence and choosing between it. So when you think God does not exists because somone said so you're thinking for yourself? That's nonsense.
I've listened to just about everything Dawkins and other prominent atheists have to say. I've also read Chesterton. The latter leaves the atheists in the dust.
Evangelical Christians, actually all Christians are exactly like democrats/liberals. You can not debate, you can not argue because you have really nothing to say. Just like lefties you make claims but when asked how and why, you go into hiding and pretend you don't exist. What do you mean by "The latter leaves the atheists in the dust."? Give us an example and tell us WHY!
Isn’t it odd that these professional atheists never seem to make a meaningful point? What do people get from this? Is it just an emperor’s new clothes thing?
There is no such thing as a "professional atheist". If there were, then there would be a "professional Christian"... can we agree on that? I am an atheist, not by profession but because I have common sense. Any question you may have, I am happy to answer it in a civilised manner.
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." That'sd a pretty fucking meaningful point. Especially if you believe in an Abrahamic god.
It is by fear of loss, that man is motivated to change his/her mind,and is governed.
A law is there for the law Breakers. Not for the law abiding individual.
Structure gives order.
Ignorance gives excuse to crime.
The only thing more exhaustingly boring than superstition are those that insist I share their superstition.
A good man who talks well above our religious leaders. I regard religions as hocus-pocus but do understand how they arose.
Not sure you are aware of the origin of “Hocus Pocus”
If we had met Jesus in his day .... experienced his grace, heard his truth-telling, witnessed his murder & resurrection.... I think you & I would have been convinced that he really was the Son of Heaven.
The disciples didn't need faith like WE need faith; they simply wrote what they heard & saw before their very eyes.
The invitation extended to us is simply to trust that what the disciples wrote & died for is indeed true..... and absolutely relevant to us today.
Faith = TRUST ... plain & simple.
Well isnt he the clever one.
For a start, your/his atheist definition of "good" is ungrounded and subjective. Also, "hocus pocus" is just your silly word for metaphysical.
“Witnessed his resurrection”? That’s about as likely as witnessing a chicken do calculus.
Well, Paul, how empty must your life be if you need some deity and it's promise / illusion / reality (does not matter which) of a reward (while on earth or in an afterlife) to give it meaning. You can not prove the existence of your god and I can not disprove it. But I will not arrange my life and certainly not demand from others to arrange theirs on the strange and contradictory demands in a bronze age book, which origins are dubious at best just because it contains a promise to play the harp in the clouds if I follow it along with the threat of a devil gnawing on my genitalia while roasting in an eternal flame if I do not. That approach seems to be transactional. I prefer to do the right thing without expecting some kind of return and/or to avoid punishment; to me that is a much nobler approach and inherently devoid of hopelessness or despair.
How empty would Dawkins life be without said deity who he does not believe in yet has afforded him his career and fortune from giving lectures interviews selling books teaching classes about about a God that doesn’t exist I wish I could build a life and fortune off deny the existence of Santa clause but I can’t because Santa actually doesn’t exist. Where would Dawkins be without this God he doesn’t believe in does anyone actually care for his work outside of the fact he’s an atheist, how many Dawkins books or papers have you read that had nothing to do with God, seems the man is nothing without these made God he denies.
@@lemnisgate8809 He is not profiting off of "this God he does not believe in yet," because that would amount to profiting off of nothing. Professor Dawkins is profiting from educating the masses on the insanity of this fiction.
@ he is absolutely profiting from it if you think not you’re just as delusional as he is 🤣🤣🤣. Unlike Dawkins the gospel has actually spread to the masses while Dawkins little speeches speak only to a tiny subset of people his impact on the world is minuscule when he dies it will be like he never existed.
@@lemnisgate8809 Why do you feel the need to insult me and Dr. Dawkins. I am sharing MY approach to life and I did not even talk about him. Furthermore he is a scientist and arrives at results based on evolutionary anthropology which interests and reaches anyone who understands how science works. Are you disputing evolution claiming creationism is at work?
@ Insulting you is fun because you decided to reply inadequately perhaps that was a bit mean I’ve been going back and forward with imbeciles you seem to have gotten caught up in the crossfire, forgive me, Dawkins on the other hand I could care less about him than he does about me. I’m not speaking for or against creationism or evolution I find the entire argument laughable because creationism isn’t biblical despite what some Christian’s and atheists think, the Christian or atheist that reads genesis and think it’s literally about the creation of the universe clearly has no idea what the text is about, imagine two people arguing about a topic that’s not even in the book they are debating over it’s the height of stupidity.
Comments are great
We all get a chance to see how diverse are our thoughts and opinions and how diversely we respond to difference whether with disdain or an openness and respect.
Makes you think the Tower of Babel wasn't just some crazy irrelevant useless myth and there is such a thing as Truth that we humans continue to search for
Agreed, Ewen, I am very content that we have taken the initiative to debate this matter.
"truth" with a big T is the most dangerous thing. its a thing that doesnt need evidence, only belief...
Three different presuppositions of babel, ‘truth’ and implying the bible means anything. 🥱🥱🥱
@@matswessling6600
Is that a Truth statement?
@@ewencameron4269 Didnt you read my post at all? Its a statement evidenced by many sects and totalitarian movements.
When we take a look around the WORLD in which we live in , SUN , MOON , STARS , the beauty of the world , OUR LOVED ones , every creature you can think of , and atheists still think we just happened , never ceases to amaze me 🙏
@@fredconnor9150 The Universe is beautiful, and whether it came from God, by accident, from an explosion or from aliens, does not change the fact that it is beautiful.
I can't get enough of dear Mr Dawkins . He's been a guiding beacon of light for me for many years . To see evolution one has to look at the results over vast time scales . If you look at a worm and a human one thinks they are not related because they look so different. It's the mostly little mutations over millions of years that transform a worm into an ape . The universe also looks like it doesn't change from day to day but it does if you have the right instruments to measure the change.
Oh sounds like you worship Dawkins, I thought atheists didn't believe in a deity.
Science reveals evidence the human cell is ireducibly complex.
It only functions in its complete form.
Will not work if added too or subtracted from.
That fact destroys evolution and Dawkins.
Facts upon facts upon more facts
@mattorr2256 are you sure as you say fact upon fact, was Dawkins there at creation did God discuss how He was going to redeem mankind from with you or Dawkins. No it is not fact upon fact it is Dawkins 's opinion and you adopted Dawkins opinion as fact. Wow that is real intellectual.
@TomHensley-g1n Dawkins preachings , if you want to call it that , brings peace of mind and acceptance of the reality of the human condition. Religious preachings about scripture and doctrine brings fear ,guilt and shame to the people who believe this but do not follow it's teachings. I'm not afraid of Richard Dawkins but preachers scare the hell out of my ,pardon the pun .
More interesting to me are the true believers' bone-headed endorsements of the supernatural (see below).
Nothing bone headed about it. Just look around you. An accident, no chance, something from nothing, no chance. And before someone says, where did God come from. He has to exist outside of time otherwise he would have been part of creation, instead of the creator. It's the atheist which needs to open their minds. It's they who are the boneheads.
@@kevinedwards2282
So you have zero evidence for your god?
It is obvious that you are just lying.
@@kevinedwards2282 Your mental gymnastics attempting to "explain" your delusion reminds me of the churches' models to "explain" earth still existing in the middle of our solar system after the invention of the telescope. You really have to google those attempts: Ridiculous, pathetic and it took them only 350 years to admit they were wrong and apologize to Galileo (in 1992). I suppose you have another 3 1/2 centuries to wake up and could still beat their timeline.
@@maylingng4107
So! You require evidence. There was an apostle by the name of Thomas, doubting Thomas. You carry on looking.....But you have already made up your mind, haven't you! You wouldn't even know where to start looking in the first place. The wrong attitude.
@@kevinedwards2282 Ok, who is to say that God isn't an accident? Was God intentionally created? Did God come from nothing?
Thank God someone is removing the god equation to find the real god of things. Which is matter.
Einstein, Hawking, and many other scientists have used the term "God" as a metaphor many times and then had to explain themselves. This metaphorical use of "God" is an unfortunate rhetorical practice. Every time it is used this way it sets up theists to claim these persons as fellow believers. Post hoc, this verbal habit has made me very annoyed with Einstein and some others. It amazes me that they didn't foresee how their words would be exploited.
A much different time…
This was fun to hear while I roll spliffs to take to a Xmas party that I'm going to just for the food and fiesta. I have to agree that religion is a delusion.
And a pernicious delusion.
@DanielRochester800 it's an excuse to get together and party with friends and family, that's about it for me
Why do you choose to wake up everyday to this world of pain and suffering if one day you will meet the inevitable end of nothingness. Why go through all the pain if at the end your life all your toiling and hard work will produce vanity? That is the dilemma of atheism. You are living for nothing and just suffering along the way. Sorry if I sound bleak or rude, just poking holes.
@Rafael765LT Life is meaningless, but you can still give it meaning. And why not go through it with a smile? We will die anyway, might as well live the best we can.
@@Rafael765LT I'm more agnostic than atheist. I believe in a higher power but I know that people don't understand it. It's worth being a good person.
The God of the Old Testament, Yahweh, was an imaginary entity used by an ancient tribe of people to give themselves the belief that they could overcome any adverse circumstances they would encounter, and prevail in any battles or conflicts they would have to fight to either survive against attacks or when seeking to acquire territories. Look at it in the context of the time, other tribal peoples the world over also held such beliefs and created similar imaginary entities. Fast forward into the 20th and 21st centuries and we have had the benefit of science, technology, neurology and psychology to deepen and widen our understanding of reality, ourselves and the universe we live in. But there is still an infinite amount to learn. For example what has emerged in the 21st century - the principle of quantum physics and mechanics - is beginning to show us that there seems to be another dimension to existence, i.e. consciousness, and this may actually reveal the existence of a super/collective consciousness which we and everything else is a part of, and that just might be what the ancients were trying to understand as 'God'.
Did those other primitive tribes also have gods who announced, "love thy neighbor", "love the stranger"?
@@marchess286 I don't recall Yahweh in the OT ever instructing the tribe who worshiped the imaginary deity to do that - precisely the opposite. If you are referring to the man who lived in the 1st century (up to AD 33) then yes he said those words, but only to then be humiliated, tortured and killed by those who still worshipped the imaginary Yahweh.
@@marchess286 166 million years ago a giant dinosaur walked across a lagoon leaving its footprints to fossilize and be discovered 166 million years later by archaeologists. To even begin to think that humans - not even atoms in comparison to the earth's history, let alone the wider cosmos and universe - have a personal 'God' different to any other human who talks to them as described in a primitive book is simply delusional and self-defeating.
Ummm... Actually, quantum physics emerged in the early part of the 20th century, around the 1920s. It was the understanding of it that led to transistors, lasers, atomic energy and more.
Lies lies lies and a lot of anger against his creator. What a pity.
@@AguiaAguia-ci1od A pity, indeed.
Ever heard of irony ? Self delude on fool.
The lies, lies, lies are in your “holy” book.
The problem with the god or no god argument. is that to question philosophically one
does not need to ask that question but to learn what is involved in the art of observation..
Nature is super but not supernatural.
(/--)/ This is an artistic proof of a created universe. When you paint a shadow it's the opposite color of the object that made the shadow. Nobody knew what the opposite color of white was so the artists avoided painting white on white. The opposite color of white is baby blue and baby pink. The first artist to figure it out was Norman Rockwell. I was the second artist to figure it out. I saw it in the corner of a white room. The lighting was perfect to see it. Pigments have different rules than light. It took them thousands of years to get all the pigments they have now.
It seems to me that Richard has given more credence to religion, than anyone before that have preceded him in that endeavour…perhaps that what his purpose has been…? Most of the earlier and medieval people attempted to justify religion with mystical stories and pseudo magic, which encouraged speculation and mistrust as being concocted by charlatans and liars, whereas Richard challenged those conclusions and explanations with demands for scientific corroborating evidence…. This has encouraged people to look for ways of augmenting the beliefs, wanted to preserve, with explanations beyond what they had been told by holy men, and scriptures… Such as the function of consciousness and perception and other scientific ventures, and in many cases, they found conclusions that offered explanations, of some reasonable value…?
How ridiculous- all these people change their mind eventually.
There are more Christians who become atheists than atheists who become Christian. Let that sink in.
I am an Evolutionist and I firmly believe in God, without any doubt. I have 4 Advanced degrees in Medicine, Science (Advanced Genetics & Marine Biology), Astronomy and Evolution (Paleontology). I did my Thesis on Australopithecus Afarensis (early hominid species found on the plains of Africa), 3 Million year old fossil, under the World-renowned Paleo-Anthropologist, Professor Phillip Tobias (WITS University, Johannesburg). I have personally been on my hands and knees digging for fossils at the Sterkfontein Caves (South Africa), a UNESCO World Heritage site. I firmly believe that the Universe began from a Big Bang 13,8 Billion years ago, and that the Earth is more than 4,5 Billion years old and that the earliest fossil discovered is that of a multicellular organism in Western Australia dated at 4 Billion years. I am a Scientist, a Medical Dr, an Evolutionist and a Creationist. There is absolutely NO DOUBT that a Supreme Creator Originated this entire Universe from non-existence into matter in 10 to power -33 of a second). Every human being, monotheist, polytheist, pantheist, agnostic and atheists will all stand in front of the Supreme Creator on the Day of Judgement, without ANY DOUBT whatsoever. My sad observation is that many Atheists are kind, honourable and intelligent people. Some Evolutionists are fond of quoting the Bible (new age Earth which they fondly mock) (I have great respect for Christians and creationists, but lets admit that the Bible DOES have many errors): Have they ever read the Quran, the FINAL Divine Scripture? If not, please put it on your bucket list. I would love to see the face of an atheist (especially Charles Darwin and Professor Richard Dawkins) when he/she is standing face-to-face in front of God. Wow. That will be a Kodak moment. Question to my dear Atheists & Agnostics: is there the SLIGHTEST, MICROSCOPIC POSSIBILITY that you are wrong in your understanding? How much time did you REALLY spend on seeking the TRUTH about God, or are you simply a fan of atheists like the esteemed Professor Dawkins? Will you follow him to his inevitable doom, or do you have your own brain? See you on the other side (Guaranteed), Warmest regards, Dr Ahmed Adam, South Africa
@@DrAhmedAdam Atheists do not claim to know the truth. We are just giving out perspective, and we might be wrong. But, Sir, you might be wrong about your perspective as well. As a scientist you have to be open to a variety of views and accept that nothing can be proven with certainty.
"There is absolutely NO DOUBT that a Supreme Creator Originated this entire Universe from non-existence into matter" IN YOUR MIND.
"Every human being, .....will all stand in front of the Supreme Creator on the Day of Judgement, without ANY DOUBT whatsoever" IN YOUR MIND.
"the Quran, (is) the FINAL Divine Scripture" IN YOUR MIND.
My question is: WhatTF makes what YOU happen to think correct for others?
I happen to think differently, but I don't go around insisting that I am right and threatening you with "inevitable doom" on the "(Guaranteed)" "other side". I am not that arrogant.
@@alanthompson8515 Yes, I was with him until he suddenly declared that God did it in 10^-33 seconds "without doubt". (Though he gave us a hint about his illogical mind when he mentioned that he is a Creationist.) There was no logic, no justification, but simply a blind expression of faith. I don't know whether he also believes in fairies and Santa Claus, but I wouldn't be surprised.
@@Chris-hf2sl Unlikely. He seems to be Muslim.
@@3122-t6h Who is? The original poster or one of the commenters?
Dawkins doesn’t have much to say about God. He is a scientist, and lacks any independently verifiable facts to support his claims to knowledge.
He actually knows an awful lot about what's written in the Bible. His only claim about God is that the whole idea seems very unlikely. What sort of independently verifiable facts would you expect?
@ From him? None. From you? All you have.
Is it to be Kristallnacht again? Is that what we should take from this excoriating critique of 'religion' and the Old Testament in particular, but not confined to that? Never mind that uncountable millions draw comfort from their faith and use it to guide them in their lives. Who do you think you are to tell any one how to feel and believe?
So Power, and Power alone makes right?
Science still hasn't answered the Origin of Life and never will and Dawkins has one foot in the grave, and like Hawking he'll soon learn of his error.
It may not have answered the toughest questions yet, but science has something that the Bronze Age-era book will never have: logic. Plus evidence.
@DanielRochester800 Logic and evidence? That shows that like Dawkins you're just spewing something you heard someone else say. Don't even waste my time with such weak and inaccurate defenses.
@@wholiddleolme476 I genuinely believe in what I say, and I'll say once again that science will always be a better tool for understanding nature than religion because it relies on logic and evidence. Religion relies on imagination.
@DanielRochester800so what about evolution theories? there's some pretty good imagination going on there! Opps sorry, did i miss something, have evolutionary scientists discovered how life got started from nonliving matter?
@DanielRochester800 "I genuinely believe in what I say,"
Sure, you can believe whatever you like, that's the beauty of Freewill, but believing something doesn't make it so.
" and I'll say once again that science will always be a better tool for understanding nature than religion because it relies on logic and evidence."
Stating the same thing again? That's beginning to sound rather religious and dogmatic to me, sure does sound like you are beginning to throw 'logic and evidence' out the window in favor of a belief system!
"Religion relies on imagination."
Of coarse you do realize that even if you are answering this with a pen and paper , that someone imagined that pen and paper. That the pc or phone you are using was first IMAGINED by someone before it became a reality, you do know that right? Hmmm, it's starting to appear that 'science' is the result of people's imaginations rather than logic. I don't think you've thought this through very well, have you!
You are aware that Darwin was not a scientist, and all his claims were not the result of evidence, but rather his own imagination .
As for Dawkins, well he's just a parrot, desperately attempting to squawk his way into the Royal Society, but he lacks some attributes to become a member: A belief in the supernatural and most importantly being a high ranking Freemason. Both of which his mentor Charlie Darwin held!
( ; ﾟДﾟ) We need to popularize the idea of getting God married. Getting God married is a good use of someone's time. You are supposed to make the environment intelligent so no God is needed. We fixed the video and audio for the best experience possible. Cameras are supernatural and all of them captured 3D that not a gimmick. The audio loud don't make violence so has depth. Nobody has to buy anything for it to work.
Seek your salvation:
John 1:1-14
1 Corinthians 15:1-4
John 3:1-8
John 3:16
Romans 10:8,9
@@petersanmiguel1468 Seek your enslavement.
No, I'd rather be free.
Free from the bondage of sin.
@@petersanmiguel1468 If you wish to be free and think freely, blindly following one book at all costs is not a good idea.
( ﾟAﾟ ) It's intelligently designed that if you master evolution it just makes you a baby doctor.
My thinking is the same as the Dalai Lama don't settle for less than logic and experience... there is truth in other religions... I think Dawkins is a dork.
Take down of God? Hard to take down a Spirit where there is questionable directivity as to what is up and what is down.
I wonder why there is so much effort among the strongly opinioned credentialed class to prove that there is no God? Do they hope to take His place? What is the motivation?
We do not wish anything or anyone to take God's place. That's the point: we should not adore or be subservient to anyone. We are born free and should think freely.
@ I completely agree. Thus I support those of faith to enjoy that freedom. I’m tired of the endless attacks on people of faith. Intellectualism is its own religion and, in my opinion, overrated as a problem solver because it seems to be entwined with a lack of humbleness.
@@4XLibelle The new atheists tend to be very arrogant, that is true. But I do not see attacks on religion as being arrogant. It is merely an ideological dispute.
@DanielRochester800 Yes, it is a dispute. Which is why it’s puzzling to me for people of faith to engage in a dispute for which there is no possible resolution. There is a need among so many to somehow prove the existence of God. To me that’s silly as it is faith. Any proof just removes faith, and all the practical wonder that comes with it.
@@4XLibelle We are not attempting to disprove God, no one can disprove anything. We simply believe that religion corrupts the human mind and our independence, that's all. On the other hand, there are may who perceive religion as a positive. It is purely ideological.
it matters nothing what he says. its not a provable matter.
God can't be proven, of course. But there is absolutely no evidence to support him. Scientific explanations, on the other hand, are backed up by evidence.
Well science gets lots of things wrong. And its built on a number of suppositions. One is science can explain everything. Another is that scientific evidence is independent. I cant prove the first is wrong but firmly believe it to be so. The second is flawed which Quantum theory shows. Enanglement is one the most proven facts in science. Particles separated by any distance communicate instantaneously in some way. That is a scientific fact. Besides this all forces act at a distance. And the origin or place of conciousness is completely unkown to science. The brain may think. But that is not conciousness. When your not thinking you are still conciously aware. Again I cant prove anything scientifically here but there are experiential proofs of experience which leave no doubt. BTW. I do not believe in a creator God.
Y'know, categorically asserting that there is no god, is just as foolishly deluded as categorically asserting that there is one. I don't know. Do you?
@@Papa-fv1rn The lack of evidence and logical reasons to believe in the Christian God points to him not existing, not to him existing. The Bible is not a source of evidence.
@DanielRochester800 Yes, that's true. But about how many things do we say, "It's unequivocally false", simply because we don't see evidence of it? We never do. I just think it's a logical mistake to insist on the truth of something either way, when there is, as you correctly say, no evidence.
@@Papa-fv1rn No, God being true is not unequivocally false. It is still possible. However, in my view, all reasoning points to there not being a God. I am not certain that God is not real, and no one can never be certain, in the same way we can never be certain that a teapot isn't orbiting the Earth right now.
Dawkins does not categorically assert that God doesn't exist. He merely says that there's no evidence for one. Furthermore he once said no-one can be 100% sure that no God exists, but that it seems highly unlikely.
Some of the world's leading scientists believe in God, but you people are far more intelligent than them.
@@kevinholling9645
Don't bother discussing with them. They do not wish to debate anything, their mind is already made up .
@kevinedwards2282 is not yours
But the vast majority do not... 93% last survey ... so there's that.
Your logic therefor suggests there is no god.
@@kevinholling9645
It is! And I believe in God. Just in case you misunderstood me. The Atheist can be quite venomous in their approach. This is not a discussion. This is an argument, mainly from the side of the Atheist, why? How do we learn anything by arguing.
@@roscius6204 if you bring God into the equation you will be condemned and lose your funding, ask Stephen Myer etc
！Σ(×_×;)! Consciousness is the particle and wave double slit experiment. The cones and rods of your eyes preserve the particle and wave duality so your vision don't look like a flat screen television. It's supposed to be a violation of physics but it is the only exception in the whole universe.
How much money does Dawkins make for these lectures? He claims to know so much and like all humans, knows so little. We do not really know with experimental evidence now the Universe was created. Is there a god, who knows. ? I remain an agnostic!
Dawkins' fiery rhetoric and perseverance has made him a lot of enemies, that's for sure. But let's heed his arguments and not merely his words.
"How much money does Dawkins make for these lectures?" - not as much as the Pope makes for his lectures.
I agree that there is no experimental evidence as to how the universe was created. However, that's absolutely no justification to conclude that it must therefore have been created using magic by an old man in the sky. It's perfectly acceptable to admit that there are a lot of things that 'we don't know'. However, that list is gradually reducing as science discovers more and more.
I do admire the faith of atheists.
What faith?
@@Rob-fc9wg The absolute faith that there is no God, and the universe, time, matter, and energy created it's self.
@donaldwatson6621
Faith is exclusively a religious concept, it's the excuse you use when you have no good reason for your beliefs.
If you had a good reason, you'd give that reason instead of just saying it's faith.
You are being deliberately dishonest about atheists or you are just stupid, which one is it?
@@donaldwatson6621 " ... the universe, time, matter, and energy created it's self." That's not what atheists say. They just say that there's no evidence that God created those things. That's all.
Even Dawkins admits that it's impossible to be 100% sure that God doesn't exist. He merely claims that it seems highly unlikely that everything was somehow created by some form of supernatural being using magic. "Beyond reasonable doubt", I think, is the correct phrase here.
One possibility is that the universe has always existed in some form or other (even before the Big Bang). To me, that's much more likely than the idea that God has always existed.
@@Rob-fc9wg Faith is confidence or trust in a person, thing, or concept.[1] In the context of religion, faith is "belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion".[2] According to the Merriam-Webster's Dictionary, faith has multiple definitions, including "something that is believed especially with strong conviction", "complete trust", "belief and trust in and loyalty to God", as well as "a firm belief in something for which there is no proof".[3]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith
The atheist who wants to justify an assertion of the “non-existence of God” is committed inevitably to defining what the word “God” means. It is here, precisely, that the trouble begins. The atheist must rely at least on a nominal definition of what is intended by “God”, and this definition often turns out to be arbitrary. Such is the argument of Jean-Luc Marion, who observes that the death of God, asserted by Nietzsche, is no more than the death of a particular idol that has come to stand for God. In each case of such proofs, one must always ask whether it is the true God, the revealed God, who is at stake in the question. As for negative theism or the assertive and militant type of atheism we have observed in exponents such as Dawkins, the question is always to determine whether such an atheism - grounded on an implicit, but often arbitrary, definition of God - does not border on theological naïveté. In a word, the God about whom it is possible to prove non-existence on the basis of a definition that is always dogmatic or hazardous can easily be suspected of not being the true God - granted, of course, that God exists.
www.abc.net.au/religion/atheism,-faith,-and-experience/13476384
The above is a good read; faith is not limited to religion. You may note I have refrained from calling names, using any epithets, or calling into question your honesty.
I have good reason to believe in God the Father and his risen Son, Jesus Christ. Although I came to Christ late in life and lived on the "other side," I would not go back to my pre-Christ ways for anything.
Its all BS... Endof... Tony cuenca
!!( ; ﾛ)ﾟ ﾟ The universe was created in 1976. It is too hot to make a universe at the time of the big bang. It can be created at anytime. God is slow and easy. A human can do a lot with their lifespan. I got the hunk. God got the chunk. Everyone else can have the rest. That is song spirit of ''76 by The Alarm.
Never found anything Dawkins or the likes of him say convincing or worth pondering. He's probably 80 plus now so its safe to say he's going to find out pretty soon whether there is a God or not.
From Dawkins?... Supporter of racists, and of racism and imperialism? Come on, guys. Can't you have better idols?
That's irrelevant, we don't idolize anyone.
@DanielRochester800 Of course you do. And you do not care to racism, to misogeny, to murderous imperialism, nothing. Religion, though hideous on itself, pales in the face of you guys. Who on Earth could have imagined that atheism would turn out to be far worse than religion! 🤮😱😭😭😭😭
Honestly, that wasn't worth watching.
At least you were open to watching it.
Why?
@@jameswright... in my opinion, this is old news,
@@peterm7915
Well as it was filmed nearly 20 years ago I'm not surprised 🤣
However it's still factual and counts today...
Unlike the nonsense he's speaking out against, that's actual old news but worse.
Ancient fake news 🤣
No disrespect to Richard Dawkins, but as psalm 14:1 says " the senseless one says in thier heart there is no JEHOVAH GOD, or as yhe king james version says " the fool hath said there is no God, and all the evolutionists and one who mock and deny JEHOVAH GODS existence, are going to find out very soon, especially as we are living in the last days foretold in the bible 💯
Your day is coming, don't worry!
I would rather descend to Hell with my dignity than ascend to Heaven with my immaturity.
You threaten others with your beliefs...
Says all we need to know about you..
@DanielRochester800 be careful what you wish for,
I have nothing to fear because I KNOW who I believe in, but you and your likes are like the wind, believing in others.
@@calderman Sir, we don't believe in anything. We think, not believe.
You cannot, and will not EVER “take down” God.
Absolutely Juvenile nonsense
And one can never "put him up" either.
How is Dawkins any different than Joel Osteen? Both profit on the unprovable
At least Professor Dawkins is passionate about what he talks about. I believe he genuinely wishes to overthrow the yoke of the despotic, tyrannical God.
Dawkins is a scientist and most of his money was made from his scientific discoveries. Osteen is a simpleton who talks on TV
Disappointingly childish. One who attempts to judge God clearly does not understand what God is. Dawkins's arrogant words demonstrate his own delusions.
Judge God? I think you got something wrong here. Mr. Dawkins believes there is no God - hence nothing to judge.
Oh, but you know what God is? What an arrogant and, at the same time, preposterous claim.
@roberthill799 not at all, You only have to read the Bible properly
lol. Which bible?
@@MichaelMiller-xo9fl any
Sorry man, unconvincing. The more horrific superlatives you're throwing, the more I'm convinced of someting else. An astonishing arrogance showing itself off.
Fair enough, it is rhetoric after all. You can't really blame Professor Dawkins for trying persuade a crowd.
What a silly way to come to a position.
Try facts....
@@roscius6204oh facts??? Does the Bible have countless facts to use????
When Richard Dawkins, or any other believer in his creed of neo-Darwinism, can explain to me how the ideas of Charles Darwin may even address, let alone satisfactorily account for, the life cycle of a butterfly I shall be impressed.
Take an Entomology course at a university. You’ll learn all about metamorphosis of the caterpillar to the butterfly and all the other wonderful processes that go on during the amazing transformation
I took Entomology at Texas Tech for my Bachelor’s degree in Horticulture and I could explain this to you…
@@mattorr2256 The processes during the transformation are defensible only if you embrace levels of IMPROBABILITY which have to be described as astronomical. Yes the spinnerets to weave the cocoon COULD have come about by accidents.
Not very likely though, is it?
Natural selection? Survival of the Fittest? Why not just mate with another caterpillar? Or reproduce by yourself like an aphid?
@@mattorr2256
Whatever you studied demands levels of improbability which are ASTRONOMICAL. I mean, the spinnerets which spin the cocoon MAY have arisen by accidents. But it's not very likely, is it?
Why not just mate with another caterpillar or reproduce by yourself, like an aphid?
Here ́s a simple a nd comprehensive critique for you.
(I hasten to add I do NOT AGREE that the ́J ́ shape of the pupa spells the initial of ́Jesus ́!!)
th-cam.com/video/r272qTTGSJQ/w-d-xo.html
Man that was brutal. Good thing he redefined God or else he might find himself in trouble with a big man😅
🙄
lol. Has anyone ever found themselves in trouble with the supposed white bearded man in the sky? No. Never ever in history has anyone seen this god do anything to anyone for anything. Your comment is a very typical one of Christian evangelists and apologists though
Stupid comment. Ignorant. Childish. Limiting. Small. Simple. Lame. Dumb. Mindless drivel. Half-witted ishkabibble.. In other words. Not much goes on upstairs for you does it??
Hmm.. Interesting question. maybe you should try consulting a necromancer to find out
💥If you think this was "brutal", wait until the KING of kings returns in the clouds of heaven in great power and glory to reply to Dawkins. You ain't seen brutal yet!
We'll have to wait a very long time.
Yea ok. He was supposed to already cone back numerous times and never does. Stop with that shit. He even promised with one of the times and where was he???? “He’s coming you’ll see!” Nope! Never ever will we see such a stupid act that’s written poorly and believed by so many ignorant people
Dawkins definition of “religion” isn’t biblical, it’s made made traditions, one can believe in God without these made made traditions. Religion as defined by the Bible “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.”
James 1:27 KJV
The latter confuses quite a many because they do not properly define “the world” one is to keep himself unspotted from. Even with that I’m sure no one should have any qualms about visiting the fatherless and widows in their affliction, yet even this has a Bible context man has largely ignored.
Dawkins is childish his understanding of God is infantile the man lumps all cultures ideas of God into one making them all the so-called creator, I’m sorry but his entire presentation is well just stupid.
It's not a matter of tradition; it's a matter of cult. Religion is a cult, and like any cult, it manipulates its followers to blindly obey some prophet, or else face damnation.
@ I just biblically defined religion what about that definition say “cult” to you or did you not read it, try again.
@ excuse me but what makes you think the Bible is about you, the Bible is speaking to a certain people that agreed to be in a covenant relationship with him with certain rules laws and regulations to follow, you’ve made the same such agreement yet without consent by being born in whatever country you were born in, you’ve agreed to follows its rules regulations and laws under threat of penalty you’ve also agreed to go to war for said country and allow deliver your own children up to war, yet God is the monster don’t make me laugh, bunch of blind hypocrites who don’t know their rear ends from a hole in the ground think to part their lips against God, what a joke.
Quoting any scripture from your book is useless and futile. It doesn’t mean to represent a fact or facts. It’s the contrary actually. More likely they are made up and fantastical superstitions
@DanielRochester800plus one their main cars to get more blind followers is to indoctrinate kids before they can think for themselves. If they can accomplish this, then the dismantling of that kids heavily engrained beliefs are damn near impossible
Thanks for the no hope and despair dawkins
Thanks for the honesty Mr Dawkins and the description of the vile, imaginary xtian “god”, luckily just as imaginary as all the other claimed deities. 🇬🇧🇪🇺
Giving meaning to your life and hope by believing in supernatural nonsense is not the smartest choice in your life! It's called a delusion!
@paulburger2963 "god" the all time Hide And Seek champion.
@@paulburger2963 a god is not detectable in any way since a god is supposed to "exist" "out of space and out of time". Whatever that means because it is a complete abstract, absurd and contradictory concept. Something can not exist for zero seconds because then it does not exist. And neither can something "exist" " out of space" because something that exists takes space itself!
So, that's very suspicious isn't it because that is exactly the same characteristic of something that does not exist in reality!
Why do you require a fairytale to have hope, you're not 5?
And if you are, that explains the grammar.
The Athiest concept on a Creator, is flawed, this is the reason for their false stance.
Is Dawkins going to tell me that the lecturn he is standing at, created itself? Or the stage he is standing on, created itself!
He will get to know the answer in the next life.
Small minds demand small answers.
Who created your creator? Yours is the most flawed concept of all time.
@bazpearce9993
I disagree with your opinion.
Let me elaborate.
You exist.
I exist.
The whole Universe exists AND is being Sustained and has evolved over time. As, we too have evolved.
Now, you need to ponder this; Nothing can come into existence by itself.
Let's take as an example , the first Atom, or the first Photon. Where did it come from?
Out of what?
Something brought this whole Universe into existence. Whatever "IT" is, that is my Creator. But as Quantum Mechanics is showing, the Past, Present and Future can exist all at the same time. Whatever Created the Universe, is, by its Nature. outside of Time!
The Creator/ Creature Force That brought the Universe into existence, must be, by its very nature, untreated.
So my " God" has always Existed and when the Universe starts its Cycle of death and rebirth ( See Roger Penrose) , My Creator will still exist.
Ponder the Anthropic Principle! There are at least 70 fundamentals of Nsture, that are SO FINELY TUNED that had any one of them been different by a fraction of a fraction of a billionth of a percent, we would not have a Universe, nor life in it!
The example given is: ROLLING A DICE TIMES ,AND ON THE VERY FIRST THROW, EACH TIME, GETTING A " 6."
This sounds impossible, but this is exactly the odds when you look at the Universe. ( See the video on TH-cam, proving God with a Dice).
Now in order to negate the Anthropic principle, the likes of yourself and Dawkins come up with THE MULTIVERSE THEORY.
How preposterous is this!!!
NOW, not only do we not know how our Universe came into existence AND to negate a Creator, some Scientists tell us there are actually countless Universes and we happen to live in one that supports life!!! 😂😂😂😂.
The Quran:
" We have Created the Universe from NOTHING and verily, it is We who are expanding It."
" We will show them Our Signs, in the Universe, in the furthest horizons and within themselves, until it becomes manifest that this is the TRUTH. "
" We have not Created the Universe and everything in it, in idle sport, everything has a PURPOSE."
" We have Created the Sun and the Moon to measure time, each swimming in an orbit, the Sun too has its own orbit." ( The fact that our Sun has its own orbit, it Rotates about a Star called Vega, has only recently been discovered.).
" We have created all life from water."
" We have got all life out from the water."
" We have created two bodies of water, one sweet and palatable, the other salty, it is not permissible for them to mix as We have created a barrier between them." ( This barrier is the Halocline barrier).
Bro, PONDER YOUR EXISTENCE, DID YOU ASK TO COME INTO THIS WORLD OR WAS YOUR SOUL, BROUGHT HERE??
@@user-k229 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@user-k229 "So my " God" has always Existed and when the Universe starts its Cycle of death and rebirth ( See Roger Penrose) , My Creator will still exist." Have you ever considered that energy could have always existed, since it cannot be created or destroyed? My point is that we need not invent some great invisible man telling us what to do to explain the origins of existence.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
No one is greater than God, and no one can Love you the way God does. Jesus beared God's wrath for the sins of mankind so that he may redeem his creation. And here comes the last point Arius was considered a heretic because he said that Jesus was created(which would make his sacrafice meaningless) whereas the bible says he existed for eternity with God.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Lasty what is Dawkins talking about (4:19 - 4:44). He just made up all these faul dirty names and applied them to God. May he have mercy on your soul because that's not very intellectual or honest just spiteful and disrespectful. Isn't he a scientist, boasting about evididence and such, show me the evidence of what you say is true? God's Word will prove you're a liar.
Merry Christmas! Though I only say so as a politeness within the cultural context in which I was raised. I read the bible regularly though I am not a believer. The God of the Old Testament as Dawkins here describes seems pretty accurate. While reading through the first 5 books of OT, I was left feeling extremely turned off by the entire Christian enterprise.
Still, Merry Christmas, because the message everyone is meant to aspire to at this time of year is still a laudable one.
@@XinwylFumudaiski Marry Christmas to you also and to everyone else. We celebrate today the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. Notice how just like Dawkins you didn't really say anything just a chain of words that are meant to mean something but not based on anything. Show me from the book, that you say you read, that God is who you and him proclaim to be. Give me an event or something that shows He is those things Dawkins say He is not your opinions.
Blah blah blah. Learn to think for yourself.
@@bazpearce9993 How does one think for themselfs beside being presented the evidence and choosing between it. So when you think God does not exists because somone said so you're thinking for yourself? That's nonsense.
God loves us so much that he sends those who disobey him to Hell.
I've listened to just about everything Dawkins and other prominent atheists have to say. I've also read Chesterton. The latter leaves the atheists in the dust.
I wouldn't trust anyone who claims that they had read "just about everything" of anything.
@DanielRochester800😂 That doesn't surprise me. You atheists are a dour and pessimistic lot... Happy Christmas!
Evangelical Christians, actually all Christians are exactly like democrats/liberals. You can not debate, you can not argue because you have really nothing to say. Just like lefties you make claims but when asked how and why, you go into hiding and pretend you don't exist.
What do you mean by "The latter leaves the atheists in the dust."? Give us an example and tell us WHY!
@gatehanger1385 At least we're realistic and don't owe allegiance to the invisible man in the sky. Merry Christmas to you too.
If you'd ever read page one of that book you love so much you'd find it's so full of holes that it isn't worth the paper it's written on.
Isn’t it odd that these professional atheists never seem to make a meaningful point? What do people get from this? Is it just an emperor’s new clothes thing?
There is no such thing as a "professional atheist". If there were, then there would be a "professional Christian"... can we agree on that?
I am an atheist, not by profession but because I have common sense.
Any question you may have, I am happy to answer it in a civilised manner.
I became an Atheist just by reading the Bible. I mean a TALKING SNAKE in the Garden of Eden???
There are many atheists who whine and bicker instead of argue, but I do not believe Dawkins to be one of them.
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
That'sd a pretty fucking meaningful point. Especially if you believe in an Abrahamic god.
Your problem is that you are brain washed in mysticism.😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢