As somebody who’s only come to Christ just a few months ago, I really do pray that somehow Richard is able to find the way to the truth. The feeling I had when I truly believed and was granted with the Holy Spirit is something I have never experienced before, EVER!! Keep the good work up on this channel brother, your doing amazing work ❤
I highly doubt it after the damage he has done to millions of people's faith. It would be an injustice if he made heaven after damming millions to hell with his teachings. I think God is more fair than that. Dawkins heart has long been hardened and darkened, he will never relent from his foolish idea that there is no God, his pride will never allow it.
This is such a weird conversation. Peterson absolutely refuses to talk to the historicity of the Biblical accounts while Dawkins absolutely refuses to acknowledge moral truths having value on their own.
It's only reasonable in my view to question the value of moral truth. In essence there is no moral truth, it's just a human concoction. Most of the jive on this channel only claims some form of taboo as being a supreme methodology but this can only be in defiance of scientific analysis. Come out of your trance folks.
The historicities cannot be proven with evidence. The question do you believe in the sacrifice of Abraham is a trap because what kind of person does that? Why would you believe in that.
Dawkins can acknowledge the moral truths just fine. He was just trying to see if Jordan really thinks those things happened. That's important because believing those things *actually* happened, is much different than treating the bible as fiction. If someone took Harry Potter literally they might act in delusional ways, such as trying to cast spells, much like christians do, who pray for help.
Jordan struggles to fully embrace the Bible as absolute Truth, finding it difficult to accept its teachings in a literal sense. Instead, he approaches it through the lens of symbolism and semi-fiction, viewing its stories and lessons as meaningful allegories rather than historical or divine facts. For Jordan, the Bible functions more as a rich tapestry of moral and philosophical ideas-valuable, but not necessarily factual. He sees the narratives as metaphors that convey deeper truths about human nature, ethics, and spirituality, but stops short of accepting them as the infallible word of God. He seems to be on a spiritual limbo, and Dawkins is poking him.
you described my situation well the problem is that there is much you learned that goes against that which if you accepted the bible as fully historically factual, it would make it seemingly impossible to make sense of the other experiences you had so far in life that you base on a lot
I’ve been there. He has to know to know…his belief isn’t enough yet. I eventually overcame that and gave my full self to Christ. Jordan can and I believe will do the same.
Dawkins: “Do you believe the Bible is a book?” Peterson, “Well, that’s a profoundly complex inquiry. The Bible, as a cultural artifact, encapsulates multifaceted narratives that shape human consciousness. Can we truly confine its essence to the mere definition of a ‘book’?”
Has Peterson ever answered a yes or no question with just a "yes" or a "no"? The dude loves to listen to himself spin up word salads that don't end up meaning anything! Sheesh!
@@RyoHazuki224 If you have ever seen those "explain X concept at 5 different levels of education" videos Jordan Peterson seems to always speak as if he is answering in the PHD level of complexity. Regardless of if it may have some benefit to 3rd party listeners oversimplify a few things. I quite like his answer, but you can definitely say essentially the same thing by saying "No, it is more than just a book."
@@RyoHazuki224 It actually means a lot. Maybe it is not the answer in the way you want to hear it, or the ultimate answer, but to say it is purely meaningless is simply not true. Maybe you don't find much meaning in there, but it doesn't mean there isn't really a meaning, when you look. It is a valid perspective. Which does not mean it is the "ultimate perspective of Christianity." PS: It is actually a good representation that you gave. Made me laugh on the inside, too.
@@fzrnikoI don't think you understand or know which comment of Richard Dawkins this is referring to. For what you are saying makes no sense. It has nothing to do with virtues.
Philosophical Materialist (Dawkins) argues with a Philosophical Idealist (Peterson). These arguments don't improve the discussion in any positive way. People should understand that there is nothing Divine that can be proven with a 100% certainty in the material realm. And then to discuss the spiritual/idealistic realm to the materialist just for him to shrug it off as "fairy tale" because of the lack of material empirical evidence and not understanding the 'above-logical' nature of the immaterial.
@@DM-dk7js Then I guess love, logic, emotions, consciousness, morality, good and evil are all apart of a fairytale because these things are all metaphysical. But we all intuitively know these exist, including God, you just don't want God to exist because you don't want to wrestle with the idea of being morally responsible to a Holy and just God for your lifestyle choices.
@@sheriffcrandy arguing about historical truth includes non metaphysical claims of which even those are questionable and some are unlikely. Especially with regards to the old testament
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools". Pray that God opens both dr. Dawkins and dr. Petersons hearts and minds. Please Lord set them free!
@@stevenosullivan187 do you think a man of this intellect is ever going to believe in something there is no evidence for that’s what he has said oh the world is turning its back on religion as we have more understanding of how life began this man I can bet my life on will never believe in a sky daddy so could you please stop forcing imaginary things on people who plain and simply do not believe in things with out evidence
“Truth is a tricky business.” - No it’s not. “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.” Romans 1:18-19
@@nitsujism that’s simple my friend, use the very same process that you use to examine every truth claim - examine the evidence. Do yourself a favour and read The Bible. 😀
Virtue - behaviour showing high moral standards. Don't need religion to show such behaviour and in some instances (As noted by Dawkins) religion hinders such behaviour.
@@stuartdavidson162 the problem is if atheists are right, there's no objective basis for morality. It all waters down to relative feelings or opinions, which implies morality itself is imaginary, therefor defeating the whole concept of it. OBJECTIVE morality, as we understand with our conscience, only makes sense if there's God AT LEAST in SOME religious / deistic way. Which is the point when pointing out HOW scientifically can anyone call Islam morally worse than Christianity? It's not a scientific standard, but we seem to agree on some objective standard, so where does our conscience derive from if not God? If it's an evolved feeling, you've watered it down to relativity. If it's laws or culture, you've watered it down to relativity. All the secular replacements don't really hold much water as anything objective, and science cannot measure such a thing. If atheists are right, the logical conclusion is Nietche was right, since he was consistent about it, and morality is just emotion. If your conscience is on fire right now reading that, urging you to insist that's wrong and morality IS objective, that's part of my point. Where is that coming from? I hope for your own soul's sake you humbly admit it must be conviction from God. Because otherwise, how will you stay sane?
Peterson continually tries to avoid answering the simple question of whether he actually believes Jesus was born of a virgin, was the son of God, and rose from the dead. His tap dancing around the subject only makes him look more ridiculous.
Because it is utterly unimportant to his claims. He is not trying to prove the world is 6000 years old. He is trying to figure out how morality can exist at all.
@@forsakenquery I think it’s important to make the distinction that hardly any Christians actually think the world is only 6000 years old. That’s not actually a commonly held belief that’s like less than 1% of the Christian population.
Most who profess "the Christ is King" _[the accurate way to state it (not "Christ is King") in the Kingdom of God/Jesus language that true John 3:1-21 qualifiers are commanded to communicate in by Him]_ are the same who the authentic austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ _[God]_ referred to in _[I'm only doing what the true austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ/the Christ Jesus commands as an elder John 3:1-21 qualified one]_ Matthew 7:13, 21-23, 13:14-15, 15:7-9, 19:16-19, 24:11, Revelation 3:15-16, 21:8, 22:15 and all parallel verses is what the authentic austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ _[God]_ has to declare about the so many who claim the Christ is King. i pray you get your road to Damascus conversion _[true John 3:1-21 qualified conversion which only a remnant of such exist every generation]_ before it's too late if ye are not yet for tomorrow is not promised and eternal perdition is a mighty eternal long time to wish with all you are that you made such different choices when you were on earth in the flesh so you would have never entered into the eternal incomprehensible, ineffable, infathomable, inimaginable misery, pain, suffering, torment, wailing and gnashing of teeth Lake of Fire where the worm dieth not and where the fires are never quenched. Selah.
Dawkins is reminiscent of the scene in Goodfellas, when Tommy tells the cop: "what are you doing here? Thought I told you to go f your mother". Dawkins says he has discovered an absolute "God killer"; infinite regress. To wit: everything must have regresses, ergo God must have a precedent. BUUTTT.... several times in his first two chapters of The God Delusion he qualifies the gods he contests as "supernatural". NOTHING suggests Dawkins knows the etiology of "infinite regress". He seems to maybe think Aeschylus, Thucydides, Plato, Hawkins, Hulk Hogan ..provided that gasper. Irrespective his gaping mawing lack of knowledge, it's the 1st Law of Thermodynamics: energy can never originate ex nihilo. THIS universe of ENERGY can therefore have only regresses. BUT...that's the most proven of all natural law known to humans (Einstein's observation). If God is supernatural, as the fn fool qualifies in his own book, ITS NOT SUBJECT TO NATURAL LAW!!! THAT'S WHAT SUPERNATURAL MEANS!!!!
@@WayneLynch69 Thank you for that. Eloquently stated _[minus the abbreviated curse word 'fn' if i am reading that correctly]._ I am aware of such subject matter you mentioned more so than not, but the way you stated it, including the analogy, and what you have observed about Dawkins, was edifying, insightful, keen and veritable. Thanks again.
Dawkins is the perfect example of “in their unrighteousness they suppress the truth”. Romans 1:18. The man is too prideful to admit there’s any truth in Christianity. You mean to tell me there’s nothing in the Be Attitudes that’s true? Come on.
I wish people studied Bible history with sharp competence so they would learn the authentic austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ didn't teach "Christianity" but rather "The Way."
@@RemnantDiscipleLazzaro-Rev1217 I've been listening to the book "Musashi" by Eiji Yoshikawa and man... your comment really resonates with me, and not in some sort of "all religions lead to God" or gnostic fashion. I kept thinking of Jesus' "I am the way" and felt Musashi was desperately seeking God. I found myself wishing I could tell Musashi "Repentance and Faith, Musashi! FAITH!" It's too bad his eyes were fogged with Zen Buddhism. The book illustrated clearly the folly of pride and honor.
Spiritual blindness. How is it possible for a man to be so blind to his blatant hypocrisy? I felt I was watching man literally under a spell, being mind controlled by a demon. I'm dumbfounded by Atheists constantly how unaware they are. They take for granted what good and evil is. It's the story of Genesis.
2Tim 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 1Corinth 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with GOD. For it s written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
I’ve come to realize that despite his diction and delivery, Dawkins is actually not a very deep thinker at all when it comes to metaphysical things. I’m not discounting his scientific achievements and career, it’s just becomes obvious he hasn’t thought very deeply beyond that when he quickly dismisses things as matter of fact when they are, in fact, not. Btw, there’s nothing wrong with people like Dawkins that are very intelligent when it comes to “book smarts” but lack the ability to think more abstractly. Just don’t then pretend you have thought beyond the simple conclusion that because you can’t measure God he doesn’t exist.
He is not that intelligent anyway. He only understands his own subject at surface level but cannot explain evolution or how it works or why it contradicts the basic laws of physics. He can't understand maths, physics, cosmology, any type of philosophy or other point of views. I would class him as less than average intelligence and very closed minded and deluded in his understanding.
@@rl7012 And you'd be wrong. He's written countless books explaining how evolution works. And it doesn't conflict with the basic laws of physics in any way whatsoever.
@@nitsujism Yes it does. He explains nothing scientifically it is just a fairy story. Scientifically evolution contradicts science. It contradicts genetics as mutations are deleterious 99.9% of the time and Evolution contradicts the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Watch the entire interview and note how he seems to be pleading with him, and the host, to leave the cave but they simply refuse to even consider the possibility.
@@CSUnger this was exactly how my dad approached life, too (he passed last year, age 72). I’ve always said of my dad that “Sagan was his Chesterton”. As such, I’m quite familiar with this line of thought (coming from Dawkins) and totally resonate with how you greatly articulated it with “…but they simply refuse to even consider the possibility”. Yes, and to even entertain the notion on a purely philosophical front is to go against the very fabric they hold so dear in their faith in science and the physical-only world.
O'Connor is getting there. In his interview with Same harris he admits that Atheism has a deep flaw concern moral ethics. That they can only go on ethical feeling or what someone feels is ethical or not which causes and whole host of other problems. Yet O'connor 100% says that there has to be more to it for a society to setup an ethical standard of what is good and moral. Before Christianity, society would sacrifice women, children, men, whoever to their gods in order to appease them. If you look Christianity is the only religion in which God sacrificed part of himself for people not the other way around.
JPB knows enough now. All that's missing is for him to stop saying "It's difficult and complicated" and take it on trust, in a very simple and childlike way. The longer he puts this off, the wordier he will get and the less he'll have to say.
Still don't like the fact that that Jordan Petersen doesn't answer the question directly, Yes! Jesus is real, he defeated death and is the resurrection.
You may not like it, but answering a question with 'I don't know and I don't claim to know' is more honest than saying yes and not meaning it full heartedly. Only we and God know the state of our heart. Would you be willing to lie in the face of that truth?
How did you know that? Did you see it by your eyes or someone film it? If it is not the case, so you don't know it, you believe it. knowing is far different from believing.
He's explained why he doesn't answer directly. Because to believe in something is to die on that hill. You may claim to be willing to get skinned alive for this truth, but when you're actually strapped to a chair being skinned alive..... well, the path is narrow.
You are in a great position to look in a more reflective manner. Use pen and paper. Stay true to yourself and never accept things that don’t make any sense to you. Most human beings are too comfortable to notice there was anything to notice in the first place.
Picture this: you breeze through life, completely ignoring tutorials, and even rally everyone to do the same. You end up with a big crowd of followers who also skip the tutorial. But as the tutorial wraps up, you realize you haven't figured out how to advance to the next level before time's up, yet you still won't follow the tutorial. In the end, the game wraps up, and a lot of people are left facing their game over screens. This is where many people are at and they refuse to see game over is closer than they think.
Dawkins doesn’t care about the truth. His only purpose, regardless of the cost, is that the message of the gospel should fail. And he doesn’t care how many he brings down with him. It’s almost like the spirit within him is the same that scripture says is the lord of this world.
@@obsoletecd-rom Dawkins wants to know if what he is believing is true. There is no point in believing in something just because it makes you feel good.
It starts to matter greatly when you end up with seven Catholics on the supreme Court. That can affect our whole country in a very anti-democratic way.
The problem that causes them to talk past each other is that Dawkins is focused on physical truth while Peterson is more interested in philosophical truth.
In other words, dawkins is purely physical/material, and Peterson acknowledges the metaphysical/immaterial. Dawkins is so myopic that essentially his philosophy is that if man can understand it, then it makes no sense. That sounds a lot to me like believing he himself or man are God, the arbiters of truth alone. Morals themselves aren't physical, and the only way to make it so is some robotic utilitarian philosophy which operates on production and material gain over all other emotions like love and compassion. He's so blind in his own arrogance and self righteousness it's actually sad.
@@dartskihutch4033 Physicalism is a metaphysical position. There is no way to scientifically test physicalism. The only thing that one could conclude is physicalism / materialism have practical utility. The immaterial / neoplatonism is just philosophizing for the sake of philosophizing.
@@kos-mos1127 that doesnt make sense for the physical to also be the metaphysical. That's like saying order is also chaos. They are two distinctions yet i agree of the same coin. Can you physically prove in a lab the metaphysical logic of Pinocchio's paradox? It's an absurd statement. Truth is found is both physical and metaphysical disciplines. The real enemy are those who decide one over the other is the real* truth, and the other is wrong. They exist in tandem, and without the metaphysical logic and philosophy, we divide ourselves from creative growth. Again, a hypothesis exists as a philosophy, and if said philosophy can be tested physically, we call that science. If it cannot, it can only be tested against another's metaphysical logic and understanding. Ethics for example are not a physically tested phenomenon, yet although unsolved (just as physical logic isnt), we can arrive at truth without a test tube. All logic and truth starts with the mind asking questions.
@@dartskihutch4033 Materialism / Physicalism are metaphysical statements taken as apriori assumption as a starting place for reasoning and logic. There is no way to scientifically prove materialism / physicialism.
Dawkins kept saying "that doesn't impress me," as if impressing him is what makes something profound. His ego stands directly between him and the truth of the Bible.
Dawkins becomes less and less intelligible the longer he spends in public life. Jordan Petersen is a different kind of lost. He feels like he's stretching out for every reason to not submit to the Lord. Pray for his conversion.
I’m actually so ridiculously tired of hearing Jordan Peterson talk in circles over and over again when presented with a straightforward question. Stop with the intellectualization and answer the question.
"so, you believe that there's only the material? Well, I wish the best and I'll pray for you", that's the most I'd be capable to say, honestly don't know how Dr Peterson has so much patience
He’s the one with the patience?! He talked the entire time. I’ve never seen Dawkins more patient. He thinks this is nonsense. He still sat and listened to JP repeat himself ever more emotionally for an hour and a half. I understand this is a religious based channel, but try to have some perspective.
@@DisrespectfulRob I didn't know this is a religious based channel as u say. What I meant is that this discussion can be reduced to a simple agreement that they have different axioms of belief that right now can't be reconciled, and they're aware of this, but Dr Peterson continues trying to "move the needle" let's say, in Dr Dawkins belief; from a Christian perspective he's not giving up on saving Dr Dawkins soul, while from other perspective it might seem like an exercise in futility
Duh, wrong way round. Petersen obfuscates all the time so it is never clear what he's saying. Dawkins isn't particularly articulate, but he clearly says what he means.
Its good that he is honest though because he does not come off as a christian he is not. He is only seeing parts of it to be true. Hopefully he will be saved dawkins too. Praying for both.
@@litigioussociety4249 totally false, he’s a christian. He’s said it publicly and has even prayed on a live event. He just sees things in a very deep and complex way, and doesn’t like to answer in a yes, or no, because he understands the implications of answering in a very cut dry answer when the debate itself is queue towards asking scientific questions to a complex metaphysical one
Why not ask believers: I'm an atheist, but I want to know about monotheists for my personal understanding: In your opinion: - Did you read ALL the Bible: All pages. - Is there only one God? Which one? - What, who is God? - Why hasn't anyone ever seen God? Why doesn't he ever show up? A reason? Thank you, Jean-Jacques THIBOUT. My religious CV: Born 1949, French, baptized, cathecism. Then Atheist at / from 20.
"He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”- Robert Jastrow
@@kydelastra lol why don't you provide some reason why Jastrow's "theologians" couldn't have been Hindu, or Norse, or Egyptian, or a hundred other religious leaders who have been "sitting there for centuries?" I'm listening!
@wiffleballer28 I don't have to, it's a popular quote with direct context. You're trying to add things to it to muddy the water, so to speak. Being indignant does equate to a "gocha".
@@kydelastra He's not muddying the water - theologians are validly theologians in a variety of different religious contexts with contradictory cosmologies, beliefs, and events. It's probably why Jastrow said "Theologians" and not "Christian Theologians" in his quote. It's a little bit like you're constricting the sayings of the author to fit your rather narrow interpretation. It really seems like you're trying to add things to it to muddy the water, so to speak.
Bad things done - in the name of Christianity - is ABUSE. Any ABUSE is bad. Nothing exists called: 'justifiable abuse'! Abuse is abuse. Period. 'In the name of Christianity' has nothing to do with the act. Following Christ isn't done 'in the Name of Christ', it is simply done because Christ demonstrated The Way, The Truth, and The Life. If you aren't following Christ's commands, you aren't being 'Christian'. Christ COMMANDED: "Love God with all your heart, mind, and soul. Love your neighbors as yourself. Love your ENEMIES." Now, tell me again all the atrocities done while following these COMMANDS of Christ??? Deviating is NOT 'following'. No one does it well enough. We all fall short and need a savior. Praise the Lord.
So true, if someone walks in a school and starts shooting “in the name of science” that doesn’t mean science is evil. It’s the act, and has nothing to do with science. People who did bad stuff “in the name of Christ” clearly knew very little about scripture.
I LOVE these videos and your content. One thing though, I wish when you were giving your sidebar explanations that you wouldn't let part of the original video playout on 'mute' because I always wonder how much of the original context of the follow-up response I actually lost or if I might come to a slightly different conclusion than yourself. Again, Love it and keep up the good work!
Dawkins says Christianity got virtually nothing right yet enjoys the benefits of living in a "Christian" society. Dawkins should do some studying of the history of pagan societies before they were Christianized.
@mirandahotspring4019 Easter itself is not a pagan tradition, how people have celebrated by integrating their pagan traditions makes it seem pagan. But the actual celebration of Easter itself and it's origins are solely Christian in nature, and this is something we see celebrated since the beginning of Christianity in the Bible and the early Church Fathers.
@@richardbonnette490 Oh come on! Easter was a pagan fertility festival, to celebrate the Spring equinox. It is named from Ēastre, the name of a goddess associated with spring. That's why we still have Easter eggs and the Easter bunny, eggs and rabbits, both symbols of fertility! Christianity simply appropriated older festivals because it's easier to take over old traditions than bring in new ones. Even Christmas, which was originally the annual festival of sun worship, the winter solstice that saw the return of Sol Invictus, the invincible sun. Even the day of worship was changed from the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday) to the day honouring Sol Invictus. Why do you think it's still called Sunday? Sun day, day of the sun, get it? Try doing a little research.
@babysealio Took over, forced. Yep that's the true origin of your religion. The most brutal became the most popular. Death was the penalty for not believing
One of my favorite videos of yours. Love your passion. Praying that all of these men will be drawn by the Father to have a true revelation of the LORD, Jesus and be saved 🙏🏾🤍
[ Dawkins: Do you believe that Jesus was born of a virgin? Peterson: There are elements of the text I don't feel qualified to comment on ]. Do you need anything more than this? It displays quite clearly that Peterson is hamstrung to call BS where he sees it because he knows who his base is. Any believer would have no problem answering yes immediately.
And btw, he doesn't feel "qualified" ? And who does he think is qualified ? Anyone? Nobody alive today witnessed any of it, and the contradictory accounts are in just a few books. An unclever dodge.
Dawkins' concern is whether or not Christianity is backed by sufficient evidence to assume it is true. That is not relevant to whether biblical stories actually have some moral context.
@@christopherquinn5899 They are, in effect, talking two different subjects, Dawkin's "is the Bible actually true" to Peterson's "the stories present examples of morality".
Dawkins didn't ask if Peterson BELEIVES the text in the Bible, not if he UNDERSTANDS the text. Peterson evades the question by answering to a question that wasn't asked!
Are there positive attributes to Christianity and the belief in Christianity? Yes Is Christianity different and more positive for society than most of the other man-made religions? Yes Can the belief in Christianity give its believers hope, encouragement and a sense of meaning? Yes Is there any objective evidence that any of the supernatural claims within Christianity are true? NO
Any objective evidence that atheism is true? NO. Not only no evidence, but monumental evidence against atheism. We all know that Nothingness cannot exist, but atheists refuse to see this obvious truth.
@@rl7012The rules of logic state that you cannot prove a negative. I cannot prove you did not kick your dog, I can only prove that you did kick your dog. So, no one can prove that God does not exist, they can only prove that he does. In the Bible, Jesus told his disciples he would return in their lifetimes, but he did not. That's pretty strong evidence that he is not God.
@@rhatala27 Jesus makes a solemn prediction that his second coming will take place before all his first followers have died (Mark 9:1; 13:30; Matt. 10:23).
Where does he think Human Rights comes from or an end to Slavery Hospitals Orphanages Aged Care Universities Mandatory Education Equality under the Law Due Process the Scientific Revolution which led to The Industrial Revolution
Love both of these guys, both are not saved. Pray for both! Been awesome watching Peterson over the years, he just needs to become child like and believe!
Just watched this interview this morning, Peterson brought up the history of the scientific method having it’s origins in a remarkably Christian Europe and for explicitly Christian reasons, and Dawkins admitted ignorance. Claiming he doesn’t even know the history of science that well but that it’s possibly related. This is a fair, however skeptic, admission, as it is true.
Bullshit Egyptians were practicing science way before Europe, Bagdad was a great scientific city, the concept of 0 is Arabic. Algorithm, alcohol, algebra, the Al is an Arab word. I am not even considering China, India, and the American natives. Evey part of the world contributed and practiced science, please don't be biased by the present. Even the Christianity religion is pretty young compared to our long history
Brilliant as always my brother in Christ. Blessings to you. And may Mr Dawkins’ heart be softened and cracked open by God’s Grace if that is His will. This conversation points to Grace in such a profound way. Dr Peterson’s humility and reverence and fear in awe of approaching God’s truth is real and an example of someone being born in Christ vs someone who refuses to know God.
Jordan wants to discuss with Dawkins about christianit(like its moral values etc.) but Richard Dawkins didn't want to discuss with Jordan but he wants to debate with Jordan Peterson on Christianity who has no enough knowledge of it. I think He must debate with christian apologists like William lain Craig etc. From whom he terrifies.
Peterson was talking about morals that he thinks only derived from Christian values. Sam Harris schooled Peterson that other belief system as well have morals. Morals can derived from Human conditions.
Jordan has immense insight into the Bible but he seems to have a stumbling block regarding belief in God and Jesus. it seems his intellectual vanity prevents him from admitting to this.
Christ Himself did not answer directly on whose authority He acted upon (Mark 11:33). When a question is not asked in good faith, then we know those asking are not ready for the straight answer. Dawkins cannot move beyond the empirical. Peterson was not going to remain within Dawkins' parameters for the discussion. It is actually brilliant.
I think he realizes that there is 100% zero chance in proving to people the virgin birth, resurrection etc. He talks about what is provable truth, but much of it is thru metaphor and human psychology, but that still makes it true. You just can't get out your calipers and measure it like the atheist scientific folks want before they label anything true. So he recognizes that proclaiming those events as facts does nothing for the debate and actually results in them recoiling from any possibility in bringing them to the light.
@@andrewdurand3181Peterson has already said he doesn’t believe in God, but acts as if he does . I’ve never seen him say anything like that “ I heard a Christian preach the gospel and I repented and Put my faith in Christ alone (not morality) to save me from the coming wrath of God for my sin” Ive never heard him confess the basic fundamentals of the Christian faith. There is a clip on RUclips . It appears he is trying to be a good person . He speaks about the conscience in other videos (which means “with knowledge “ ….. of right and wrong ) . The work of the law is written on our hearts and our conscience bears witness (see Romans ) If he is actually born again and he is trying to preach the gospel then his methods are not biblical and he needs to submit to an eldership and gifted ministries and get discipled and taught what the gospel is and how to effectively communicate it. Christ , Peter , Paul etc were all preachers of repentance. God commands all men everywhere to repent . That should be Peterson message. That is the clarion call of the gospel . That’s the action sinners who are in danger of hell need to be urged to take. We are to proclaim it loud and CLEAR from the rooftops. God bless you Greetings from Scotland
Psalm 73:1-3, 12-26 is a Bible verse that expresses feelings of doubt and envy, and reminds us that it's normal to experience these emotions. Peterson has no problem saying idk to those questions (in his own elaborate way) bc his scientific mind knows these questions can't be proven currently.
For me, Peterson is an spiritual man who sees pragmatic values (He has described himself as a pragmatist before) on Christianity. I actually kinda respect self aware atheists more than this mythic symbolic talk Peterson does. And that’s because as he says a LOT post modernists got right that there is no such thing as truth if God does not exist. So if Peterson does not believe in Jesus the way Jesus asked people to believe in Him, everything Peterson says is a matter of opinion and he is just trying to impose his views on other people. And if he doesn’t believe in the resurrection after all these years talking about the Bible… I mean what else can I say… He values the Bible because it agrees with its values not because he thinks it is true. Do you know what I mean? I can’t comprehend how a person that believes that God exists (any God) and that the God that made the universe couldn’t be able to resurrect someone or make a virgin birth. So in this respect I see Dawkins position more favorably even though I don’t like him very much. And I think he is deeply myopic and don’t seem to really know the bible as much as he says he does. I pray that all three men in this painful debate find Jesus and give their lives to Him. They all suffer from a evil I know too well: pride of the mind, vanity of self observation and delusion that a human being can understand the world around us (not only the material world but the cultural, psychological, cognitive world as well). I used to like Peterson very much and I thank him for giving such respect to the Bible which led me to read the bible and become a Christian. But after reading the Bible I saw how new age peterson is and just picks and chooses the parts of the Bible that he agrees with. That has made me very uncomfortable and sad. He is a great honest smart guy with a capacity for words and convincing people that is admirable but for now, I am having great difficulties listening to him.
It comes down to : Dawkins only believes in the material world. To him, there is no spiritual world because it cannot be physically measured. But he admits in a hierarchy of goodness where “goodness “ has no origin. It just exists like gravity. He really is spiritually blind. Both gravity and goodness (and time etc…) must have a Creator unless they created themselves.
As smart as Dawkins appears to be (which I question…. Just because you can sound smart it doesn’t make you smart).. he is more so a fool. He’s a hypocrite… and he has logic problems.
Washed in the blood of Jesus, I walk in His righteousness, He paid my debt for sin, He brought my salvation with His final work at the cross, by God's grace🙏🏻✝️👑🙌🏻♥️🙏🏻
@anniematushenko9180 this sounds traumatic. Washed in the blood of Jesus? Yikes, I don’t think any all knowing and all loving god would hold their creations to a debt they personally didn’t pay in a trap that the god set up for them. That’s an abusive relationship
Sigh. God bless you all. You are indeed children of God. With exactly the amount of intelligence and ability to think critically as child. God bless you.
I swear Peterson spoke 85 percent of that podcast. Peterson seems to say that look how profound the story of bible is and no one has done it before. Richard seems to say i don't value it. There are countless profound story outside Christianity and those are written by humans before the bible. Jordan is like harry potter fans who over analyse and see the things that aren't even there .
Dawkins wants to have his cake and eat it too. You cannot separate Christianity's fruit from its teaching/truth. Dawkins cannot accept that much we take for granted is directly a result of Christianity.
I’m actually impressed with JP in this conversation and was probably one of the best people Dawkins could have had this conversation with. I don’t agree with JP on everything but for Dawkins I think this was a step forward.
The more I study, the more I know Christ is God. The less I'm sure about why we have to make arguments for Him. I mean, just from what I've witnessed, there's so much historical, moral, philosophical, scientific and other forms of evidence. But, the more I realize, it's just that I need Him. There's no one else who has a better way of being, and on that I stake my claim. I think by living in Grace, you're saved. There doesn't need to be an argument made for or against Him. Just simply a life lived for the Gospel. That's all the evidence that's needed.
Board the John 3:1-21 Ark by the roads of Mark 1:15, 16:16, Luke 13:1-5, 24:47, Matthew 18:1-3, John 1:12, Acts 2:38, Romans 6:1-23, 10:9, Galatians 1:7-9, 1Corinthians 3:18-23 and parallel verses before it is too late - this day, because the door is closing and most will not escape the coming inescapable global flood of fire storm but a remnant and most so called true disciples of the authentic austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ _[God]_ clearly for now are exactly who the true Jesus referred to in Matthew 7:21-23 and parallel verses if you are not truly part of the John 3:1-21 qualified remnant. Selah.
Intelligence and wisdom are not synonyms. We just witnessed a good example of someone intelligent to comprehend difficult aspects of the physical world with zero capacity to grasp the higher depth behind it.
That’s why it’s called faith, you’re accepting either argument on faith, science hasn’t disproven God and I believe there is a creator vs we popped out of nothingness, it must be one or the other.
"Science" _[the word in English]_ comes from the Latin word "Scientia/Scienza" which in sum it means 'practical knowledge'. So according to non-corrupted use of the word "science" _[which Darwin popularised the serious corruption of the word 'science' + it's understanding and correct usage as we see today]_ when you learn how to cut a steak with a knife, that's 'science', when you learn how to ride a bicycle, that's "science", when you learn how to skate on ice, that is science, when you learn how read and write, this is science. So tragically and tormentingly sad though, the definition of 'science' in the Far West has been perversely redefined by Darwin _[who only had one degree, in theology!]_ and lovingly adopted by Communists, Fascists and Socialists _[Social Darwinists]_ to be based solely on materialist, mechanistic, naturalist, atheist view of reality which itself, is a perpetual self-refuting, self destroying, self-demolishing, self-annihilating position.
Science can be a religion itself. We didn't see the beginning of existence, yet scientists believe in the big bang, based on the evidence provided them. Yet still we cannot know for sure, so they have faith that's how things started. Same but different as a Christians faith works. We didn't see it happen, but we have documentation and verifiable proofs on much of it. Neither group can 100% prove or disprove the other. Hence faith.
@@simmorg290 I mean that is essentially the theist position. That God is was and always will be. As we learn more about the universe it seems more apparent that it didn't suddenly come to be out of its own design, and everything we know points to a cosmic clock ticking down.
Yes, it is faith based, but we can make very precise predictions of the future with science. There is no future predictions with religion except maybe after we die and I'd rather not test that.
The goal of science is to develop arguments about how the world is that can be falsified without resorting to the metaphysical, and this includes falsifying initial assumptions. Faith of the religious kind relies on dogma.
That was a great video, it is a relationship with God through Jesus and comforted by the Holy Spirit. 🙌 Jesus has changed my life, I am brighter, think more clearly and through reading scripture discernment of my mind has sharpened exponentially. This is the power of our creator and feel grateful everyday. Why has Dawkins gone and is going the wrong way surely not to stand by what he has written in the public sphere? It is vitally important that Dawkins with all his stubborn scientific background comes to know Jesus at some point! He would make more headlines from doing that than any other thought process.
There's a reason that for all the word salads these 3 men could conjure up, John Lennox can show what fools they are in but a few words. It's because it is not his own wisdom that he relies upon, but God's.
He fears having to live a way contrary to his own will. So ironically he becomes a slave to his will, and paradoxically when we give our will to God and do His, by aligning our will to His, we actually become free. It’s crazy but I can see it, just a little bit but I can. Now easier said than done.
I used to be like this youtuber. I was converted through reading CS Lewis, and began to have a relationship with our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. I went to Bible college, studied apologetics, old and new Testament, hermeneutics, and systematic theology. But doubts began creeping in. I jI talked to my pastor and professors about the conflicts I had with my faith, the way the Bible contradicts then one day I realized that praying is just thinking
@@YuelSea-sw2rpYes, I repented, acknowledged my sin, and I accepted Jesus as my personal Lord and Saviour. I had a relationship with him, and attended Bible College. Then one day I realized that praying is just thinking, and that what I called a relationship God, was a set of relationships with the church, my pastor, my professors, and my imagination. I found freedom in release from the bondage and fear of some sky god judging my soul. It's all imaginary! May you find that Jesus is merely an imaginary friend as well, and freedom from the tyranny of the Bible.
@@caseyspaos448 Were you truly born again to begin with ? Do you fully understand repentance and faith ? Were you convinced of being a sinner ? If not watch evolution v God on RUclips or the Athiest delusion. read pilgrims progress They got off track and ended up in doubting castle We have to put on the full armour of God to quench the fiery darts of the enemy . We need the shield of faith Doubt and unbelief is very dangerous . Read Hebrews with multiple warnings The heart is deceitful. We are led away by our desire for sun and independence and the cares of this short life . See the parable of the sower . If you have truly been born again then please Repent today . Change your mind . Stop sinning and return to God . See the prodigal son
@@caseyspaos448 bible college can mess up peoples heads You find God when you get alone with Him in prayer with an open heart and let Him deal with the sin in your heart God speaks to me . I know God . That is Christianity Your faith could not have matured much if you didn’t hear God speak to you or answer prayers Going to church and studying koine Greek won’t cut it . We have to draw near to Him . Heart to Heart. On our knees When God convinced me I was a sinner my whole life was turned upside down I wanted nothing more than to please God and make Him happy and get to know Him in a greater way . The more I submitted my life to Him thd more He revealed Himself and sometimes in very dramatic undeniable ways
"materialists dismiss the whole sphere of human existance" No, materialist still love their children and it doesn't matter to them if love is a chemical reaction in the brain instead of some magical fairy dust.
@@461weavile It is a quote from Seneca. And I think he was wise, because there is no good reason or evidence to think that it is true as far as I can tell. You have any?
@@461weavile You are very predictable, no evidence. And if you have no good evidence, then it is simply irrational and not wise to think that it is true.
Saying marriage comes from Christianity is ignorant because it ignores the existence of marriage in other cultures and also in cultures before Christianity even existed.
Honest question. Don’t you think Peterson do that too? And for me is even worse because he knows the Bible much more profoundly than Dawkins and he still can bring himself to say that the Bible is true period. That Jesus really was born of a Virgin and that he resurrected. He still believes more in himself and his views of the world than he believes in God. I might be wrong and being unfair, thats also a possibility of course. :)
I agree on the first part.. but I dont think its an ego problem but that his ideas belong to a different paradigm and purpose.. the new atheist movement was all about checking claims of super naturality... these days we dont really concern ourselves with this so much as the religions hold on truth claims have decreased sufficiently...
@@andrealeobons I think the issue you are touching on is that you are taking your faith and making it true and Peterson is not wanting to rely on faith to inform his understanding. You say that the Bible is true period, but that is a faith claim, not a truth claim. Peterson can't have a productive conversation with Dawkins using faith claims. "Yes, I believe Christ was born of a virgin." vs. "Well, I don't believe he was born of virgin." They can agree to disagree and end the conversation. The podcast would last 2 minutes.
These two intellectuals are revelling in their great intelligence. There is a problem. They could have this removed in 1 minute, God forbid, by a stroke or heart attack. Therefore they could be considered prideful in the gifts they were given at birth - and as pride is the greatest block to knowledge of God, it is not surprising that Dawkins has no experience of God. He is getting in his own way. I pray that he opens up his brilliant but very closed mind. If St. Augustine, a great philosopher, can move from intellectual activity to a humble acceptance of the simplicity of the gospels, then why does Mr. Dawkins believe he is cleverer than this great thinker. Also, as an artist, my observations of character, he does not look like a happy man - he looks worried, stressed and unhappy. I went from aetheism to Catholicism - his arguments re the Virgin Mary are those of a 12 year old.
How dare you presume to judge one of God's creations. You have no right, and no authority to pass judgement onto Dawkins. God placed him upon his journey as he has on yours. When you stand before judgement, you will answer for the pride you are demonstrating here, and you should fall on your knees and beg for forgiveness for the slight you have done against His creation.
The Bible tells us God’s love is stronger and than truth. Philippians 4:7 “And the Peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.”
@@sigurdholbarki8268 It wasn't an appeal to authority, it was representing an objective fact (Dawkins is a credited academic) and weighing it against an anonymous subjective opinion. Nothing Dawkins says should be taken as true because of who he is, I say only that the question of Dawkins being a deep thinker is already demonstrated.
When i was a member of the atheist religion, i believed that peterson was a preacher of the atheist faith. Dawkins is still a pastor of the atheist religion. Sure do kove seeing i was wrong about Peterson at this point on my life.
Aye- I remember when a lot of loud atheist voices were dissing peterson when he had his health crisis. I was atheist then and it hit me oddly the ire so many had towards him. Glad to have escaped that dark place.
@Readrose8 (on dark places) Yes! God Yes! One of the primary reasons I abandoned the atheist religion is how rude *we* get to good people that only want to help. It was a very dark and nasty time of my life. This Jesus thing made everything clear and beautiful.
The religion of evolution has Darwin as their Pope, Dawkins and Degrasse as their high priests, the museum of natural history is their cathedral and the missing link is their messiah.
@RemnantDiscipleLazzaro-Rev1217 even as an atheist we never saw this missing link. I haven't completely abandoned evolution, but got stuck on this question. If we come from an ape like creature, what happened to the fish, bird, and reptile people? Where can I go to see evidence of evolution as explained by 1800, 1900, and 2k technology? What is the big bang? What is the god partical? How is light created? How is a star older than the universe? Why are stilagmite growing on steel hand rails in caverns? Once I gave up on magic theory and conjecture, and out of frustration asked Jesus to forgive my ignorance and show me what I am missing, boom. All new world.
@@Mbrace818 Oh, I'm certain he understands. The idea that the Christian worldview is more predictive of reality than the atheistic one is not a new idea. He certainly knows about this. If he knows the bible half as well as he says he does, then he knows this. Yet here he is pretending that Christian metaphysics does not predict the universe, life, reason and consciousness, etc., while the atheistic one does. No, he knows that he has no reason-based position.
@@kos-mos1127 This has nothing to do with Christianity, but with God. Hopefully you will one day realize you need Jesus, preferably before it's too late.
I was a completely anti-religion atheist until I started listening to Jordan Peterson he's gotta be one of the greatest all time evangelist. He was one of the only people able to make it make sense for me so I now I see it has great value even if I'm still agnostic.
Make what make sense ? He doesn’t preach the gospel . Do you understand what repentance and faith are ? Law, sin, death , judgment, hell, amazing grace , repentance and faith Do you understand what the bible teaches about these things ?
@@ourclarioncall wouldn't say I understand it in the same way you do just saying where as before I dismissed religion out of hand now I see it as at the very least being time tested, profound and having deep insight into the human condition.
@@generaltso5592 sorry mate , I didn’t fully catch everything you wrote . Yes , I understand what you mean. I really like Jordan and he seems to be realising the depth of truth through the lens of his field of expertise. Praying for you mate . Greetings from Scotland 🏴
At 8:30 is where Dawkins lost. He failed to understand that even fiction is based in truth. For example. A murder mystery is not valid unless humans do in fact commit murder.
@@VilVideos And he failed to make that point. The hilarious thing is, Dawkins was trying to win a debate where Peterson was having a learn-ed discussion.
Dawkins (and that guy in the middle) are two of the most obnoxious and dogmatic atheists that I have had the displeasure listening to. There are many others, also, but they all seem to follow the same script. There is always a level of cognitive dissonance.
Do you feel the same way about " obnoxious and dogmatic" Muslims? Or " obnoxious and dogmatic" Christians? Or " obnoxious and dogmatic" Buddhists? They are asking for facts. If you're in the jury box, do you not ask for facts? If you're seeking a medical diagnosis, do you not ask for facts? Surely you would, right? Why would you not ask for facts when it pertains to claims about the condition of your soul? Do you just want stories that confirm your presuppositions?
@@CMA418 most definitely. It is ALWAYS about the FACTS. The problems are about what is accepted as FACTS. There much to do about the interpretation of information that suddenly is presented as a fact, when it actually IS NOT. Maybe check out skeptical 'reviewer', David Berlinski.
“Christianity began in Palestine as a fellowship (a relationship), and then moved to Greece and became a philosophy (way to think). Afterward, it moved on to Rome and became an institution (a place you go) and then to Europe where it became a culture (a way of life). Finally it settled in America where it has become an enterprise (a business).” - Sam Pascoe
@@krejdloc Maths aren't evidence for anything... there you go, the entire field of Western Science trashed by one small, yet, incredibly sdignificant truth. TOFF-EE!!!! :P
@@ShuggieEdvaldson Yet 2000+ year old fables designed to enslave and control people with the promise of rewards AFTER your DEAD is perfectly TRUE. Please loan me $2000 dollars... I will pay you back in heaven. I Promise.
As somebody who’s only come to Christ just a few months ago, I really do pray that somehow Richard is able to find the way to the truth. The feeling I had when I truly believed and was granted with the Holy Spirit is something I have never experienced before, EVER!! Keep the good work up on this channel brother, your doing amazing work ❤
Thank you for the encouragement & for sharing this short but powerful testimony! God is so good! Welcome home! 🙏❤️
@@Daily_Dose_Of_Wisdommuch appreciated. God bless ❤
He probably will in some time in his life...isn't going to be the first one!
@@renierramirez9534 god willing, I hope he does 🙏
I highly doubt it after the damage he has done to millions of people's faith. It would be an injustice if he made heaven after damming millions to hell with his teachings. I think God is more fair than that. Dawkins heart has long been hardened and darkened, he will never relent from his foolish idea that there is no God, his pride will never allow it.
This is such a weird conversation. Peterson absolutely refuses to talk to the historicity of the Biblical accounts while Dawkins absolutely refuses to acknowledge moral truths having value on their own.
I thought the same thing.
One is drunk on symbolism; the other is drunk on empirical facts. A sobering moment for both of them.
It's only reasonable in my view to question the value of moral truth. In essence there is no moral truth, it's just a human concoction. Most of the jive on this channel only claims some form of taboo as being a supreme methodology but this can only be in defiance of scientific analysis. Come out of your trance folks.
The historicities cannot be proven with evidence. The question do you believe in the sacrifice of Abraham is a trap because what kind of person does that? Why would you believe in that.
Dawkins can acknowledge the moral truths just fine. He was just trying to see if Jordan really thinks those things happened. That's important because believing those things *actually* happened, is much different than treating the bible as fiction. If someone took Harry Potter literally they might act in delusional ways, such as trying to cast spells, much like christians do, who pray for help.
Jordan struggles to fully embrace the Bible as absolute Truth, finding it difficult to accept its teachings in a literal sense. Instead, he approaches it through the lens of symbolism and semi-fiction, viewing its stories and lessons as meaningful allegories rather than historical or divine facts. For Jordan, the Bible functions more as a rich tapestry of moral and philosophical ideas-valuable, but not necessarily factual. He sees the narratives as metaphors that convey deeper truths about human nature, ethics, and spirituality, but stops short of accepting them as the infallible word of God. He seems to be on a spiritual limbo, and Dawkins is poking him.
You put it perfectly.
Because he is to smart to understand that its not actually true
Excellent observation.
you described my situation well
the problem is that there is much you learned that goes against that which if you accepted the bible as fully historically factual, it would make it seemingly impossible to make sense of the other experiences you had so far in life that you base on a lot
I’ve been there. He has to know to know…his belief isn’t enough yet. I eventually overcame that and gave my full self to Christ. Jordan can and I believe will do the same.
Dawkins: “Do you believe the Bible is a book?” Peterson, “Well, that’s a profoundly complex inquiry. The Bible, as a cultural artifact, encapsulates multifaceted narratives that shape human consciousness. Can we truly confine its essence to the mere definition of a ‘book’?”
Has Peterson ever answered a yes or no question with just a "yes" or a "no"? The dude loves to listen to himself spin up word salads that don't end up meaning anything! Sheesh!
The book we write every day through our DNA is the eternal story of heaven and earth. It is the Temple of Worship.
@@RyoHazuki224 If you have ever seen those "explain X concept at 5 different levels of education" videos Jordan Peterson seems to always speak as if he is answering in the PHD level of complexity. Regardless of if it may have some benefit to 3rd party listeners oversimplify a few things. I quite like his answer, but you can definitely say essentially the same thing by saying "No, it is more than just a book."
@@RyoHazuki224❗️💯❗️
@@RyoHazuki224 It actually means a lot. Maybe it is not the answer in the way you want to hear it, or the ultimate answer, but to say it is purely meaningless is simply not true. Maybe you don't find much meaning in there, but it doesn't mean there isn't really a meaning, when you look. It is a valid perspective. Which does not mean it is the "ultimate perspective of Christianity."
PS: It is actually a good representation that you gave. Made me laugh on the inside, too.
He loves apples. He hates trees.
Richard Donkins
@@morefiction3264 haha nicely put
@@dan13770 Can't claim credit. Got it from David Woods.
Kinda dumb statement. Apple’s come solely from Apple trees. Virtues come from many traditions and not just Christianity.
@@fzrnikoI don't think you understand or know which comment of Richard Dawkins this is referring to. For what you are saying makes no sense. It has nothing to do with virtues.
Philosophical Materialist (Dawkins) argues with a Philosophical Idealist (Peterson).
These arguments don't improve the discussion in any positive way.
People should understand that there is nothing Divine that can be proven with a 100% certainty in the material realm.
And then to discuss the spiritual/idealistic realm to the materialist just for him to shrug it off as "fairy tale" because of the lack of material empirical evidence and not understanding the 'above-logical' nature of the immaterial.
It literally is a fairy tale tho, this metaphysical you speak of.
@@DM-dk7js Then I guess love, logic, emotions, consciousness, morality, good and evil are all apart of a fairytale because these things are all metaphysical. But we all intuitively know these exist, including God, you just don't want God to exist because you don't want to wrestle with the idea of being morally responsible to a Holy and just God for your lifestyle choices.
@@sheriffcrandy that or their life sucks, and they so no God would do this to me, he must not exist
@@sheriffcrandy arguing about historical truth includes non metaphysical claims of which even those are questionable and some are unlikely. Especially with regards to the old testament
@@sheriffcrandy couldn't have said it better myself 🙏
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools". Pray that God opens both dr. Dawkins and dr. Petersons hearts and minds. Please Lord set them free!
@@btprice3001 don’t be stupid Dawkins is telling the truth based on evidence why would he believe in god he’s far to intelligent for that rubbish
@TracyMorton-i1e that's just an ignorant comment to be honest
@ really well where is your proof of god then
@@stevenosullivan187 do you think a man of this intellect is ever going to believe in something there is no evidence for that’s what he has said oh the world is turning its back on religion as we have more understanding of how life began this man I can bet my life on will never believe in a sky daddy so could you please stop forcing imaginary things on people who plain and simply do not believe in things with out evidence
@@TracyMorton-i1e John Lennox and Hugh Ross. I pray that God will find his way into your heart as well. God bless.
If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? John 3:12
Exactly. JESUS is too accurate. Yikes!
“Truth is a tricky business.” - No it’s not.
“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.”
Romans 1:18-19
Well, why should I believe what Paul wrote?
@@nitsujism that’s simple my friend, use the very same process that you use to examine every truth claim - examine the evidence. Do yourself a favour and read The Bible. 😀
@@simonbrown1486 I did, and I have. Which is why I'm not a Christian.
@@nitsujism I’m sorry to hear that.
Spot on biblical verse with a good context for this conversation
The mental gymnastics of Jordan Peterson is something to applaud 👏🏾
@@joebuydem it takes an agile mind to do do so; Something that Dawkins clearly lacks!
@@djfortunomusic cope.
@@djfortunomusic C'mon that guy suffered a stroke a while back and he's still so much smarter than JBP
@@deussivenatura5805 superficial, brazen comment. Dawkins approves.
@@deussivenatura5805 and brian Green?
I have gotten so much from this channel. Thank you for breaking some of these conversations down!
Dawkins talks about virtue, but proclaims that he lives in a universe of blind moral indifference. His position is incoherent.
Virtue - behaviour showing high moral standards.
Don't need religion to show such behaviour and in some instances (As noted by Dawkins) religion hinders such behaviour.
@@stuartdavidson162 Why are you introducing “religion” into it? The observation has nothing to do with religion.
@@stuartdavidson162 the problem is if atheists are right, there's no objective basis for morality. It all waters down to relative feelings or opinions, which implies morality itself is imaginary, therefor defeating the whole concept of it.
OBJECTIVE morality, as we understand with our conscience, only makes sense if there's God AT LEAST in SOME religious / deistic way. Which is the point when pointing out HOW scientifically can anyone call Islam morally worse than Christianity? It's not a scientific standard, but we seem to agree on some objective standard, so where does our conscience derive from if not God? If it's an evolved feeling, you've watered it down to relativity. If it's laws or culture, you've watered it down to relativity. All the secular replacements don't really hold much water as anything objective, and science cannot measure such a thing.
If atheists are right, the logical conclusion is Nietche was right, since he was consistent about it, and morality is just emotion.
If your conscience is on fire right now reading that, urging you to insist that's wrong and morality IS objective, that's part of my point. Where is that coming from? I hope for your own soul's sake you humbly admit it must be conviction from God. Because otherwise, how will you stay sane?
@SandwichDoctorZ 💥💥👍
That's what happens when you live by a double standard.
Peterson continually tries to avoid answering the simple question of whether he actually believes Jesus was born of a virgin, was the son of God, and rose from the dead.
His tap dancing around the subject only makes him look more ridiculous.
Because it is utterly unimportant to his claims. He is not trying to prove the world is 6000 years old. He is trying to figure out how morality can exist at all.
@@forsakenquery It's easy how morality exists. It exists subjectively. Morality is most likely stance dependent. That's all you need.
@@forsakenquery I think it’s important to make the distinction that hardly any Christians actually think the world is only 6000 years old. That’s not actually a commonly held belief that’s like less than 1% of the Christian population.
Christ IS King!
Most who profess "the Christ is King" _[the accurate way to state it (not "Christ is King") in the Kingdom of God/Jesus language that true John 3:1-21 qualifiers are commanded to communicate in by Him]_ are the same who the authentic austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ _[God]_ referred to in _[I'm only doing what the true austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ/the Christ Jesus commands as an elder John 3:1-21 qualified one]_ Matthew 7:13, 21-23, 13:14-15, 15:7-9, 19:16-19, 24:11, Revelation 3:15-16, 21:8, 22:15 and all parallel verses is what the authentic austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ _[God]_ has to declare about the so many who claim the Christ is King. i pray you get your road to Damascus conversion _[true John 3:1-21 qualified conversion which only a remnant of such exist every generation]_ before it's too late if ye are not yet for tomorrow is not promised and eternal perdition is a mighty eternal long time to wish with all you are that you made such different choices when you were on earth in the flesh so you would have never entered into the eternal incomprehensible, ineffable, infathomable, inimaginable misery, pain, suffering, torment, wailing and gnashing of teeth Lake of Fire where the worm dieth not and where the fires are never quenched. Selah.
Dawkins is reminiscent of the scene in Goodfellas, when Tommy tells the cop: "what are you doing
here? Thought I told you to go f your mother". Dawkins says he has discovered an absolute "God killer";
infinite regress. To wit: everything must have regresses, ergo God must have a precedent. BUUTTT....
several times in his first two chapters of The God Delusion he qualifies the gods he contests as "supernatural".
NOTHING suggests Dawkins knows the etiology of "infinite regress". He seems to maybe think Aeschylus, Thucydides,
Plato, Hawkins, Hulk Hogan ..provided that gasper. Irrespective his gaping mawing lack of knowledge, it's
the 1st Law of Thermodynamics: energy can never originate ex nihilo. THIS universe of ENERGY can therefore
have only regresses. BUT...that's the most proven of all natural law known to humans (Einstein's observation).
If God is supernatural, as the fn fool qualifies in his own book, ITS NOT SUBJECT TO NATURAL LAW!!!
THAT'S WHAT SUPERNATURAL MEANS!!!!
It makes no difference to me if Christ is King.
@@WayneLynch69 Supernatural means beyond the understanding of man not beyond the universe.
@@WayneLynch69 Thank you for that. Eloquently stated _[minus the abbreviated curse word 'fn' if i am reading that correctly]._ I am aware of such subject matter you mentioned more so than not, but the way you stated it, including the analogy, and what you have observed about Dawkins, was edifying, insightful, keen and veritable. Thanks again.
Dawkins is the perfect example of “in their unrighteousness they suppress the truth”. Romans 1:18. The man is too prideful to admit there’s any truth in Christianity. You mean to tell me there’s nothing in the Be Attitudes that’s true? Come on.
Like trying to hold a basketball under water, it takes a lot of work to suppress the Truth.
@@Daily_Dose_Of_WisdomIt’s a dangerous game to play.
I wish people studied Bible history with sharp competence so they would learn the authentic austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ didn't teach "Christianity" but rather "The Way."
@@RemnantDiscipleLazzaro-Rev1217 I've been listening to the book "Musashi" by Eiji Yoshikawa and man... your comment really resonates with me, and not in some sort of "all religions lead to God" or gnostic fashion. I kept thinking of Jesus' "I am the way" and felt Musashi was desperately seeking God. I found myself wishing I could tell Musashi "Repentance and Faith, Musashi! FAITH!" It's too bad his eyes were fogged with Zen Buddhism. The book illustrated clearly the folly of pride and honor.
Spiritual blindness. How is it possible for a man to be so blind to his blatant hypocrisy? I felt I was watching man literally under a spell, being mind controlled by a demon. I'm dumbfounded by Atheists constantly how unaware they are. They take for granted what good and evil is. It's the story of Genesis.
2Tim 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 1Corinth 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with GOD. For it s written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
I’ve come to realize that despite his diction and delivery, Dawkins is actually not a very deep thinker at all when it comes to metaphysical things. I’m not discounting his scientific achievements and career, it’s just becomes obvious he hasn’t thought very deeply beyond that when he quickly dismisses things as matter of fact when they are, in fact, not.
Btw, there’s nothing wrong with people like Dawkins that are very intelligent when it comes to “book smarts” but lack the ability to think more abstractly. Just don’t then pretend you have thought beyond the simple conclusion that because you can’t measure God he doesn’t exist.
He is not that intelligent anyway. He only understands his own subject at surface level but cannot explain evolution or how it works or why it contradicts the basic laws of physics. He can't understand maths, physics, cosmology, any type of philosophy or other point of views. I would class him as less than average intelligence and very closed minded and deluded in his understanding.
@@rl7012 And you'd be wrong. He's written countless books explaining how evolution works. And it doesn't conflict with the basic laws of physics in any way whatsoever.
@@nitsujism Yes it does. He explains nothing scientifically it is just a fairy story. Scientifically evolution contradicts science. It contradicts genetics as mutations are deleterious 99.9% of the time and Evolution contradicts the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
@@rl7012wow,
Less than average.
What religion could make people do
@@nitsujismevolution is a fairytale not “science”
Watch the entire interview and note how he seems to be pleading with him, and the host, to leave the cave but they simply refuse to even consider the possibility.
I definitely felt that.
Pride is a sturdy prison.
@@CSUnger this was exactly how my dad approached life, too (he passed last year, age 72). I’ve always said of my dad that “Sagan was his Chesterton”. As such, I’m quite familiar with this line of thought (coming from Dawkins) and totally resonate with how you greatly articulated it with “…but they simply refuse to even consider the possibility”. Yes, and to even entertain the notion on a purely philosophical front is to go against the very fabric they hold so dear in their faith in science and the physical-only world.
O'Connor is getting there. In his interview with Same harris he admits that Atheism has a deep flaw concern moral ethics. That they can only go on ethical feeling or what someone feels is ethical or not which causes and whole host of other problems. Yet O'connor 100% says that there has to be more to it for a society to setup an ethical standard of what is good and moral.
Before Christianity, society would sacrifice women, children, men, whoever to their gods in order to appease them.
If you look Christianity is the only religion in which God sacrificed part of himself for people not the other way around.
Christianity is a farce. It is as true as Thor and Krishna and Anubis
JPB knows enough now. All that's missing is for him to stop saying "It's difficult and complicated" and take it on trust, in a very simple and childlike way. The longer he puts this off, the wordier he will get and the less he'll have to say.
Still don't like the fact that that Jordan Petersen doesn't answer the question directly, Yes! Jesus is real, he defeated death and is the resurrection.
You may not like it, but answering a question with 'I don't know and I don't claim to know' is more honest than saying yes and not meaning it full heartedly. Only we and God know the state of our heart. Would you be willing to lie in the face of that truth?
Because he is still battling with his own intellectual honesty. He wants to say no, but he's aware that would alienate a fair chunk of his fan base.
How did you know that? Did you see it by your eyes or someone film it? If it is not the case, so you don't know it, you believe it. knowing is far different from believing.
He's explained why he doesn't answer directly. Because to believe in something is to die on that hill. You may claim to be willing to get skinned alive for this truth, but when you're actually strapped to a chair being skinned alive..... well, the path is narrow.
you have to remember he was talking to a man who doesnt believe anything Biblical
It's difficult for a former atheist who is not yet fully persuaded in the gospel to defend it.
You are in a great position to look in a more reflective manner. Use pen and paper. Stay true to yourself and never accept things that don’t make any sense to you.
Most human beings are too comfortable to notice there was anything to notice in the first place.
Peterson is still an Atheist
@3:40 😂 "Virtually Nothing"
Picture this: you breeze through life, completely ignoring tutorials, and even rally everyone to do the same. You end up with a big crowd of followers who also skip the tutorial. But as the tutorial wraps up, you realize you haven't figured out how to advance to the next level before time's up, yet you still won't follow the tutorial. In the end, the game wraps up, and a lot of people are left facing their game over screens. This is where many people are at and they refuse to see game over is closer than they think.
Good analogy!
I agree with DDoW... keen analogy.
Dawkins doesn’t care about the truth. His only purpose, regardless of the cost, is that the message of the gospel should fail. And he doesn’t care how many he brings down with him. It’s almost like the spirit within him is the same that scripture says is the lord of this world.
Don't skip the tutorials. Stay in school. Learn about the scientific theory of evolution.
@@obsoletecd-rom Dawkins wants to know if what he is believing is true. There is no point in believing in something just because it makes you feel good.
Ngl i can honestly see Dawkins having one of the most tear jerking change of heart when his eyes are opened. Pray for this man
What a bizarre thing to concern yourself with-another person’s death. Quite sick actually.
@@DM-dk7jslmfao wut
@@DM-dk7js he’s wishing him well as himself, Not death and hell like most Christians I’ll give him that
When people debate things that really do not matter, this is the conversation you end up with....
It starts to matter greatly when you end up with seven Catholics on the supreme Court. That can affect our whole country in a very anti-democratic way.
@@stevegold7307 😂😂 Just two old eggheads
The problem that causes them to talk past each other is that Dawkins is focused on physical truth while Peterson is more interested in philosophical truth.
In other words, dawkins is purely physical/material, and Peterson acknowledges the metaphysical/immaterial.
Dawkins is so myopic that essentially his philosophy is that if man can understand it, then it makes no sense. That sounds a lot to me like believing he himself or man are God, the arbiters of truth alone.
Morals themselves aren't physical, and the only way to make it so is some robotic utilitarian philosophy which operates on production and material gain over all other emotions like love and compassion.
He's so blind in his own arrogance and self righteousness it's actually sad.
@@dartskihutch4033 Physicalism is a metaphysical position. There is no way to scientifically test physicalism. The only thing that one could conclude is physicalism / materialism have practical utility. The immaterial / neoplatonism is just philosophizing for the sake of philosophizing.
@@kos-mos1127 that doesnt make sense for the physical to also be the metaphysical. That's like saying order is also chaos. They are two distinctions yet i agree of the same coin. Can you physically prove in a lab the metaphysical logic of Pinocchio's paradox? It's an absurd statement.
Truth is found is both physical and metaphysical disciplines. The real enemy are those who decide one over the other is the real* truth, and the other is wrong. They exist in tandem, and without the metaphysical logic and philosophy, we divide ourselves from creative growth.
Again, a hypothesis exists as a philosophy, and if said philosophy can be tested physically, we call that science. If it cannot, it can only be tested against another's metaphysical logic and understanding. Ethics for example are not a physically tested phenomenon, yet although unsolved (just as physical logic isnt), we can arrive at truth without a test tube. All logic and truth starts with the mind asking questions.
Jordan is plenty interested in physical truth, he just doesn't want anyone to think he is.
@@dartskihutch4033 Materialism / Physicalism are metaphysical statements taken as apriori assumption as a starting place for reasoning and logic. There is no way to scientifically prove materialism / physicialism.
Hey dude just want to say I really appreciate your channel!!!
Dawkins kept saying "that doesn't impress me," as if impressing him is what makes something profound. His ego stands directly between him and the truth of the Bible.
Such is pride. Makes me appreciate God's Word even more when He warns us not to be proud of knowing anything but to trust Him alone.
No, the absurdity of the Bible is what stands between him and the Bible
@faltron533 what is the truth of the Bible?
@@grega2638that Jesus is the way. The truth and the life
He's obviously a big fan of Shania Twain...
hehe!
Dawkins becomes less and less intelligible the longer he spends in public life.
Jordan Petersen is a different kind of lost. He feels like he's stretching out for every reason to not submit to the Lord.
Pray for his conversion.
I’m actually so ridiculously tired of hearing Jordan Peterson talk in circles over and over again when presented with a straightforward question. Stop with the intellectualization and answer the question.
It means he either has to deny or submit to Our Lord. And his luciferian pride does not allow that.
Then don't watch....no ones forcing you to.
Obscurantism at its worst
What were these questions in your opinion?
I like that. We should not take for granted the mercy, tolerance and loving kindness brought about by Christ.
"so, you believe that there's only the material? Well, I wish the best and I'll pray for you", that's the most I'd be capable to say, honestly don't know how Dr Peterson has so much patience
He’s the one with the patience?! He talked the entire time.
I’ve never seen Dawkins more patient. He thinks this is nonsense. He still sat and listened to JP repeat himself ever more emotionally for an hour and a half. I understand this is a religious based channel, but try to have some perspective.
Both are second death qualified.
@@DisrespectfulRob Dawkins answers are one dimensional while Jordans covers multiple layers like their not even In the same league of intellect
@@DisrespectfulRob I didn't know this is a religious based channel as u say. What I meant is that this discussion can be reduced to a simple agreement that they have different axioms of belief that right now can't be reconciled, and they're aware of this, but Dr Peterson continues trying to "move the needle" let's say, in Dr Dawkins belief; from a Christian perspective he's not giving up on saving Dr Dawkins soul, while from other perspective it might seem like an exercise in futility
Dawkins is, still, a pseudointellectual.
He really is. Every time I hear him I am astonished at his intellectual weakness and closed mindedness. Most unscientific indeed.
And peterson is a bastion of intellect :D
Duh, wrong way round. Petersen obfuscates all the time so it is never clear what he's saying. Dawkins isn't particularly articulate, but he clearly says what he means.
Do you know anything about his body of work over 50+ years?
@@neilprocter I wouldnt' say Peterson obfuscates necessarily. He seeems to think in very abstract terms.
Everyone is going to die and will regret not making the time necessary to understand Jesus Christ.
I wish JP would answer a yes or no question with a yes or a no.
He doesn't believe the gospel is true, but doesn't want to be perceived as a non-believer for some reason.
Simplistic interpretation does not make complex things simple, General Tennar.
Its good that he is honest though because he does not come off as a christian he is not. He is only seeing parts of it to be true. Hopefully he will be saved dawkins too. Praying for both.
@@litigioussociety4249 ✔✔
@@litigioussociety4249 totally false, he’s a christian. He’s said it publicly and has even prayed on a live event. He just sees things in a very deep and complex way, and doesn’t like to answer in a yes, or no, because he understands the implications of answering in a very cut dry answer when the debate itself is queue towards asking scientific questions to a complex metaphysical one
Dawkins suffers from foot in mouth disease and the pride of saving face, may our sweet Lord heal him 🙏
Proverbs 16:18.
@@RemnantDiscipleLazzaro-Rev1217 1 Corinthians 1:18 as well
@@Jaydabwoy 👍👍Amen
Peterson suffers from a disease that prevent him from answering simple questions.
Sweet?
Why not ask believers: I'm an atheist, but I want to know about monotheists for my personal understanding:
In your opinion:
- Did you read ALL the Bible: All pages.
- Is there only one God? Which one?
- What, who is God?
- Why hasn't anyone ever seen God? Why doesn't he ever show up? A reason?
Thank you,
Jean-Jacques THIBOUT.
My religious CV: Born 1949, French, baptized, cathecism. Then Atheist at / from 20.
"He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”- Robert Jastrow
yes, those Hindus had it right all along!!
@wiffleballer28 that is some lofi trolling. Perhaps some coffee will perk up that wit a bit?
@@kydelastra lol why don't you provide some reason why Jastrow's "theologians" couldn't have been Hindu, or Norse, or Egyptian, or a hundred other religious leaders who have been "sitting there for centuries?" I'm listening!
@wiffleballer28 I don't have to, it's a popular quote with direct context. You're trying to add things to it to muddy the water, so to speak. Being indignant does equate to a "gocha".
@@kydelastra He's not muddying the water - theologians are validly theologians in a variety of different religious contexts with contradictory cosmologies, beliefs, and events. It's probably why Jastrow said "Theologians" and not "Christian Theologians" in his quote. It's a little bit like you're constricting the sayings of the author to fit your rather narrow interpretation. It really seems like you're trying to add things to it to muddy the water, so to speak.
Bad things done - in the name of Christianity - is ABUSE. Any ABUSE is bad. Nothing exists called: 'justifiable abuse'! Abuse is abuse. Period. 'In the name of Christianity' has nothing to do with the act. Following Christ isn't done 'in the Name of Christ', it is simply done because Christ demonstrated The Way, The Truth, and The Life. If you aren't following Christ's commands, you aren't being 'Christian'.
Christ COMMANDED: "Love God with all your heart, mind, and soul. Love your neighbors as yourself. Love your ENEMIES."
Now, tell me again all the atrocities done while following these COMMANDS of Christ???
Deviating is NOT 'following'. No one does it well enough. We all fall short and need a savior. Praise the Lord.
So true, if someone walks in a school and starts shooting “in the name of science” that doesn’t mean science is evil. It’s the act, and has nothing to do with science. People who did bad stuff “in the name of Christ” clearly knew very little about scripture.
I LOVE these videos and your content. One thing though, I wish when you were giving your sidebar explanations that you wouldn't let part of the original video playout on 'mute' because I always wonder how much of the original context of the follow-up response I actually lost or if I might come to a slightly different conclusion than yourself. Again, Love it and keep up the good work!
My Shaolin Master told me "don't waste your time on stubborn sceptics".
“Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces."
Wise
Not a Christian BTW
Dawkins says Christianity got virtually nothing right yet enjoys the benefits of living in a "Christian" society. Dawkins should do some studying of the history of pagan societies before they were Christianized.
I'm sure he has. There are pagan elements incorporated in Christianity, Easter for example.
@mirandahotspring4019 Easter itself is not a pagan tradition, how people have celebrated by integrating their pagan traditions makes it seem pagan. But the actual celebration of Easter itself and it's origins are solely Christian in nature, and this is something we see celebrated since the beginning of Christianity in the Bible and the early Church Fathers.
@@richardbonnette490 Oh come on! Easter was a pagan fertility festival, to celebrate the Spring equinox. It is named from Ēastre, the name of a goddess associated with spring. That's why we still have Easter eggs and the Easter bunny, eggs and rabbits, both symbols of fertility!
Christianity simply appropriated older festivals because it's easier to take over old traditions than bring in new ones. Even Christmas, which was originally the annual festival of sun worship, the winter solstice that saw the return of Sol Invictus, the invincible sun.
Even the day of worship was changed from the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday) to the day honouring Sol Invictus. Why do you think it's still called Sunday? Sun day, day of the sun, get it?
Try doing a little research.
@@mirandahotspring4019It’s cute how we took over holidays that were once pagan and turned them into being Jesus ❤ Praise God
@babysealio Took over, forced. Yep that's the true origin of your religion. The most brutal became the most popular. Death was the penalty for not believing
One of my favorite videos of yours. Love your passion. Praying that all of these men will be drawn by the Father to have a true revelation of the LORD, Jesus and be saved 🙏🏾🤍
[ Dawkins: Do you believe that Jesus was born of a virgin? Peterson: There are elements of the text I don't feel qualified to comment on ]. Do you need anything more than this? It displays quite clearly that Peterson is hamstrung to call BS where he sees it because he knows who his base is. Any believer would have no problem answering yes immediately.
And btw, he doesn't feel "qualified" ? And who does he think is qualified ? Anyone? Nobody alive today witnessed any of it, and the contradictory accounts are in just a few books. An unclever dodge.
Dawkins' concern is whether or not Christianity is backed by sufficient evidence to assume it is true. That is not relevant to whether biblical stories actually have some moral context.
My Shaolin Master told me "don't waste your time on stubborn sceptics".
Nothing will be enough for Dawkins.
@@christopherquinn5899 They are, in effect, talking two different subjects, Dawkin's "is the Bible actually true" to Peterson's "the stories present examples of morality".
Dawkins didn't ask if Peterson BELEIVES the text in the Bible, not if he UNDERSTANDS the text. Peterson evades the question by answering to a question that wasn't asked!
Are there positive attributes to Christianity and the belief in Christianity? Yes
Is Christianity different and more positive for society than most of the other man-made religions? Yes
Can the belief in Christianity give its believers hope, encouragement and a sense of meaning? Yes
Is there any objective evidence that any of the supernatural claims within Christianity are true? NO
Any objective evidence that atheism is true? NO. Not only no evidence, but monumental evidence against atheism. We all know that Nothingness cannot exist, but atheists refuse to see this obvious truth.
@@rl7012The rules of logic state that you cannot prove a negative. I cannot prove you did not kick your dog, I can only prove that you did kick your dog. So, no one can prove that God does not exist, they can only prove that he does. In the Bible, Jesus told his disciples he would return in their lifetimes, but he did not. That's pretty strong evidence that he is not God.
Where did he say he would return in the lifetime if the apostles?
@@user-vu7yt8pm4p Prove that nothingness can exist then. And what evidence would you consider as proof of god?
@@rhatala27 Jesus makes a solemn prediction that his second coming will take place before all his first followers have died (Mark 9:1; 13:30; Matt. 10:23).
Dawkins has been blinded as tight as can be.
I love watching Peterson debate. He never dissapoints!
The issue with Dawkins is that he's trying to measure the ocean with a ruler. Then dismiss the existence of the ocean when his ruler can't do the job.
So do you want to measure the ocean in angel wings or magical unicorn breaths instead?
Its just not acceptable to insert the super natural because we don't don't the ruler yet
Where does he think Human Rights comes from or an end to Slavery Hospitals Orphanages Aged Care Universities Mandatory Education Equality under the Law Due Process the Scientific Revolution which led to The Industrial Revolution
humans
Love both of these guys, both are not saved. Pray for both! Been awesome watching Peterson over the years, he just needs to become child like and believe!
Just watched this interview this morning, Peterson brought up the history of the scientific method having it’s origins in a remarkably Christian Europe and for explicitly Christian reasons, and Dawkins admitted ignorance. Claiming he doesn’t even know the history of science that well but that it’s possibly related. This is a fair, however skeptic, admission, as it is true.
Why’s that such an important point, anyway??
Bullshit Egyptians were practicing science way before Europe, Bagdad was a great scientific city, the concept of 0 is Arabic.
Algorithm, alcohol, algebra, the Al is an Arab word. I am not even considering China, India, and the American natives. Evey part of the world contributed and practiced science, please don't be biased by the present. Even the Christianity religion is pretty young compared to our long history
@@Jules-z4e Wrong!, Zero is actually Indian, including the numerical numbering system, which the Arabs passed on as their own, So you don't know sh*t.
Brilliant as always my brother in Christ. Blessings to you. And may Mr Dawkins’ heart be softened and cracked open by God’s Grace if that is His will. This conversation points to Grace in such a profound way. Dr Peterson’s humility and reverence and fear in awe of approaching God’s truth is real and an example
of someone being born in Christ vs someone who refuses to know God.
what chapter and verse from the original copy that the son of god is talking or preaching about christian or christianity?
Great vid, thank you for putting this together.
Jordan wants to discuss with Dawkins about christianit(like its moral values etc.) but Richard Dawkins didn't want to discuss with Jordan but he wants to debate with Jordan Peterson on Christianity who has no enough knowledge of it.
I think He must debate with christian apologists like William lain Craig etc. From whom he terrifies.
They are both for now hell bound. I pray they truly become John 3:1-21 qualified believers.
Of course Peterson understand it. Its not like he havent read the bible the last decades.
Peterson was talking about morals that he thinks only derived from Christian values.
Sam Harris schooled Peterson that other belief system as well have morals. Morals can derived from Human conditions.
The moderating making an attempt to rescue Dawkins from Peterson.
Trying to get Peterson to answer at least one simple question.
Brilliant, bro. Thanks for creating this video
Jordan has immense insight into the Bible but he seems to have a stumbling block regarding belief in God and Jesus. it seems his intellectual vanity prevents him from admitting to this.
Christ Himself did not answer directly on whose authority He acted upon (Mark 11:33). When a question is not asked in good faith, then we know those asking are not ready for the straight answer. Dawkins cannot move beyond the empirical. Peterson was not going to remain within Dawkins' parameters for the discussion.
It is actually brilliant.
@@andrewdurand3181 It's a load of crap.
Peterson is an intellectual coward.
I think he realizes that there is 100% zero chance in proving to people the virgin birth, resurrection etc. He talks about what is provable truth, but much of it is thru metaphor and human psychology, but that still makes it true. You just can't get out your calipers and measure it like the atheist scientific folks want before they label anything true. So he recognizes that proclaiming those events as facts does nothing for the debate and actually results in them recoiling from any possibility in bringing them to the light.
@@andrewdurand3181Peterson has already said he doesn’t believe in God, but acts as if he does . I’ve never seen him say anything like that “ I heard a Christian preach the gospel and I repented and Put my faith in Christ alone (not morality) to save me from the coming wrath of God for my sin”
Ive never heard him confess the basic fundamentals of the Christian faith.
There is a clip on RUclips . It appears he is trying to be a good person . He speaks about the conscience in other videos (which means “with knowledge “ ….. of right and wrong ) . The work of the law is written on our hearts and our conscience bears witness (see Romans )
If he is actually born again and he is trying to preach the gospel then his methods are not biblical and he needs to submit to an eldership and gifted ministries and get discipled and taught what the gospel is and how to effectively communicate it.
Christ , Peter , Paul etc were all preachers of repentance. God commands all men everywhere to repent . That should be Peterson message. That is the clarion call of the gospel . That’s the action sinners who are in danger of hell need to be urged to take. We are to proclaim it loud and CLEAR from the rooftops.
God bless you
Greetings from Scotland
Psalm 73:1-3, 12-26 is a Bible verse that expresses feelings of doubt and envy, and reminds us that it's normal to experience these emotions.
Peterson has no problem saying idk to those questions (in his own elaborate way) bc his scientific mind knows these questions can't be proven currently.
For me, Peterson is an spiritual man who sees pragmatic values (He has described himself as a pragmatist before) on Christianity. I actually kinda respect self aware atheists more than this mythic symbolic talk Peterson does. And that’s because as he says a LOT post modernists got right that there is no such thing as truth if God does not exist.
So if Peterson does not believe in Jesus the way Jesus asked people to believe in Him, everything Peterson says is a matter of opinion and he is just trying to impose his views on other people. And if he doesn’t believe in the resurrection after all these years talking about the Bible… I mean what else can I say… He values the Bible because it agrees with its values not because he thinks it is true. Do you know what I mean?
I can’t comprehend how a person that believes that God exists (any God) and that the God that made the universe couldn’t be able to resurrect someone or make a virgin birth.
So in this respect I see Dawkins position more favorably even though I don’t like him very much. And I think he is deeply myopic and don’t seem to really know the bible as much as he says he does.
I pray that all three men in this painful debate find Jesus and give their lives to Him. They all suffer from a evil I know too well: pride of the mind, vanity of self observation and delusion that a human being can understand the world around us (not only the material world but the cultural, psychological, cognitive world as well).
I used to like Peterson very much and I thank him for giving such respect to the Bible which led me to read the bible and become a Christian. But after reading the Bible I saw how new age peterson is and just picks and chooses the parts of the Bible that he agrees with. That has made me very uncomfortable and sad. He is a great honest smart guy with a capacity for words and convincing people that is admirable but for now, I am having great difficulties listening to him.
Well stated. I see it and feel much the same way as you
A lesson on how to have a civil conversation with someone you disagree with. Well done gentlemen.
It comes down to : Dawkins only believes in the material world. To him, there is no spiritual world because it cannot be physically measured. But he admits in a hierarchy of goodness where “goodness “ has no origin. It just exists like gravity. He really is spiritually blind. Both gravity and goodness (and time etc…) must have a Creator unless they created themselves.
Not really.
As smart as Dawkins appears to be (which I question…. Just because you can sound smart it doesn’t make you smart).. he is more so a fool. He’s a hypocrite… and he has logic problems.
interesting take...is there an argument from this video you think is evidence of "logic problems?"
He is way less unhinged than JP in that regard
Amazing editing and great commentary. Thank you!
Washed in the blood of Jesus, I walk in His righteousness, He paid my debt for sin, He brought my salvation with His final work at the cross, by God's grace🙏🏻✝️👑🙌🏻♥️🙏🏻
Have you read Matthew 7:13-14, 21-23, 13:14-15, 15:7-9, 19:16-19, 24:11, Revelation 3:15-16, 21:8, 22:15 etc lately?
@anniematushenko9180 this sounds traumatic. Washed in the blood of Jesus? Yikes, I don’t think any all knowing and all loving god would hold their creations to a debt they personally didn’t pay in a trap that the god set up for them. That’s an abusive relationship
Peterson. A true artist in speaking 30.000 words to say NOTHING.
Many of them about dragons and hallucinogenic drugs being evidence for God.
He said a lot. Not following what he is saying is not the same as him saying nothing.
@@andrewdurand3181 .......... Aha. Can you please explain me what he said?
@@andrewdurand3181 pretending that he didn’t avoid answering questions isn’t a good way to go either.
@@BARKERPRODUCTION he avoided the framework that Dawkins was trying to trap him in.
Sigh. God bless you all. You are indeed children of God. With exactly the amount of intelligence and ability to think critically as child. God bless you.
I swear Peterson spoke 85 percent of that podcast. Peterson seems to say that look how profound the story of bible is and no one has done it before. Richard seems to say i don't value it. There are countless profound story outside Christianity and those are written by humans before the bible. Jordan is like harry potter fans who over analyse and see the things that aren't even there .
Not really profound.
Hindu and Buddhist teachings are way more profound than this.
@@BM-zd3vswhat is your favorite or most profound Hindu story you've read?
Dawkins wants to have his cake and eat it too. You cannot separate Christianity's fruit from its teaching/truth. Dawkins cannot accept that much we take for granted is directly a result of Christianity.
I’m actually impressed with JP in this conversation and was probably one of the best people Dawkins could have had this conversation with. I don’t agree with JP on everything but for Dawkins I think this was a step forward.
Dawkins has dug a hole so deep that he needs to say borderline irrational shit just to stay consistent.
Didn't waffle on about dragons though, did he?
Specifically what did Dawkins say that was irrational?
Back up your statement and quote Dawkins in context as irrational.
That he enjoys a world that has been deeply affected by Christianity and he likes that, yet tries to tear it down and disprove it for instance.
@@benliftin4awhileHe didn't say he likes Christian values. He said he was brought up a cultural Christian. Were you listening?
The more I study, the more I know Christ is God. The less I'm sure about why we have to make arguments for Him.
I mean, just from what I've witnessed, there's so much historical, moral, philosophical, scientific and other forms of evidence. But, the more I realize, it's just that I need Him. There's no one else who has a better way of being, and on that I stake my claim. I think by living in Grace, you're saved. There doesn't need to be an argument made for or against Him. Just simply a life lived for the Gospel. That's all the evidence that's needed.
The evidence is abundant and overwhelming… but better than that… so is He!
Board the John 3:1-21 Ark by the roads of Mark 1:15, 16:16, Luke 13:1-5, 24:47, Matthew 18:1-3, John 1:12, Acts 2:38, Romans 6:1-23, 10:9, Galatians 1:7-9, 1Corinthians 3:18-23 and parallel verses before it is too late - this day, because the door is closing and most will not escape the coming inescapable global flood of fire storm but a remnant and most so called true disciples of the authentic austere Scriptural Jesus the Christ _[God]_ clearly for now are exactly who the true Jesus referred to in Matthew 7:21-23 and parallel verses if you are not truly part of the John 3:1-21 qualified remnant. Selah.
@@Daily_Dose_Of_Wisdom Yes He is. :)
Intelligence and wisdom are not synonyms. We just witnessed a good example of someone intelligent to comprehend difficult aspects of the physical world with zero capacity to grasp the higher depth behind it.
That’s why it’s called faith, you’re accepting either argument on faith, science hasn’t disproven God and I believe there is a creator vs we popped out of nothingness, it must be one or the other.
There is a third option - that something must have always existed.
"Science" _[the word in English]_ comes from the Latin word "Scientia/Scienza" which in sum it means 'practical knowledge'. So according to non-corrupted use of the word "science" _[which Darwin popularised the serious corruption of the word 'science' + it's understanding and correct usage as we see today]_ when you learn how to cut a steak with a knife, that's 'science', when you learn how to ride a bicycle, that's "science", when you learn how to skate on ice, that is science, when you learn how read and write, this is science. So tragically and tormentingly sad though, the definition of 'science' in the Far West has been perversely redefined by Darwin _[who only had one degree, in theology!]_ and lovingly adopted by Communists, Fascists and Socialists _[Social Darwinists]_ to be based solely on materialist, mechanistic, naturalist, atheist view of reality which itself, is a perpetual self-refuting, self destroying, self-demolishing, self-annihilating position.
Science can be a religion itself. We didn't see the beginning of existence, yet scientists believe in the big bang, based on the evidence provided them. Yet still we cannot know for sure, so they have faith that's how things started. Same but different as a Christians faith works. We didn't see it happen, but we have documentation and verifiable proofs on much of it. Neither group can 100% prove or disprove the other. Hence faith.
@@simmorg290that’s God
@@simmorg290 I mean that is essentially the theist position. That God is was and always will be.
As we learn more about the universe it seems more apparent that it didn't suddenly come to be out of its own design, and everything we know points to a cosmic clock ticking down.
Science is entirely based on fundamental assumptions. Meaning that everything in science is faith based too.
Yes, it is faith based, but we can make very precise predictions of the future with science. There is no future predictions with religion except maybe after we die and I'd rather not test that.
The goal of science is to develop arguments about how the world is that can be falsified without resorting to the metaphysical, and this includes falsifying initial assumptions. Faith of the religious kind relies on dogma.
That was a great video, it is a relationship with God through Jesus and comforted by the Holy Spirit. 🙌 Jesus has changed my life, I am brighter, think more clearly and through reading scripture discernment of my mind has sharpened exponentially. This is the power of our creator and feel grateful everyday. Why has Dawkins gone and is going the wrong way surely not to stand by what he has written in the public sphere? It is vitally important that Dawkins with all his stubborn scientific background comes to know Jesus at some point! He would make more headlines from doing that than any other thought process.
There's a reason that for all the word salads these 3 men could conjure up, John Lennox can show what fools they are in but a few words.
It's because it is not his own wisdom that he relies upon, but God's.
Dr. John Lennox. Straight forward, logical, clear belief testimony with teeth. Love Dr. Lennox.
Dawkins has a deep fear or hate for Christianity. Wonder what happened there.
Science and logic and thinking for himself
He fears having to live a way contrary to his own will. So ironically he becomes a slave to his will, and paradoxically when we give our will to God and do His, by aligning our will to His, we actually become free. It’s crazy but I can see it, just a little bit but I can. Now easier said than done.
@@JoseDiaz-tf2ql wow.
@@bryanhuseboe539 interesting.
@@bryanhuseboe539science and logic point to God bud.
I used to be like this youtuber. I was converted through reading CS Lewis, and began to have a relationship with our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. I went to Bible college, studied apologetics, old and new Testament, hermeneutics, and systematic theology. But doubts began creeping in. I jI talked to my pastor and professors about the conflicts I had with my faith, the way the Bible contradicts then one day I realized that praying is just thinking
My fat fingers accidentally pushed send before I was finished typing my comment, and my phone won't let me edit it.
@@YuelSea-sw2rpYes, I repented, acknowledged my sin, and I accepted Jesus as my personal Lord and Saviour. I had a relationship with him, and attended Bible College. Then one day I realized that praying is just thinking, and that what I called a relationship God, was a set of relationships with the church, my pastor, my professors, and my imagination. I found freedom in release from the bondage and fear of some sky god judging my soul. It's all imaginary! May you find that Jesus is merely an imaginary friend as well, and freedom from the tyranny of the Bible.
@@caseyspaos448
Were you truly born again to begin with ? Do you fully understand repentance and faith ? Were you convinced of being a sinner ?
If not watch evolution v God on RUclips or the Athiest delusion.
read pilgrims progress
They got off track and ended up in doubting castle
We have to put on the full armour of God to quench the fiery darts of the enemy . We need the shield of faith
Doubt and unbelief is very dangerous . Read Hebrews with multiple warnings
The heart is deceitful. We are led away by our desire for sun and independence and the cares of this short life . See the parable of the sower .
If you have truly been born again then please Repent today . Change your mind . Stop sinning and return to God . See the prodigal son
@@caseyspaos448 bible college can mess up peoples heads
You find God when you get alone with Him in prayer with an open heart and let Him deal with the sin in your heart
God speaks to me . I know God . That is Christianity
Your faith could not have matured much if you didn’t hear God speak to you or answer prayers
Going to church and studying koine Greek won’t cut it . We have to draw near to Him . Heart to Heart. On our knees
When God convinced me I was a sinner my whole life was turned upside down
I wanted nothing more than to please God and make Him happy and get to know Him in a greater way . The more I submitted my life to Him thd more He revealed Himself and sometimes in very dramatic undeniable ways
materialists dismiss the whole sphere of human existance
no it does not.
@@kos-mos1127 elaborate on that please
@@kos-mos1127well everything start with unmaterialistic. Intention itself came from nothing
@@potatoxgaming9466 Everting starts with material than that material acquires form.
"materialists dismiss the whole sphere of human existance" No, materialist still love their children and it doesn't matter to them if love is a chemical reaction in the brain instead of some magical fairy dust.
As soon as Dawkins said the science that got us to the moon you know he is completely LOST 😂
Yes, because Mohammed carried us on his winged horse.
What was it then?
We it sure wasn't prayers.
@@killerkev999 🤣
loved this one - excellent commentary
Jesus is the truth
No.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.
@@Koltkaze Who said that? Obviously not a religious person or a wise person.
@@461weavile It is a quote from Seneca. And I think he was wise, because there is no good reason or evidence to think that it is true as far as I can tell. You have any?
@@461weavile You are very predictable, no evidence. And if you have no good evidence, then it is simply irrational and not wise to think that it is true.
Saying marriage comes from Christianity is ignorant because it ignores the existence of marriage in other cultures and also in cultures before Christianity even existed.
Right, as if the Bible itself doesn't mention Jews getting married centuries before Jesus was born lmfao
Even though these two disagree, i have to say i love and respect them both equally
Dawkins like to play God, in the sense that HE is the one that decides what is right and what is wrong. Big ego problem.
Honest question. Don’t you think Peterson do that too? And for me is even worse because he knows the Bible much more profoundly than Dawkins and he still can bring himself to say that the Bible is true period. That Jesus really was born of a Virgin and that he resurrected.
He still believes more in himself and his views of the world than he believes in God.
I might be wrong and being unfair, thats also a possibility of course. :)
I agree on the first part.. but I dont think its an ego problem but that his ideas belong to a different paradigm and purpose.. the new atheist movement was all about checking claims of super naturality... these days we dont really concern ourselves with this so much as the religions hold on truth claims have decreased sufficiently...
@@andrealeobons I think the issue you are touching on is that you are taking your faith and making it true and Peterson is not wanting to rely on faith to inform his understanding. You say that the Bible is true period, but that is a faith claim, not a truth claim. Peterson can't have a productive conversation with Dawkins using faith claims.
"Yes, I believe Christ was born of a virgin." vs. "Well, I don't believe he was born of virgin." They can agree to disagree and end the conversation. The podcast would last 2 minutes.
He isn’t doing that
Better to believe that someone who sends 10 plagues against Egypt knows right from wrong?
These two intellectuals are revelling in their great intelligence. There is a problem. They could have this removed in 1 minute, God forbid, by a stroke or heart attack. Therefore they could be considered prideful in the gifts they were given at birth - and as pride is the greatest block to knowledge of God, it is not surprising that Dawkins has no experience of God. He is getting in his own way. I pray that he opens up his brilliant but very closed mind. If St. Augustine, a great philosopher, can move from intellectual activity to a humble acceptance of the simplicity of the gospels, then why does Mr. Dawkins believe he is cleverer than this great thinker. Also, as an artist, my observations of character, he does not look like a happy man - he looks worried, stressed and unhappy. I went from aetheism to Catholicism - his arguments re the Virgin Mary are those of a 12 year old.
J Peterson is no intellectual
How dare you presume to judge one of God's creations. You have no right, and no authority to pass judgement onto Dawkins. God placed him upon his journey as he has on yours. When you stand before judgement, you will answer for the pride you are demonstrating here, and you should fall on your knees and beg for forgiveness for the slight you have done against His creation.
The Bible tells us God’s love is stronger and than truth. Philippians 4:7 “And the Peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.”
Dawkins is not a very deep thinker and Alex was not needed
And why is Alex is aping Hitler too in his looks is not just showing his atheist bias, but attention seeking too.
Well Dawkins has his resume and you are nobody on the Internet. I don't think he will lose sleep over your opinion.
You are also nobody on the internet and no one won’t lose sleep over yours. See my point? Haha.
@@TurinTuramber0 days since an atheist last uses the Appeal to Authority Fallacy.
@@sigurdholbarki8268 It wasn't an appeal to authority, it was representing an objective fact (Dawkins is a credited academic) and weighing it against an anonymous subjective opinion. Nothing Dawkins says should be taken as true because of who he is, I say only that the question of Dawkins being a deep thinker is already demonstrated.
When i was a member of the atheist religion, i believed that peterson was a preacher of the atheist faith.
Dawkins is still a pastor of the atheist religion.
Sure do kove seeing i was wrong about Peterson at this point on my life.
Aye- I remember when a lot of loud atheist voices were dissing peterson when he had his health crisis. I was atheist then and it hit me oddly the ire so many had towards him. Glad to have escaped that dark place.
@Readrose8 (on dark places)
Yes! God Yes! One of the primary reasons I abandoned the atheist religion is how rude *we* get to good people that only want to help. It was a very dark and nasty time of my life. This Jesus thing made everything clear and beautiful.
The religion of evolution has Darwin as their Pope, Dawkins and Degrasse as their high priests, the museum of natural history is their cathedral and the missing link is their messiah.
@RemnantDiscipleLazzaro-Rev1217 even as an atheist we never saw this missing link.
I haven't completely abandoned evolution, but got stuck on this question.
If we come from an ape like creature, what happened to the fish, bird, and reptile people?
Where can I go to see evidence of evolution as explained by 1800, 1900, and 2k technology?
What is the big bang?
What is the god partical?
How is light created?
How is a star older than the universe?
Why are stilagmite growing on steel hand rails in caverns?
Once I gave up on magic theory and conjecture, and out of frustration asked Jesus to forgive my ignorance and show me what I am missing, boom. All new world.
and Hitchens is one of their saints
I could listen to Richard Dawkins talking until the cows come home but five minutes of Jordan Peterson is enough for me!
Dawkins' dishonesty is amazing to see.
I don't think it's dishonesty. I think he's just genuinely not understanding Peterson's points.
He understands them perfectly, he’s not impressed. What video are you people watching?
@@Mbrace818 Oh, I'm certain he understands. The idea that the Christian worldview is more predictive of reality than the atheistic one is not a new idea. He certainly knows about this. If he knows the bible half as well as he says he does, then he knows this. Yet here he is pretending that Christian metaphysics does not predict the universe, life, reason and consciousness, etc., while the atheistic one does. No, he knows that he has no reason-based position.
@@droe2570 The Universe was around long before Christian metaphysics and will be around after Christian metaphysics dies.
@@kos-mos1127 This has nothing to do with Christianity, but with God. Hopefully you will one day realize you need Jesus, preferably before it's too late.
I was a completely anti-religion atheist until I started listening to Jordan Peterson he's gotta be one of the greatest all time evangelist. He was one of the only people able to make it make sense for me so I now I see it has great value even if I'm still agnostic.
Evolution happened/happening
Make what make sense ? He doesn’t preach the gospel . Do you understand what repentance and faith are ?
Law, sin, death , judgment, hell, amazing grace , repentance and faith
Do you understand what the bible teaches about these things ?
@@ourclarioncall wouldn't say I understand it in the same way you do just saying where as before I dismissed religion out of hand now I see it as at the very least being time tested, profound and having deep insight into the human condition.
@@generaltso5592 sorry mate , I didn’t fully catch everything you wrote .
Yes , I understand what you mean. I really like Jordan and he seems to be realising the depth of truth through the lens of his field of expertise.
Praying for you mate . Greetings from Scotland 🏴
I was hoping you would review this.
At 8:30 is where Dawkins lost. He failed to understand that even fiction is based in truth. For example. A murder mystery is not valid unless humans do in fact commit murder.
His point is simply that there’s still a difference between something being “based” on truth and it actually being true. Peterson lost at 0:01
@@VilVideos And he failed to make that point. The hilarious thing is, Dawkins was trying to win a debate where Peterson was having a learn-ed discussion.
@@VilVideosHow old were you when Dawkins touched you down there?
Dawkins (and that guy in the middle) are two of the most obnoxious and dogmatic atheists that I have had the displeasure listening to.
There are many others, also, but they all seem to follow the same script.
There is always a level of cognitive dissonance.
The irony😂🤣 it’s the religious sheep that are the delusional ones. Keep believing in fantasy stories told hundreds of years ago….
@@Gobnogler How did anything come to exist mr atheist?
@@rl7012 idk I don’t claim to have all the answers to everything…
Do you feel the same way about " obnoxious and dogmatic" Muslims? Or " obnoxious and dogmatic" Christians? Or " obnoxious and dogmatic" Buddhists?
They are asking for facts. If you're in the jury box, do you not ask for facts? If you're seeking a medical diagnosis, do you not ask for facts? Surely you would, right? Why would you not ask for facts when it pertains to claims about the condition of your soul? Do you just want stories that confirm your presuppositions?
@@CMA418 most definitely.
It is ALWAYS about the FACTS.
The problems are about what is accepted as FACTS.
There much to do about the interpretation of information that suddenly is presented as a fact, when it actually IS NOT.
Maybe check out skeptical 'reviewer', David Berlinski.
i admire seeing two intellectual titans have such a civil debate
“Christianity began in Palestine as a fellowship (a relationship), and then moved to Greece and became a philosophy (way to think). Afterward, it moved on to Rome and became an institution (a place you go) and then to Europe where it became a culture (a way of life). Finally it settled in America where it has become an enterprise (a business).”
- Sam Pascoe
Believing something doesn't make it true.... It really is that simple.
Not believing something doesn't make it false. Simple as that as well
@@calebroberts08 What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence...... I know you are but what am I....Wheres the beef?
Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
@@krejdloc Maths aren't evidence for anything...
there you go, the entire field of Western Science trashed by one small, yet, incredibly sdignificant truth.
TOFF-EE!!!! :P
@@ShuggieEdvaldson Yet 2000+ year old fables designed to enslave and control people with the promise of rewards AFTER your DEAD is perfectly TRUE.
Please loan me $2000 dollars... I will pay you back in heaven. I Promise.
Every time I listen to Peterson I feel I am wasting my time
Hear hear