Ah, shouldn't have used "2 + 2 = 4" as an example there. Simply because we can be assured of this, as we have the practical applications of mathematics - engineering, technology, physics, chemistry, even finance - and we have machines, in computers, that obey these mathematical rules (and are capable of doing so objectively, without bias or "interpretation"), and it always objectively works out every single time. And, as a programmer myself, I can also add that whenever it doesn't work out - my code is misbehaving - it always invariably, every single time, results from an error in my logic. I review my code over and over, then I realise my dumb mistake, correct it and then, once my logic is in order, it all just works as intended. And perhaps not everyone experiences that secondary bit of proof, unless they code, but the negation, of course, proves the rule. Every time the logic is sound, it works. Every time it deviates, it fails. Invariably. Every single time. 100%. My job is to apply mathematics - in this case, logic is a proper subset of mathematics and, admittedly, most of programming is focused on logic primarily, though I do graphics programming which strays into geometry too - and it's just a pragmatic observable truth that every time the logic is sound, it works, and every time it isn't, it fails. No matter the application, that's always 100% true every single time without exception. Indeed, for me, the reason I know natural selection to be true comes from a completely different place than biology. Genetic Algorithms is where you apply the process of natural selection to a problem and then watch it pragmatically "evolve" an answer for you. We have a population. We apply a form of sexual reproduction. Throw in a sprinkling of mutation. Select for the best answers. Rinse and repeat. And you can see evolution occur. And the thing is I would say that I do not "believe" in natural selection, I know it to be a pragmatic fact. Because when I create this mathematical simulation of its principles, evolution is what fall out the other end. And, in this mathematical realm, I know there's no cheating, nothing up anyone's sleeve, as I wrote the code (but, more than that, I can pause the simulation at any point, look at the data and then manually apply the principles myself - do it by hand, with pen and paper - then verify that this is exactly what the simulation is also doing). This is an isolated mathematical realm. There can be no interference. No cheating. Nothing external can get at it. All that's in that simulation is the principles of natural selection.... and evolution falls out the other end. Now, of course, this only proves the mathematical truth of natural selection. It doesn't confirm that this is what happened in the natural world for us to reach this point. But, well, knowing that natural selection is a mathematical fact, how could it be any other way? The ingredients are there and you can't escape this principle, as it is written in mathematical law itself, so it can't not be there. And, you know, when you delve into the details that biologists give us, it all 100% aligns with this. It's an old joke. If you're good at maths, you become a physicist. If you're okay, then a chemist. If you're not good at maths, then become a biologist. But, humour aside, there's perhaps a truth there that the biologists don't make the mathematical argument. But as an "applied mathematician", this is utterly, utterly convincing to me. Mathematical proof is fact. I don't "believe" in natural selection, I know it to be 100% fact. Indeed, in science, we have theories and theorems. Very, very few things ever reach the status of "theorem", because they require total mathematical proof. And I guess what I'm getting at is that biologists would say "the theory of evolution", but I'd rather say "the theorem of natural selection"... and, from there, natural selection mathematically proven, how else could the world have ended up this way and, its negation, that with all the ingredients there, it would be impossible to avoid it. You can't turn mathematical principles on and off. If the ingredients are there, which they are, then it must necessarily happen. In this sense, I sometimes feel that biologists miss a trick, as they are not as mathematically inclined to see that, from my mathematical perspective, there is no "debate" whatsoever. It is mathematically proven. The only room for debate is just the "fine details" of how this species became that species and so forth. But where the biologists deal in those "fine details" and try to build up, from the evidence, to proof that it's true. I start with the principle - in mathematical form - and show it's fact. Then the evidence must necessarily fall into place - which it does (and where it temporarily doesn't, some more examination reveals our mistakes, which it invariably is. But the principle for me is never in jeopardy by this. A pre-Cambrian rabbit would not jeopardise the principle of natural selection, this has to hold. It must be evidence of gods or aliens messing around with our planet. What's off the table, by the mathematics, is that natural selection is wrong). Perhaps it's just because I have a mathematical mind and that inclination automatically appeals to me. But I do find that the lack of maths disappointing. To me, the perfect route to proof is right there. But biologists don't take it, as they never liked doing sums. Granted, though, if the goal is to convince a general audience, the biologists are doing it right. Maths doesn't convince people who're not mathematically minded, as they often can't follow it to appreciate its conclusions. But it is, to my mind, the vastly better proof here.
He would not like to debate much these days.....too many people can see through him....? Evil is also part of the great scheme of things...."from evil can come sweetless and light."..:Danial......
0:26 I believe that Richard got Ayaan Hirsi Ali wrong here on the reason for why she and he differ… It’s not that Ayaan isn’t concerned about whether Christianity is true like he is, and she is more focused on morality. But it’s that Ayaan has already got past whether Christianity is true in that she already believes and knows it to be true, so she can move on to how the truth of Christianity has the morals that people in all sectors of the world should adopt for the betterment of mankind because those morals are given by a sovereign and perfectly moral God, and they are therefore true and right and good, and every other belief system/set of beliefs is therefore not moral, right, or good for humanity. Dawkins on the other hand, is still grappling with whether Christianity is true or not - he wouldn’t see Christianity as moral until he sees it to be true because he already believes in a (good) standard of morality that doesn’t come from a Christian basis (this attitude is outlined in Proverbs 21:2, 16:2, 30:12 KJV, and Romans 2:14-16 KJV).
3:18 & 9:27-10:04 - Well couldn’t/wouldn’t the improbable and implausible reason for life be that the Almighty Creator God spoke into existence all of creation giving it life, and mankind being made dead through the trespasses and sins against God of our ancestor the first Adam, and our own trespasses and sins against God since, and mankind being brought back to life by the death, burial, and resurrection of His only begotten Son who He sent to save us from our sins and the eternal damnation that comes as a consequence of them?? That’s very improbable and implausible to the human mind which is carnal and at enmity with God (Romans 8:5-8 KJV) and is therefore unable to comprehend this spiritual reality (as 1 Corinthians 2 KJV explains). However, as Dawkins suggested, the reason is likely very probable, and probable that God did do as is said above (as He attests to in His written word which He has gifted us with, The Bible) because that is the truth of how we all came to be, and this truth will by known by each individual as God reveals to them that truth by His Spirit (as 1 Corinthians 2 KJV says). 3:48-4:10 The problem for mankind being that YOU CAN’T become a Christian just by “preferring it as a more comfortable worldview”, and/or one having the ability to “adopt Christianity just because of its social function”… You can only become a Christian by God electing you to be one - which causes many people (even some professing Christians who don’t believe and/or know that truth) to foam at the mouth because they realise their powerlessness to save themselves and their lives are at the mercy of a God they hate, and a God and faith which they think they can just pick up and drop as and when it’s “convenient” in achieving their selfish agendas, when God commands faithfulness to living unto Him and in His ways continually. 5:43 This ‘suffering built in to the evolutionary system’ that you speak of is not evolutionary, but is the consequence of SIN, passed down from our ancestors, the first Adam - as God explains it to us to be in The Bible.
Really? I thought he was holding in his frustration with Alex's philosophical questions. I felt like Dawkins was trying to steer the conversation to more of hard science, but Alex kept on reverting.
Don’t worship these men, their knowledge is just as futile as ours, without divine revelation we wouldn’t even have been here to do these conversations. Jesus changed the world and now we aren’t barbaric animals but we are still sinners and need forgiveness, that is of course if we wish to live in God’s presence for eternity.
@@davidekdal7190 Don’t be so sure that you aren’t the one without a brain, when I have the Holy Spirit flowing through me I have the wisdom of God and welcome challenges
I love to see Dawkins looking great and sounding so eloquent after his stroke. At his age that could’ve taken him entirely out of the game so it’s great to see he has more in him still at the age of 82
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
@@x1ctt According to atheist religion which rejects free will and therefore any kind of personal responsibility and accountability, Why was it not evil when atheist mao zedong did away with 70 million people?
@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 no one says this. You are propping up a false sentiment. Lying, stealing, sexual sins all hurt people. No would says they wouldn't. Your whole point is stupid at the very best.
Atheism: The religious belief that men can give birth and that it is _liberating_ for women to be sent to hospital by pdf file atheist men in womens only competitions
I believe Dr. Dawkins is onto something about the universality of science. I’m a physician and I have lost my theistic childhood Christian faith. It’s been a long painful process, but now in my 40s I find a great peace in the natural world. Science, real science, marches on illumination reality and making our lives longer with increasing levels of flourishing. And I’m privileged to have had the education I’ve had.
That's not science that is pseudoscience. Life comes from life not none life. The big bang, abiogenesis and macroevolution is nothing but pseudoscience. Naturalism, scientism same deal.
Well, 1st thing you probably should do is speak with those who work in Hospice, they can probably provide you with info you are not considering. They observe a lot. End of life studies is an actual Science now. There is a Canadian neurologist that has done some amazing work. Approach it as you would any Scientific endevor, with an open mind, and examine the data.
Science doesn’t have the answers on moral questions and when he calls religion evil he is basing that assessment on a religious framework. Evil is a religious term
Alex is definitely someone skilled in the art of ‘Kao wo tateru’ or ‘saving face’. I’ve noticed he never backs people in to a corner, and always gives them room to change their mind if needs be without being triumphant. He was very good at pulling on the thread of some of Richards arguments and gently asking questions that challenged him (quite fairly). Dawkins was very open to accept that Alex made ‘fair points’ and was happy to revisit and expand on them. Very good interview
But at the same time, he is steamrolling them by not steamrolling them. It's clear from this interview that Alex is so far ahead of Richard on the topic of religion. Richard comes across as lazy and someone who just says something like "well it's ridiculous and not true so who cares".
@@StephenICI'm only at 20 min and haven't seen him "ahead" of Dawkins (whatever that means) up to here. Since I have basically the same position and approach towards religions Dawkins has, it's highly unlikely I will spot any weak spot in Dawkins' view. Can you point me to a more specific point?
@@StephenIC from what I remember (and I’m new to Alex) I think he specifically studied the classic religions. But I remember Dawkins and Hitchins and Sam Harris (the new atheists) in some pretty epic debates with religious scholars. Dawkins was always pretty frank and blunt in what he thought. I actually loved what he said about Jordan Peterson (whilst I agree with Peterson on many things) his Christian ramblings always seemed like BS to me, and I loved Dawkins calling it out. I find Alex much more ingratiating and forgiving in his style, maybe Dawkins ha la had so many of these chats about religion he just can’t be arsed anymore 😂. I like that Alex can gently bring him back around on certain points though without telling him some of his arguments may seem a tad unreasonable
That's because Alex isn't interested in "defeating opponents," he's interested in progress. Progress comes through understanding people who are different, reaching an understanding with them, even if that understanding is, "We don't necessarily agree on much of anything, but I think you're nice enough," and proposing how to coexist with those opposing ideas.
I was a devout Christian who lost faith at age 25. I was deeply practicing until I was 18, and I gradually drifted. At one point in my life I believed in god just enough to know that I was a bad Christian and that I'd go to hell if I died, but not enough to prompt me to do anything about immediately. At age 25 I stopped believing in hell, and had no concept of death. In Christianity death is but a portal to the afterlife. Without faith, death was just the end of me. My mind couldn't digest the thought of just not existing. I lost sleep for many weeks. I expressed my anxiety to a close friend who told me "You didn't exist for billions of years before you were born, right? You were fine then." I slept like a baby that night.
Such a shame the cult spread as widely as it did... but it's losing ground now. More and more people are waking up and getting out, despite their efforts to indoctrinate children. Intellect will win out: superstition will wither.
In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
God concept with latest sciencetific findings is out date d why god has created so many injustices among them law of them jungle where survival of the fittest order of the day
Alex, I commend you on conducting an engaging and intellectual discussion while not becoming distracted by that one unbuttoned button on Dawkins' shirt. Mad props.
Indeed… and brilliant pushback about William Lane Craig and on Dawkin’s flimsy excuse for choosing not to debate him… if Dawkin’s case against God’s existence is so watertight, why not debate Craig and put him to the sword once and for all?.. I think because we all know that Dawkin’s arguments would barely survive the first round…
He's right about the modifiable testament, but not the final one The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha". It's the word Isa PBUH used. Sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Languages degrade, they do not "evolve". It is a tool for thinking, not communication, it is what separates other lifeforms from humans. The mere fact that translation is even possible underlies a common origin for all languages, orca whales separated from their birth pod are unable to communicate with other whales if they get adopted, they are only able to track the others visually. Classical Arabic has largest phonemic inventories among semitic languages. It has 28 consonants (29 with Hamza) and 6 vowels (3 short and 3 long). Some of these sounds are rare or absent in other semitic languages. For example, - Classical Arabic has two pharyngeal consonants /ʕ/ (ع) and /ħ/ (ح). These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic). - Classical Arabic has two emphatic consonants /sˤ/ (ص) and /dˤ/ (ض) These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic). - Classical Arabic has two glottal consonants /ʔ/ (ء) and /h/ (ه), which are produced by opening and closing the glottis ). Akkadian has lost the glottal stop /ʔ/, while Aramaic has lost both the glottal stop and the glottal fricative /h/. - Classical Arabic has six vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, /æ /, /e/, /o/, which can be short or long. Akkadian has only three vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, which can be short or long, while Aramaic has only two vowel phonemes /a/ and /i/, which can be short or long. |Classical Arabic | 28 consonants, 29 with Hamza and 6 vowels; some consonants are emphatic or pharyngealized; some vowels are marked with diacritics | Complex system of word formation based on roots and patterns; roots are sequences of consonants that carry the basic meaning of a word; patterns are sequences of vowels and affixes that modify the meaning and function of a word | Flexible word order, but VSO is most common; SVO is also possible; subject and object are marked by case endings (-u for nominative, -a for accusative, -i for genitive); verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different moods and aspects | | Akkadian | 22 consonants and 3 vowels; some consonants are glottalized or palatalized; vowels are not marked | Similar system, but with different roots and patterns; some roots have more than three consonants; some patterns have infixes or reduplication | Fixed word order of SVO; subject and object are not marked by case endings, but by prepositions or word order; verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different tenses and aspects | | Aramaic | 22 consonants and 3 vowels (later variants have more); no emphatic or pharyngealized consonants (except in some dialects); vowels are not marked (except in later variants such as Syriac) | Simple system of word formation based on prefixes and suffixes; some roots or patterns exist, but are less productive than in Arabic or Akkadian | "Semitic" is just mumbled Arabic, really. Imagine English with a third of its letters removed and simplified grammar. That's Aramaic, Hebrew, etc. For example, combine T and D into just T; there's no need to have 2 letters. The same goes for k, q, c - they should all be c from now on, etc., etc. Arabic is the only corollary to proto-Semitic. In fact, the whole classification of Semitic languages is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning brain. Hebrew, Aramaic, and the rest of these made-up dialect continua only have 22 letters out of the 29 proto-Semitic letters. Arabic has all 29. The difference between Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as the difference between Latin and pig Latin or Italian. "Phoenician" is an Arabic dialect continuum, and not only that, it is pidgin. It is simplified to the point of stupidity. Anyone with a basic knowledge of Arabic would see this clearly. What happened was that Arabic handicapped "scholars" saw the equivalent of Scottish Twitter spelling, with added mumbling due to phonemic mergers (22 letters, not 29), and mistakenly thought they were seeing a different language." Let's start with a simple sentence: ## The house is big Arabic: البيتُ كبيرٌ al-bayt-u kabīr-un Proto-Semitic: *ʔal-bayt-u kabīr-u Hebrew: הבית גדול ha-bayit gadol Akkadian: bītum rabûm Amharic: ቤቱ ገደሉ betu gedelu As can be seen, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (noun-adjective), the same definite article (al-), and the same case endings (-u for nominative). Hebrew and Akkadian have lost the case endings and changed the definite article (ha- and -um respectively). Amharic has changed the word order (adjective-noun) and the definite article (u-). But Arabic is not only similar to Proto-Semitic, it is also pre-Semitic, meaning that it is the original form of Semitic before it split into different branches. This is because Arabic preserves many features that are not found in any other Semitic language, but are found in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. These features include: - The definite article al-, which is derived from the demonstrative pronoun *ʔal- 'that'. This article is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the article n- in Berber and the article p-, t-, n- in Egyptian. - The dual number for nouns and verbs, which is marked by the suffix -ān or -ayn. This number is rare in other Semitic languages, but it is common in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. - The imperfective prefix t- for verbs, which indicates the second person singular feminine or third person plural feminine. This prefix is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the prefix t- in Berber and Egyptian. - The passive voice for verbs, which is marked by the infix t between the first and second root consonants. This voice is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the passive voice in Egyptian and Berber. Finally, a more complex sentence: The letter was written with a pen. Arabic: كُتِبَتِ الرِّسَالَةُ بِالقَلَمِ kutiba-t al-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Proto-Semitic: *kutiba-t ʔal-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Hebrew: המכתב נכתב בעט ha-michtav niktav ba-et Akkadian: šipram šapāru bēlum Egyptian: sḏm.n.f p-ẖry m rnp.t Berber: tturra-t tibratin s uccen Here, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (verb-subject-object), the same passive voice marker (-t-), the same definite article (al-), and the same preposition (bi-). Hebrew has changed the word order (subject-verb-object), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (ha-) and the preposition (ba-). Akkadian has changed the word order (object-subject-verb), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (-um) and the preposition (bēlum). Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing? Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Textual criticism in christianity began when the bible was first translated into european vernavular in the 16th century (was translated into Arabic in the 19th century), it reached a professional level around the 19-20th century and is still ongoing today, In Islam however it started in the first century. Unlike the Quran, the hadith are transmitted oral accounts which were written 2-3 centuries after they happened and even in the canonical collections of Bukhari and Muslim there are several narrations of the same hadith due to some people paraphrasing and others forgetting part of it. Most of the hadith are without context, this is not to take from the value of hadith as in practice it was the first serious endeavor of having authentication of the historical record. The hadith are transmitted by way of chains of narration, x heard from y who heard from z that .... took place, a study of who x, who y, and who z were and whether what they are saying is true by checking what others had said about them and whether they had indeed met those who they are purported to have taken the accounts from began and so the first "peer review" mechanism took place, all before the internet in the 2nd and 3rd centuries fo the hijra, which unlike the christian calendar has been continously kept, the current gregorian calendar for example was first instanced int he year 535 CE by Dionysius Exiguus, the 25th of December in addition for example being the pagan holdiay of the roman deirty 'Sol Invictus' is clearly shown in the "Chronograph of 354", the earliest christian calendar predating the current one, but I digress, the writing down of hadith was forbidden by the prophet himself for the aforementioned issue (people forgetting, paraphrasing, taking words out of context) only the Quran was ordered to have been written and linguistically they are too far apart, it is clear that the Matn of the hadith, the substance or the wording was altered as the language used seems to be more modern in many instances (Arabic had not changed in any significant way since the Abbassids, 1200 years ago sound as "modern" as things written in the last 50 years. Arabic is the oldest continuously spoken language in the world, the only possible corollary, chinese, has script which has no relation to the actual language hence why Japanese and old vietnamese use it, event the script itself was only codified in the 1700s in the kangxi emperor's dictionary. A miracle in plainsight blinded by familiarity). Hadith for example has several levels of correctness, from Hasan which means "well" to rejected as pertains to the Matn or the substance of the hadith itself, the "isnad" of the Hadith or the chains of transmission / citation also have varying levels from Marfu' meaning quoted without having actually met any of the people in the transmission chain or a second hand account or Mudalas meaning plagarised from another transmitter of hadith without citing and Marfud meaning outright rejected for various reasons, There is another layer of complexity here called ilm-aa-rijal, the study of the bibilogrophy of those in the chains of transmission themselves and their soundness whether objectively by crosschecking where they lived and whome they met or subjectively by seeing what their peers said about them regarding their character. Those unaware of the aforementioned would not only have not been allowed to cite hadith it would have been a criminal offense and there are hadith which clearly contradict one another and one ought not be citing hadith without knowing all other hadith from the colossal hadith collections that were written, even the earliest hadith collection, Musannaf Abdel Razaq Al-Sanani ( 137-211H / 744- 827 CE) and Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah ( 159H-235H / 775-849 CE). for instance had over 53,000 hadith with their chains of transmissions included has yet to be translated into English . Yes, Bukhari and Muslim are taken the most correct as they had the most narrow criterion, but an enormous study is required before citing either one of them. Later scholars such an Al-Darqutni show that there were mistakes made. I say later here though he is still over a millennium old this seriousness of scholarship was the first endeavor of its kind in human history, what became today known as university degrees started with the institutions giving "ijaza" or certificate t transmit hadith and talk about it , indeed they are the origins of the University system we know today. There are texts from the 800's CE debating whether, if one for example were to take a log of wood that was not theirs, make a column out of it and have it as a foundation of a house, later the original owner of the column comes back and demands the log to be retrieved into his custody and refuse monetary compensation ought the judge comply, tear down the structure and give him the log or ought he enforce a monetary compensation. this was 1200 years. Property rights were taken that seriously, you could not simply handwave it and enforce a monetary compensation as that property in question was not attained by proper channels, hence it' s ownership and how much ought be the compensation for it is judicated by its owner and no one else has the right to, not the governor or even the caliph. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". This scientific method of studying hadith and jurisprudence was developed and already in practice in the 2nd and third centuries of the hijra (around 800 CE) back when most of europe did not have a written script for their vernacular, enormous encyclopedia such as the 40 volume history of Al-Tabari which, averages 400 pages per volume (and is only one of his works) were written, the only corollary of which in the west would have been the "decline and Fall of The Roman Empire" by Edward Gibbons in the 1700s, considered a watershed, a monument of its time, with a span that would have hardly constituted a volume and a half of Al-Tabari's encyclopedia and written a millennium later. Jabir Ibn Hayyan (101-199 H / 721-815 CE) the father of chemistry whose theories (distillation, measurement system, oxidaton, nature of substances, etc) remained dominant until the 18th century. and who was the first to elucidate the scientific method said: "The first thing that is required for anyone who seeks the knowledge of chemistry is that he should work with his hands and experiment, for he who does not work with his hands and does not experiment will not attain any degree of knowledge." Ibn al-Haytham (4th century of Hijra), referred to as "the Physicist" in Europe is famous for the first comprehensive scientific book on optics, before his study of optics and perspective paintings were entirely 2 dimensional, a leap after his treatises and works were translated is visible in how paintings became three dimensional, He discovered integral calculus (physicist, mathematician and astronomer who discovered calculus, Newton often references Arabic in his writings for a reason), is even still argued with today the work "The Enigma of Reason" primarily deals with his arguments. regarding the scientific method he said "The duty of the man who investigates the writings of scientists, if learning the truth is his goal, is to make himself an enemy of all that he reads, and... attack it from every side. He should also suspect himself as he performs his critical examination of it, so that he may avoid falling into either prejudice or leniency." Over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before.. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from the Qur'an. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger. What started this cognitive revolution, what started this sharp contrast between before Islam and after it, what started the real Enlightenment of humanity? God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
I left the Mormon church after believing it for 32 years, and I think I'm less afraid of death now than I was as a Mormon. The Mormon church is obsessed with death, and they live their lives planning for it and making sure they're good enough to live with not only God, but their loved ones as well. It's an incredible amount of stress to carry around for your entire life. Leaving the church has made me realize that even though life is still hard, I can just enjoy living, and learning, and spending time with family while I'm alive. A Mormon believes that they will go on to have even more children and create worlds and educate people who didn't believe in God while they were alive, or spend eternity regretting every choice they ever made on earth... But now as an atheist I just think of my eventual death as a well deserved rest.
Hey brother/sister (unsure....) - I am happy that you, too, have finally achieved true and genuine freedom. I mean it when I say that I want to congratulate you: You not only liberated yourself from the shackles of abusive, religious people in power who control the minds of people they brainwash from early age - you also acquired the freedom of thought, opinion and living your life. So happy for you, mate. Welcome to the enlightenment! I wish you nothing but happiness!
@@kiddytube3915 How about you take your delusion back into your own four walls where you can play with it as much as you want and leave this person alone with your dogmatic threats and intimidations? Thanks.
Hi, I just want to send you some greetings. You are not alone. It took me 34 years to exit the same church lol. Those years are not entirely wasted. At least noone can bedazzle me with silly words from a religious text now. And I am quite happy with the decisions I made in the past; some of them were quite healthy. I wish you all the best and I am happy to have read your words!👍👍
@@RathwulvenBushcraftIt gets better all the time for those that are now allowed to think for themselves. Mark Twain's "Letters From the Earth" is great. Satan writes back to heaven about this thing earth that was made from him and the other angels. Then, "Oxford Dictionary of The Bible". Abortion is supported in the bible. The punishments were often sacrifice a ram, for sin, and others that sound like a sin,but a different category. Twain quoted the bible in conversation with a preacher who said he wants to emulate God. "So you want to push grandma down the stairs" or some paraphrased action of God, who is a sonuva bitch through the whole thing. BTW, Noah's tale was lifted from the Sumerians 5000 years earlier.
I have been in church since childhood. I have believing parents. Now I am 29 years old and I finally realized that I can be responsible for my life myself. Belief in religion and God in Abrahamic religions brings a lot of evil. How many life decisions my father made and continues to make based on nonsense. But my actions in life are already changing his life, and showing how to live differently.
In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 This is the problem, religious insanity. Quite simply, "god is a mental disease, even worse it is a viral social contagion". It behaves exactly like a mental disease and when coupled as it is, it as dangerous as a viral social contagion. The world will be a better place without god and religion and there is ample evidence of this. This post is another concrete piece of evidence demonstrating this mental disease and the devastating damage it has caused the human race.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 heaven is that what you see with your eyes. You live this life alone. No one is helping you from the no where. Stop telling this nonsense to other People. You Will die and all. Es todo.
@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 No. Absolutely not. You are being a horrible human being, forcing a fairy tale on strangers! WHO ARE YOU TO TELL PEOPLE HOW TO LIVE? HOW DARE YOU! ATHEISTS MUST STAND UP TO THE SCOURGE OF RELIGION, THE WORST BELIEF SYSTEM EVER!!! GOD DOES NOT EXIST. JESUS DOES NOT EXIST!!!
Interviewing Dawkins would certainly be an intimidating task for someone so much younger and less experienced, but you’ve handled it well and also kept him engaged. A great conversation, well done.
The adoration for Dawkins is baffling to me. I know he speaks in a calm and well spoken English accent but people grossly over state his intellectual level. His arguments against religion are so juvenile and bad faith that it seems like he stole them from an angry teenage atheist in an RE class. That’s why Dawkins has been stumped by almost every intelligent religious person he ever debated.
@@shmick6079 Stumped by logical arguments for believing in a creator. I only recently watched a debate between Dawkins and a scientist named John Lennox, who happens to be religious. I was genuinely shocked by how incapable Dawkins was at logically defending his world views against a scientist more intelligent than himself. I almost felt sorry for Dick.
@@dantheman4838the fact you call all of Dawkins arguments against religion "bad faith" and "juvenile" and claim he was "stumped by every religious person" is so ridiculous it's baffling. Especially when the gullibility required to build your entire world view, society, etc around some unseen, unknown, untouchable 'creator' because soneone else told you to is INCREDIBLY juvenile.
I am a christian, I chose to watch this immediately after your discussion from nine months prior with william lane craig. Admittedly I had reservations against clicking on this video, I am so happy now that I did. You did such an honest interview with william lane craig, asking the most prodding questions against the christian world view but far more respectfully than anyone else I have ever seen, and then did exactly the same toward proffesor dawkins. You have presented the christian arguments in the most honest manner I have ever seen someone who was not themself a christian and this is also the most respectfully I have ever seen professor dawkins respond. Thank you both ever so much for this delightful interview.
We live in a BIBLICAL world, where masons rule and where BAAL - lucifer, the master of masonry is worshipped and praised to this day and CHRIST is rejected by many. GOD give us different languages, just to stop us from finishing the building of the tower of BABEL. If the tower of BABEL was never build, the language of man would have stayed the same. /whatever was the language in which mankind speak in those days). GOD give us languages of different kind, not religions. Man made up religions. Religions are our own fantasies and imaginations. Therefore, souls, lets seek CHRIST, not religions. No verse given in bible, which calls us to become “religious”. Bible has verses which say: REPENT AND BORN AGAIN! Matthew 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. John 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
Thanks for showing how these conversations do more to comfort fascists than challenge them. Alex isn't changing minds, he's just platforming a washed up bigot.
I would say "politely respond', rather than 'respectfully'. There is no good reason to respect something that has been so harmful historically, and the harm Christianity does today. I am a victim of Christianity, destroying my happiness, both physically and mentally.
I'm a member of the Oxford Union and attend debates every week (was lucky enough to meet Alex last term), and I have to agree that debates there are much more performative than truth seeking exercises. They make enjoyable theatre, but the live audience don't generally care for new opinions or points of view. I also agree with Dawkins on points of information - they are exclusively used for members to interject their own view into a debate which does further add to the performance and detract from the truth seeking.
Once did a Chineses sanctioned tour of a Tibetan monestry and got the monk debate show. Lots of self body slapping. Send a team over, I dont think language or content mean much anyway
I actually disagree with this. I used to think that debated were a waste of time because it's just an argument but conversations like these are only really constructive when you are relatively in the same sphere of thinking and already understand each other. Proper debates with candidates who understand the best arguments for their side and are also seasoned at debating then you can get a pretty good idea of the thought processes behind different points of view and whoever is more convincing tends to be pretty obviously correct logically. This idea that the convincing power of an argument only comes from the theatre of the presentation is rarely true in my experience listening to debates, at least ones that are done correctly and moderated well, etc.
Doesn't the theatre of it speak volumes to 'the truth'? Assuming there is an actual attempt at the thing not just a display of feathers and babbling ego.
He's right about the modifiable testament, but not the final one The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha". It's the word Isa PBUH used. Sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Languages degrade, they do not "evolve". It is a tool for thinking, not communication, it is what separates other lifeforms from humans. The mere fact that translation is even possible underlies a common origin for all languages, orca whales separated from their birth pod are unable to communicate with other whales if they get adopted, they are only able to track the others visually. Classical Arabic has largest phonemic inventories among semitic languages. It has 28 consonants (29 with Hamza) and 6 vowels (3 short and 3 long). Some of these sounds are rare or absent in other semitic languages. For example, - Classical Arabic has two pharyngeal consonants /ʕ/ (ع) and /ħ/ (ح). These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic). - Classical Arabic has two emphatic consonants /sˤ/ (ص) and /dˤ/ (ض) These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic). - Classical Arabic has two glottal consonants /ʔ/ (ء) and /h/ (ه), which are produced by opening and closing the glottis ). Akkadian has lost the glottal stop /ʔ/, while Aramaic has lost both the glottal stop and the glottal fricative /h/. - Classical Arabic has six vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, /æ /, /e/, /o/, which can be short or long. Akkadian has only three vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, which can be short or long, while Aramaic has only two vowel phonemes /a/ and /i/, which can be short or long. |Classical Arabic | 28 consonants, 29 with Hamza and 6 vowels; some consonants are emphatic or pharyngealized; some vowels are marked with diacritics | Complex system of word formation based on roots and patterns; roots are sequences of consonants that carry the basic meaning of a word; patterns are sequences of vowels and affixes that modify the meaning and function of a word | Flexible word order, but VSO is most common; SVO is also possible; subject and object are marked by case endings (-u for nominative, -a for accusative, -i for genitive); verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different moods and aspects | | Akkadian | 22 consonants and 3 vowels; some consonants are glottalized or palatalized; vowels are not marked | Similar system, but with different roots and patterns; some roots have more than three consonants; some patterns have infixes or reduplication | Fixed word order of SVO; subject and object are not marked by case endings, but by prepositions or word order; verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different tenses and aspects | | Aramaic | 22 consonants and 3 vowels (later variants have more); no emphatic or pharyngealized consonants (except in some dialects); vowels are not marked (except in later variants such as Syriac) | Simple system of word formation based on prefixes and suffixes; some roots or patterns exist, but are less productive than in Arabic or Akkadian | "Semitic" is just mumbled Arabic, really. Imagine English with a third of its letters removed and simplified grammar. That's Aramaic, Hebrew, etc. For example, combine T and D into just T; there's no need to have 2 letters. The same goes for k, q, c - they should all be c from now on, etc., etc. Arabic is the only corollary to proto-Semitic. In fact, the whole classification of Semitic languages is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning brain. Hebrew, Aramaic, and the rest of these made-up dialect continua only have 22 letters out of the 29 proto-Semitic letters. Arabic has all 29. The difference between Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as the difference between Latin and pig Latin or Italian. "Phoenician" is an Arabic dialect continuum, and not only that, it is pidgin. It is simplified to the point of stupidity. Anyone with a basic knowledge of Arabic would see this clearly. What happened was that Arabic handicapped "scholars" saw the equivalent of Scottish Twitter spelling, with added mumbling due to phonemic mergers (22 letters, not 29), and mistakenly thought they were seeing a different language." Let's start with a simple sentence: ## The house is big Arabic: البيتُ كبيرٌ al-bayt-u kabīr-un Proto-Semitic: *ʔal-bayt-u kabīr-u Hebrew: הבית גדול ha-bayit gadol Akkadian: bītum rabûm Amharic: ቤቱ ገደሉ betu gedelu As can be seen, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (noun-adjective), the same definite article (al-), and the same case endings (-u for nominative). Hebrew and Akkadian have lost the case endings and changed the definite article (ha- and -um respectively). Amharic has changed the word order (adjective-noun) and the definite article (u-). But Arabic is not only similar to Proto-Semitic, it is also pre-Semitic, meaning that it is the original form of Semitic before it split into different branches. This is because Arabic preserves many features that are not found in any other Semitic language, but are found in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. These features include: - The definite article al-, which is derived from the demonstrative pronoun *ʔal- 'that'. This article is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the article n- in Berber and the article p-, t-, n- in Egyptian. - The dual number for nouns and verbs, which is marked by the suffix -ān or -ayn. This number is rare in other Semitic languages, but it is common in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. - The imperfective prefix t- for verbs, which indicates the second person singular feminine or third person plural feminine. This prefix is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the prefix t- in Berber and Egyptian. - The passive voice for verbs, which is marked by the infix t between the first and second root consonants. This voice is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the passive voice in Egyptian and Berber. Finally, a more complex sentence: The letter was written with a pen. Arabic: كُتِبَتِ الرِّسَالَةُ بِالقَلَمِ kutiba-t al-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Proto-Semitic: *kutiba-t ʔal-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Hebrew: המכתב נכתב בעט ha-michtav niktav ba-et Akkadian: šipram šapāru bēlum Egyptian: sḏm.n.f p-ẖry m rnp.t Berber: tturra-t tibratin s uccen Here, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (verb-subject-object), the same passive voice marker (-t-), the same definite article (al-), and the same preposition (bi-). Hebrew has changed the word order (subject-verb-object), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (ha-) and the preposition (ba-). Akkadian has changed the word order (object-subject-verb), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (-um) and the preposition (bēlum). Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing? Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Christian here. I just wanted to say that I loved watching you guys and hearing your perspectives. Alex, you have a grace about you that is appreciated in these types of heavy discussions. I hope you never lose that.
I completely agree! I’m a Christian as well and enjoy listening to these conversations! I don’t agree with Alex’s conclusions (or Dawkins’) but respect his lines of questioning greatly. And agree that Alex has a certain grace about him in his discussions with others. It deepens my own faith to think through these same questions and I appreciate anyone who delves deeply into these ideas.
How can you be a Christian and listen to these discussions and not feel like a complete idiotic fool. No offence intended maybe a bit harsh but It just doesn't really make sense to me how you could listen to pure logic and sense explaining away your beliefs and then go away and still be a theist?
The older I grow, the more I love listening to Richard Dawkins. He's looking so well. Great interview, it's nice to listen to an interviewer who's not intent on attacking him. Thank you.
Dawkins' new atheism is only training-wheels to get off Religion. Then the real work begins. We have observable evidence for one universe fine-tuned for Life. This demands an explanation.
Without pressure, i could see clearly how his logic is flawed. With other theist, all I could see is he attacking others. Without the attacks, his argument could not even stand by it self.
@@rbaxter286 yeah, they are both very polite. Several things I am quite disagree with him. 1. hirshi Ali (another famous atheist converted to Christian). He said Ali only convert because Christianity is good at holding the fort for other bad forces (like Islam, etc), but not true. That is the first time, Dawkins said religion is good at smth. Before he said religion is only bad. (I have to give credit to Dawkins and Alex for saying those words). 👍👍 Then he said Ali only converted to Christianity because it is good, though she believes it is not true. This is Dawkins putting words on Ali's mouth. She never said that. 🙏 2. 3.
@@rbaxter286sorry, I have to write many sections as I have to re-listen what he said. Could not remember all at once. 🙏 #2. Of science. This is the first time, Dawkins said Darwin only solved the theory of narutal selection (which I quite disagree). But, scientists does not have a clue how life began nor how universe began (all evidence seems to point other direction). Also, now first time I heard it, Dawkins admit earth is probably the only life in universe. Before he said, there must be plenty of life elsewhere (now he said "stupendously improbable" for life to begin elsewhere, a word I have to remember 😂). Though he draws different conclusion from it. I gave him and Alex credit for that. But, it also show how obnoxious and enmity his view toward a creator was. 🙏 I mean he always presume a creator must be God that demand worship. For scientist, that is not true. Creator is a creator. Somebody design it. The creator does not have to be care about his creation. Earth could a high school project for a super smart alien, that he left in the basement for few years (or few millenia in our time) that he completely forgot about.
Outside of Biology, Dawkins is a fool. He has lived in a bubble all his life and has no idea of the real world. He praised the warmonger John McCain as a "good man", has "no sympathy" for Julian Assange and supports Israel even as it carries out a genocide. I doubt very much much if Alex shares Dawkins' views on these things.
@@JH-ji6cj it’s not that I’m a big fan of Alex, although I believe he’s concerned with truth. It’s that I’m not a fan of Dawkins ; he’s a good scientist but lives in a bubble and has little idea of the real world.
@@briansmith3791 well, as a 'fan' of Alex myself, calling Alex twice the man of Dawkins because you have a dislike of Dawkins' personality is quite the definition of extreme hyperbole.
I grew up in a very conservative christian church but realized early on in my life that there is something off. I live my life according to morals I was taught by my parents and, a few years ago, a colleague said I must be a very big christian. She was immensely shocked when I told her that I am not. Just because I try to be a good person and live a good life, doesn’t make me a christian. To be a good person is not the exclusive right if christians.
@@dukedukeson2158 In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 I believe in God and I pray every day. And there is no such thing as being without sin only jesus was without sin, because all humans other than jesus were born with sin it was like that ever since Adam and Eve bit from the fruit. Every human soul in heaven was the soul of a sinners but God will take us in DESPITE our sin God loves us DESPITE our sin, you and I are both sinners all humans are, so don't think yourself better than your fellow man.
@@dukedukeson2158 Make sure as a you are a repentant Christian. Read the Bible daily and pray often throughout the day, the devil is trying to make lukewarm Christians everywhere (Rev 3:16). Join us in spreading the good news of Jesus Christ. If you tell everyone that you are a mechanic but day in and out, you do the work of an accountant are you truly a mechanic? No, you are an accountant. Likewise, a Christian by name who lives contrary to Jesus’ teachings by living sinful/worldly is not a real Christian.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 I pray every morning before I wake up and before I sleep, I try not to raise my voice and not to use violence, if someone does wrong by me or hurts me I try to forgive them, if someone doesn't agree with me I do not wish them any harm. Tell me how am I not trying to live my life as jesus would want? But even still I am a sinner and so are you.
I don't know if it's something about his complexion or his general demeanor, but Dawkins looks better here than he did a few years ago. You really get the best out of him. Fantastic interview with two of the greatest minds of their respective generations.
I hope he is well for a long time to come. I also hope he realises he must apologise for new atheisms et al thought crime designs considering they scratched the surface of religion before embarking on the total abolition of EVERYONES FREE SPEECH. I'm quite happy there no big man upstairs to answer to, but Humankind deserves better than this bunch of snidey creeps claiming to want religion stopped for the good, when its really all people being hounded down by thought crimes. Maybe some of you adoring fanatics will begin to realise whats been going on.
@@joshmastiff1128 No. They are the source of the first ideology thats wanted people put on charges since the witch trails. The fact that new atheisms fanatics did not have the personal wherewithal to realise what it would MEAN to give mobbing consensus to having people shut up by law is a shame. But basically the laws that now prevent christianity from being done as hate speech are leaking into all public parlances = thought crime models for ALL. New atheist fan people really should not have supported it. Thought crime against any X was only ever going to end up hounding every Y down -= ALL OF US. Personally i simply cannot understand how or why any of the followers of such a creepy and snidey movement could not see they were being taken for a ride by a lab must have known that any ban on thought, be it religious or otherwise would lead to a universal one. Aside from that they even had the brass neck to ban christianity being done in public & allow another majot abrahamic religion to move into its place. And how many more religious problems have there been even though being a christian in public is now against the law ? - 100 Times worse on new atheisms watch ? What does it take before the penny drops among new atheist fanatics ?
A really excellent and thoughtful conversation; Alex is growing into an ever more natural and confident interviewer. Well done on asking challenging questions and pushing back - but doing it in a winsome way. Really found this a fascinating dialogue.
Dawkins lost all his credibility with a billion people when he tried to take on astrology. He should have chosen his battles more carefully. If you check the word 'God' on Google trends, you will see that the search has INCREASED since 2004. In other words, Dawkins has not made any effect on the world, neither Harris or the other two horsemen, Hitchens, and all the kings men. All failed in their attempt to destroy religion. They should rather focus on getting religions to tolerate each other. Naive Aries lost the plot 30 years ago.
In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
I hope he lives a long and healthy life because when he dies he will meet his maker ,he will bow down before our God but it will be to late for him ,unless he repents and accepts Jesus as his Lord and Savior he will spend eternity in Hell ,I pray he will see the light before he dies ,God help him 🙏
Evolution is one of the great evils that we all have to face in the world today. It is very destructive and should not be taught in the educational system. Children are being taught lies and all Christians should draw their children out of public education. When Dawkins talks about the Bible, he doesn't have a clue of what he is talking about. To understand spiritual things you have to be spiritually minded.
One of the most kind well spoken people ever "Be a good person and leave the world a better place than you found it" - Richard Dawkins evil hell-bound atheist. "I am angry at the bad world I created guess I'll drown everyone on the planet other than a handful of people" - God
Hey, I'm a christian. Can I debate with you? This is my first time debating with someone, I just wanted to *try* it I guess. Of course, you can decline 😅
This was a deeply engaging, yet very easy conversation to listen to. Nobody trying to win the argument for winning's sake, just an honest attempt to find a common ground.
@@joseph-jg2ie Rubbish! Dawkins soundly defeated Lennox in a live debate... and then Lennox went away, and, like the chess-playing pigeon, created a straw-man to 'prove' that Dawkins was actually a secret believer and claimed 'victory'! Lennox is not only wrong, but dishonest!
If only all politicians and "diplomats," who've seem to have lost the artful form of civil discourse and different ideas, to come to a beneficial negotiating stance, then humanity would be that much better and lead to improved social contracts and lives. The direction we're headed in now is the way of WEF, and that can only lead to disaster.
I cannot explain how pleasant it is to listen to two people discussing a topic both while speaking in a super relaxed tone. Mostly cause you respect each other and don't argue loudly, but also you both seem to just have very relaxed styles of speaking.
Yes isn't it a lot of fun new atheism hiding their thought crime models in anti religious tactics before the models are inflicted on everyone & shut down all free speech. I mean Dawkins is such a gorgeous ultra intelligent genius isn't he.
yes, it's called "Being normal". We're just conditioned by unhinged liberals ranting on TV, devices, the presidential podium, and the NYTs Op/Ed page to expect the worst.
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
I am do happy to see Alex getting to this point in his life. It's been wonderful folowing his journey throughout the years. Congrats Alex! I am a few years younger than you, but God damn (😉) you are one hell of an inspiration.
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
@@theocarrie9033 People underestimate hell, it is bad because it is separation from God. In a vision I was shown a person who claimed to be Christian but started fornication (premarital sex), He died relatively young and went to hell forever (1 Cor 6:9). God’s holiness means He will not coexist with sinners forever therefore Repent (Luke 13:3) and have a relationship with Jesus.
Former Christian. Once you step outside, you can never step inside again. The only thing religion does well is community. We all need to connect with people on a deeper level somehow
@@kerlygerlNo. Just community. Religion hinders concious living because ot makes you believe untruths and reject truths because they don't align with religious beliefs.
The Abrahamic religions were always something that mankind was going to grow out of. With the coming of the Age of Reason, the writing was on the wall. A good thing, because with rationality came progress. Superstition would never have provided clothing, food and sanitation to this many humans.
Thank you Mr Dawkins for all the light you have shed, even in the darkest corners of the world where you would not expect free spirits to be struggling. We all love you Sir.
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
Alex is an amazing interviewer and it shows especially when he is given an equally bright guest. Very enjoyable listen. Not sure I have listened to a more high-level, vigorous or tough conversation on the utility of religion ever before.
Previously, we ran an article that featured Dr. Merritt’s research into the story concerning Voltaire’s prediction that the Bible would not be read in a century and the use of his facilities as a Bible repository. After running the article, Dr. Merritt came across further evidence verifying this story. This updated edition features eyewitness accounts that Voltaire’s own printing press was used to print copies of the Bible. As Dr. Merritt and I discussed in conversation, the evidence clearly backs up this story to the glory of God. Often, stories are passed along in Christian circles without having the merits of their veracity examined. At times, the stories are shown to be little more than urban legends. At other times, a story’s facts become even more intriguing than the fictions ascribed to them. Such is the case with the story concerning Voltaire’s prediction that the Bible would no longer be read within a century, and the later ironic use of his home being used for Bible distribution after his passing. Dr. Daniel Merritt offers one of the best-researched defenses for the story’s authenticity that I have read. You are about to read the results of his research. We are all indebted to Dr. Merritt’s scholarship as we shall see, what I believe, to be the hand of God working to prove his Word as faithful despite the cynicism offered by a skeptical world. - Brian G. Chilton
Fascinating conversation. I love that Alex surfaces opposing views with a sense of respect for those views; I mean, he assumes positive intent and is genuinely curious about views he may disagree with. This is the mark of an educated person and also a person who fundamentally respects others. It’s very appreciated.
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents, unbelief etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
What's the difference between a cult and a religion? In a cult, there's someone at the top who knows it's all bs. In a religion, that person has died long time ago.
I would argue that people do know what's going on; that religiosity is designed to control people, and they would deliberately create an environment that takes the form of religiosity. I'm sure there are people who actually believe in religion. But there are others who know religion is full of shit, and use it to gain power.
I was born and lived in a eastern European country so I was bread in Orthodox Christianity and I deeply believed in God but around 13-15 I realized God is fictional and felt a huge relief. Living with Christian belief made me miserable, I was afraid of most things, afraid of having a "ungodly" thought , afraid of death and of living in sin. There's so much happiness in a life without any kind of God.
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
@@somebody7070 Ok this is coming from a good place God through the Holy Spirit has shown me several things relating to the afterlife with the purpose of convincing people like yourself. Stuff like Heaven and Hell, Angels, and evil Spirits the Lord Jesus (not worthy at all), a miracle happened to me that saved my life (thank you God) & so much more. I am more than happy to give further details.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Your personal belief in a miracle occuring in your life is not convincing for anyone else and is also not justification for this particular religion having any evidence or truth to it, when you think of the world’s existence outside of yourself. I don’t know what you think you will achieve by attempting to convert atheists in youtube comment sections with anecdotes.
Though I am a Christian, I love Richard Dawkins. I'm very glad to see he has had a very good recovery from his stroke, however many years ago that has been now. Good tidings and wishes from me. Stay healthy and vigilant for the truth.
What make you love Dawkins so much? I think he's a bitter, extremely patronizing and intolerant old man, with what must be some kind of trauma connected to Christianity he have experienced in his life, hat make him extremely hateful and insulting toward anyone with a honest faith in Jesus, and it's clearly not religion, but Christianity that trigger him. I recommend "I Don't Believe in Atheists" by Chris Hedges, that explain very well the phenomena of "New Atheism", and all those people all around on internet in special that just love to behave like school yard bullies, have nothing reasonable or friendly to say, but have as their greatest joy to spew out blasphemy, and considering themselves as great intellectuals because of it. And people like Dawkins and the late Hitchens are the idols of people like that, that suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect. Anyway, curious to hear what you have to say.
@@BloatedHeffa many Christian’s don’t run around telling other people they will burn in Hell.. what I find startling is some atheists push their beliefs upon Christians and do what they claim Christians do.. we all travel through this world by ourselves and must contend with what we believe.. or not and shouldn’t force others to believe what we believe.
As a religious person, it is not just a concern or fear of death. One of my greatest fears is the loss of love, love would be hard to let go of, all your family (spouse, children, parents, etc.) and your friends, the idea that it was all in vain, would be a scary thought, because, love is so good, I would hate to see if disappear...
@@spiralsausage In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@BaseSixBasics God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
When you pushed back against some of the things Richard said, he admitted you had a fair point and then re-examined his own thought. The difference between this and Christopher Hitchen's approach is why I am much more inclined to listen to Richard. Another great interview Alex.
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents, unbelief etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
Terrific conversation...thank you both, Richard and Alex. I was raised in a Catholic household in Chicago, in the 50s. I imagine that experience had much to do with my existential beliefs today. Common sense and moral questions led me to (and I hate labels) Atheism. Discussing religion and politics is next to impossible now, and they seem to be enmeshed with each other. They blend together now, so it seems impossible to debate politics without religion tossed into the mix.
huh. I think athiest morality is absolutely degenerate and repulsive, which hurts because I can't believe in a fairy tale book with a man in the sky. I also don't see how politics is tied to religion at all, although both are frankly completely missing the point, religion in terms of reality and politics in terms of, well, not actually solving any problems.
You can't trust a politician who tells you how to pray, or a preacher who tells you how to vote. As evidenced by an irrational belief that Trump is God's chosen one.
What do you get when you combine science with politics? (answer: politics) What do you get when you combine religion with politics? (answer: also politics) Once you realize the truth of this rather sick joke, you'll be less naive about it. The problem is not that many people may uphold rather silly ideas. The problems start when silly ideas get enforced within a society. You can't do the latter without politics.
All we have to come to terms with our reality is how we interact through our thoughts and perceptions; we think of our intelligence as having some meaning? Then is it possible that it came about without some form of understanding, yet we are so arrogant that we begrudge even that which formed us as having intelligence, nor understanding, even if it is beyond our ability to comprehend it? As for the handing down from primitive ignorant tribes…..well, when you pick up a poisonous insect, isn’t it advisable to be wearing gloves? If our understanding of everything came down to us already prepared, like a Christmas turkey from the local butcher, then there would be no need for science/sifting through the feathers to find some truth? Meaning, perhaps reality has to come to us by garbled ignorance and doubt, for us to sort out? A tree bears fruit because of its struggles, so does the attainment of knowledge ….
Thank you for this interview. I’ve read several of Richard Dawkins’s books and seen him speak a couple of times. In 1995, when I was 19, I asked Richard Dawkins whether he thought the propensity for humans to have religious faith is an evolved trait. I don’t recall his exact answer, however, I remember feeling disappointed in a somewhat non-committal answer. Ever since then, I’ve looked out for his comments on this matter. Your interview is the very first time that I have heard Richard Dawkins agree that the propensity for religious faith appears to be a characteristic of humans that has evolved through natural selection. It’s taken nearly thirty years but you have inadvertently given me the response I was looking for. Thank you!
@quenky1Exactly, he used to fudge the answer, perhaps concerned that it appears to validate religion at some level (at least in the eyes of believers). Of course, it does the opposite, and I’m glad to see Dawkins being clear on this topic.
Regarding life and death and fear of dying I sometimes think back to the film Troy (2004). While surely not a theological masterpiece I remember Achiles saying: "I will tell you a secret: The gods envy us! They envy us because we are mortal, because any moment could be our last. Everything is more beautiful because we are doomed. We will never be here again."
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
I like the speeches in thst movie. And the point of view of eternal life in the opinion of Achilles which is more practical based than spiritual as his story will be told many years after his death.
@@Zodinthara-jo5yi In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 thanks for your message. I'll try to relay to others. ✌️👍🌈now rainbow has a different meaning which I hate as I like it as a symbol of hope, a sign of a coming sunny day. But I am gonna use it anyway and not let the woke make it theirs
@@Zodinthara-jo5yi Make sure as a you are a repentant Christian. Read the Bible daily and pray often throughout the day, the devil is trying to make lukewarm Christians everywhere (Rev 3:16). Join us in spreading the good news of Jesus Christ. If you tell everyone that you are a mechanic but day in and out, you do the work of an accountant are you truly a mechanic? No, you are an accountant. Likewise, a Christian by name who lives contrary to Jesus’ teachings by living sinful/worldly is not a real Christian.
The fact that Richard said is not his obligation to bring confort to the reality of death is amazing, he demonstrates he is centered and balanced. Also he embraced the idea of pleasure for the collective and not to torture ourselves with the inevitability of our finitude; trying to not be selfish or cynical despite the enigma of the after life. Living with dignity and having the certainty that science works. Cool stuff.
Dawkins said something like your first sentence before. In 'Something for Nothing' Q&A (1hr39m), he answered a question on "the belief in God of people who are suffering, hanging on to life with their fingertips...", by saying, "Who cares what you feel like, who cares what feels good, who cares what makes you feel comforted, who cares what helps you sleep at night, what matters is what's true". Not so cool, i would think.
@@briansmith3791Doesn't matter if it's not cool, whether something exists is only determined by whether it's true, it's not the job of the person who argues that it isn't true to comfort those who are uncomfortable with such an idea. Feelings are personal so it is up to the person with the feelings to figure out how to find comfort with the truth. A pretty simple way is to practice awareness and to sit with the idea for an extended period of time. It will become comfortable enough evemtually
@@briansmith3791There is no life after death. Souls are only in your head and in the minds of those who took the time to put you in their memory because you effected them. 10 commandment are BS. You only need 3 rules. 1) don't hurt anybody, 2) help whoever you can whenever you can 3) have fun
@@rorybessell8280 God doesn't exist and never has. Jesus was real but not divine, so Christianity is a farce. Secular atheist Democracies are more Christian than America. American Christians seek revenge and their leader says he has never asked for forgiveness because he has never done anything wrong. Grabbing women by the pussy is allowed when you're a star, and Christians agree.
Interesting, your comment was posted within 15 minutes of an hour long talk. Do you listen 4x speed so they sound like chipmunks? But YT only allows 2x speed. Or did you just not watch it?
'In 75 years, avowedly genocidally atheistic Communism was responsible for 100 million deaths.' "The Black Book of Communism" (Harvard Univ. Press) 'WWI & WWII & 20th century wars combined caused the death of 158 million people.' ("Encyclopedia of Wars, Vols. I-III" )... NONE of the principals of those wars had even a tincture of religious fervor in advancing their plans; Churchill/Roosevelt/Hitler/Stalin/Tojo/Wilhelm/Clemenceau/George/Wilson.... WTF!? The Bible can't be relied upon for a tenth the deaths caused by secularism in the 20th century ALONE?!? But it certainly is guilty of licensing the smarmy, supercilious, oh so sexy self-aggrandizement of "New Atheism", and that eats sh%tt
WE ARE ETERNAL. I am 86 and I have compressed my thinking about life and existence in a small poem that I composed some 50 years ago. Before I show you my poem I like you to know that I admirer you for your extraordinary preparation, intelligence and a sense of realism about the fantasies of religions. The title of my poem is : REALITY, HUMAN AND OTHER, PLUS ETERNITY : I have been the sky, I have been the sea, I have been the wind and I have been the tree. This is why I know that I was, that I am and that through the atoms of my body, in an unlimited number of forms and millennia, I will always be. WE ARE ETERNAL !
It's still vigent after millennia for a good reason: - Don't eat animal grease (cholesterol) Leviticus 7:23 - Don't eat scale-less fish (mercury) Deuteronomy 14:10 - Don't marry close relatives (genetic issues) Leviticus 18:6 - Don't eat pork (trichinosis disease) Leviticus 11:7 . Don't eat vermin (rabies, plague, etc) Isaiah 66:17 - Stay away from the dead (contagion) Numbers 19:11 - Wash with running water (pollution) Leviticus 15:13 - Bury human waste (cholera) Deuteronomy 23:13 - Avoid seminal emissions (STD's) Leviticus 15:16 They didn't know why they ought to obey these things and they didn't have the technology to come up with them, they just were told to avoid them, despite that other cultures did and enjoyed such things because they made more sense to them than invisible issues, which caused them to think that they were a weird and probably superstitious people. And the experience they had when they were told to obey these things was so powerful, that they did not only obey them, but they also taught their descendants to obey them too for millennia, until relatively recently it was known why. For other comandments given to them, things like quantum physics still remain a mistery, however the predicted things coming to be all at once today just corroborate more. He who commanded these things to them definitely knew more, before and better than anyone else. And the ones that thought themselves to be wiser paid the price, it was their choice.
@@ericreed4535 You're just coping, I can tell by the emote. If you were right, then a lot of people wouldn't had passed away for millennia because of ignoring these things. Like, not too long ago, when people didn't wash their hands in hospitals, before the microscope was invented; before Mendel's discoveries (a catholic friar btw), etc. So, no, can't deem any reasoning as being horrible if we don't reason at all. Proof > rhetoric.
Not by Christian definition, I have always found Richard Dawkins to be such a graceful gentleman. His intellect and intelligence are gigantic. To possess and have developed such an amazing, advanced capacity to think in so many forms including rationally, analytically, scientifically, creatively, and yet maintain such humility is remarkable. He is beyond a national treasure and more a great asset to humanity itself.
Dawkins may be some of the things you mentioned, but he lacks the vital quality of compassion. In 'Something from Nothing', in answer to a question on " the belief in a God of many suffering people on Earth, who are clinging on to Life with their fingertips", Dawkins replied, " who cares....." (1hr 39mins).
Well, he is right on that score...who DOES care? And how is it shown? The world as it is tells me that people actually ONLY care about domination and destruction. That is Christian? @@briansmith3791
@@briansmith3791 I would love to see this in context and see what he actually meant to answer with "who cares", because this seems a little too much like failure to interpret what is being said correctly. But I don't know what video you might be talking about - when you say _In "Something from nothing",_ is that the name of the video?
Wow. That "laws of literature" thing (which i guess you were using to describe an error of thinking, perhaps a flaw in logic, or what did you call it: a categorization error) that was pretty brilliant
Christian here. I enjoy listening to these two intellectuals. I think it's my duty to expose myself to different ideas and think them through. I have to say that at minute 25:00 - Dawkins is mistaken. Jesus, according to NT, knew that he was going to die because he address this issue multiple times with his desciples. At one time He says "No one takes my life from me. I give it up willingly! I have the power to give it up and the power to receive it back again, just as my Father commanded me to do." John 10:18 . So, I believe he knew He was about to die and He was willing to die. That's why we see love in that message. To give your life for others is the most powerful message. Cheers.
In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” - Matthew 7:3-5
I would willingly die on a cross like JC to end war and world hunger if I could get a deal lick JC where I would be guaranteed to be back sipping wine with my friends in three days time and straight off to Heaven a few weeks later. Christians make such a big deal about JC dying on a cross. It was nothing , the guy had a bad weekend. Plenty of ordinary people have much more suffering than that. And think about it , JC died on the cross to save you..Save you from who? Save you from himself. How ridiculous is that. All religion is bullshit.
@@Helen-Spires Hey man we live by faith , if you falll away you will go to hell so please don't deny Jesus. Jesus loves you and wants to save you from the fiery pit God through the Holy Spirit has shown me several things relating to the afterlife with the purpose of convincing people like yourself. Stuff like Heaven and Hell, Angels, and evil Spirits the Lord Jesus (not worthy at all), a miracle happened to me that saved my life (thank you God) & so much more. I am more than happy to give further details.
On Jordan Peterson: I think it's usually the case that people genuinely believe what they say they believe. But it's just so hard to take Peterson seriously when he talks about religion. It's so two faced. To me, he desperately sounds like an atheist who won't outright lie, but is committed to not losing his conservative base - but you could probably come to the exact opposite POV. It would never happen, but it'd be immensely fascinating to have an honest conversation with him.
@@luisgustavo6117 God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
Woke is a meme, and being atheist makes Richard Dawkins firmly part of the woke mob the right hate so much. I think he may be getting older and grumpier and possibly a little senile. It happens to us all eventually.
I always enjoy your conversations/interviews with Richard Dawkins. He has always been correct in stating that the question of God existence is not only a scientific question but a very important. This cop out that religion has traditionally been given as being completely outside the domain (or 'magisterium') of science is ridiculous,, given the implications of the claim that an omnipotent deity is responsible for the universe and everything in it.
Glad you added magisterium "if you've ever seen, or read the Golden Compass, most religions would consider it, absolutely Utopia, if the magisterium ruled absolute control, and making sure the general populace is not given the burden of actually thinking for themselves and weighing independent evidence.
Dawkins had his chance against William Lane Craig but brave Sir Richard ran away. Rowan Williams also took him apart as did Keith Ward and John Lennox.
The question of immortality is an interesting one. I had a missionary come to my door one day, and he didn't take long to find that I am an atheist. He then asked me that I did not want to live eternally once I died on Earth. I asked him if he had really thought about what that would mean. For me that would be a dreadful occurrence as what would I do for all that time? Sometimes it is enticing to think that to NOT have something in normal life would be a huge gift after life. But one has to be careful about what one might wish for.
1) damn, Alex: ❤️ you’re GOOD 2) you asked an icon the questions we all had on our mind. You also brought out a side of Dawkins I’ve never seen and I think it was so real and productive. Not a debate or celeb podcast or big name talk in a huge arena somewhere. Just sitting at a table, with 10 slices of a tree between you and some curious art on the walls. 3) I read the god delusion like many others ten+ years ago but yeah… I mean it had a certain arrogance to it. I’m not sure it did atheism any favours? Forget atheism even. I guess a certain disdainful tone from the position of rationalism. I’m not sure it’d have been written this way in 2024. 4) I’ve been thinking about the tone of Dawkins message and truth for many years. And this is the conversation I wanted to hear to see how he talks about his beliefs (which I agree with) now. So thanks Alex. And love this podcast. A lot. 5) Dawkins: what would we do without this guy. Hero. 6) love the fact his third button isn’t done 7) whose place was this shot in? Fascinated by the artwork tbh.
Then do not tell me this is not a sick cult with godless ass kissers and godless alone trash people that are so obsessed with what other believe and the reflection of other people believe. No respect for those sick godless people. For Real? What kind of stupid empty cult is this nothing offer nothing gives, but empty BS? As God really cares about what you think and your stupid philosophy empty words as godless alone trash person (anyone who deny God is a godless alone trash person)… Another reason none can respect you, you are a lier as any modern Goddenier.. And we hope the next generation will be better then you and forget about you and your empty stupid worthless atheism not even worst to clean my ass. … you are just empty like it. Then why only godless alone trash people are obsessed with hell, while we are not? Another reason to do not be like them, and live with this constantly fear… What idiots! For really you did not get those empty Videos where godless alone people constantly talk about God, showing their obsession, are made not to help anyhow your godless alone life but to trap you into this empty stupid cult called atheism they know we live in the time of stupidity and godless trash people so they need to capture them as more as they can. They know you are the most stupid, weakest and alone people in the face of earth and they need to take advantages on you. They know you run anytime you see godless ass to kiss it. That what this empty BS cult atheism make you be, without God and without dignity. But let see how you are in trapped in this cult: Let see how many godless rats are here with their empty words and life, just as their cult called atheism. Why? Why Godless alone trash people want see the existence of God when it is clear that if they and all the things they see around (earth, stars, planets and so on) if they are creation something must created them. For real no respect for those godless blind trash people. God is what they do not know have and do not know in their miserable alone trash life. But God will take care about them as well, once death as anyone alse. Let's hope we will have better generation that those godless alone trash one.... We really do not need this empty and worthless cult called atheism and those modern godless alone idiots who thinks God cares to exist what those poor alone people think about him. No respect for them and their miserable godless alone life. (they are also godless ass kissers, as they run anytime they see a godless alone person... that what happen when you do not have God in your life, you lose your dignity, and you start to be disgusting in that way)... Oh anyway when you stopped to believe in God something died on you but you are so pathetic that you are not willing to admit it (right?). What trashy people without shame they deny their creator, and they will be judge for it.... Liars ad patetich as any Goddeniers. so their worthless empty life without him.... They are even the weakest people, because if they are wrong, they are the ones who will pay for denying God... Won't be in their shoes. No respect for them.... I told you this godless is the worst generation (those people are just empty and worthless as the cult they are in), and when it will be gone with their stupid empty, worthless atheism that does not going anywhere, that do not offer or teach anything, none will complain about it, not even those very weak losers!!!!! ... Do not call them atheist but godless alone souless trash. Let's forget about those worthless empty people and their worthless and empty cult do not even good to clean the dirtiest motel. WHEN YOU WILL BE GONE NONE WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT YOU AND YOUR STUPID CULt CALLED ATHEISM. You are the worst of people, no respect for you:... those are juss godless alone trash people, liers as any Godeniers with less thing sacred in their miserable alone godless life… those weak people are so weak and alone that they wait for an empty videos from an obsessed godless person to kiss his ass, disgustingly (no God, No Dignity) it would not change their life, actually more alone and empty, (they do not even have a real community) empty life they live empty shit they are in like this stupid cult called Atheism! No respect for them. (They are very weak, empty and frustrated people, a life that none will accepted, but those godless alone trash idiots).. those who say there is no God will pay for it, soon or later... No won't be a godless alone trash person into an empty cult not even good for my ass such atheism, that offers them nothing. But emptiness and lonlyness for their miserabile godless alone life. No respect for them. They are just empty as their cult called atheism. But they will pay this soon or later, and all the emptiness for nothing they are facing in their ridicolous miserable alone life! It is time to throw on the trash empty atheism and godless alone trash people, they are not even worthless to clean shit. You can not respect them and their emptiness! It is over for you, trash is not even good to clean you of all this atheism BS. No respect for you. Let's really hope we can have a better generation and forget this godless alone trash one as quickly as possible. IT IS OVER, it is time for you and this nosense called atheism to go back from the nothing you come from. No respect for you. You will pay all this shit, soon or later... Today I will put your BS atheism in the toilet and flash it and you godless alone will shut up, ok? You are worthless and empty as your stupid cult. No respect for you.... This is the worst, weakest, empty generation, and when it will be over with their stupid empty cult called atheism none will complain it. IT'S IS OVER, godless alone trash.... Those godless alone poor people are playing with the fire, and they will pay for it, and even badly........ They are so desperate and frustrated in and empty stupid life... No sorry for you. Let's hope in the next generation, let's hope in a better generation, and let's forget this one and trhow it on the trash with their stupid, nosense cult called atheism that will lead them anywhere. No respect for you again..... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GODLESS ALONE TRASH PEOPLE AND YOUR EMPTY STUPID ATHEISM NOT EVEN GOOD TO CLEAN THE DIRTIEST TOILET IN THE WORLD... You got no peace over there (and if God is real you will be and are f.... up.. You godless alone people are so weak)......... God will care about you as well, poor person.... (you life is more miserable and empty without God, but you are so patetic to realize it). NO respect for you and your empty cult called atheism....... You are just frutrated,obsessed, miserable, alone godless person that does deserve any kind of respect, just to be so. (Lier as any Godenier)....... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GUYS, YOU AND YOUR STUPID EMPTY CULT ATHEISM That does not even deserve my piss….. all this just show how much those godless trash people are frustrated (to do not have what people have sacred and holly) no respect for them. it is time to throw away that empty BS cult called atheism that does not explain anything and it is not even good to clean the dirtiest toilet. Godless alone trash people, liars as an any Goddenier, dishonest and the worst and stupidest generation ever had. Let’s froget about this godless trash worthless generation and waiting for a better one. (By the way you will be judge as anyone alse once death by God, do not think you will escape because you deny him, as a godless alone rat as you are (You are also a disgusting godless ass kisser, that anytime you see a godlesss ass you run to kiss it. because you got no God and no dignity in your miserable godless life) NO RESPECT FOR YOU (your life is more empty and miserable without God, but you are the only fool to do not get it… WHY?)... this godless alone trash generation is the worst... Let's hope we can forget about them and have a better one. No respect for them and their stupid empty cult called atheism...... Godless weak people (you are weaker now and later ponce you will confront God, no matter what you sick people think about him)........... They do not deserve any respect, with their godless alone trash family who raised so trashy and sick to deny God. (and they will also pay fgor it, soon or later......... They got No God and no Dignity... something dies inside them when they stop to believe in God, but their are so patetic to admit... Soon or later they will stop to write empty shit on youtube about what we believe... Why? They are very weak, and quickly to change their mind about God... they are worthless people just like their empty atheism... but surelly they can not call theirselves atheists, but godless alone weak trash people. No respect for those liers or disgusting godless desperate ass kissers.... /they need to slpit on their dirthy mouth every morning as they deny God... but they are deceiving none but themselves, as they will paid for it, and be judge by God once death as anyone alse. (So it is better to be a son of God,m that a godless alone weak person). It is time to theow on the trash atheims (where it belong) and forget about this generation (have better people then them). God will take care about them as well, and I won't be in the place of those godless weak alone people and disguasting godless ass kisses...... They lost any dignity, denying God, no doubt about that.........
I would assume this was Dawkins home, the unusual art, the scattered nature yet slightly bland but also with African influence. Just feels like more Dawkins but tbh I wouldn't have guessed either if I was to imagine in my mind.
@@loodlebop Then do not tell me this is not a sick cult with godless ass kissers and godless alone trash people that are so obsessed with what other believe and the reflection of other people believe. No respect for those sick godless people. For Real? What kind of stupid empty cult is this nothing offer nothing gives, but empty BS? As God really cares about what you think and your stupid philosophy empty words as godless alone trash person (anyone who deny God is a godless alone trash person)… Another reason none can respect you, you are a lier as any modern Goddenier.. And we hope the next generation will be better then you and forget about you and your empty stupid worthless atheism not even worst to clean my ass. … you are just empty like it. Then why only godless alone trash people are obsessed with hell, while we are not? Another reason to do not be like them, and live with this constantly fear… What idiots! For really you did not get those empty Videos where godless alone people constantly talk about God, showing their obsession, are made not to help anyhow your godless alone life but to trap you into this empty stupid cult called atheism they know we live in the time of stupidity and godless trash people so they need to capture them as more as they can. They know you are the most stupid, weakest and alone people in the face of earth and they need to take advantages on you. They know you run anytime you see godless ass to kiss it. That what this empty BS cult atheism make you be, without God and without dignity. But let see how you are in trapped in this cult: Let see how many godless rats are here with their empty words and life, just as their cult called atheism. Why? Why Godless alone trash people want see the existence of God when it is clear that if they and all the things they see around (earth, stars, planets and so on) if they are creation something must created them. For real no respect for those godless blind trash people. God is what they do not know have and do not know in their miserable alone trash life. But God will take care about them as well, once death as anyone alse. Let's hope we will have better generation that those godless alone trash one.... We really do not need this empty and worthless cult called atheism and those modern godless alone idiots who thinks God cares to exist what those poor alone people think about him. No respect for them and their miserable godless alone life. (they are also godless ass kissers, as they run anytime they see a godless alone person... that what happen when you do not have God in your life, you lose your dignity, and you start to be disgusting in that way)... Oh anyway when you stopped to believe in God something died on you but you are so pathetic that you are not willing to admit it (right?). What trashy people without shame they deny their creator, and they will be judge for it.... Liars ad patetich as any Goddeniers. so their worthless empty life without him.... They are even the weakest people, because if they are wrong, they are the ones who will pay for denying God... Won't be in their shoes. No respect for them.... I told you this godless is the worst generation (those people are just empty and worthless as the cult they are in), and when it will be gone with their stupid empty, worthless atheism that does not going anywhere, that do not offer or teach anything, none will complain about it, not even those very weak losers!!!!! ... Do not call them atheist but godless alone souless trash. Let's forget about those worthless empty people and their worthless and empty cult do not even good to clean the dirtiest motel. WHEN YOU WILL BE GONE NONE WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT YOU AND YOUR STUPID CULt CALLED ATHEISM. You are the worst of people, no respect for you:... those are juss godless alone trash people, liers as any Godeniers with less thing sacred in their miserable alone godless life… those weak people are so weak and alone that they wait for an empty videos from an obsessed godless person to kiss his ass, disgustingly (no God, No Dignity) it would not change their life, actually more alone and empty, (they do not even have a real community) empty life they live empty shit they are in like this stupid cult called Atheism! No respect for them. (They are very weak, empty and frustrated people, a life that none will accepted, but those godless alone trash idiots).. those who say there is no God will pay for it, soon or later... No won't be a godless alone trash person into an empty cult not even good for my ass such atheism, that offers them nothing. But emptiness and lonlyness for their miserabile godless alone life. No respect for them. They are just empty as their cult called atheism. But they will pay this soon or later, and all the emptiness for nothing they are facing in their ridicolous miserable alone life! It is time to throw on the trash empty atheism and godless alone trash people, they are not even worthless to clean shit. You can not respect them and their emptiness! It is over for you, trash is not even good to clean you of all this atheism BS. No respect for you. Let's really hope we can have a better generation and forget this godless alone trash one as quickly as possible. IT IS OVER, it is time for you and this nosense called atheism to go back from the nothing you come from. No respect for you. You will pay all this shit, soon or later... Today I will put your BS atheism in the toilet and flash it and you godless alone will shut up, ok? You are worthless and empty as your stupid cult. No respect for you.... This is the worst, weakest, empty generation, and when it will be over with their stupid empty cult called atheism none will complain it. IT'S IS OVER, godless alone trash.... Those godless alone poor people are playing with the fire, and they will pay for it, and even badly........ They are so desperate and frustrated in and empty stupid life... No sorry for you. Let's hope in the next generation, let's hope in a better generation, and let's forget this one and trhow it on the trash with their stupid, nosense cult called atheism that will lead them anywhere. No respect for you again..... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GODLESS ALONE TRASH PEOPLE AND YOUR EMPTY STUPID ATHEISM NOT EVEN GOOD TO CLEAN THE DIRTIEST TOILET IN THE WORLD... You got no peace over there (and if God is real you will be and are f.... up.. You godless alone people are so weak)......... God will care about you as well, poor person.... (you life is more miserable and empty without God, but you are so patetic to realize it). NO respect for you and your empty cult called atheism....... You are just frutrated,obsessed, miserable, alone godless person that does deserve any kind of respect, just to be so. (Lier as any Godenier)....... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GUYS, YOU AND YOUR STUPID EMPTY CULT ATHEISM That does not even deserve my piss….. all this just show how much those godless trash people are frustrated (to do not have what people have sacred and holly) no respect for them. it is time to throw away that empty BS cult called atheism that does not explain anything and it is not even good to clean the dirtiest toilet. Godless alone trash people, liars as an any Goddenier, dishonest and the worst and stupidest generation ever had. Let’s froget about this godless trash worthless generation and waiting for a better one. (By the way you will be judge as anyone alse once death by God, do not think you will escape because you deny him, as a godless alone rat as you are (You are also a disgusting godless ass kisser, that anytime you see a godlesss ass you run to kiss it. because you got no God and no dignity in your miserable godless life) NO RESPECT FOR YOU (your life is more empty and miserable without God, but you are the only fool to do not get it… WHY?)... this godless alone trash generation is the worst... Let's hope we can forget about them and have a better one. No respect for them and their stupid empty cult called atheism...... Godless weak people (you are weaker now and later ponce you will confront God, no matter what you sick people think about him)........... They do not deserve any respect, with their godless alone trash family who raised so trashy and sick to deny God. (and they will also pay fgor it, soon or later......... They got No God and no Dignity... something dies inside them when they stop to believe in God, but their are so patetic to admit... Soon or later they will stop to write empty shit on youtube about what we believe... Why? They are very weak, and quickly to change their mind about God... they are worthless people just like their empty atheism... but surelly they can not call theirselves atheists, but godless alone weak trash people. No respect for those liers or disgusting godless desperate ass kissers.... /they need to slpit on their dirthy mouth every morning as they deny God... but they are deceiving none but themselves, as they will paid for it, and be judge by God once death as anyone alse. (So it is better to be a son of God,m that a godless alone weak person). It is time to theow on the trash atheims (where it belong) and forget about this generation (have better people then them). God will take care about them as well, and I won't be in the place of those godless weak alone people and disguasting godless ass kisses...... They lost any dignity, denying God, no doubt about that......... No respect for them..... The worst generaration, the weakest one (they got no God and No dignity)...
@@dominicmacdonald-wallace6851 Then do not tell me this is not a sick cult with godless ass kissers and godless alone trash people that are so obsessed with what other believe and the reflection of other people believe. No respect for those sick godless people. For Real? What kind of stupid empty cult is this nothing offer nothing gives, but empty BS? As God really cares about what you think and your stupid philosophy empty words as godless alone trash person (anyone who deny God is a godless alone trash person)… Another reason none can respect you, you are a lier as any modern Goddenier.. And we hope the next generation will be better then you and forget about you and your empty stupid worthless atheism not even worst to clean my ass. … you are just empty like it. Then why only godless alone trash people are obsessed with hell, while we are not? Another reason to do not be like them, and live with this constantly fear… What idiots! For really you did not get those empty Videos where godless alone people constantly talk about God, showing their obsession, are made not to help anyhow your godless alone life but to trap you into this empty stupid cult called atheism they know we live in the time of stupidity and godless trash people so they need to capture them as more as they can. They know you are the most stupid, weakest and alone people in the face of earth and they need to take advantages on you. They know you run anytime you see godless ass to kiss it. That what this empty BS cult atheism make you be, without God and without dignity. But let see how you are in trapped in this cult: Let see how many godless rats are here with their empty words and life, just as their cult called atheism. Why? Why Godless alone trash people want see the existence of God when it is clear that if they and all the things they see around (earth, stars, planets and so on) if they are creation something must created them. For real no respect for those godless blind trash people. God is what they do not know have and do not know in their miserable alone trash life. But God will take care about them as well, once death as anyone alse. Let's hope we will have better generation that those godless alone trash one.... We really do not need this empty and worthless cult called atheism and those modern godless alone idiots who thinks God cares to exist what those poor alone people think about him. No respect for them and their miserable godless alone life. (they are also godless ass kissers, as they run anytime they see a godless alone person... that what happen when you do not have God in your life, you lose your dignity, and you start to be disgusting in that way)... Oh anyway when you stopped to believe in God something died on you but you are so pathetic that you are not willing to admit it (right?). What trashy people without shame they deny their creator, and they will be judge for it.... Liars ad patetich as any Goddeniers. so their worthless empty life without him.... They are even the weakest people, because if they are wrong, they are the ones who will pay for denying God... Won't be in their shoes. No respect for them.... I told you this godless is the worst generation (those people are just empty and worthless as the cult they are in), and when it will be gone with their stupid empty, worthless atheism that does not going anywhere, that do not offer or teach anything, none will complain about it, not even those very weak losers!!!!! ... Do not call them atheist but godless alone souless trash. Let's forget about those worthless empty people and their worthless and empty cult do not even good to clean the dirtiest motel. WHEN YOU WILL BE GONE NONE WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT YOU AND YOUR STUPID CULt CALLED ATHEISM. You are the worst of people, no respect for you:... those are juss godless alone trash people, liers as any Godeniers with less thing sacred in their miserable alone godless life… those weak people are so weak and alone that they wait for an empty videos from an obsessed godless person to kiss his ass, disgustingly (no God, No Dignity) it would not change their life, actually more alone and empty, (they do not even have a real community) empty life they live empty shit they are in like this stupid cult called Atheism! No respect for them. (They are very weak, empty and frustrated people, a life that none will accepted, but those godless alone trash idiots).. those who say there is no God will pay for it, soon or later... No won't be a godless alone trash person into an empty cult not even good for my ass such atheism, that offers them nothing. But emptiness and lonlyness for their miserabile godless alone life. No respect for them. They are just empty as their cult called atheism. But they will pay this soon or later, and all the emptiness for nothing they are facing in their ridicolous miserable alone life! It is time to throw on the trash empty atheism and godless alone trash people, they are not even worthless to clean shit. You can not respect them and their emptiness! It is over for you, trash is not even good to clean you of all this atheism BS. No respect for you. Let's really hope we can have a better generation and forget this godless alone trash one as quickly as possible. IT IS OVER, it is time for you and this nosense called atheism to go back from the nothing you come from. No respect for you. You will pay all this shit, soon or later... Today I will put your BS atheism in the toilet and flash it and you godless alone will shut up, ok? You are worthless and empty as your stupid cult. No respect for you.... This is the worst, weakest, empty generation, and when it will be over with their stupid empty cult called atheism none will complain it. IT'S IS OVER, godless alone trash.... Those godless alone poor people are playing with the fire, and they will pay for it, and even badly........ They are so desperate and frustrated in and empty stupid life... No sorry for you. Let's hope in the next generation, let's hope in a better generation, and let's forget this one and trhow it on the trash with their stupid, nosense cult called atheism that will lead them anywhere. No respect for you again..... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GODLESS ALONE TRASH PEOPLE AND YOUR EMPTY STUPID ATHEISM NOT EVEN GOOD TO CLEAN THE DIRTIEST TOILET IN THE WORLD... You got no peace over there (and if God is real you will be and are f.... up.. You godless alone people are so weak)......... God will care about you as well, poor person.... (you life is more miserable and empty without God, but you are so patetic to realize it). NO respect for you and your empty cult called atheism....... You are just frutrated,obsessed, miserable, alone godless person that does deserve any kind of respect, just to be so. (Lier as any Godenier)....... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GUYS, YOU AND YOUR STUPID EMPTY CULT ATHEISM That does not even deserve my piss….. all this just show how much those godless trash people are frustrated (to do not have what people have sacred and holly) no respect for them. it is time to throw away that empty BS cult called atheism that does not explain anything and it is not even good to clean the dirtiest toilet. Godless alone trash people, liars as an any Goddenier, dishonest and the worst and stupidest generation ever had. Let’s froget about this godless trash worthless generation and waiting for a better one. (By the way you will be judge as anyone alse once death by God, do not think you will escape because you deny him, as a godless alone rat as you are (You are also a disgusting godless ass kisser, that anytime you see a godlesss ass you run to kiss it. because you got no God and no dignity in your miserable godless life) NO RESPECT FOR YOU (your life is more empty and miserable without God, but you are the only fool to do not get it… WHY?)... this godless alone trash generation is the worst... Let's hope we can forget about them and have a better one. No respect for them and their stupid empty cult called atheism...... Godless weak people (you are weaker now and later ponce you will confront God, no matter what you sick people think about him)........... They do not deserve any respect, with their godless alone trash family who raised so trashy and sick to deny God. (and they will also pay fgor it, soon or later......... They got No God and no Dignity... something dies inside them when they stop to believe in God, but their are so patetic to admit... Soon or later they will stop to write empty shit on youtube about what we believe... Why? They are very weak, and quickly to change their mind about God... they are worthless people just like their empty atheism... but surelly they can not call theirselves atheists, but godless alone weak trash people. No respect for those liers or disgusting godless desperate ass kissers.... /they need to slpit on their dirthy mouth every morning as they deny God... but they are deceiving none but themselves, as they will paid for it, and be judge by God once death as anyone alse. (So it is better to be a son of God,m that a godless alone weak person). It is time to theow on the trash atheims (where it belong) and forget about this generation (have better people then them). God will take care about them as well, and I won't be in the place of those godless weak alone people and disguasting godless ass kisses...... They lost any dignity, denying God, no doubt about that......... No respect for them..... The worst generaration, the weakest one (they got no God and No dignity)...
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
Has anyone watched Richard Dawkins doing those lovely science presentations for children decades ago. The sweetest man. He became forthright for a time but was compelled to. Please look at those videos. So lovely
An excellent conversation. Most of the proponent-of-atheism videos on YT are snippets and one-liners. Alex and Richard are really exploring the ideas. Thank you.
I used to be a Christian Greek Orthodox to be exact and I was talking with people of many different faiths and how they couldn’t understand my view point which I grew up with and I the same when discussing theirs, and then I started to question myself if pray every day and night to help help others for salvation then I took a step back and read the bible with an open mind. That’s when I questioned myself own beliefs and now I’m agnostic I still can’t get around evolution and the Big Bang, there’s probably something out there but it’s not the God that I had or anyone else has for that matter. I’m looking into simulation theory. Then I started to question free will and it really goes against Christianity. I told my friend if God is all knowing and knows when I’m going to die and how and I have the free will to choose then if I buy a motorcycle and die in an accident was that my choice or was it my destiny to buy it and die on it? Then I read the Old Testament and I was so like yeah this isn’t God. I have no problems with death, if I die and go to hell I don’t understand how that’s just when God made me this way and made Himself hard for me to understand and then if I was correct what about everyone else following wrong religions. So many questions. If we have souls and get reincarnated after death or we go to another dimension or born as someone else or nothing or just become energy particles floating around is something we don’t know.
I grew up Syriac Orthodox Christian and started to question my faith for the same reason you described. If you want to learn more about evolution, I recommend Richard Dawkins' book "The Greatest Show on Earth". It is meant to explain evolution in a simple way.
@@CoreDump451 I don’t believe in evolution either, at this point I haven’t decided I’m still searching all I can say if there is a God we don’t know who He is. Nothing in any book describes a perfect almighty being. Evolution has holes in it too.
@@kyriakoskarallis5268 In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 and you know this how, how is there a heaven? What makes your faith true. How did you come to the conclusion Christianity is correct and not Buddhism or Islam? Or any other faith? Don’t say you believe the bible. Prove to me Star Wars isn’t real?
I agree. I'm hearing thoughts and perspectives about science, origins, design and direction and aspects from a vantage that is entirely new for my brain, and I've listened to scores upon scores of hours of Dawkins and a handful of contemporaries. Not sure I'm really getting anywhere new... yet. Nonetheless, it is refreshing and compelling enough to impress me beyond my normal levels of appreciation, though the normal levels indeed rest at a height.
It is a beautiful analogy and perhaps he slightly misses the point, but it's also a flawed analogy in that we have an incredibly compelling explanation for the complexity of life that explains exactly how he can come about without an author. When applied to physics on the other hand it's even less compelling to my mind, I can accept either than the laws of physics just are what they are, or perhaps that there is a multiverse and thus we exist in the kind of universe that can result in human life, and everything else.
@@Enoch-RootI think you missed the point. The analogy included the very dispute you have. This is more of an argument of an entire meta view. It’s an exploration of humility
@@Enoch-Root but who says that those laws you are refering too havent been createdby something. Not that i would belive in that, but just by observing the laws we could never deduce anything about how the laws have come to be. Because by definition those laws must have come to be without the laws influencing that.
@@dylogysminter Yes, I get the point he was making, and it was beautifully made. When it comes to physics it may apply, but we hardly need to even ask about the origin of natural selection, it's such a simplistic rule. With physics though, the strong force, weak force, etc etc and how those came to be so precisely calibrated, it may be that science can't explain the origins of the laws of physics, even why the universe is comprehensible, or it may turn out to be something so simplistic, like natural selection, that the universe couldn't have been any other way. I think there was some other deeper point he was making though and I want to listen to that part again, but I just ran in excess of a half marathon, it's late where I am and I'm too exhausted now.
Both of my parents were conservative Catholics and stuffed me with their sick, perverted, sadistic doctrine from my early childhood, so that I decided to leave the church when I was just five years old. I've been an atheist for 40 years now and I'm doing much better than I did back then! 
I as well. Except I became spiritual because I knew there was more they didn't want us to know and many who has experienced. This religion/faith got it all wrong!
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Perfect epitome? God is a Jealous, vengeful, discriminating... God. Do you not conclude this by the very books that were written by man to sway your beliefs and opinions about a 'God' you know nothing of. One's faith/belief is concluded from a story you read and chose to believe. Why not Islam, Hinduism, Buddhaiscm... repent from what and who... and why?
@@razony All sin must be punished that’s how judgement works, a Judge judges you on the bad you do and since everyone has sinned (lied, stolen ,sexual immorality, dishonoured parents, had hatred towards other people etc). All humans need to repent and believe in Jesus (God) to go to Heaven or spend eternity paying for your sins in hell.
1. Is there only one god, or are there multiple gods? If multiple, how is a person to choose which deserves obedience? 2. Would you agree that before anything can exist, something has to create it? Did your god create everything? If yes, who/what created your god? 3. Is your god infallible? 4. Is your god omnipotent? 5. Is your god omniscient? 6. Is your god benevolent, or malicious? 7. If your god cannot make mistakes, then it follows that everything it creates is either perfect, or that your god intentionally makes things that are flawed. Would a benevolent god intentionally create something likely to suffer because of its flaws? 8. If your god can do anything, and it created the universe, why didn't it simply create a perfect world inhabited by perfect beings? If your god wanted obedience, and god is not malicious, why did god make disobedience possible? 9. If your god knows everything, does it already understand every thought and feeling you have? Does it instantaneously know everything you say and do? If yes, what is the point of religious rituals, such as prayer? 10. Why would an omnipotent and omniscient god not communicate directly and unambiguously with individuals, with no need of books, churches, prophets, signs, miracles, etc? If a person is not intelligent enough, or not "worthy" enough to speak directly with god, whose fault is that? Who made the person in the first place? If a person is unworthy or incapable of directly communicating with god, how can that person be capable of recognizing a valid spokesperson for god? 11. Think about the person/people who convinced/persuaded/ordered you to believe in a version of god. Are they infallible? Is it at all possible for them to tell you something they sincerely believe, but for that thing they tell you to be actually incorrect? 12. Are feelings reliable tools to guide actions? Suppose I hear a person in my neighborhood talking a lot about the presence of violent break in robberies nearby, and I get apprehensive. I am convinced by the passion my neighbor puts into this story, even though I've seen no tangible evidence. That night, I hear a noise. I FEEL certain that it is a robber breaking in to harm my family. I get out of bed, pull a pistol from the bedside table. Without opening the bedroom door, I shoot through it to get the robber. When I open the door, there is my son, lying dead on the floor from my bullet. I was sure. I relied on my feelings. My fear of a robber. My hope of being a defender father. Feelings, not facts. Was that a good way to live my life? 14. Do you deny that religion (superstition, irrational behavior) is the root cause of most human conflict in history, that for centuries millions have been tortured and murdered "because god told me to do it"? That is why 9/11 happened, because "god hates the infidels". 13. Suppose a person has a book full of maps to guide a group journey. They rely upon it, but the group is perpetually lost. You question the book, but your friend insists that the book is accurate. "How do you know?" you ask. They reply, "I know that this book is accurate and perfect, because it says so in the book." Your friend insists that the book is information from god.....but some other people wrote the book, based on their interpretations...why? Why didn't god write the book personally? How could information possibly become more accurate and truthful when filtered thorough con men?.....but that is okay, because of how passionately they shout about their version of the books, and how strongly it makes your friend feel. When you show them hundreds of self contradictions in the book, they get upset and say that you are just not reading the book correctly. Which person is messed up? You, or the book fanatic? How do you justify cherry picking which parts of the bible to follow? Leviticus? 14. If the point is to die and go to heaven, why not simply commit mass suicide and get it over with? Christ was quite literally a kamikaze; is that what you preach should be emulated in daily life? 15. Why is it necessary to use superstition and irrationality to justify your practical principles? Why treat humans like a donkey in need of the stick of hell and the carrot of heaven? If you want positive secular behavior, why not justify that behavior in practical secular terms? If you "only follow Jesus and only care about Jesus", well who does JESUS follow, obey and care about? The father who led him to be tortured and murdered. The insane vicious sadist who caused all misery DELIBERATELY. Religion is an evil scam that preys upon the desperate, the weak and the stupid.
Creation is not defined, solely by what or how everything was created. The clues are in the individualistic limitations of creation. Or indeed what the creatior defines as uniformity and the intergratiin of harmonious functionality within the cycles of caos and destruction.
@@stevenbradley9851Lol. Dude, that's a pretty hogwash - borderline gibberish - way of claiming science can't explain everything/the universe's origin. I think that's what you're getting at? Only you and "god" could ever know. Make sure you know what you're saying and that your descriptions make sense before you comment. It doesn't make you sound smart here. Esepcially this community. You will get called out for gobbledegook.
@@stevenbradley9851 Neanderthals were quite successful and had no sky fairies. They lived longer than Homo Sapiens, who have created the 6th extinction and will cease to exist.
An extraordinary intelligent discussion as is expected. Can you imagine what a wonderful planet this would be is even a small percentage of humans could talk to each other on such clear and calm terms. Imagine how much we could learn. Thank you gentleman. You have done the rest of us a continuing service.
What finally struck towards the end of this engaging interaction was that, putting aside the intellectual capabilities of the young man, Richard Dawkins was presenting the kind of wisdom and deep awareness that can only come with age! And this. for me ,made this so much more interesting. Much like a grandfather engaging the thinking of his grandson. Very enjoyable.
I did notice a tone of "this young man is earnestly discussing these things that we have all thought about to some degree in this field. let's see what part of it interests him"
What a conversation. Thank you Alex, thank you Richard. Thank you for trying to find answers to some of the biggest questions known to man. We may never know how life has come about or why we’re here, but who cares when the journey to improved understanding looks like this.
What I love the most about most atheists is how free-spirited (no pun intended) they are. How open-minded. How curious! It's the exact type of person I love to talk to, but only get the chance to meet occasionally, because of how society teaches us to KNOW (without really knowing), but never to LEARN. I feel like I am flying when I spend time with others like that (or just myself, since I'm curious too), like almost anything is possible.
It kind of reminds me of a window curtain I've been using different colors of paint on. Try it sometime. Just be creative. Get some permanent bright paint and go at it.
After listening to this episode twice this evening, I somehow got a growing sense of ‘OUR Alex’ (maybe time to form a fandom?).. So glad to hear Alex asking so many critical yet fine questions. Also very glad that Prof. Dawkins is taking Alex equally intellectual and answered all the not-so-easy questions with his profound knowledge and admirable manner(perhaps Mr Hitchens could learn a bit from here~). Alex, thanks for this wonderful discussion, you’re a great rep for Gen-Z critical thinkers, keep up the outstanding work! Maybe try to invite more guests like RD?
Indeed, Alex is awesome!.. and brilliant pushback about William Lane Craig and on Dawkin’s flimsy excuse for choosing not to debate him… if Dawkin’s case against God’s existence is so watertight, why not debate Craig and put him to the sword once and for all?.. I think because there is another reason for his reluctance - his arguments would barely survive the first round….
@@trashvomitstudios In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY
The first time I saw any sort of presentation from Alex was when he debated Trent Horn. I have to say that I am truely impressed with how far he has come. His measured and mature approach to discussion and debate has to be commended.
The only people going to heaven is a very small number ( the 144,000) Revelation 7:4, 14:1, & 3. That is why Jesus called them the Little Flock in Luke 12:32. There are at least 9 different name’s used for the heavenly group, another one is God’s children (Romans 8:16). Jesus also said in John 10:16 I have OTHER SHEEP that are not of this FOLD, because (this FOLD) was the heavenly group, and the (OTHER SHEEP) are going to be the people that will live forever on the earth. ( Psalm’s 37:9,11, & 29). Because the Earth is going to be here forever (Ecclesiastes 1:4)
You are in error. There are a lot of people going to heaven. Anyone who accepts Jesus as their Savior and repents of their sins has a promise from Jesus who said that if anyone came to Him,He would in no wise cast out. The 144,000 are the Jews during the Tribulation.
@@pam7500 The people that will be in Heaven with Jesus are going to be the Judge’s over the earth like it says in 1 Corinthians 6:2, and Revelation 5:10 - and you made them to be a Kingdom , and priest’s to our God , and they are to rule as Kings OVER THE EARTH. But some Bible’s will say ON THE EARTH. But Heaven is over the Earth. And like it says in John 10:16 “And I have OTHER SHEEP, which are not of THIS FOLD. Because the other sheep are going to be the people that will live forever on the earth (Psalm’s 37:9, 11, & 29 ) And THIS FOLD are going to be the co-rulers with Jesus in Heaven. But what happened even before the Apostle’s has all died Satan organized false religion in the Apostasy in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 9 and created all of these churches or Divisions. Because in Romans 16:17 - Which says: Now I urge you Brothers, to keep your eye on those who created Divisions and causes for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and AVOID THEM.
Alex, you are 20 to 30 years younger than I am and yet you present your arguments with such aplomb and persistent civility it amazes me. Even in the face of raging lunacy, (P Hitchens), you calmly reiterate your intentions without engaging in the anger that is directed at you. I now endeavor to emulate your style and method of intellectual discussion. Also, your arguments regarding animal suffering managed to shift the fulcrum under the lever of my thinking in such a way that I could finally pry myself out of those habitual behaviors and made the shift to vegan in December of 2019. Thank you.
Thank you for pressuring Richard on the whole WLC thing, been a long time coming he answered for that, i'm also glad to see you stood your ground on defending his character.
Craig is a fraud. He clearly understands logic and fallacies. He accuses others of using logical fallacies, but ignores that every single one of his arguments contain logical fallacies. He’s just bilking Christians out of their money.
Well it’s theatre. Dawkins knows that and didn’t get to be the world’s most famous atheist by accident. WLC is or was a tremendous debater really a different class. That doesn’t mean his arguments are correct. Sam Harris surely lost in their head-to-head. Dawkins argument that WLC believes something atrocious whereas nice Christians are happy to say children getting cancer is God’s will was unpicked rather nicely. Of course WLC could easily have damaged Dawkins’ reputation. The risk was too high.
@@andreweagleton8879 I understand your points I think. Unfortunately it is theatre, and for that reason one could argue Harris won on the basis of theatre, because his was an emotionally charged argument, as appose to a rigid factual one. Craig won that debate argument wise but failed to win the audiences hearts.
@@SoldatDuChristChannel What "rigid factual" arguments stand behind the Christian god proposition? The facts are that children die, regularly, in horrible and excruciating ways. The fact is that Craig tried to defend heinous biblical text endorsing infanticide based upon a fanciful notion of infant heaven.
Wonderful discussion, it is clear to see you both respect each other and enjoy the discourse. It is such a pleasure to listen to and gives much food for thought. Among many such thoughts one came to mind, that when you look at Richard's eyes you seee his sort of grandfatherly or village elder grace and kindness emanating through his smiles and earnestness alike, even while he's stating something is appalling (and therefore probably making many people angry), it comes from a place of an honest almost innocent heart and mind, rather than a righteous or like he himself denounced behaviors of "condescening" attitude. The man is a living legend and I am so glad you had this chat with him to remind us that open discussions for the sake of truth seeking are possible.
I have so much respect for Dawkins, he was my first intellectual crush growing up. I still have my paperback penguin copy of the Selfish Gene from the late 70's. His remark '...there are no good arguments...' for religion, 😂😂. Thank you for this discussion. I much prefer listening to a discussion with this great mind than a 'for clicks' debate.
@@Christus.2004 Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Offer the evidence for your claims or I will continue to have an absence of belief. Reminder: more claims are not evidence
@@MrMerve-tl9my yet you claim there is no God because you cannot see him and believe in a non rational narrative. The Bible has Scientific facts written over 3600 years ago Most of them discovered in the last 300-400 years. If you want the source just type Scientific Facts in the Bible. Or do it with Prophecy. Remember if you want proof be objective.
@Marcelo.1927 I think your fantasy is one of delusional and baseless submissions, my dear. I choose to make my own decisions without fear or favour. And by the way Christianity seems to be going, a Christian god might favour me, even though I had not worshipped the false idols so preverlant in today. Eg. The Orange One, whose name we should never speak. He comes with forked tongues but loves the poorly educated.
Today’s Meditation "By accepting the sufferings ‘offered’ by life and allowed by God for our progress and purification, we spare ourselves much harder ones. We need to develop this kind of realism and, once and for all, stop dreaming of a life without suffering or conflict. That is the life of heaven, not earth. We must take up our cross and follow Christ courageously every day; the bitterness of that cross will sooner or later be transformed into sweetness." -Fr. Jacques Philippe, p. 49
Wonderful conversation and respectful, no one interrupting! My question to Professor Dawkins ,when he talked about the concept of eternity, an idea he didn't care for , my point I would raise is why do we assume that the dimension of time exists in eternity .
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
Solid interview Alex, congratulations :) Since you cover philosophy and thought experiments in so many videos, I'd love to see some videos more in the Dawkins wheelhouse, i.e. wrestling against modern spiritual arguments using with what we know about the natural world and evolution that debunks creation and the supernatural. Personally and for many others including Dawkins, this is the primary reason we hold our world view, and it may continue convincing people who have never been exposed to these specific examples of natural history, especially people who weren't here for the discussion taking place in the 2000's. I think new videos like these would be a great addition to your channel, and of course make for great discussions that you can explore and try to dismantle in your signature style. Love you man!
Neither of these people have studied religion. How can you even ask the question without acknowledging the astrological origins of religion. Nothing solid about these fools who don't know the history or content of religion.
As one who was here for the debates in the early 2000s, and as a Christian, I would love nothing more than to go back to the Dawkins approach! Literally the easiest objections to deal with. It’s very clear that Dawkins has never attempted to understand what the Bible is communicating on its own terms. “Evolution disproves God” is comically idiotic.
@@realDonaldTrump420 What do you mean by 'neither of them studied religion'? Alex has a degree in theology. Now, that makes your statement appear flawed in many ways, doesn't it? Who's the fool now? lmao
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
@@kendrickjahn1261 I hope you have a blessed rest of the year but remember if the world gets dark that Jesus is the light of the world and can comfort you in this life and the next. When you repent and Believe in Jesus you will only regret that you didn’t sooner. Romans 10: 13 For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.”
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
@@OneOfEightBillion Nhh no appealing at all just misery forever People underestimate hell, it is bad because it is separation from God. In a vision I was shown a person who claimed to be Christian but started fornication (premarital sex), He died relatively young and went to hell forever (1 Cor 6:9). God’s holiness means He will not coexist with sinners forever therefore Repent (Luke 13:3) and have a relationship with Jesus.
@@OneOfEightBillion The best thing about the Christian God, he gives you what your heart desires. So if you've made up your mind, remember to say exactly what you did to Jesus directly to his face.
Fascinating, thank you Alex, you managed to get more out of Richard Dawkins than any debate, and actually demonstrates the gap between his atheism and his "opponants'" faith, which seems to be more cognitive and in approach rather than intellectual argument.
If using in class, please fact check Dawkins claims about the Midianites story Judges 6 and 7 compared to stories about Jupiter, Apollo and Thor (that he claims is about the same at 48:00-). If one can´t see the difference, one is certainly not into historical analysis. One is most likely based upon history with some spices that were COMMON in that time (1200-1350 BC) in all history writing, with a made up myth story about ancient Gods. Read yourself Judges 6, 7 (shortly: Midianites were in conflict with the Israelites. They lived in the mountains, when they planted crops, the enemy came and tried to destroy it. (quite a normal way to hinder Israelites - the enemy from getting food). God says he will help the Israelites. Then Gideon (Israel) defeats the enemy.) This event may be from around 1210-1350 BC.. in that time all history was written differently than today (which I hope Dawkins knows), so when analysing a text one should take that into account. While one can´t make a 100% objective series of events, the stories most often have a core, on which some spices are added. But in the stories of (Apollo) it is not written as history with some spices, but like this. If Dawkins can´t see the difference, I urge him not to try to claim knowledge in historical writings. Here are myths about Apollo From the DAY he was born, Greek god Apollo led a life of adventure. He was the son of Zeus and his mistress, the Titaness Leto. When Zeus’s jealous wife Hera found out about the pregnancy, she punished Leto, forbidding her from giving birth on land, and sending the deadly Python to chase her away. Leto found refuge on the floating island of Ortygia. Hera then forced Eileithyia, the goddess of childbirth, to prolong Leto’s labor for an agonizing 9 days. Eventually Leto gave birth to twins: Artemis, and her twin brother Apollo. Thus the great Greek god Apollo entered the world, fully grown, carrying a golden sword. The island around him burst into life, filled with lush plants, fragrant flowers and beautiful music. At just four DAYS old, Apollo went on a hunt to avenge the Python who had tormented his pregnant mother. With his handy bow and arrow, he hit the Python and killed it instantly, while the nymphs of Delphi cheered him on. The Python’s mother Gaea, meanwhile, was deeply angered. So much so, she told Zeus to banish Apollo to Tartarus.
@@STR82DVD Exactly my point! Fables are fables, history again is history. And Ancient history is ancient history, and must be read in that way. When Pharao Ramesses attacked the Hittites and it´s king Muwatalli, in Kadesh, the most plausible outcome is that it was a draw. But as Ramesses returned home, he wrote about the war, but depicted himself as a strong hero (who alone on the field slew 100 enemies), and caused a great victory. ** Well this is how history was written back then - real events, the battle at Kadesh, some real data, 4 divisions from the Egyptian side,,, but then as history was written, you add a little spice... the king was alone on the battlefield, slew 100... well that detail was not true, nor the great victory... but the rest is mainly real history. We happen to know this as we also have the Hittites description of the war. When you compare for example how the war with Midianites is described, it is in the same style of (the Egyptian - Hittite war). The fables / myths about Apollo are written in a totally different style, genre, not in a historic way. Even Alex basically points out about Judges, the historical perspective. That is different from let´s say Genesis.
Get early access to episodes, and get them ad-free, by supporting the channel at www.Patreon.com/AlexOC
Ah, shouldn't have used "2 + 2 = 4" as an example there.
Simply because we can be assured of this, as we have the practical applications of mathematics - engineering, technology, physics, chemistry, even finance - and we have machines, in computers, that obey these mathematical rules (and are capable of doing so objectively, without bias or "interpretation"), and it always objectively works out every single time.
And, as a programmer myself, I can also add that whenever it doesn't work out - my code is misbehaving - it always invariably, every single time, results from an error in my logic. I review my code over and over, then I realise my dumb mistake, correct it and then, once my logic is in order, it all just works as intended. And perhaps not everyone experiences that secondary bit of proof, unless they code, but the negation, of course, proves the rule. Every time the logic is sound, it works. Every time it deviates, it fails. Invariably. Every single time. 100%.
My job is to apply mathematics - in this case, logic is a proper subset of mathematics and, admittedly, most of programming is focused on logic primarily, though I do graphics programming which strays into geometry too - and it's just a pragmatic observable truth that every time the logic is sound, it works, and every time it isn't, it fails. No matter the application, that's always 100% true every single time without exception.
Indeed, for me, the reason I know natural selection to be true comes from a completely different place than biology. Genetic Algorithms is where you apply the process of natural selection to a problem and then watch it pragmatically "evolve" an answer for you.
We have a population. We apply a form of sexual reproduction. Throw in a sprinkling of mutation. Select for the best answers. Rinse and repeat. And you can see evolution occur.
And the thing is I would say that I do not "believe" in natural selection, I know it to be a pragmatic fact. Because when I create this mathematical simulation of its principles, evolution is what fall out the other end. And, in this mathematical realm, I know there's no cheating, nothing up anyone's sleeve, as I wrote the code (but, more than that, I can pause the simulation at any point, look at the data and then manually apply the principles myself - do it by hand, with pen and paper - then verify that this is exactly what the simulation is also doing).
This is an isolated mathematical realm. There can be no interference. No cheating. Nothing external can get at it. All that's in that simulation is the principles of natural selection.... and evolution falls out the other end.
Now, of course, this only proves the mathematical truth of natural selection. It doesn't confirm that this is what happened in the natural world for us to reach this point. But, well, knowing that natural selection is a mathematical fact, how could it be any other way? The ingredients are there and you can't escape this principle, as it is written in mathematical law itself, so it can't not be there. And, you know, when you delve into the details that biologists give us, it all 100% aligns with this.
It's an old joke. If you're good at maths, you become a physicist. If you're okay, then a chemist. If you're not good at maths, then become a biologist.
But, humour aside, there's perhaps a truth there that the biologists don't make the mathematical argument. But as an "applied mathematician", this is utterly, utterly convincing to me. Mathematical proof is fact. I don't "believe" in natural selection, I know it to be 100% fact.
Indeed, in science, we have theories and theorems. Very, very few things ever reach the status of "theorem", because they require total mathematical proof. And I guess what I'm getting at is that biologists would say "the theory of evolution", but I'd rather say "the theorem of natural selection"... and, from there, natural selection mathematically proven, how else could the world have ended up this way and, its negation, that with all the ingredients there, it would be impossible to avoid it. You can't turn mathematical principles on and off. If the ingredients are there, which they are, then it must necessarily happen.
In this sense, I sometimes feel that biologists miss a trick, as they are not as mathematically inclined to see that, from my mathematical perspective, there is no "debate" whatsoever. It is mathematically proven. The only room for debate is just the "fine details" of how this species became that species and so forth. But where the biologists deal in those "fine details" and try to build up, from the evidence, to proof that it's true. I start with the principle - in mathematical form - and show it's fact. Then the evidence must necessarily fall into place - which it does (and where it temporarily doesn't, some more examination reveals our mistakes, which it invariably is. But the principle for me is never in jeopardy by this. A pre-Cambrian rabbit would not jeopardise the principle of natural selection, this has to hold. It must be evidence of gods or aliens messing around with our planet. What's off the table, by the mathematics, is that natural selection is wrong).
Perhaps it's just because I have a mathematical mind and that inclination automatically appeals to me. But I do find that the lack of maths disappointing. To me, the perfect route to proof is right there. But biologists don't take it, as they never liked doing sums.
Granted, though, if the goal is to convince a general audience, the biologists are doing it right. Maths doesn't convince people who're not mathematically minded, as they often can't follow it to appreciate its conclusions. But it is, to my mind, the vastly better proof here.
You are appalling scunbag
He would not like to debate much these days.....too many people can see through him....?
Evil is also part of the great scheme of things...."from evil can come sweetless and light."..:Danial......
0:26 I believe that Richard got Ayaan Hirsi Ali wrong here on the reason for why she and he differ…
It’s not that Ayaan isn’t concerned about whether Christianity is true like he is, and she is more focused on morality. But it’s that Ayaan has already got past whether Christianity is true in that she already believes and knows it to be true, so she can move on to how the truth of Christianity has the morals that people in all sectors of the world should adopt for the betterment of mankind because those morals are given by a sovereign and perfectly moral God, and they are therefore true and right and good, and every other belief system/set of beliefs is therefore not moral, right, or good for humanity.
Dawkins on the other hand, is still grappling with whether Christianity is true or not - he wouldn’t see Christianity as moral until he sees it to be true because he already believes in a (good) standard of morality that doesn’t come from a Christian basis (this attitude is outlined in Proverbs 21:2, 16:2, 30:12 KJV, and Romans 2:14-16 KJV).
3:18 & 9:27-10:04 - Well couldn’t/wouldn’t the improbable and implausible reason for life be that the Almighty Creator God spoke into existence all of creation giving it life, and mankind being made dead through the trespasses and sins against God of our ancestor the first Adam, and our own trespasses and sins against God since, and mankind being brought back to life by the death, burial, and resurrection of His only begotten Son who He sent to save us from our sins and the eternal damnation that comes as a consequence of them??
That’s very improbable and implausible to the human mind which is carnal and at enmity with God (Romans 8:5-8 KJV) and is therefore unable to comprehend this spiritual reality (as 1 Corinthians 2 KJV explains).
However, as Dawkins suggested, the reason is likely very probable, and probable that God did do as is said above (as He attests to in His written word which He has gifted us with, The Bible) because that is the truth of how we all came to be, and this truth will by known by each individual as God reveals to them that truth by His Spirit (as 1 Corinthians 2 KJV says).
3:48-4:10 The problem for mankind being that YOU CAN’T become a Christian just by “preferring it as a more comfortable worldview”, and/or one having the ability to “adopt Christianity just because of its social function”…
You can only become a Christian by God electing you to be one - which causes many people (even some professing Christians who don’t believe and/or know that truth) to foam at the mouth because they realise their powerlessness to save themselves and their lives are at the mercy of a God they hate, and a God and faith which they think they can just pick up and drop as and when it’s “convenient” in achieving their selfish agendas, when God commands faithfulness to living unto Him and in His ways continually.
5:43 This ‘suffering built in to the evolutionary system’ that you speak of is not evolutionary, but is the consequence of SIN, passed down from our ancestors, the first Adam - as God explains it to us to be in The Bible.
It's clear Richard has an enormous amount of respect for you as an intellectual Alex. I could honestly listen to you both for hours
Really? I thought he was holding in his frustration with Alex's philosophical questions. I felt like Dawkins was trying to steer the conversation to more of hard science, but Alex kept on reverting.
@@jamqdlaty "a little louder, please!"
Don’t worship these men, their knowledge is just as futile as ours, without divine revelation we wouldn’t even have been here to do these conversations. Jesus changed the world and now we aren’t barbaric animals but we are still sinners and need forgiveness, that is of course if we wish to live in God’s presence for eternity.
@@Bossman21DWrong space to turn off your brain. There is time to delete the comment.
@@davidekdal7190 Don’t be so sure that you aren’t the one without a brain, when I have the Holy Spirit flowing through me I have the wisdom of God and welcome challenges
I love to see Dawkins looking great and sounding so eloquent after his stroke. At his age that could’ve taken him entirely out of the game so it’s great to see he has more in him still at the age of 82
Absolutely agree, it's good to see he's made such a good recovery. Answer to prayer! 😂
'cept for that third button down from top being undone, i'm with you!
it's surely bcuz God is watching over him 😋
prayer to whom? atheist has no God/s ,but themselves. they think their(human's)wisdom is superior than God/s!. hahaha
Indeed, Dog was there, watching him. Probably Apollo. @@john-ic5pz
This is the best I have seen Richard since prior to his stroke. He looks vibrant and full of life and I’m all here for it.
The Alex effect ✊
Stroke?
@@cyberbules3085 Yeah, google it. Was 2016 I think
Rosy red cheeks. Pinched, or an ale with lunch?
Synapses can perform miracles 😊
zero bullshit intro, straight into the interview. For that alone, I appreciate this channel. Great conversation
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363who cares
@@x1ctt According to atheist religion which rejects free will and therefore any kind of personal responsibility and accountability, Why was it not evil when atheist mao zedong did away with 70 million people?
@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 no one says this. You are propping up a false sentiment. Lying, stealing, sexual sins all hurt people. No would says they wouldn't. Your whole point is stupid at the very best.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363Also, who said I want to join this god character in heaven, forever? What are we going to do when we get there?
Lovely conversation and it was great to see Richard in good health both physically and mentally. He obviously enjoys interacting with Alex.
Bursting with health!
Remarkable clarity of thought for his health
Atheism: The religious belief that men can give birth and that it is _liberating_ for women to be sent to hospital by pdf file atheist men in womens only competitions
@@shortscenes9338 and incest and necrophilia and cannibalism, which pdf file atheist prophet richard dorkins condones
One of these days, I hope this atheist will someday learn that God is real before he dies.
I believe Dr. Dawkins is onto something about the universality of science. I’m a physician and I have lost my theistic childhood Christian faith. It’s been a long painful process, but now in my 40s I find a great peace in the natural world. Science, real science, marches on illumination reality and making our lives longer with increasing levels of flourishing. And I’m privileged to have had the education I’ve had.
That's not science that is pseudoscience. Life comes from life not none life. The big bang, abiogenesis and macroevolution is nothing but pseudoscience. Naturalism, scientism same deal.
Well, 1st thing you probably should do is speak with those who work in Hospice, they can probably provide you with info you are not considering. They observe a lot. End of life studies is an actual Science now. There is a Canadian neurologist that has done some amazing work. Approach it as you would any Scientific endevor, with an open mind, and examine the data.
Wow
Very impressive.
If you have reached that level of freedom and peace, you have arrived
Beautiful
👍👍
Qqq@@timorean320
Science doesn’t have the answers on moral questions and when he calls religion evil he is basing that assessment on a religious framework. Evil is a religious term
Alex is definitely someone skilled in the art of ‘Kao wo tateru’ or ‘saving face’. I’ve noticed he never backs people in to a corner, and always gives them room to change their mind if needs be without being triumphant. He was very good at pulling on the thread of some of Richards arguments and gently asking questions that challenged him (quite fairly). Dawkins was very open to accept that Alex made ‘fair points’ and was happy to revisit and expand on them. Very good interview
As much as it annoys people when Alex doesn't steamroll people in these interviews, this is probably why he's having so much success.
But at the same time, he is steamrolling them by not steamrolling them. It's clear from this interview that Alex is so far ahead of Richard on the topic of religion. Richard comes across as lazy and someone who just says something like "well it's ridiculous and not true so who cares".
@@StephenICI'm only at 20 min and haven't seen him "ahead" of Dawkins (whatever that means) up to here. Since I have basically the same position and approach towards religions Dawkins has, it's highly unlikely I will spot any weak spot in Dawkins' view. Can you point me to a more specific point?
@@StephenIC from what I remember (and I’m new to Alex) I think he specifically studied the classic religions. But I remember Dawkins and Hitchins and Sam Harris (the new atheists) in some pretty epic debates with religious scholars. Dawkins was always pretty frank and blunt in what he thought. I actually loved what he said about Jordan Peterson (whilst I agree with Peterson on many things) his Christian ramblings always seemed like BS to me, and I loved Dawkins calling it out. I find Alex much more ingratiating and forgiving in his style, maybe Dawkins ha la had so many of these chats about religion he just can’t be arsed anymore 😂. I like that Alex can gently bring him back around on certain points though without telling him some of his arguments may seem a tad unreasonable
That's because Alex isn't interested in "defeating opponents," he's interested in progress.
Progress comes through understanding people who are different, reaching an understanding with them, even if that understanding is, "We don't necessarily agree on much of anything, but I think you're nice enough," and proposing how to coexist with those opposing ideas.
I was a devout Christian who lost faith at age 25. I was deeply practicing until I was 18, and I gradually drifted. At one point in my life I believed in god just enough to know that I was a bad Christian and that I'd go to hell if I died, but not enough to prompt me to do anything about immediately. At age 25 I stopped believing in hell, and had no concept of death. In Christianity death is but a portal to the afterlife. Without faith, death was just the end of me. My mind couldn't digest the thought of just not existing. I lost sleep for many weeks. I expressed my anxiety to a close friend who told me "You didn't exist for billions of years before you were born, right? You were fine then."
I slept like a baby that night.
Such a shame the cult spread as widely as it did... but it's losing ground now. More and more people are waking up and getting out, despite their efforts to indoctrinate children. Intellect will win out: superstition will wither.
In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
Mark Twain noted this also.
You were a child who was indoctrinated into a sick religion. Glad you are free.
God concept with latest sciencetific findings is out date d why god has created so many injustices among them law of them jungle where survival of the fittest order of the day
Alex, I commend you on conducting an engaging and intellectual discussion while not becoming distracted by that one unbuttoned button on Dawkins' shirt. Mad props.
why did u have to point that out man now i can't stop looking at it...very distracting🤣
He had a stroke so perhaps his dexterity isn't what it once was.
@heyya99 really? I didn't know that, but now that you've pointed it out, I notice the subtle change in speech.
😂😂😂
@@DoomkingBalerdroch maybe the button popped off and went into the gutter
This is the most engaged and thoughtful I've seen Dawkins in an interview in a very long time. You're doing an amazing job, Alex!
Exactly!
Indeed… and brilliant pushback about William Lane Craig and on Dawkin’s flimsy excuse for choosing not to debate him… if Dawkin’s case against God’s existence is so watertight, why not debate Craig and put him to the sword once and for all?.. I think because we all know that Dawkin’s arguments would barely survive the first round…
He's right about the modifiable testament, but not the final one The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha". It's the word Isa PBUH used. Sounds familiar?
Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization.
The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua.
infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name."
jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah )
Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language:
"From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen.
He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown.
"protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22)
𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼
ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي
A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y
א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת
Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic:
ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain
س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining
ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining
ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining
ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining
ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining
The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word.
As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries.
The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate,
Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE).
And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical.
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken?
The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Languages degrade, they do not "evolve". It is a tool for thinking, not communication, it is what separates other lifeforms from humans. The mere fact that translation is even possible underlies a common origin for all languages, orca whales separated from their birth pod are unable to communicate with other whales if they get adopted, they are only able to track the others visually.
Classical Arabic has largest phonemic inventories among semitic languages. It has 28 consonants (29 with Hamza) and 6 vowels (3 short and 3 long). Some of these sounds are rare or absent in other semitic languages. For example,
- Classical Arabic has two pharyngeal consonants /ʕ/ (ع) and /ħ/ (ح). These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic).
- Classical Arabic has two emphatic consonants /sˤ/ (ص) and /dˤ/ (ض) These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic).
- Classical Arabic has two glottal consonants /ʔ/ (ء) and /h/ (ه), which are produced by opening and closing the glottis ). Akkadian has lost the glottal stop /ʔ/, while Aramaic has lost both the glottal stop and the glottal fricative /h/.
- Classical Arabic has six vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, /æ /, /e/, /o/, which can be short or long. Akkadian has only three vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, which can be short or long, while Aramaic has only two vowel phonemes /a/ and /i/, which can be short or long.
|Classical Arabic | 28 consonants, 29 with Hamza and 6 vowels; some consonants are emphatic or pharyngealized; some vowels are marked with diacritics | Complex system of word formation based on roots and patterns; roots are sequences of consonants that carry the basic meaning of a word; patterns are sequences of vowels and affixes that modify the meaning and function of a word | Flexible word order, but VSO is most common; SVO is also possible; subject and object are marked by case endings (-u for nominative, -a for accusative, -i for genitive); verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different moods and aspects |
| Akkadian | 22 consonants and 3 vowels; some consonants are glottalized or palatalized; vowels are not marked | Similar system, but with different roots and patterns; some roots have more than three consonants; some patterns have infixes or reduplication | Fixed word order of SVO; subject and object are not marked by case endings, but by prepositions or word order; verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different tenses and aspects |
| Aramaic | 22 consonants and 3 vowels (later variants have more); no emphatic or pharyngealized consonants (except in some dialects); vowels are not marked (except in later variants such as Syriac) | Simple system of word formation based on prefixes and suffixes; some roots or patterns exist, but are less productive than in Arabic or Akkadian |
"Semitic" is just mumbled Arabic, really. Imagine English with a third of its letters removed and simplified grammar. That's Aramaic, Hebrew, etc. For example, combine T and D into just T; there's no need to have 2 letters. The same goes for k, q, c - they should all be c from now on, etc., etc. Arabic is the only corollary to proto-Semitic. In fact, the whole classification of Semitic languages is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning brain. Hebrew, Aramaic, and the rest of these made-up dialect continua only have 22 letters out of the 29 proto-Semitic letters. Arabic has all 29. The difference between Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as the difference between Latin and pig Latin or Italian. "Phoenician" is an Arabic dialect continuum, and not only that, it is pidgin. It is simplified to the point of stupidity. Anyone with a basic knowledge of Arabic would see this clearly. What happened was that Arabic handicapped "scholars" saw the equivalent of Scottish Twitter spelling, with added mumbling due to phonemic mergers (22 letters, not 29), and mistakenly thought they were seeing a different language."
Let's start with a simple sentence:
## The house is big
Arabic:
البيتُ كبيرٌ
al-bayt-u kabīr-un
Proto-Semitic:
*ʔal-bayt-u kabīr-u
Hebrew:
הבית גדול
ha-bayit gadol
Akkadian:
bītum rabûm
Amharic:
ቤቱ ገደሉ
betu gedelu
As can be seen, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (noun-adjective), the same definite article (al-), and the same case endings (-u for nominative). Hebrew and Akkadian have lost the case endings and changed the definite article (ha- and -um respectively). Amharic has changed the word order (adjective-noun) and the definite article (u-).
But Arabic is not only similar to Proto-Semitic, it is also pre-Semitic, meaning that it is the original form of Semitic before it split into different branches. This is because Arabic preserves many features that are not found in any other Semitic language, but are found in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. These features include:
- The definite article al-, which is derived from the demonstrative pronoun *ʔal- 'that'. This article is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the article n- in Berber and the article p-, t-, n- in Egyptian.
- The dual number for nouns and verbs, which is marked by the suffix -ān or -ayn. This number is rare in other Semitic languages, but it is common in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber.
- The imperfective prefix t- for verbs, which indicates the second person singular feminine or third person plural feminine. This prefix is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the prefix t- in Berber and Egyptian.
- The passive voice for verbs, which is marked by the infix t between the first and second root consonants. This voice is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the passive voice in Egyptian and Berber.
Finally, a more complex sentence: The letter was written with a pen.
Arabic:
كُتِبَتِ الرِّسَالَةُ بِالقَلَمِ
kutiba-t al-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i
Proto-Semitic:
*kutiba-t ʔal-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i
Hebrew:
המכתב נכתב בעט
ha-michtav niktav ba-et
Akkadian:
šipram šapāru bēlum
Egyptian:
sḏm.n.f p-ẖry m rnp.t
Berber:
tturra-t tibratin s uccen
Here, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (verb-subject-object), the same passive voice marker (-t-), the same definite article (al-), and the same preposition (bi-). Hebrew has changed the word order (subject-verb-object), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (ha-) and the preposition (ba-). Akkadian has changed the word order (object-subject-verb), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (-um) and the preposition (bēlum).
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing?
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken?
The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Textual criticism in christianity began when the bible was first translated into european vernavular in the 16th century (was translated into Arabic in the 19th century), it reached a professional level around the 19-20th century and is still ongoing today, In Islam however it started in the first century. Unlike the Quran, the hadith are transmitted oral accounts which were written 2-3 centuries after they happened and even in the canonical collections of Bukhari and Muslim there are several narrations of the same hadith due to some people paraphrasing and others forgetting part of it. Most of the hadith are without context, this is not to take from the value of hadith as in practice it was the first serious endeavor of having authentication of the historical record. The hadith are transmitted by way of chains of narration, x heard from y who heard from z that .... took place, a study of who x, who y, and who z were and whether what they are saying is true by checking what others had said about them and whether they had indeed met those who they are purported to have taken the accounts from began and so the first "peer review" mechanism took place, all before the internet in the 2nd and 3rd centuries fo the hijra, which unlike the christian calendar has been continously kept, the current gregorian calendar for example was first instanced int he year 535 CE by Dionysius Exiguus, the 25th of December in addition for example being the pagan holdiay of the roman deirty 'Sol Invictus' is clearly shown in the "Chronograph of 354", the earliest christian calendar predating the current one, but I digress, the writing down of hadith was forbidden by the prophet himself for the aforementioned issue (people forgetting, paraphrasing, taking words out of context) only the Quran was ordered to have been written and linguistically they are too far apart, it is clear that the Matn of the hadith, the substance or the wording was altered as the language used seems to be more modern in many instances (Arabic had not changed in any significant way since the Abbassids, 1200 years ago sound as "modern" as things written in the last 50 years. Arabic is the oldest continuously spoken language in the world, the only possible corollary, chinese, has script which has no relation to the actual language hence why Japanese and old vietnamese use it, event the script itself was only codified in the 1700s in the kangxi emperor's dictionary. A miracle in plainsight blinded by familiarity).
Hadith for example has several levels of correctness, from Hasan which means "well" to rejected as pertains to the Matn or the substance of the hadith itself, the "isnad" of the Hadith or the chains of transmission / citation also have varying levels from Marfu' meaning quoted without having actually met any of the people in the transmission chain or a second hand account or Mudalas meaning plagarised from another transmitter of hadith without citing and Marfud meaning outright rejected for various reasons,
There is another layer of complexity here called ilm-aa-rijal, the study of the bibilogrophy of those in the chains of transmission themselves and their soundness whether objectively by crosschecking where they lived and whome they met or subjectively by seeing what their peers said about them regarding their character.
Those unaware of the aforementioned would not only have not been allowed to cite hadith it would have been a criminal offense and there are hadith which clearly contradict one another and one ought not be citing hadith without knowing all other hadith from the colossal hadith collections that were written, even the earliest hadith collection, Musannaf Abdel Razaq Al-Sanani ( 137-211H / 744- 827 CE) and Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah ( 159H-235H / 775-849 CE). for instance had over 53,000 hadith with their chains of transmissions included has yet to be translated into English . Yes, Bukhari and Muslim are taken the most correct as they had the most narrow criterion, but an enormous study is required before citing either one of them. Later scholars such an Al-Darqutni show that there were mistakes made. I say later here though he is still over a millennium old this seriousness of scholarship was the first endeavor of its kind in human history, what became today known as university degrees started with the institutions giving "ijaza" or certificate t transmit hadith and talk about it , indeed they are the origins of the University system we know today.
There are texts from the 800's CE debating whether, if one for example were to take a log of wood that was not theirs, make a column out of it and have it as a foundation of a house, later the original owner of the column comes back and demands the log to be retrieved into his custody and refuse monetary compensation ought the judge comply, tear down the structure and give him the log or ought he enforce a monetary compensation. this was 1200 years. Property rights were taken that seriously, you could not simply handwave it and enforce a monetary compensation as that property in question was not attained by proper channels, hence it' s ownership and how much ought be the compensation for it is judicated by its owner and no one else has the right to, not the governor or even the caliph. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia".
This scientific method of studying hadith and jurisprudence was developed and already in practice in the 2nd and third centuries of the hijra (around 800 CE) back when most of europe did not have a written script for their vernacular, enormous encyclopedia such as the 40 volume history of Al-Tabari which, averages 400 pages per volume (and is only one of his works) were written, the only corollary of which in the west would have been the "decline and Fall of The Roman Empire" by Edward Gibbons in the 1700s, considered a watershed, a monument of its time, with a span that would have hardly constituted a volume and a half of Al-Tabari's encyclopedia and written a millennium later.
Jabir Ibn Hayyan (101-199 H / 721-815 CE) the father of chemistry whose theories (distillation, measurement system, oxidaton, nature of substances, etc) remained dominant until the 18th century. and who was the first to elucidate the scientific method said: "The first thing that is required for anyone who seeks the knowledge of chemistry is that he should work with his hands and experiment, for he who does not work with his hands and does not experiment will not attain any degree of knowledge." Ibn al-Haytham (4th century of Hijra), referred to as "the Physicist" in Europe is famous for the first comprehensive scientific book on optics, before his study of optics and perspective paintings were entirely 2 dimensional, a leap after his treatises and works were translated is visible in how paintings became three dimensional, He discovered integral calculus (physicist, mathematician and astronomer who discovered calculus, Newton often references Arabic in his writings for a reason), is even still argued with today the work "The Enigma of Reason" primarily deals with his arguments. regarding the scientific method he said "The duty of the man who investigates the writings of scientists, if learning the truth is his goal, is to make himself an enemy of all that he reads, and... attack it from every side. He should also suspect himself as he performs his critical examination of it, so that he may avoid falling into either prejudice or leniency."
Over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before.. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from the Qur'an. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
What started this cognitive revolution, what started this sharp contrast between before Islam and after it, what started the real Enlightenment of humanity?
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
I left the Mormon church after believing it for 32 years, and I think I'm less afraid of death now than I was as a Mormon. The Mormon church is obsessed with death, and they live their lives planning for it and making sure they're good enough to live with not only God, but their loved ones as well. It's an incredible amount of stress to carry around for your entire life. Leaving the church has made me realize that even though life is still hard, I can just enjoy living, and learning, and spending time with family while I'm alive. A Mormon believes that they will go on to have even more children and create worlds and educate people who didn't believe in God while they were alive, or spend eternity regretting every choice they ever made on earth... But now as an atheist I just think of my eventual death as a well deserved rest.
Hey brother/sister (unsure....) - I am happy that you, too, have finally achieved true and genuine freedom. I mean it when I say that I want to congratulate you: You not only liberated yourself from the shackles of abusive, religious people in power who control the minds of people they brainwash from early age - you also acquired the freedom of thought, opinion and living your life. So happy for you, mate. Welcome to the enlightenment! I wish you nothing but happiness!
@@kiddytube3915 How about you take your delusion back into your own four walls where you can play with it as much as you want and leave this person alone with your dogmatic threats and intimidations? Thanks.
Hi, I just want to send you some greetings. You are not alone. It took me 34 years to exit the same church lol. Those years are not entirely wasted. At least noone can bedazzle me with silly words from a religious text now. And I am quite happy with the decisions I made in the past; some of them were quite healthy. I wish you all the best and I am happy to have read your words!👍👍
@@kiddytube3915 -proof?
-trust me bro 😂
@@RathwulvenBushcraftIt gets better all the time for those that are now allowed to think for themselves. Mark Twain's "Letters From the Earth" is great. Satan writes back to heaven about this thing earth that was made from him and the other angels.
Then, "Oxford Dictionary of The Bible". Abortion is supported in the bible. The punishments were often sacrifice a ram, for sin, and others that sound like a sin,but a different category. Twain quoted the bible in conversation with a preacher who said he wants to emulate God. "So you want to push grandma down the stairs" or some paraphrased action of God, who is a sonuva bitch through the whole thing. BTW, Noah's tale was lifted from the Sumerians 5000 years earlier.
I have been in church since childhood. I have believing parents. Now I am 29 years old and I finally realized that I can be responsible for my life myself. Belief in religion and God in Abrahamic religions brings a lot of evil. How many life decisions my father made and continues to make based on nonsense. But my actions in life are already changing his life, and showing how to live differently.
In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 This is the problem, religious insanity. Quite simply, "god is a mental disease, even worse it is a viral social contagion". It behaves exactly like a mental disease and when coupled as it is, it as dangerous as a viral social contagion. The world will be a better place without god and religion and there is ample evidence of this. This post is another concrete piece of evidence demonstrating this mental disease and the devastating damage it has caused the human race.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 heaven is that what you see with your eyes. You live this life alone. No one is helping you from the no where. Stop telling this nonsense to other People. You Will die and all. Es todo.
@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 No. Absolutely not. You are being a horrible human being, forcing a fairy tale on strangers! WHO ARE YOU TO TELL PEOPLE HOW TO LIVE? HOW DARE YOU!
ATHEISTS MUST STAND UP TO THE SCOURGE OF RELIGION, THE WORST BELIEF SYSTEM EVER!!! GOD DOES NOT EXIST. JESUS DOES NOT EXIST!!!
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 So you have been to heaven? looks like they didn't want you there. lol
Interviewing Dawkins would certainly be an intimidating task for someone so much younger and less experienced, but you’ve handled it well and also kept him engaged.
A great conversation, well done.
The adoration for Dawkins is baffling to me. I know he speaks in a calm and well spoken English accent but people grossly over state his intellectual level. His arguments against religion are so juvenile and bad faith that it seems like he stole them from an angry teenage atheist in an RE class. That’s why Dawkins has been stumped by almost every intelligent religious person he ever debated.
@@dantheman4838 stumped by ridiculousness perhaps.
@@shmick6079 Stumped by logical arguments for believing in a creator. I only recently watched a debate between Dawkins and a scientist named John Lennox, who happens to be religious. I was genuinely shocked by how incapable Dawkins was at logically defending his world views against a scientist more intelligent than himself. I almost felt sorry for Dick.
@@dantheman4838 that was laughable. There is no argument against nonsense.
@@dantheman4838the fact you call all of Dawkins arguments against religion "bad faith" and "juvenile" and claim he was "stumped by every religious person" is so ridiculous it's baffling. Especially when the gullibility required to build your entire world view, society, etc around some unseen, unknown, untouchable 'creator' because soneone else told you to is INCREDIBLY juvenile.
I am a christian, I chose to watch this immediately after your discussion from nine months prior with william lane craig. Admittedly I had reservations against clicking on this video, I am so happy now that I did. You did such an honest interview with william lane craig, asking the most prodding questions against the christian world view but far more respectfully than anyone else I have ever seen, and then did exactly the same toward proffesor dawkins. You have presented the christian arguments in the most honest manner I have ever seen someone who was not themself a christian and this is also the most respectfully I have ever seen professor dawkins respond. Thank you both ever so much for this delightful interview.
We live in a BIBLICAL world, where masons rule and where BAAL - lucifer, the master of masonry is worshipped and praised to this day and CHRIST is rejected by many.
GOD give us different languages, just to stop us from finishing the building of the tower of BABEL.
If the tower of BABEL was never build, the language of man would have stayed the same. /whatever was the language in which mankind speak in those days).
GOD give us languages of different kind, not religions. Man made up religions. Religions are our own fantasies and imaginations.
Therefore, souls, lets seek CHRIST, not religions.
No verse given in bible, which calls us to become “religious”.
Bible has verses which say: REPENT AND BORN AGAIN!
Matthew 3:2
And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
John 3:7
Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
@@theharshtruthoutthere Breathe.
Thanks for showing how these conversations do more to comfort fascists than challenge them. Alex isn't changing minds, he's just platforming a washed up bigot.
@@theharshtruthoutthere Hella brainwashed, fam. Wtf is a mason even? 💀
I would say "politely respond', rather than 'respectfully'. There is no good reason to respect something that has been so harmful historically, and the harm Christianity does today. I am a victim of Christianity, destroying my happiness, both physically and mentally.
I'm a member of the Oxford Union and attend debates every week (was lucky enough to meet Alex last term), and I have to agree that debates there are much more performative than truth seeking exercises. They make enjoyable theatre, but the live audience don't generally care for new opinions or points of view. I also agree with Dawkins on points of information - they are exclusively used for members to interject their own view into a debate which does further add to the performance and detract from the truth seeking.
Once did a Chineses sanctioned tour of a Tibetan monestry and got the monk debate show. Lots of self body slapping. Send a team over, I dont think language or content mean much anyway
I actually disagree with this. I used to think that debated were a waste of time because it's just an argument but conversations like these are only really constructive when you are relatively in the same sphere of thinking and already understand each other. Proper debates with candidates who understand the best arguments for their side and are also seasoned at debating then you can get a pretty good idea of the thought processes behind different points of view and whoever is more convincing tends to be pretty obviously correct logically. This idea that the convincing power of an argument only comes from the theatre of the presentation is rarely true in my experience listening to debates, at least ones that are done correctly and moderated well, etc.
Doesn't the theatre of it speak volumes to 'the truth'? Assuming there is an actual attempt at the thing not just a display of feathers and babbling ego.
He's right about the modifiable testament, but not the final one The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha". It's the word Isa PBUH used. Sounds familiar?
Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization.
The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua.
infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name."
jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah )
Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language:
"From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen.
He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown.
"protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22)
𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼
ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي
A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y
א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת
Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic:
ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain
س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining
ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining
ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining
ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining
ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining
The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word.
As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries.
The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate,
Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE).
And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical.
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken?
The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Languages degrade, they do not "evolve". It is a tool for thinking, not communication, it is what separates other lifeforms from humans. The mere fact that translation is even possible underlies a common origin for all languages, orca whales separated from their birth pod are unable to communicate with other whales if they get adopted, they are only able to track the others visually.
Classical Arabic has largest phonemic inventories among semitic languages. It has 28 consonants (29 with Hamza) and 6 vowels (3 short and 3 long). Some of these sounds are rare or absent in other semitic languages. For example,
- Classical Arabic has two pharyngeal consonants /ʕ/ (ع) and /ħ/ (ح). These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic).
- Classical Arabic has two emphatic consonants /sˤ/ (ص) and /dˤ/ (ض) These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic).
- Classical Arabic has two glottal consonants /ʔ/ (ء) and /h/ (ه), which are produced by opening and closing the glottis ). Akkadian has lost the glottal stop /ʔ/, while Aramaic has lost both the glottal stop and the glottal fricative /h/.
- Classical Arabic has six vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, /æ /, /e/, /o/, which can be short or long. Akkadian has only three vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, which can be short or long, while Aramaic has only two vowel phonemes /a/ and /i/, which can be short or long.
|Classical Arabic | 28 consonants, 29 with Hamza and 6 vowels; some consonants are emphatic or pharyngealized; some vowels are marked with diacritics | Complex system of word formation based on roots and patterns; roots are sequences of consonants that carry the basic meaning of a word; patterns are sequences of vowels and affixes that modify the meaning and function of a word | Flexible word order, but VSO is most common; SVO is also possible; subject and object are marked by case endings (-u for nominative, -a for accusative, -i for genitive); verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different moods and aspects |
| Akkadian | 22 consonants and 3 vowels; some consonants are glottalized or palatalized; vowels are not marked | Similar system, but with different roots and patterns; some roots have more than three consonants; some patterns have infixes or reduplication | Fixed word order of SVO; subject and object are not marked by case endings, but by prepositions or word order; verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different tenses and aspects |
| Aramaic | 22 consonants and 3 vowels (later variants have more); no emphatic or pharyngealized consonants (except in some dialects); vowels are not marked (except in later variants such as Syriac) | Simple system of word formation based on prefixes and suffixes; some roots or patterns exist, but are less productive than in Arabic or Akkadian |
"Semitic" is just mumbled Arabic, really. Imagine English with a third of its letters removed and simplified grammar. That's Aramaic, Hebrew, etc. For example, combine T and D into just T; there's no need to have 2 letters. The same goes for k, q, c - they should all be c from now on, etc., etc. Arabic is the only corollary to proto-Semitic. In fact, the whole classification of Semitic languages is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning brain. Hebrew, Aramaic, and the rest of these made-up dialect continua only have 22 letters out of the 29 proto-Semitic letters. Arabic has all 29. The difference between Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as the difference between Latin and pig Latin or Italian. "Phoenician" is an Arabic dialect continuum, and not only that, it is pidgin. It is simplified to the point of stupidity. Anyone with a basic knowledge of Arabic would see this clearly. What happened was that Arabic handicapped "scholars" saw the equivalent of Scottish Twitter spelling, with added mumbling due to phonemic mergers (22 letters, not 29), and mistakenly thought they were seeing a different language."
Let's start with a simple sentence:
## The house is big
Arabic:
البيتُ كبيرٌ
al-bayt-u kabīr-un
Proto-Semitic:
*ʔal-bayt-u kabīr-u
Hebrew:
הבית גדול
ha-bayit gadol
Akkadian:
bītum rabûm
Amharic:
ቤቱ ገደሉ
betu gedelu
As can be seen, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (noun-adjective), the same definite article (al-), and the same case endings (-u for nominative). Hebrew and Akkadian have lost the case endings and changed the definite article (ha- and -um respectively). Amharic has changed the word order (adjective-noun) and the definite article (u-).
But Arabic is not only similar to Proto-Semitic, it is also pre-Semitic, meaning that it is the original form of Semitic before it split into different branches. This is because Arabic preserves many features that are not found in any other Semitic language, but are found in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. These features include:
- The definite article al-, which is derived from the demonstrative pronoun *ʔal- 'that'. This article is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the article n- in Berber and the article p-, t-, n- in Egyptian.
- The dual number for nouns and verbs, which is marked by the suffix -ān or -ayn. This number is rare in other Semitic languages, but it is common in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber.
- The imperfective prefix t- for verbs, which indicates the second person singular feminine or third person plural feminine. This prefix is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the prefix t- in Berber and Egyptian.
- The passive voice for verbs, which is marked by the infix t between the first and second root consonants. This voice is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the passive voice in Egyptian and Berber.
Finally, a more complex sentence: The letter was written with a pen.
Arabic:
كُتِبَتِ الرِّسَالَةُ بِالقَلَمِ
kutiba-t al-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i
Proto-Semitic:
*kutiba-t ʔal-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i
Hebrew:
המכתב נכתב בעט
ha-michtav niktav ba-et
Akkadian:
šipram šapāru bēlum
Egyptian:
sḏm.n.f p-ẖry m rnp.t
Berber:
tturra-t tibratin s uccen
Here, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (verb-subject-object), the same passive voice marker (-t-), the same definite article (al-), and the same preposition (bi-). Hebrew has changed the word order (subject-verb-object), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (ha-) and the preposition (ba-). Akkadian has changed the word order (object-subject-verb), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (-um) and the preposition (bēlum).
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing?
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken?
The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
The sad truth is so many ppl would rather use a religion or belief system than to be themselves and learn about the human condition
It's not mutually exclusive
Christian here. I just wanted to say that I loved watching you guys and hearing your perspectives. Alex, you have a grace about you that is appreciated in these types of heavy discussions. I hope you never lose that.
Did you listen to anything either one of them said, or just look at their mannerisms?
@@rodneyharrington5049 I did indeed watch the whole thing. I don't take offence since I find them educational.
I completely agree! I’m a Christian as well and enjoy listening to these conversations! I don’t agree with Alex’s conclusions (or Dawkins’) but respect his lines of questioning greatly. And agree that Alex has a certain grace about him in his discussions with others. It deepens my own faith to think through these same questions and I appreciate anyone who delves deeply into these ideas.
Same here from another Christian.,.. I have respect towards Alex!
How can you be a Christian and listen to these discussions and not feel like a complete idiotic fool. No offence intended maybe a bit harsh but It just doesn't really make sense to me how you could listen to pure logic and sense explaining away your beliefs and then go away and still be a theist?
The older I grow, the more I love listening to Richard Dawkins. He's looking so well. Great interview, it's nice to listen to an interviewer who's not intent on attacking him. Thank you.
Dawkins' new atheism is only training-wheels to get off Religion. Then the real work begins. We have observable evidence for one universe fine-tuned for Life. This demands an explanation.
Without pressure, i could see clearly how his logic is flawed. With other theist, all I could see is he attacking others.
Without the attacks, his argument could not even stand by it self.
@@Jocky8807 Not nearly as flawed as your posting.
@@rbaxter286 yeah, they are both very polite.
Several things I am quite disagree with him.
1. hirshi Ali (another famous atheist converted to Christian). He said Ali only convert because Christianity is good at holding the fort for other bad forces (like Islam, etc), but not true.
That is the first time, Dawkins said religion is good at smth. Before he said religion is only bad. (I have to give credit to Dawkins and Alex for saying those words). 👍👍
Then he said Ali only converted to Christianity because it is good, though she believes it is not true. This is Dawkins putting words on Ali's mouth. She never said that. 🙏
2.
3.
@@rbaxter286sorry, I have to write many sections as I have to re-listen what he said. Could not remember all at once. 🙏
#2. Of science. This is the first time, Dawkins said Darwin only solved the theory of narutal selection (which I quite disagree). But, scientists does not have a clue how life began nor how universe began (all evidence seems to point other direction).
Also, now first time I heard it, Dawkins admit earth is probably the only life in universe. Before he said, there must be plenty of life elsewhere (now he said "stupendously improbable" for life to begin elsewhere, a word I have to remember 😂). Though he draws different conclusion from it.
I gave him and Alex credit for that. But, it also show how obnoxious and enmity his view toward a creator was. 🙏
I mean he always presume a creator must be God that demand worship. For scientist, that is not true. Creator is a creator. Somebody design it. The creator does not have to be care about his creation. Earth could a high school project for a super smart alien, that he left in the basement for few years (or few millenia in our time) that he completely forgot about.
So proud of you man. Been watching this channel for years and now you're talking to Richard Dawkins himself. Congrats!
Outside of Biology, Dawkins is a fool. He has lived in a bubble all his life and has no idea of the real world. He praised the warmonger John McCain as a "good man", has "no sympathy" for Julian Assange and supports Israel even as it carries out a genocide. I doubt very much much if Alex shares Dawkins' views on these things.
Alex is twice the man Dawkins is.
@briansmith3791 you really put the fanatic into fan right there.
@@JH-ji6cj it’s not that I’m a big fan of Alex, although I believe he’s concerned with truth. It’s that I’m not a fan of Dawkins ; he’s a good scientist but lives in a bubble and has little idea of the real world.
@@briansmith3791 well, as a 'fan' of Alex myself, calling Alex twice the man of Dawkins because you have a dislike of Dawkins' personality is quite the definition of extreme hyperbole.
I grew up in a very conservative christian church but realized early on in my life that there is something off. I live my life according to morals I was taught by my parents and, a few years ago, a colleague said I must be a very big christian. She was immensely shocked when I told her that I am not. Just because I try to be a good person and live a good life, doesn’t make me a christian. To be a good person is not the exclusive right if christians.
Honestly as a Christian I agree
@@dukedukeson2158 In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 I believe in God and I pray every day. And there is no such thing as being without sin only jesus was without sin, because all humans other than jesus were born with sin it was like that ever since Adam and Eve bit from the fruit. Every human soul in heaven was the soul of a sinners but God will take us in DESPITE our sin God loves us DESPITE our sin, you and I are both sinners all humans are, so don't think yourself better than your fellow man.
@@dukedukeson2158 Make sure as a you are a repentant Christian. Read the Bible daily and pray often throughout the day, the devil is trying to make lukewarm Christians everywhere (Rev 3:16). Join us in spreading the good news of Jesus Christ.
If you tell everyone that you are a mechanic but day in and out, you do the work of an accountant are you truly a mechanic? No, you are an accountant. Likewise, a Christian by name who lives contrary to Jesus’ teachings by living sinful/worldly is not a real Christian.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 I pray every morning before I wake up and before I sleep, I try not to raise my voice and not to use violence, if someone does wrong by me or hurts me I try to forgive them, if someone doesn't agree with me I do not wish them any harm. Tell me how am I not trying to live my life as jesus would want? But even still I am a sinner and so are you.
I don't know if it's something about his complexion or his general demeanor, but Dawkins looks better here than he did a few years ago. You really get the best out of him. Fantastic interview with two of the greatest minds of their respective generations.
I hope he is well for a long time to come. I also hope he realises he must apologise for new atheisms et al thought crime designs considering they scratched the surface of religion before embarking on the total abolition of EVERYONES FREE SPEECH.
I'm quite happy there no big man upstairs to answer to, but Humankind deserves better than this bunch of snidey creeps claiming to want religion stopped for the good, when its really all people being hounded down by thought crimes.
Maybe some of you adoring fanatics will begin to realise whats been going on.
@@cameroncameron2826atheism perpetuated thought crimes? I think you are a bit too deep in mud
@@joshmastiff1128 No.
They are the source of the first ideology thats wanted people put on charges since the witch trails. The fact that new atheisms fanatics did not have the personal wherewithal to realise what it would MEAN to give mobbing consensus to having people shut up by law is a shame. But basically the laws that now prevent christianity from being done as hate speech are leaking into all public parlances = thought crime models for ALL. New atheist fan people really should not have supported it. Thought crime against any X was only ever going to end up hounding every Y down -= ALL OF US.
Personally i simply cannot understand how or why any of the followers of such a creepy and snidey movement could not see they were being taken for a ride by a lab must have known that any ban on thought, be it religious or otherwise would lead to a universal one. Aside from that they even had the brass neck to ban christianity being done in public & allow another majot abrahamic religion to move into its place.
And how many more religious problems have there been even though being a christian in public is now against the law ? - 100 Times worse on new atheisms watch ?
What does it take before the penny drops among new atheist fanatics ?
@@cameroncameron2826What are you on about? Lol
Greatest minds? Lol...Dawkins has been dismissed time and time again....
A really excellent and thoughtful conversation; Alex is growing into an ever more natural and confident interviewer. Well done on asking challenging questions and pushing back - but doing it in a winsome way. Really found this a fascinating dialogue.
Dawkins lost all his credibility with a billion people when he tried to take on astrology. He should have chosen his battles more carefully. If you check the word 'God' on Google trends, you will see that the search has INCREASED since 2004. In other words, Dawkins has not made any effect on the world, neither Harris or the other two horsemen, Hitchens, and all the kings men. All failed in their attempt to destroy religion. They should rather focus on getting religions to tolerate each other. Naive Aries lost the plot 30 years ago.
In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
Keep living a long healthy life, Mr. Dawkins...your voice is SO needed
Why?
@@helencheung2537Why are you SO dense?
I hope he lives a long and healthy life because when he dies he will meet his maker ,he will bow down before our God but it will be to late for him ,unless he repents and accepts Jesus as his Lord and Savior he will spend eternity in Hell ,I pray he will see the light before he dies ,God help him 🙏
Evolution is one of the great evils that we all have to face in the world today. It is very destructive and should not be taught in the educational system. Children are being taught lies and all Christians should draw their children out of public education. When Dawkins talks about the Bible, he doesn't have a clue of what he is talking about. To understand spiritual things you have to be spiritually minded.
@@CatherineJackson-v1lBS there is no God God was created by mankind not the other way around
One of the most kind well spoken people ever "Be a good person and leave the world a better place than you found it" - Richard Dawkins evil hell-bound atheist.
"I am angry at the bad world I created guess I'll drown everyone on the planet other than a handful of people" - God
Hey, I'm a christian. Can I debate with you? This is my first time debating with someone, I just wanted to *try* it I guess. Of course, you can decline 😅
Take the challenge @@efrayen4497
@@efrayen4497I'll convert you
@@efrayen4497 What is there to debate? Whether or not Harry Potter is true?
@@Intamin Well, whether or not you want to debate in good faith I can't tell. Godspeed :)
This was a deeply engaging, yet very easy conversation to listen to. Nobody trying to win the argument for winning's sake, just an honest attempt to find a common ground.
John Lennox destroyed any valid claims made by Dawkins years ago, Its foolishness at this point. Even Ayaan had enough.
@@joseph-jg2ie Rubbish! Dawkins soundly defeated Lennox in a live debate... and then Lennox went away, and, like the chess-playing pigeon, created a straw-man to 'prove' that Dawkins was actually a secret believer and claimed 'victory'!
Lennox is not only wrong, but dishonest!
If only all politicians and "diplomats," who've seem to have lost the artful form of civil discourse and different ideas, to come to a beneficial negotiating stance, then humanity would be that much better and lead to improved social contracts and lives. The direction we're headed in now is the way of WEF, and that can only lead to disaster.
They’re both atheists!! Of course there won’t be any pushback from opposing points of view!
@@rapidrhinos2254 Leave it up to creationist stooges to make up strawman fallacies like a common leftie feminist.
I cannot explain how pleasant it is to listen to two people discussing a topic both while speaking in a super relaxed tone. Mostly cause you respect each other and don't argue loudly, but also you both seem to just have very relaxed styles of speaking.
Yes isn't it a lot of fun new atheism hiding their thought crime models in anti religious tactics before the models are inflicted on everyone & shut down all free speech.
I mean Dawkins is such a gorgeous ultra intelligent genius isn't he.
yes, it's called "Being normal". We're just conditioned by unhinged liberals ranting on TV, devices, the presidential podium, and the NYTs Op/Ed page to expect the worst.
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
I am do happy to see Alex getting to this point in his life. It's been wonderful folowing his journey throughout the years. Congrats Alex! I am a few years younger than you, but God damn (😉) you are one hell of an inspiration.
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 ctrl c - ctrl v demon
@@theocarrie9033 People underestimate hell, it is bad because it is separation from God. In a vision I was shown a person who claimed to be Christian but started fornication (premarital sex), He died relatively young and went to hell forever (1 Cor 6:9). God’s holiness means He will not coexist with sinners forever therefore Repent (Luke 13:3) and have a relationship with Jesus.
Former Christian. Once you step outside, you can never step inside again. The only thing religion does well is community. We all need to connect with people on a deeper level somehow
Yes. Community. Conscious Living. Together.
@@kerlygerlNo. Just community. Religion hinders concious living because ot makes you believe untruths and reject truths because they don't align with religious beliefs.
You will be back. Facts have their limitations and not all things can be articulated by formulas. Good luck to you
You were never a “true” Christian if you “stepped outside.” Sad to see people on here so blind about God almighty
The Abrahamic religions were always something that mankind was going to grow out of. With the coming of the Age of Reason, the writing was on the wall. A good thing, because with rationality came progress. Superstition would never have provided clothing, food and sanitation to this many humans.
Thank you Mr Dawkins for all the light you have shed, even in the darkest corners of the world where you would not expect free spirits to be struggling. We all love you Sir.
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
+
Let’s see how much light he sheds in the hell he doesn’t believe in shall we?
No we don’t!
Alex is an amazing interviewer and it shows especially when he is given an equally bright guest. Very enjoyable listen. Not sure I have listened to a more high-level, vigorous or tough conversation on the utility of religion ever before.
You have no clue who or what Dawkins has done.
It's two atheists in an echo chamber. Silly responses. Truth was already debated with alex and his response was "I don't agree".
@@RD-kz4wr
If you’re claiming that Christianity is “truth” then you have no clue what you’re talking about.
"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool." Voltaire
That was Mark Twain, not Voltaire.
@@domco_i No, the quote is from Voltaire.
The best quote I read in a long time!!!
@@dennyworthington6641 You're right. Mark Twain said something similar, so I mixed things up.
Previously, we ran an article that featured Dr. Merritt’s research into the story concerning Voltaire’s prediction that the Bible would not be read in a century and the use of his facilities as a Bible repository. After running the article, Dr. Merritt came across further evidence verifying this story. This updated edition features eyewitness accounts that Voltaire’s own printing press was used to print copies of the Bible. As Dr. Merritt and I discussed in conversation, the evidence clearly backs up this story to the glory of God.
Often, stories are passed along in Christian circles without having the merits of their veracity examined. At times, the stories are shown to be little more than urban legends. At other times, a story’s facts become even more intriguing than the fictions ascribed to them. Such is the case with the story concerning Voltaire’s prediction that the Bible would no longer be read within a century, and the later ironic use of his home being used for Bible distribution after his passing. Dr. Daniel Merritt offers one of the best-researched defenses for the story’s authenticity that I have read. You are about to read the results of his research. We are all indebted to Dr. Merritt’s scholarship as we shall see, what I believe, to be the hand of God working to prove his Word as faithful despite the cynicism offered by a skeptical world. - Brian G. Chilton
Fascinating conversation. I love that Alex surfaces opposing views with a sense of respect for those views; I mean, he assumes positive intent and is genuinely curious about views he may disagree with. This is the mark of an educated person and also a person who fundamentally respects others. It’s very appreciated.
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents, unbelief etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
What's the difference between a cult and a religion? In a cult, there's someone at the top who knows it's all bs. In a religion, that person has died long time ago.
Nice one! Although I'd still call christanity an abusive cult.
I would argue that people do know what's going on; that religiosity is designed to control people, and they would deliberately create an environment that takes the form of religiosity.
I'm sure there are people who actually believe in religion. But there are others who know religion is full of shit, and use it to gain power.
*_BRILLIANT!!_* 👋👋👋👋👋👋
I wouldn’t doubt the pope being an atheist.. 😂😂
That's crazy 😂
I was born and lived in a eastern European country so I was bread in Orthodox Christianity and I deeply believed in God but around 13-15 I realized God is fictional and felt a huge relief. Living with Christian belief made me miserable, I was afraid of most things, afraid of having a "ungodly" thought , afraid of death and of living in sin. There's so much happiness in a life without any kind of God.
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 yeah you're not gonna change my mind bro, I'd didn't even read it so move on
@@somebody7070 Ok this is coming from a good place
God through the Holy Spirit has shown me several things relating to the afterlife with the purpose of convincing people like yourself. Stuff like Heaven and Hell, Angels, and evil Spirits the Lord Jesus (not worthy at all), a miracle happened to me that saved my life (thank you God) & so much more. I am more than happy to give further details.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Your personal belief in a miracle occuring in your life is not convincing for anyone else and is also not justification for this particular religion having any evidence or truth to it, when you think of the world’s existence outside of yourself. I don’t know what you think you will achieve by attempting to convert atheists in youtube comment sections with anecdotes.
@@galaxychar THANK YOU !!!! SOMEBODY SAID IT 👏👏👏👏
Though I am a Christian, I love Richard Dawkins. I'm very glad to see he has had a very good recovery from his stroke, however many years ago that has been now. Good tidings and wishes from me. Stay healthy and vigilant for the truth.
What make you love Dawkins so much? I think he's a bitter, extremely patronizing and intolerant old man, with what must be some kind of trauma connected to Christianity he have experienced in his life, hat make him extremely hateful and insulting toward anyone with a honest faith in Jesus, and it's clearly not religion, but Christianity that trigger him. I recommend "I Don't Believe in Atheists" by Chris Hedges, that explain very well the phenomena of "New Atheism", and all those people all around on internet in special that just love to behave like school yard bullies, have nothing reasonable or friendly to say, but have as their greatest joy to spew out blasphemy, and considering themselves as great intellectuals because of it. And people like Dawkins and the late Hitchens are the idols of people like that, that suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Anyway, curious to hear what you have to say.
Wow a christian who doesn't issue warnings of burning in hell to nonbelievers is a rarity. Good tidings and wishes to you as well.
@@BloatedHeffa many Christian’s don’t run around telling other people they will burn in Hell.. what I find startling is some atheists push their beliefs upon Christians and do what they claim Christians do.. we all travel through this world by ourselves and must contend with what we believe.. or not and shouldn’t force others to believe what we believe.
You’re not a true Christian
@CidersAndReligiousCrusadeshow is he wrong? His beliefs conform with reality, that isn't a bad start?
As a religious person, it is not just a concern or fear of death. One of my greatest fears is the loss of love, love would be hard to let go of, all your family (spouse, children, parents, etc.) and your friends, the idea that it was all in vain, would be a scary thought, because, love is so good, I would hate to see if disappear...
Great to see a fascinating and intelligent discussion on TH-cam
Proverbs 14:1
Spice level: -minty- Werther's Original
Mint smothered in capsaicin
I'm craving some more spice
@@spiralsausage In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@BaseSixBasics God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
When you pushed back against some of the things Richard said, he admitted you had a fair point and then re-examined his own thought. The difference between this and Christopher Hitchen's approach is why I am much more inclined to listen to Richard. Another great interview Alex.
The latter being a credited scholar with a lifetime of achievement, th3 former being a paid shill for the establishment.
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
19:13 Whenever Dawkins says "bullshit", you know I gotta hit that back button at least once.
All Humans need to repent & Believe in Jesus as their God. Why? Because all Humans have sinned (lied, lusted sexually, stolen, dishonoured parents, unbelief etc). Avoid the fires of Hell (justice of God) and choose Heaven today. Jesus defeated death by rising from the dead. GOD IS HOLY
Terrific conversation...thank you both, Richard and Alex. I was raised in a Catholic household in Chicago, in the 50s. I imagine that experience had much to do with my existential beliefs today. Common sense and moral questions led me to (and I hate labels) Atheism. Discussing religion and politics is next to impossible now, and they seem to be enmeshed with each other. They blend together now, so it seems impossible to debate politics without religion tossed into the mix.
huh. I think athiest morality is absolutely degenerate and repulsive, which hurts because I can't believe in a fairy tale book with a man in the sky.
I also don't see how politics is tied to religion at all, although both are frankly completely missing the point, religion in terms of reality and politics in terms of, well, not actually solving any problems.
You can't trust a politician who tells you how to pray, or a preacher who tells you how to vote. As evidenced by an irrational belief that Trump is God's chosen one.
What do you get when you combine science with politics?
(answer: politics)
What do you get when you combine religion with politics?
(answer: also politics)
Once you realize the truth of this rather sick joke, you'll be less naive about it.
The problem is not that many people may uphold rather silly ideas. The problems start when silly ideas get enforced within a society. You can't do the latter without politics.
All we have to come to terms with our reality is how we interact through our thoughts and perceptions; we think of our intelligence as having some meaning? Then is it possible that it came about without some form of understanding, yet we are so arrogant that we begrudge even that which formed us as having intelligence, nor understanding, even if it is beyond our ability to comprehend it? As for the handing down from primitive ignorant tribes…..well, when you pick up a poisonous insect, isn’t it advisable to be wearing gloves? If our understanding of everything came down to us already prepared, like a Christmas turkey from the local butcher, then there would be no need for science/sifting through the feathers to find some truth? Meaning, perhaps reality has to come to us by garbled ignorance and doubt, for us to sort out?
A tree bears fruit because of its struggles, so does the attainment of knowledge ….
Thank you for this interview. I’ve read several of Richard Dawkins’s books and seen him speak a couple of times. In 1995, when I was 19, I asked Richard Dawkins whether he thought the propensity for humans to have religious faith is an evolved trait. I don’t recall his exact answer, however, I remember feeling disappointed in a somewhat non-committal answer. Ever since then, I’ve looked out for his comments on this matter. Your interview is the very first time that I have heard Richard Dawkins agree that the propensity for religious faith appears to be a characteristic of humans that has evolved through natural selection. It’s taken nearly thirty years but you have inadvertently given me the response I was looking for. Thank you!
Imagine having respect for a child molester like Dawkins
Pretty neat :)
@quenky1Exactly, he used to fudge the answer, perhaps concerned that it appears to validate religion at some level (at least in the eyes of believers). Of course, it does the opposite, and I’m glad to see Dawkins being clear on this topic.
48 years have gone by since Richard wrote the book The Selfish Gene. WOW!!!!!
I'm currently rereading it!
oh shush :( i read it 38 years ago , sighhhh
@@PazLeBon
Feeling old?
He should have spent the last 48 years in prison for child molestation
@@Highlanderz85glad someone finally said im still not over what he done to me to this very day
Regarding life and death and fear of dying I sometimes think back to the film Troy (2004).
While surely not a theological masterpiece I remember Achiles saying:
"I will tell you a secret:
The gods envy us!
They envy us because we are mortal, because any moment could be our last.
Everything is more beautiful because we are doomed.
We will never be here again."
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
I like the speeches in thst movie. And the point of view of eternal life in the opinion of Achilles which is more practical based than spiritual as his story will be told many years after his death.
@@Zodinthara-jo5yi In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 thanks for your message. I'll try to relay to others. ✌️👍🌈now rainbow has a different meaning which I hate as I like it as a symbol of hope, a sign of a coming sunny day. But I am gonna use it anyway and not let the woke make it theirs
@@Zodinthara-jo5yi Make sure as a you are a repentant Christian. Read the Bible daily and pray often throughout the day, the devil is trying to make lukewarm Christians everywhere (Rev 3:16). Join us in spreading the good news of Jesus Christ.
If you tell everyone that you are a mechanic but day in and out, you do the work of an accountant are you truly a mechanic? No, you are an accountant. Likewise, a Christian by name who lives contrary to Jesus’ teachings by living sinful/worldly is not a real Christian.
The fact that Richard said is not his obligation to bring confort to the reality of death is amazing, he demonstrates he is centered and balanced. Also he embraced the idea of pleasure for the collective and not to torture ourselves with the inevitability of our finitude; trying to not be selfish or cynical despite the enigma of the after life. Living with dignity and having the certainty that science works. Cool stuff.
Dawkins said something like your first sentence before. In 'Something for Nothing' Q&A (1hr39m), he answered a question on "the belief in God of people who are suffering, hanging on to life with their fingertips...", by saying, "Who cares what you feel like, who cares what feels good, who cares what makes you feel comforted, who cares what helps you sleep at night, what matters is what's true". Not so cool, i would think.
@@briansmith3791Doesn't matter if it's not cool, whether something exists is only determined by whether it's true, it's not the job of the person who argues that it isn't true to comfort those who are uncomfortable with such an idea. Feelings are personal so it is up to the person with the feelings to figure out how to find comfort with the truth. A pretty simple way is to practice awareness and to sit with the idea for an extended period of time. It will become comfortable enough evemtually
@@briansmith3791There is no life after death. Souls are only in your head and in the minds of those who took the time to put you in their memory because you effected them. 10 commandment are BS. You only need 3 rules. 1) don't hurt anybody, 2) help whoever you can whenever you can 3) have fun
@@rorybessell8280 God doesn't exist and never has. Jesus was real but not divine, so Christianity is a farce. Secular atheist Democracies are more Christian than America. American Christians seek revenge and their leader says he has never asked for forgiveness because he has never done anything wrong. Grabbing women by the pussy is allowed when you're a star, and Christians agree.
@@dthomas9230 Loved the 3 rules bit. I would perhaps try to add a fourth one: seek love in whatever you do and in the people that surround you.
Wow! This is an amazing conversation on a variety of levels. Congratulations!
TLC present!
Absolutely loved it. Thank you for bringing him on Alex.
Interesting, your comment was posted within 15 minutes of an hour long talk. Do you listen 4x speed so they sound like chipmunks? But YT only allows 2x speed. Or did you just not watch it?
'In 75 years, avowedly genocidally atheistic Communism was responsible for 100 million deaths.'
"The Black Book of Communism" (Harvard Univ. Press)
'WWI & WWII & 20th century wars combined caused the death of 158 million people.' ("Encyclopedia of Wars, Vols. I-III" )...
NONE of the principals of those wars had even a tincture of religious fervor in advancing their plans; Churchill/Roosevelt/Hitler/Stalin/Tojo/Wilhelm/Clemenceau/George/Wilson....
WTF!? The Bible can't be relied upon for a tenth the deaths caused by secularism in the 20th century ALONE?!?
But it certainly is guilty of licensing the smarmy, supercilious, oh so sexy self-aggrandizement of "New Atheism",
and that eats sh%tt
@@forgetaboutit1069he already knew he was gonna love it, it’s Richard Dawkins!
@@danielmcfarland-lawson6477 sure but at least be honest when you fanboy regardless of what is actually said
@@forgetaboutit1069 I've checked; 4x speed isn't enough for chipmunk pitch.
WE ARE ETERNAL. I am 86 and I have compressed my thinking about life and existence in a small poem that I composed some 50 years ago. Before I show you my poem I like you to know that I admirer you for your extraordinary preparation, intelligence and a sense of realism about the fantasies of religions. The title of my poem is : REALITY, HUMAN AND OTHER, PLUS ETERNITY : I have been the sky, I have been the sea, I have been the wind and I have been the tree. This is why I know that I was, that I am and that through the atoms of my body, in an unlimited number of forms and millennia, I will always be. WE ARE ETERNAL !
In a meta way, this interview is still happening. Wonderful episode, loved every minute!
haha, jp is a funny guy
It's still vigent after millennia for a good reason:
- Don't eat animal grease (cholesterol) Leviticus 7:23
- Don't eat scale-less fish (mercury) Deuteronomy 14:10
- Don't marry close relatives (genetic issues) Leviticus 18:6
- Don't eat pork (trichinosis disease) Leviticus 11:7
. Don't eat vermin (rabies, plague, etc) Isaiah 66:17
- Stay away from the dead (contagion) Numbers 19:11
- Wash with running water (pollution) Leviticus 15:13
- Bury human waste (cholera) Deuteronomy 23:13
- Avoid seminal emissions (STD's) Leviticus 15:16
They didn't know why they ought to obey these things and they didn't have the technology to come up with them, they just were told to avoid them, despite that other cultures did and enjoyed such things because they made more sense to them than invisible issues, which caused them to think that they were a weird and probably superstitious people. And the experience they had when they were told to obey these things was so powerful, that they did not only obey them, but they also taught their descendants to obey them too for millennia, until relatively recently it was known why. For other comandments given to them, things like quantum physics still remain a mistery, however the predicted things coming to be all at once today just corroborate more. He who commanded these things to them definitely knew more, before and better than anyone else. And the ones that thought themselves to be wiser paid the price, it was their choice.
For the short remainder of my conscious day, the archetypes portrayed in this interview will constitute the metaphysical substrate of my ethos.
@@milesprowrweak 🥱. It's just being observant and seeing patterns. Results based learning. Horrible reasoning imo.
@@ericreed4535 You're just coping, I can tell by the emote. If you were right, then a lot of people wouldn't had passed away for millennia because of ignoring these things. Like, not too long ago, when people didn't wash their hands in hospitals, before the microscope was invented; before Mendel's discoveries (a catholic friar btw), etc. So, no, can't deem any reasoning as being horrible if we don't reason at all. Proof > rhetoric.
Not by Christian definition, I have always found Richard Dawkins to be such a graceful gentleman. His intellect and intelligence are gigantic. To possess and have developed such an amazing, advanced capacity to think in so many forms including rationally, analytically, scientifically, creatively, and yet maintain such humility is remarkable. He is beyond a national treasure and more a great asset to humanity itself.
Dawkins may be some of the things you mentioned, but he lacks the vital quality of compassion. In 'Something from Nothing', in answer to a question on " the belief in a God of many suffering people on Earth, who are clinging on to Life with their fingertips", Dawkins replied, " who cares....." (1hr 39mins).
Well, he is right on that score...who DOES care? And how is it shown? The world as it is tells me that people actually ONLY care about domination and destruction. That is Christian? @@briansmith3791
@@briansmith3791 I would love to see this in context and see what he actually meant to answer with "who cares", because this seems a little too much like failure to interpret what is being said correctly. But I don't know what video you might be talking about - when you say _In "Something from nothing",_ is that the name of the video?
@@robsku1 Yeah, 'Something from Nothing' is a TH-cam video of a talk with Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins. Q&A 1hr 39mins.
He’s a petty brain-dead a-hole.
Wow. That "laws of literature" thing (which i guess you were using to describe an error of thinking, perhaps a flaw in logic, or what did you call it: a categorization error) that was pretty brilliant
Christian here. I enjoy listening to these two intellectuals. I think it's my duty to expose myself to different ideas and think them through.
I have to say that at minute 25:00 - Dawkins is mistaken. Jesus, according to NT, knew that he was going to die because he address this issue multiple times with his desciples. At one time He says "No one takes my life from me. I give it up willingly! I have the power to give it up and the power to receive it back again, just as my Father commanded me to do." John 10:18 . So, I believe he knew He was about to die and He was willing to die. That's why we see love in that message. To give your life for others is the most powerful message.
Cheers.
In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” - Matthew 7:3-5
I would willingly die on a cross like JC to end war and world hunger if I could get a deal lick JC where I would be guaranteed to be back sipping wine with my friends in three days time and straight off to Heaven a few weeks later.
Christians make such a big deal about JC dying on a cross. It was nothing , the guy had a bad weekend. Plenty of ordinary people have much more suffering than that.
And think about it , JC died on the cross to save you..Save you from who?
Save you from himself. How ridiculous is that.
All religion is bullshit.
@@Helen-Spires sorry, coming to what understanding?
@@Helen-Spires Hey man we live by faith , if you falll away you will go to hell so please don't deny Jesus. Jesus loves you and wants to save you from the fiery pit
God through the Holy Spirit has shown me several things relating to the afterlife with the purpose of convincing people like yourself. Stuff like Heaven and Hell, Angels, and evil Spirits the Lord Jesus (not worthy at all), a miracle happened to me that saved my life (thank you God) & so much more. I am more than happy to give further details.
On Jordan Peterson: I think it's usually the case that people genuinely believe what they say they believe. But it's just so hard to take Peterson seriously when he talks about religion. It's so two faced. To me, he desperately sounds like an atheist who won't outright lie, but is committed to not losing his conservative base - but you could probably come to the exact opposite POV. It would never happen, but it'd be immensely fascinating to have an honest conversation with him.
I've seen Peterson's talks harm young men and make them bitter....he is not talking from faith.
Your wish is granted
@@luisgustavo6117 God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Your emotional manipulation and your threats won't work on me.
Have a good day!
@@luisgustavo6117 Jesus loves you and wants to save you from the fiery pit
inventor of the word "meme" decades before its common usage. legend
One of the lesser achievements.
Really? Wow, I had no idea!
In 1976, The Selfish Gene.
Woke is a meme, and being atheist makes Richard Dawkins firmly part of the woke mob the right hate so much. I think he may be getting older and grumpier and possibly a little senile. It happens to us all eventually.
The fact he invented would by definition mean he used it before it became common.
'Invented the wheel before people had cars - bravo!'
I always enjoy your conversations/interviews with Richard Dawkins. He has always been correct in stating that the question of God existence is not only a scientific question but a very important. This cop out that religion has traditionally been given as being completely outside the domain (or 'magisterium') of science is ridiculous,, given the implications of the claim that an omnipotent deity is responsible for the universe and everything in it.
Not really is god is immaterial to some degree than it would be beyond the remit of science.
Glad you added magisterium "if you've ever seen, or read the Golden Compass, most religions would consider it, absolutely Utopia, if the magisterium ruled absolute control, and making sure the general populace is not given the burden of actually thinking for themselves and weighing independent evidence.
Dawkins had his chance against William Lane Craig but brave Sir Richard ran away. Rowan Williams also took him apart as did Keith Ward and John Lennox.
@@TBOTSS I need to watch those. I’ve only ever seen him play with believers. It’s never even close.
@@TBOTSSYou got that wrong. Those buffoons gave zero credible evidence. You are clearly way down the rabbit hole.
The question of immortality is an interesting one. I had a missionary come to my door one day, and he didn't take long to find that I am an atheist. He then asked me that I did not want to live eternally once I died on Earth. I asked him if he had really thought about what that would mean. For me that would be a dreadful occurrence as what would I do for all that time? Sometimes it is enticing to think that to NOT have something in normal life would be a huge gift after life. But one has to be careful about what one might wish for.
1) damn, Alex: ❤️ you’re GOOD
2) you asked an icon the questions we all had on our mind. You also brought out a side of Dawkins I’ve never seen and I think it was so real and productive. Not a debate or celeb podcast or big name talk in a huge arena somewhere. Just sitting at a table, with 10 slices of a tree between you and some curious art on the walls.
3) I read the god delusion like many others ten+ years ago but yeah… I mean it had a certain arrogance to it. I’m not sure it did atheism any favours? Forget atheism even. I guess a certain disdainful tone from the position of rationalism. I’m not sure it’d have been written this way in 2024.
4) I’ve been thinking about the tone of Dawkins message and truth for many years. And this is the conversation I wanted to hear to see how he talks about his beliefs (which I agree with) now. So thanks Alex. And love this podcast. A lot.
5) Dawkins: what would we do without this guy. Hero.
6) love the fact his third button isn’t done
7) whose place was this shot in? Fascinated by the artwork tbh.
Then do not tell me this is not a sick cult with godless ass kissers and godless alone trash people that are so obsessed with what other believe and the reflection of other people believe. No respect for those sick godless people.
For Real? What kind of stupid empty cult is this nothing offer nothing gives, but empty BS? As God really cares about what you think and your stupid philosophy empty words as godless alone trash person (anyone who deny God is a godless alone trash person)… Another reason none can respect you, you are a lier as any modern Goddenier.. And we hope the next generation will be better then you and forget about you and your empty stupid worthless atheism not even worst to clean my ass. … you are just empty like it.
Then why only godless alone trash people are obsessed with hell, while we are not? Another reason to do not be like them, and live with this constantly fear… What idiots!
For really you did not get those empty Videos where godless alone people
constantly talk about God, showing their obsession, are made not to
help anyhow your godless alone life but to trap you into this empty
stupid cult called atheism they know we live in the time of stupidity
and godless trash people so they need to capture them as more as they
can.
They know you are the most stupid, weakest and alone people in
the face of earth and they need to take advantages on you. They know you
run anytime you see godless ass to kiss it. That what this empty BS
cult atheism make you be, without God and without dignity. But let see
how you are in trapped in this cult: Let see how many godless rats are
here with their empty words and life, just as their cult called atheism.
Why? Why Godless alone trash people want see the existence of God
when it is clear that if they and all the things they see around (earth,
stars, planets and so on) if they are creation something must created
them. For real no respect for those godless blind trash people. God is
what they do not know have and do not know in their miserable alone
trash life. But God will take care about them as well, once death as
anyone alse. Let's hope we will have better generation that those
godless alone trash one.... We really do not need this empty and
worthless cult called atheism and those modern godless alone idiots who
thinks God cares to exist what those poor alone people think about him.
No respect for them and their miserable godless alone life. (they are
also godless ass kissers, as they run anytime they see a godless alone
person... that what happen when you do not have God in your life, you
lose your dignity, and you start to be disgusting in that way)... Oh
anyway when you stopped to believe in God something died on you but you
are so pathetic that you are not willing to admit it (right?). What
trashy people without shame they deny their creator, and they will be
judge for it.... Liars ad patetich as any Goddeniers. so their worthless
empty life without him.... They are even the weakest people, because if
they are wrong, they are the ones who will pay for denying God... Won't
be in their shoes. No respect for them....
I told you this godless
is the worst generation (those people are just empty and worthless as
the cult they are in), and when it will be gone with their stupid
empty, worthless atheism that does not going anywhere, that do not offer
or teach anything, none will complain about it, not even those very
weak losers!!!!! ... Do not call them atheist but godless alone souless
trash. Let's forget about those worthless empty people and their
worthless and empty cult do not even good to clean the dirtiest motel.
WHEN YOU WILL BE GONE NONE WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT YOU AND YOUR STUPID CULt
CALLED ATHEISM. You are the worst of people, no respect for you:...
those are juss godless alone trash people, liers as any Godeniers with
less thing sacred in their miserable alone godless life… those weak
people are so weak and alone that they wait for an empty videos from an
obsessed godless person to kiss his ass, disgustingly (no God, No
Dignity) it would not change their life, actually more alone and empty,
(they do not even have a real community) empty life they live empty shit
they are in like this stupid cult called Atheism! No respect for them.
(They are very weak, empty and frustrated people, a life that none will
accepted, but those godless alone trash idiots).. those who say there is
no God will pay for it, soon or later... No won't be a godless alone
trash person into an empty cult not even good for my ass such atheism,
that offers them nothing. But emptiness and lonlyness for their
miserabile godless alone life. No respect for them. They are just empty
as their cult called atheism. But they will pay this soon or later, and
all the emptiness for nothing they are facing in their ridicolous
miserable alone life! It is time to throw on the trash empty atheism and
godless alone trash people, they are not even worthless to clean shit.
You can not respect them and their emptiness! It is over for you, trash
is not even good to clean you of all this atheism BS. No respect for
you. Let's really hope we can have a better generation and forget this
godless alone trash one as quickly as possible. IT IS OVER, it is time
for you and this nosense called atheism to go back from the nothing you
come from. No respect for you. You will pay all this shit, soon or
later...
Today I will put your BS atheism in the toilet and flash it
and you godless alone will shut up, ok? You are worthless and empty as
your stupid cult. No respect for you.... This is the worst, weakest,
empty generation, and when it will be over with their stupid empty cult
called atheism none will complain it. IT'S IS OVER, godless alone
trash.... Those godless alone poor people are playing with the fire, and
they will pay for it, and even badly........
They are so
desperate and frustrated in and empty stupid life... No sorry for you.
Let's hope in the next generation, let's hope in a better generation,
and let's forget this one and trhow it on the trash with their stupid,
nosense cult called atheism that will lead them anywhere. No respect for
you again..... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GODLESS ALONE TRASH PEOPLE AND
YOUR EMPTY STUPID ATHEISM NOT EVEN GOOD TO CLEAN THE DIRTIEST TOILET IN
THE WORLD... You got no peace over there (and if God is real you will be
and are f.... up.. You godless alone people are so weak).........
God
will care about you as well, poor person.... (you life is more
miserable and empty without God, but you are so patetic to realize it).
NO respect for you and your empty cult called atheism....... You are
just frutrated,obsessed, miserable, alone godless person that does
deserve any kind of respect, just to be so. (Lier as any
Godenier)....... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GUYS, YOU AND YOUR STUPID EMPTY CULT
ATHEISM That does not even deserve my piss….. all this just show how much those godless trash people are frustrated (to do not have what people have sacred and holly) no respect for them. it is time to throw away that empty BS cult called atheism that does not explain anything and it is not even good to clean the dirtiest toilet. Godless alone trash people, liars as an any Goddenier, dishonest and the worst and stupidest generation ever had. Let’s froget about this godless trash worthless generation and waiting for a better one. (By the way you will be judge as anyone alse once death by God, do not think you will escape because you deny him, as a godless alone rat as you are (You are also a disgusting godless ass kisser, that anytime you see a godlesss ass you run to kiss it. because you got no God and no dignity in your miserable godless life) NO RESPECT FOR YOU (your life is more empty and miserable without God, but you are the only fool to do not get it… WHY?)... this godless alone trash generation is the worst... Let's hope we can forget about them and have a better one. No respect for them and their stupid empty cult called atheism...... Godless weak people (you are weaker now and later ponce you will confront God, no matter what you sick people think about him)........... They do not deserve any respect, with their godless alone trash family who raised so trashy and sick to deny God. (and they will also pay fgor it, soon or later......... They got No God and no Dignity... something dies inside them when they stop to believe in God, but their are so patetic to admit... Soon or later they will stop to write empty shit on youtube about what we believe... Why? They are very weak, and quickly to change their mind about God... they are worthless people just like their empty atheism... but surelly they can not call theirselves atheists, but godless alone weak trash people. No respect for those liers or disgusting godless desperate ass kissers.... /they need to slpit on their dirthy mouth every morning as they deny God... but they are deceiving none but themselves, as they will paid for it, and be judge by God once death as anyone alse. (So it is better to be a son of God,m that a godless alone weak person).
It is time to theow on the trash atheims (where it belong) and forget about this generation (have better people then them). God will take care about them as well, and I won't be in the place of those godless weak alone people and disguasting godless ass kisses...... They lost any dignity, denying God, no doubt about that.........
Apparently there are millions of Christian atheists. Disciples of Christ's wisdoms, but don't believe in the need for a daddy in the sky.
I would assume this was Dawkins home, the unusual art, the scattered nature yet slightly bland but also with African influence. Just feels like more Dawkins but tbh I wouldn't have guessed either if I was to imagine in my mind.
@@loodlebop Then do not tell me this is not a sick cult with godless ass kissers and godless alone trash people that are so obsessed with what other believe and the reflection of other people believe. No respect for those sick godless people.
For Real? What kind of stupid empty cult is this nothing offer nothing gives, but empty BS? As God really cares about what you think and your stupid philosophy empty words as godless alone trash person (anyone who deny God is a godless alone trash person)… Another reason none can respect you, you are a lier as any modern Goddenier.. And we hope the next generation will be better then you and forget about you and your empty stupid worthless atheism not even worst to clean my ass. … you are just empty like it.
Then why only godless alone trash people are obsessed with hell, while we are not? Another reason to do not be like them, and live with this constantly fear… What idiots!
For really you did not get those empty Videos where godless alone people
constantly talk about God, showing their obsession, are made not to
help anyhow your godless alone life but to trap you into this empty
stupid cult called atheism they know we live in the time of stupidity
and godless trash people so they need to capture them as more as they
can.
They know you are the most stupid, weakest and alone people in
the face of earth and they need to take advantages on you. They know you
run anytime you see godless ass to kiss it. That what this empty BS
cult atheism make you be, without God and without dignity. But let see
how you are in trapped in this cult: Let see how many godless rats are
here with their empty words and life, just as their cult called atheism.
Why? Why Godless alone trash people want see the existence of God
when it is clear that if they and all the things they see around (earth,
stars, planets and so on) if they are creation something must created
them. For real no respect for those godless blind trash people. God is
what they do not know have and do not know in their miserable alone
trash life. But God will take care about them as well, once death as
anyone alse. Let's hope we will have better generation that those
godless alone trash one.... We really do not need this empty and
worthless cult called atheism and those modern godless alone idiots who
thinks God cares to exist what those poor alone people think about him.
No respect for them and their miserable godless alone life. (they are
also godless ass kissers, as they run anytime they see a godless alone
person... that what happen when you do not have God in your life, you
lose your dignity, and you start to be disgusting in that way)... Oh
anyway when you stopped to believe in God something died on you but you
are so pathetic that you are not willing to admit it (right?). What
trashy people without shame they deny their creator, and they will be
judge for it.... Liars ad patetich as any Goddeniers. so their worthless
empty life without him.... They are even the weakest people, because if
they are wrong, they are the ones who will pay for denying God... Won't
be in their shoes. No respect for them....
I told you this godless
is the worst generation (those people are just empty and worthless as
the cult they are in), and when it will be gone with their stupid
empty, worthless atheism that does not going anywhere, that do not offer
or teach anything, none will complain about it, not even those very
weak losers!!!!! ... Do not call them atheist but godless alone souless
trash. Let's forget about those worthless empty people and their
worthless and empty cult do not even good to clean the dirtiest motel.
WHEN YOU WILL BE GONE NONE WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT YOU AND YOUR STUPID CULt
CALLED ATHEISM. You are the worst of people, no respect for you:...
those are juss godless alone trash people, liers as any Godeniers with
less thing sacred in their miserable alone godless life… those weak
people are so weak and alone that they wait for an empty videos from an
obsessed godless person to kiss his ass, disgustingly (no God, No
Dignity) it would not change their life, actually more alone and empty,
(they do not even have a real community) empty life they live empty shit
they are in like this stupid cult called Atheism! No respect for them.
(They are very weak, empty and frustrated people, a life that none will
accepted, but those godless alone trash idiots).. those who say there is
no God will pay for it, soon or later... No won't be a godless alone
trash person into an empty cult not even good for my ass such atheism,
that offers them nothing. But emptiness and lonlyness for their
miserabile godless alone life. No respect for them. They are just empty
as their cult called atheism. But they will pay this soon or later, and
all the emptiness for nothing they are facing in their ridicolous
miserable alone life! It is time to throw on the trash empty atheism and
godless alone trash people, they are not even worthless to clean shit.
You can not respect them and their emptiness! It is over for you, trash
is not even good to clean you of all this atheism BS. No respect for
you. Let's really hope we can have a better generation and forget this
godless alone trash one as quickly as possible. IT IS OVER, it is time
for you and this nosense called atheism to go back from the nothing you
come from. No respect for you. You will pay all this shit, soon or
later...
Today I will put your BS atheism in the toilet and flash it
and you godless alone will shut up, ok? You are worthless and empty as
your stupid cult. No respect for you.... This is the worst, weakest,
empty generation, and when it will be over with their stupid empty cult
called atheism none will complain it. IT'S IS OVER, godless alone
trash.... Those godless alone poor people are playing with the fire, and
they will pay for it, and even badly........
They are so
desperate and frustrated in and empty stupid life... No sorry for you.
Let's hope in the next generation, let's hope in a better generation,
and let's forget this one and trhow it on the trash with their stupid,
nosense cult called atheism that will lead them anywhere. No respect for
you again..... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GODLESS ALONE TRASH PEOPLE AND
YOUR EMPTY STUPID ATHEISM NOT EVEN GOOD TO CLEAN THE DIRTIEST TOILET IN
THE WORLD... You got no peace over there (and if God is real you will be
and are f.... up.. You godless alone people are so weak).........
God
will care about you as well, poor person.... (you life is more
miserable and empty without God, but you are so patetic to realize it).
NO respect for you and your empty cult called atheism....... You are
just frutrated,obsessed, miserable, alone godless person that does
deserve any kind of respect, just to be so. (Lier as any
Godenier)....... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GUYS, YOU AND YOUR STUPID EMPTY CULT
ATHEISM That does not even deserve my piss….. all this just show how much those godless trash people are frustrated (to do not have what people have sacred and holly) no respect for them. it is time to throw away that empty BS cult called atheism that does not explain anything and it is not even good to clean the dirtiest toilet. Godless alone trash people, liars as an any Goddenier, dishonest and the worst and stupidest generation ever had. Let’s froget about this godless trash worthless generation and waiting for a better one. (By the way you will be judge as anyone alse once death by God, do not think you will escape because you deny him, as a godless alone rat as you are (You are also a disgusting godless ass kisser, that anytime you see a godlesss ass you run to kiss it. because you got no God and no dignity in your miserable godless life) NO RESPECT FOR YOU (your life is more empty and miserable without God, but you are the only fool to do not get it… WHY?)... this godless alone trash generation is the worst... Let's hope we can forget about them and have a better one. No respect for them and their stupid empty cult called atheism...... Godless weak people (you are weaker now and later ponce you will confront God, no matter what you sick people think about him)........... They do not deserve any respect, with their godless alone trash family who raised so trashy and sick to deny God. (and they will also pay fgor it, soon or later......... They got No God and no Dignity... something dies inside them when they stop to believe in God, but their are so patetic to admit... Soon or later they will stop to write empty shit on youtube about what we believe... Why? They are very weak, and quickly to change their mind about God... they are worthless people just like their empty atheism... but surelly they can not call theirselves atheists, but godless alone weak trash people. No respect for those liers or disgusting godless desperate ass kissers.... /they need to slpit on their dirthy mouth every morning as they deny God... but they are deceiving none but themselves, as they will paid for it, and be judge by God once death as anyone alse. (So it is better to be a son of God,m that a godless alone weak person).
It is time to theow on the trash atheims (where it belong) and forget about this generation (have better people then them). God will take care about them as well, and I won't be in the place of those godless weak alone people and disguasting godless ass kisses...... They lost any dignity, denying God, no doubt about that......... No respect for them..... The worst generaration, the weakest one (they got no God and No dignity)...
@@dominicmacdonald-wallace6851 Then do not tell me this is not a sick cult with godless ass kissers and godless alone trash people that are so obsessed with what other believe and the reflection of other people believe. No respect for those sick godless people.
For Real? What kind of stupid empty cult is this nothing offer nothing gives, but empty BS? As God really cares about what you think and your stupid philosophy empty words as godless alone trash person (anyone who deny God is a godless alone trash person)… Another reason none can respect you, you are a lier as any modern Goddenier.. And we hope the next generation will be better then you and forget about you and your empty stupid worthless atheism not even worst to clean my ass. … you are just empty like it.
Then why only godless alone trash people are obsessed with hell, while we are not? Another reason to do not be like them, and live with this constantly fear… What idiots!
For really you did not get those empty Videos where godless alone people
constantly talk about God, showing their obsession, are made not to
help anyhow your godless alone life but to trap you into this empty
stupid cult called atheism they know we live in the time of stupidity
and godless trash people so they need to capture them as more as they
can.
They know you are the most stupid, weakest and alone people in
the face of earth and they need to take advantages on you. They know you
run anytime you see godless ass to kiss it. That what this empty BS
cult atheism make you be, without God and without dignity. But let see
how you are in trapped in this cult: Let see how many godless rats are
here with their empty words and life, just as their cult called atheism.
Why? Why Godless alone trash people want see the existence of God
when it is clear that if they and all the things they see around (earth,
stars, planets and so on) if they are creation something must created
them. For real no respect for those godless blind trash people. God is
what they do not know have and do not know in their miserable alone
trash life. But God will take care about them as well, once death as
anyone alse. Let's hope we will have better generation that those
godless alone trash one.... We really do not need this empty and
worthless cult called atheism and those modern godless alone idiots who
thinks God cares to exist what those poor alone people think about him.
No respect for them and their miserable godless alone life. (they are
also godless ass kissers, as they run anytime they see a godless alone
person... that what happen when you do not have God in your life, you
lose your dignity, and you start to be disgusting in that way)... Oh
anyway when you stopped to believe in God something died on you but you
are so pathetic that you are not willing to admit it (right?). What
trashy people without shame they deny their creator, and they will be
judge for it.... Liars ad patetich as any Goddeniers. so their worthless
empty life without him.... They are even the weakest people, because if
they are wrong, they are the ones who will pay for denying God... Won't
be in their shoes. No respect for them....
I told you this godless
is the worst generation (those people are just empty and worthless as
the cult they are in), and when it will be gone with their stupid
empty, worthless atheism that does not going anywhere, that do not offer
or teach anything, none will complain about it, not even those very
weak losers!!!!! ... Do not call them atheist but godless alone souless
trash. Let's forget about those worthless empty people and their
worthless and empty cult do not even good to clean the dirtiest motel.
WHEN YOU WILL BE GONE NONE WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT YOU AND YOUR STUPID CULt
CALLED ATHEISM. You are the worst of people, no respect for you:...
those are juss godless alone trash people, liers as any Godeniers with
less thing sacred in their miserable alone godless life… those weak
people are so weak and alone that they wait for an empty videos from an
obsessed godless person to kiss his ass, disgustingly (no God, No
Dignity) it would not change their life, actually more alone and empty,
(they do not even have a real community) empty life they live empty shit
they are in like this stupid cult called Atheism! No respect for them.
(They are very weak, empty and frustrated people, a life that none will
accepted, but those godless alone trash idiots).. those who say there is
no God will pay for it, soon or later... No won't be a godless alone
trash person into an empty cult not even good for my ass such atheism,
that offers them nothing. But emptiness and lonlyness for their
miserabile godless alone life. No respect for them. They are just empty
as their cult called atheism. But they will pay this soon or later, and
all the emptiness for nothing they are facing in their ridicolous
miserable alone life! It is time to throw on the trash empty atheism and
godless alone trash people, they are not even worthless to clean shit.
You can not respect them and their emptiness! It is over for you, trash
is not even good to clean you of all this atheism BS. No respect for
you. Let's really hope we can have a better generation and forget this
godless alone trash one as quickly as possible. IT IS OVER, it is time
for you and this nosense called atheism to go back from the nothing you
come from. No respect for you. You will pay all this shit, soon or
later...
Today I will put your BS atheism in the toilet and flash it
and you godless alone will shut up, ok? You are worthless and empty as
your stupid cult. No respect for you.... This is the worst, weakest,
empty generation, and when it will be over with their stupid empty cult
called atheism none will complain it. IT'S IS OVER, godless alone
trash.... Those godless alone poor people are playing with the fire, and
they will pay for it, and even badly........
They are so
desperate and frustrated in and empty stupid life... No sorry for you.
Let's hope in the next generation, let's hope in a better generation,
and let's forget this one and trhow it on the trash with their stupid,
nosense cult called atheism that will lead them anywhere. No respect for
you again..... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GODLESS ALONE TRASH PEOPLE AND
YOUR EMPTY STUPID ATHEISM NOT EVEN GOOD TO CLEAN THE DIRTIEST TOILET IN
THE WORLD... You got no peace over there (and if God is real you will be
and are f.... up.. You godless alone people are so weak).........
God
will care about you as well, poor person.... (you life is more
miserable and empty without God, but you are so patetic to realize it).
NO respect for you and your empty cult called atheism....... You are
just frutrated,obsessed, miserable, alone godless person that does
deserve any kind of respect, just to be so. (Lier as any
Godenier)....... IT IS OVER FOR YOU GUYS, YOU AND YOUR STUPID EMPTY CULT
ATHEISM That does not even deserve my piss….. all this just show how much those godless trash people are frustrated (to do not have what people have sacred and holly) no respect for them. it is time to throw away that empty BS cult called atheism that does not explain anything and it is not even good to clean the dirtiest toilet. Godless alone trash people, liars as an any Goddenier, dishonest and the worst and stupidest generation ever had. Let’s froget about this godless trash worthless generation and waiting for a better one. (By the way you will be judge as anyone alse once death by God, do not think you will escape because you deny him, as a godless alone rat as you are (You are also a disgusting godless ass kisser, that anytime you see a godlesss ass you run to kiss it. because you got no God and no dignity in your miserable godless life) NO RESPECT FOR YOU (your life is more empty and miserable without God, but you are the only fool to do not get it… WHY?)... this godless alone trash generation is the worst... Let's hope we can forget about them and have a better one. No respect for them and their stupid empty cult called atheism...... Godless weak people (you are weaker now and later ponce you will confront God, no matter what you sick people think about him)........... They do not deserve any respect, with their godless alone trash family who raised so trashy and sick to deny God. (and they will also pay fgor it, soon or later......... They got No God and no Dignity... something dies inside them when they stop to believe in God, but their are so patetic to admit... Soon or later they will stop to write empty shit on youtube about what we believe... Why? They are very weak, and quickly to change their mind about God... they are worthless people just like their empty atheism... but surelly they can not call theirselves atheists, but godless alone weak trash people. No respect for those liers or disgusting godless desperate ass kissers.... /they need to slpit on their dirthy mouth every morning as they deny God... but they are deceiving none but themselves, as they will paid for it, and be judge by God once death as anyone alse. (So it is better to be a son of God,m that a godless alone weak person).
It is time to theow on the trash atheims (where it belong) and forget about this generation (have better people then them). God will take care about them as well, and I won't be in the place of those godless weak alone people and disguasting godless ass kisses...... They lost any dignity, denying God, no doubt about that......... No respect for them..... The worst generaration, the weakest one (they got no God and No dignity)...
Excellent conversation Alex. Good questions, interesting answers!
Richard looks much healthier here than what I had seen during the Covid years, I’m so happy he made this conversation happen
Two of my favorite people just sitting and talking together is just precious. I want to watch this every day for the rest of my life.
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
Has anyone watched Richard Dawkins doing those lovely science presentations for children decades ago. The sweetest man. He became forthright for a time but was compelled to. Please look at those videos. So lovely
An excellent conversation. Most of the proponent-of-atheism videos on YT are snippets and one-liners. Alex and Richard are really exploring the ideas. Thank you.
You definitely werent around in 2007-2012 then lol
I used to be a Christian Greek Orthodox to be exact and I was talking with people of many different faiths and how they couldn’t understand my view point which I grew up with and I the same when discussing theirs, and then I started to question myself if pray every day and night to help help others for salvation then I took a step back and read the bible with an open mind. That’s when I questioned myself own beliefs and now I’m agnostic I still can’t get around evolution and the Big Bang, there’s probably something out there but it’s not the God that I had or anyone else has for that matter. I’m looking into simulation theory. Then I started to question free will and it really goes against Christianity. I told my friend if God is all knowing and knows when I’m going to die and how and I have the free will to choose then if I buy a motorcycle and die in an accident was that my choice or was it my destiny to buy it and die on it? Then I read the Old Testament and I was so like yeah this isn’t God. I have no problems with death, if I die and go to hell I don’t understand how that’s just when God made me this way and made Himself hard for me to understand and then if I was correct what about everyone else following wrong religions. So many questions. If we have souls and get reincarnated after death or we go to another dimension or born as someone else or nothing or just become energy particles floating around is something we don’t know.
I grew up Syriac Orthodox Christian and started to question my faith for the same reason you described.
If you want to learn more about evolution, I recommend Richard Dawkins' book "The Greatest Show on Earth". It is meant to explain evolution in a simple way.
@@CoreDump451 I don’t believe in evolution either, at this point I haven’t decided I’m still searching all I can say if there is a God we don’t know who He is. Nothing in any book describes a perfect almighty being. Evolution has holes in it too.
@@kyriakoskarallis5268 In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 and you know this how, how is there a heaven? What makes your faith true. How did you come to the conclusion Christianity is correct and not Buddhism or Islam? Or any other faith? Don’t say you believe the bible. Prove to me Star Wars isn’t real?
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 also funny how I’m unclean but I say yes Jesus forgive me and somehow that would erase everything you listed above 😂
So refreshing to have someone like Alex interviewing him. We really get into the details and specifics here. I love how fast paced this is.
I agree. I'm hearing thoughts and perspectives about science, origins, design and direction and aspects from a vantage that is entirely new for my brain, and I've listened to scores upon scores of hours of Dawkins and a handful of contemporaries. Not sure I'm really getting anywhere new... yet. Nonetheless, it is refreshing and compelling enough to impress me beyond my normal levels of appreciation, though the normal levels indeed rest at a height.
Yeah, always good to hear a nasty bigot interviewed. Dawkins doesn't deserve to be platformed.
Your analogy with the laws of a written book was brilliant. Its sad that Richard Dawkins didn't really get what you were trying to ask.
I'm glad someone else noticed that
It is a beautiful analogy and perhaps he slightly misses the point, but it's also a flawed analogy in that we have an incredibly compelling explanation for the complexity of life that explains exactly how he can come about without an author. When applied to physics on the other hand it's even less compelling to my mind, I can accept either than the laws of physics just are what they are, or perhaps that there is a multiverse and thus we exist in the kind of universe that can result in human life, and everything else.
@@Enoch-RootI think you missed the point. The analogy included the very dispute you have.
This is more of an argument of an entire meta view.
It’s an exploration of humility
@@Enoch-Root but who says that those laws you are refering too havent been createdby something. Not that i would belive in that, but just by observing the laws we could never deduce anything about how the laws have come to be. Because by definition those laws must have come to be without the laws influencing that.
@@dylogysminter Yes, I get the point he was making, and it was beautifully made. When it comes to physics it may apply, but we hardly need to even ask about the origin of natural selection, it's such a simplistic rule. With physics though, the strong force, weak force, etc etc and how those came to be so precisely calibrated, it may be that science can't explain the origins of the laws of physics, even why the universe is comprehensible, or it may turn out to be something so simplistic, like natural selection, that the universe couldn't have been any other way.
I think there was some other deeper point he was making though and I want to listen to that part again, but I just ran in excess of a half marathon, it's late where I am and I'm too exhausted now.
Saw you via Dawkins a little bit ago. Have to admit you are very intelligent and respectful when having conversations and debates. Very respectable!
Both of my parents were conservative Catholics and stuffed me with their sick, perverted, sadistic doctrine from my early childhood, so that I decided to leave the church when I was just five years old. I've been an atheist for 40 years now and I'm doing much better than I did back then!

I as well. Except I became spiritual because I knew there was more they didn't want us to know and many who has experienced. This religion/faith got it all wrong!
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363
Perfect epitome? God is a Jealous, vengeful, discriminating... God. Do you not conclude this by the very books that were written by man to sway your beliefs and opinions about a 'God' you know nothing of. One's faith/belief is concluded from a story you read and chose to believe. Why not Islam, Hinduism, Buddhaiscm... repent from what and who... and why?
@@razony All sin must be punished that’s how judgement works, a Judge judges you on the bad you do and since everyone has sinned (lied, stolen ,sexual immorality, dishonoured parents, had hatred towards other people etc). All humans need to repent and believe in Jesus (God) to go to Heaven or spend eternity paying for your sins in hell.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363
All lies and deceptions. Christianity is a disease. You'll wake up one day.
I find Alex to be a tremendous interviewer, I love how he challenges his guests.
1. Is there only one god, or are there multiple gods? If multiple, how is a person to choose which deserves obedience?
2. Would you agree that before anything can exist, something has to create it?
Did your god create everything? If yes, who/what created your god?
3. Is your god infallible?
4. Is your god omnipotent?
5. Is your god omniscient?
6. Is your god benevolent, or malicious?
7. If your god cannot make mistakes, then it follows that everything it creates is either perfect, or that your god intentionally makes things that are flawed. Would a benevolent god intentionally create something likely to suffer because of its flaws?
8. If your god can do anything, and it created the universe, why didn't it simply create a perfect world inhabited by perfect beings? If your god wanted obedience, and god is not malicious, why did god make disobedience possible?
9. If your god knows everything, does it already understand every thought and feeling you have? Does it instantaneously know everything you say and do? If yes, what is the point of religious rituals, such as prayer?
10. Why would an omnipotent and omniscient god not communicate directly and unambiguously with individuals, with no need of books, churches, prophets, signs, miracles, etc?
If a person is not intelligent enough, or not "worthy" enough to speak directly with god, whose fault is that? Who made the person in the first place? If a person is unworthy or incapable of directly communicating with god, how can that person be capable of recognizing a valid spokesperson for god?
11. Think about the person/people who convinced/persuaded/ordered you to believe in a version of god. Are they infallible? Is it at all possible for them to tell you something they sincerely believe, but for that thing they tell you to be actually incorrect?
12. Are feelings reliable tools to guide actions? Suppose I hear a person in my neighborhood talking a lot about the presence of violent break in robberies nearby, and I get apprehensive. I am convinced by the passion my neighbor puts into this story, even though I've seen no tangible evidence. That night, I hear a noise. I FEEL certain that it is a robber breaking in to harm my family. I get out of bed, pull a pistol from the bedside table. Without opening the bedroom door, I shoot through it to get the robber. When I open the door, there is my son, lying dead on the floor from my bullet. I was sure. I relied on my feelings. My fear of a robber. My hope of being a defender father. Feelings, not facts. Was that a good way to live my life?
14. Do you deny that religion (superstition, irrational behavior) is the root cause of most human conflict in history, that for centuries millions have been tortured and murdered "because god told me to do it"? That is why 9/11 happened, because "god hates the infidels".
13. Suppose a person has a book full of maps to guide a group journey. They rely upon it, but the group is perpetually lost.
You question the book, but your friend insists that the book is accurate. "How do you know?" you ask. They reply, "I know that this book is accurate and perfect, because it says so in the book."
Your friend insists that the book is information from god.....but some other people wrote the book, based on their interpretations...why? Why didn't god write the book personally? How could information possibly become more accurate and truthful when filtered thorough con men?.....but that is okay, because of how passionately they shout about their version of the books, and how strongly it makes your friend feel.
When you show them hundreds of self contradictions in the book, they get upset and say that you are just not reading the book correctly.
Which person is messed up? You, or the book fanatic?
How do you justify cherry picking which parts of the bible to follow? Leviticus?
14. If the point is to die and go to heaven, why not simply commit mass suicide and get it over with?
Christ was quite literally a kamikaze; is that what you preach should be emulated in daily life?
15. Why is it necessary to use superstition and irrationality to justify your practical principles?
Why treat humans like a donkey in need of the stick of hell and the carrot of heaven? If you want positive secular behavior, why not justify that behavior in practical secular terms?
If you "only follow Jesus and only care about Jesus", well who does JESUS follow, obey and care about?
The father who led him to be tortured and murdered.
The insane vicious sadist who caused all misery DELIBERATELY.
Religion is an evil scam that preys upon the desperate, the weak and the stupid.
@@noneyabusiness2237you’re not that guy pal 😭
@@noneyabusiness2237 Maybe see a therapist about these God issues you have.
How's your Covid Jab?
@@noneyabusiness2237 You are not as intellectual as you think you are.
I didn't need the Dawktor to tell me that, but I'd still like to hear it.
The Dawkmeister General.
Creation is not defined, solely by what or how everything was created. The clues are in the individualistic limitations of creation. Or indeed what the creatior defines as uniformity and the intergratiin of harmonious functionality within the cycles of caos and destruction.
@@stevenbradley9851Lol. Dude, that's a pretty hogwash - borderline gibberish - way of claiming science can't explain everything/the universe's origin. I think that's what you're getting at? Only you and "god" could ever know.
Make sure you know what you're saying and that your descriptions make sense before you comment. It doesn't make you sound smart here. Esepcially this community. You will get called out for gobbledegook.
@@stevenbradley9851 Neanderthals were quite successful and had no sky fairies. They lived longer than Homo Sapiens, who have created the 6th extinction and will cease to exist.
Great questions Alex!
An extraordinary intelligent discussion as is expected. Can you imagine what a wonderful planet this would be is even a small percentage of humans could talk to each other on such clear and calm terms. Imagine how much we could learn. Thank you gentleman. You have done the rest of us a continuing service.
Loved this conversation. Was surprised to hear Richard is aware and scared of the uncertainty of what eternity feels and looks like.
Richard dawkins nedds to focus on supporting aubrey de grey
When you die and go to the next world, you won't have time to feel scared, because there's nothing to be scared of.
Same as before birth, nothing. Stay Safe and Stay Free 4:11 ❤
What finally struck towards the end of this engaging interaction was that, putting aside the intellectual capabilities of the young man, Richard Dawkins was presenting the kind of wisdom and deep awareness that can only come with age! And this. for me ,made this so much more interesting. Much like a grandfather engaging the thinking of his grandson. Very enjoyable.
I did notice a tone of "this young man is earnestly discussing these things that we have all thought about to some degree in this field. let's see what part of it interests him"
What a conversation. Thank you Alex, thank you Richard. Thank you for trying to find answers to some of the biggest questions known to man. We may never know how life has come about or why we’re here, but who cares when the journey to improved understanding looks like this.
What I love the most about most atheists is how free-spirited (no pun intended) they are. How open-minded. How curious!
It's the exact type of person I love to talk to, but only get the chance to meet occasionally, because of how society teaches us to KNOW (without really knowing), but never to LEARN. I feel like I am flying when I spend time with others like that (or just myself, since I'm curious too), like almost anything is possible.
That tablecloth needs to have its own interview, cause it certainly has got its own life :)
It kind of reminds me of a window curtain I've been using different colors of paint on. Try it sometime. Just be creative. Get some permanent bright paint and go at it.
Love listening to both of these guys. Great conversation😊
After listening to this episode twice this evening, I somehow got a growing sense of ‘OUR Alex’ (maybe time to form a fandom?).. So glad to hear Alex asking so many critical yet fine questions. Also very glad that Prof. Dawkins is taking Alex equally intellectual and answered all the not-so-easy questions with his profound knowledge and admirable manner(perhaps Mr Hitchens could learn a bit from here~).
Alex, thanks for this wonderful discussion, you’re a great rep for Gen-Z critical thinkers, keep up the outstanding work! Maybe try to invite more guests like RD?
Indeed, Alex is awesome!.. and brilliant pushback about William Lane Craig and on Dawkin’s flimsy excuse for choosing not to debate him… if Dawkin’s case against God’s existence is so watertight, why not debate Craig and put him to the sword once and for all?.. I think because there is another reason for his reluctance - his arguments would barely survive the first round….
This was great to listen to. Thanks to both of you.
I think you did ask excellent questions :D
A bloody wonderful conversation Alex and Richard !!!!
If you mean by a convolution of cliché for the duped.
@@trashvomitstudios In heaven no unclean person is allowed in, you are unclean if you have sinned just once like lying, stealing, sexual immorality, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, evil thoughts etc Jesus (God manifest in the flesh) can put his sinless righteousness on you since He died on the cross, rose from the dead so REPENT AND BELIEVE IN HIM TODAY
The first time I saw any sort of presentation from Alex was when he debated Trent Horn. I have to say that I am truely impressed with how far he has come. His measured and mature approach to discussion and debate has to be commended.
The only people going to heaven is a very small number ( the 144,000) Revelation 7:4, 14:1, & 3. That is why Jesus called them the Little Flock in Luke 12:32. There are at least 9 different name’s used for the heavenly group, another one is God’s children (Romans 8:16). Jesus also said in John 10:16 I have OTHER SHEEP that are not of this FOLD, because (this FOLD) was the heavenly group, and the (OTHER SHEEP) are going to be the people that will live forever on the earth. ( Psalm’s 37:9,11, & 29). Because the Earth is going to be here forever (Ecclesiastes 1:4)
You are in error. There are a lot of people going to heaven. Anyone who accepts Jesus as their Savior and repents of their sins has a promise from Jesus who said that if anyone came to Him,He would in no wise cast out. The 144,000 are the Jews during the Tribulation.
@@pam7500 The people that will be in Heaven with Jesus are going to be the Judge’s over the earth like it says in 1 Corinthians 6:2, and Revelation 5:10 - and you made them to be a Kingdom , and priest’s to our God , and they are to rule as Kings OVER THE EARTH. But some Bible’s will say ON THE EARTH. But Heaven is over the Earth. And like it says in John 10:16 “And I have OTHER SHEEP, which are not of THIS FOLD. Because the other sheep are going to be the people that will live forever on the earth (Psalm’s 37:9, 11, & 29 ) And THIS FOLD are going to be the co-rulers with Jesus in Heaven. But what happened even before the Apostle’s has all died Satan organized false religion in the Apostasy in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 9 and created all of these churches or Divisions. Because in Romans 16:17 - Which says: Now I urge you Brothers, to keep your eye on those who created Divisions and causes for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and AVOID THEM.
@@gargould7186 Leviticus 25 : 44-46. The true goal of abrahamic religions.
What a stupid JW eisegesis!
RIchard Dawkins' faculties are INCREDIBLE for 82
Alex, you are 20 to 30 years younger than I am and yet you present your arguments with such aplomb and persistent civility it amazes me. Even in the face of raging lunacy, (P Hitchens), you calmly reiterate your intentions without engaging in the anger that is directed at you. I now endeavor to emulate your style and method of intellectual discussion. Also, your arguments regarding animal suffering managed to shift the fulcrum under the lever of my thinking in such a way that I could finally pry myself out of those habitual behaviors and made the shift to vegan in December of 2019. Thank you.
Thank you for pressuring Richard on the whole WLC thing, been a long time coming he answered for that, i'm also glad to see you stood your ground on defending his character.
Does Craig actually have any?
Craig is a fraud. He clearly understands logic and fallacies. He accuses others of using logical fallacies, but ignores that every single one of his arguments contain logical fallacies. He’s just bilking Christians out of their money.
Well it’s theatre. Dawkins knows that and didn’t get to be the world’s most famous atheist by accident. WLC is or was a tremendous debater really a different class. That doesn’t mean his arguments are correct. Sam Harris surely lost in their head-to-head. Dawkins argument that WLC believes something atrocious whereas nice Christians are happy to say children getting cancer is God’s will was unpicked rather nicely. Of course WLC could easily have damaged Dawkins’ reputation. The risk was too high.
@@andreweagleton8879 I understand your points I think. Unfortunately it is theatre, and for that reason one could argue Harris won on the basis of theatre, because his was an emotionally charged argument, as appose to a rigid factual one. Craig won that debate argument wise but failed to win the audiences hearts.
@@SoldatDuChristChannel What "rigid factual" arguments stand behind the Christian god proposition? The facts are that children die, regularly, in horrible and excruciating ways. The fact is that Craig tried to defend heinous biblical text endorsing infanticide based upon a fanciful notion of infant heaven.
Wonderful discussion, it is clear to see you both respect each other and enjoy the discourse. It is such a pleasure to listen to and gives much food for thought.
Among many such thoughts one came to mind, that when you look at Richard's eyes you seee his sort of grandfatherly or village elder grace and kindness emanating through his smiles and earnestness alike, even while he's stating something is appalling (and therefore probably making many people angry), it comes from a place of an honest almost innocent heart and mind, rather than a righteous or like he himself denounced behaviors of "condescening" attitude. The man is a living legend and I am so glad you had this chat with him to remind us that open discussions for the sake of truth seeking are possible.
I have so much respect for Dawkins, he was my first intellectual crush growing up. I still have my paperback penguin copy of the Selfish Gene from the late 70's. His remark '...there are no good arguments...' for religion, 😂😂. Thank you for this discussion. I much prefer listening to a discussion with this great mind than a 'for clicks' debate.
🥰
Turn to God instead of listening to delusional people
@@Christus.2004 Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Offer the evidence for your claims or I will continue to have an absence of belief.
Reminder: more claims are not evidence
@@MrMerve-tl9my yet you claim there is no God because you cannot see him and believe in a non rational narrative.
The Bible has Scientific facts written over 3600 years ago
Most of them discovered in the last 300-400 years.
If you want the source just type
Scientific Facts in the Bible.
Or do it with Prophecy.
Remember if you want proof be objective.
@Marcelo.1927 I think your fantasy is one of delusional and baseless submissions, my dear. I choose to make my own decisions without fear or favour. And by the way Christianity seems to be going, a Christian god might favour me, even though I had not worshipped the false idols so preverlant in today. Eg. The Orange One, whose name we should never speak. He comes with forked tongues but loves the poorly educated.
Today’s Meditation
"By accepting the sufferings ‘offered’ by life and allowed by God for our progress and purification, we spare ourselves much harder ones. We need to develop this kind of realism and, once and for all, stop dreaming of a life without suffering or conflict. That is the life of heaven, not earth. We must take up our cross and follow Christ courageously every day; the bitterness of that cross will sooner or later be transformed into sweetness." -Fr. Jacques Philippe, p. 49
was great to hear this discussion, during these times of sorting through so many perspectives
Wonderful conversation and respectful, no one interrupting! My question to Professor Dawkins ,when he talked about the concept of eternity, an idea he didn't care for , my point I would raise is why do we assume that the dimension of time exists in eternity .
well show some endpoint. we only think we know when time started, no agreement on if it will end. so it's eternal.
Fascinating conversation. Thanks for uploading. ❤❤❤
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
Solid interview Alex, congratulations :) Since you cover philosophy and thought experiments in so many videos, I'd love to see some videos more in the Dawkins wheelhouse, i.e. wrestling against modern spiritual arguments using with what we know about the natural world and evolution that debunks creation and the supernatural.
Personally and for many others including Dawkins, this is the primary reason we hold our world view, and it may continue convincing people who have never been exposed to these specific examples of natural history, especially people who weren't here for the discussion taking place in the 2000's. I think new videos like these would be a great addition to your channel, and of course make for great discussions that you can explore and try to dismantle in your signature style. Love you man!
Neither of these people have studied religion. How can you even ask the question without acknowledging the astrological origins of religion.
Nothing solid about these fools who don't know the history or content of religion.
As one who was here for the debates in the early 2000s, and as a Christian, I would love nothing more than to go back to the Dawkins approach!
Literally the easiest objections to deal with. It’s very clear that Dawkins has never attempted to understand what the Bible is communicating on its own terms. “Evolution disproves God” is comically idiotic.
@@realDonaldTrump420 Alex has a degree in philosophy and theology from St. Johns college at Oxford University.
@@realDonaldTrump420 what a pathetic comment. They don't have to have a "degree" on religion to debate about it. Get a life.
@@realDonaldTrump420 What do you mean by 'neither of them studied religion'? Alex has a degree in theology. Now, that makes your statement appear flawed in many ways, doesn't it? Who's the fool now? lmao
It's such a pleasure to be able to say that I existed to listen to Richard Dawkins. In a mad world, it's good to at least recognize this gift.
People often say, “I’m not hurting anyone so it’s ok to sin (lying, stealing, sexual sins, disrespecting parents etc)” The same God who said to love your neighbour first said to love Him to the best of your ability. If you carry on sinning, then you do not love God but are selfish like the devil so you will be joined to your father in hell or repent of your sins and believe in Jesus as God so Jesus adopts you as His child and you will join Him in Heaven forever.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 🤣🤣
@@kendrickjahn1261 I hope you have a blessed rest of the year but remember if the world gets dark that Jesus is the light of the world and can comfort you in this life and the next. When you repent and Believe in Jesus you will only regret that you didn’t sooner.
Romans 10: 13 For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.”
In totality religion has been a net negative for humanity
God is the epitome of Holiness because He is sinlessly perfect, A sinner (liar, sexually immoral, taking the Lord’s Name in vain, thief etc) cannot be in the presence of God or else he will be utterly consumed therefore repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour to go to Heaven.
@@thereisnonegoodbutgodjohn363 Hell sounds more appealing 😅
@@OneOfEightBillion Nhh no appealing at all just misery forever
People underestimate hell, it is bad because it is separation from God. In a vision I was shown a person who claimed to be Christian but started fornication (premarital sex), He died relatively young and went to hell forever (1 Cor 6:9). God’s holiness means He will not coexist with sinners forever therefore Repent (Luke 13:3) and have a relationship with Jesus.
@@OneOfEightBillion The best thing about the Christian God, he gives you what your heart desires. So if you've made up your mind, remember to say exactly what you did to Jesus directly to his face.
And what about the 100 million (a very conservative estimate) murdered by atheist regimes in the 20th century alone?
Not a single word lost about the main reason why religion exists. Class dominance.
Fascinating, thank you Alex, you managed to get more out of Richard Dawkins than any debate, and actually demonstrates the gap between his atheism and his "opponants'" faith, which seems to be more cognitive and in approach rather than intellectual argument.
Great conversation and fun listen.
Now.....this is what I call a down to earth Sunday sermon . Many thanks .
Thanks for this substantial interview. Really great!
Great discussion. I'll be using this in my class. Thank you.
If using in class, please fact check Dawkins claims about the Midianites story Judges 6 and 7 compared to stories about Jupiter, Apollo and Thor (that he claims is about the same at 48:00-). If one can´t see the difference, one is certainly not into historical analysis. One is most likely based upon history with some spices that were COMMON in that time (1200-1350 BC) in all history writing, with a made up myth story about ancient Gods.
Read yourself Judges 6, 7
(shortly: Midianites were in conflict with the Israelites. They lived in the mountains, when they planted crops, the enemy came and tried to destroy it. (quite a normal way to hinder Israelites - the enemy from getting food). God says he will help the Israelites. Then Gideon (Israel) defeats the enemy.)
This event may be from around 1210-1350 BC.. in that time all history was written differently than today (which I hope Dawkins knows), so when analysing a text one should take that into account. While one can´t make a 100% objective series of events, the stories most often have a core, on which some spices are added.
But in the stories of (Apollo) it is not written as history with some spices, but like this. If Dawkins can´t see the difference, I urge him not to try to claim knowledge in historical writings.
Here are myths about Apollo
From the DAY he was born, Greek god Apollo led a life of adventure. He was the son of Zeus and his mistress, the Titaness Leto. When Zeus’s jealous wife Hera found out about the pregnancy, she punished Leto, forbidding her from giving birth on land, and sending the deadly Python to chase her away. Leto found refuge on the floating island of Ortygia. Hera then forced Eileithyia, the goddess of childbirth, to prolong Leto’s labor for an agonizing 9 days. Eventually Leto gave birth to twins: Artemis, and her twin brother Apollo. Thus the great Greek god Apollo entered the world, fully grown, carrying a golden sword. The island around him burst into life, filled with lush plants, fragrant flowers and beautiful music.
At just four DAYS old, Apollo went on a hunt to avenge the Python who had tormented his pregnant mother. With his handy bow and arrow, he hit the Python and killed it instantly, while the nymphs of Delphi cheered him on. The Python’s mother Gaea, meanwhile, was deeply angered. So much so, she told Zeus to banish Apollo to Tartarus.
@@PjotrII A fable is not a fact. Let's focus on facts please.
@@STR82DVD Exactly my point! Fables are fables, history again is history. And Ancient history is ancient history, and must be read in that way.
When Pharao Ramesses attacked the Hittites and it´s king Muwatalli, in Kadesh, the most plausible outcome is that it was a draw.
But as Ramesses returned home, he wrote about the war, but depicted himself as a strong hero (who alone on the field slew 100 enemies), and caused a great victory.
** Well this is how history was written back then - real events, the battle at Kadesh, some real data, 4 divisions from the Egyptian side,,,
but then as history was written, you add a little spice... the king was alone on the battlefield, slew 100... well that detail was not true, nor the great victory...
but the rest is mainly real history.
We happen to know this as we also have the Hittites description of the war.
When you compare for example how the war with Midianites is described, it is in the same style of (the Egyptian - Hittite war).
The fables / myths about Apollo are written in a totally different style, genre, not in a historic way.
Even Alex basically points out about Judges, the historical perspective. That is different from let´s say Genesis.