♦"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool." ♦"Religion is founded on the fear & gullibility of many & the cleverness of few." ♦"Only fools revere the supernatural bs just bc a book says it's the holy truth." ♦"The delusional religious fools are cocksure & the intelligent full of doubt." ♦"The religious believe by the millions what only lunatics believe on their own." ♦"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." ♦"It's difficult to free the religious fools from the chains they revere." ♦“To have faith is precisely to lose one's mind so as to win God.” ♦"The death of dogma is the birth of morality." ♦"Religion fools many bc human brain is susceptible to pareidolia & apophenia." ♦"There is no objective order or structure in the world except what we give it." ♦"Morality is an evolutionary process. Jesus & authors of Bible didn't know slavery is immoral, but today we know slavery is immoral."
Christopher Hitchens is missed in our time, when fundamentalists of all religions and denominations threaten the very foundations of liberal democracy. He was such an extraordinary intellectual.
Sad that he is dead, But of course if you stand this path until You reach the end of your life. You will be reunited. If you could hear him now he would tell you he was wrong.
@@matthewwilson1860 he was an alcoholic, ego maniac, narcissistic Buffon , in love with his own voice .. the few good things he did were overshadowed by his desire to bully , not a good human being !!!!! Athirst ? However did you figure that one out . DUH !!!!!
I love British people, their accent is one of the best im my opinion. Hitchens makes me proud to be a Christian. He is one of the reasons I studied the Bible and found peace in the Lord Jesus Christ.
I agree, and disagree with so many theism ideas, I don't need any basis for altruism, but it makes sense , long before theism, to help others, and there are many logical reasons for this. I am not 'militant', nor do I consider Hitchens or most others, but, adamant and logical. So many points made that just do not make sense, but, are based on the 'mystery of faith'. I care not at all to rob anyone of the comfort of their beliefs, but, I do profess , according to logic. I would not debate anyone that I thought needed the crutch or comfort of beliefs in any religion though.
Is the D'Souza gentleman considered an "intellectual" in the United States? I sure hope not. If so, the Conservative intellectuals have migrated far from the days of William F. Buckley, Jr.
Dinesh trounced Hitchens, you are not smart enough to realize it. Obviously you didn't understand what either of them were saying. Hitchens kept conflating religion with Islam, Christianity with Islam, Catholicism with Christianity and just using whatever one he wanted when it suited him. VERY dishonest.
Dinesh is brilliant. He brought out the big guns in the opening statement- the ones that REALLY show how ignorant an atheist has to be, and still no rebuttal 😂
D’Souza has always been, and remains till this day, a terrible debater. His inability to convincingly articulate a reasonable argument with a logically sequential conclusion coupled with a cognitive bias whereby he grossly overestimates his knowledge and competence in most, not to say all, domains he debates, makes it painful to listen. And then to go against an intellectual juggernaut like Hitchens?!?! Nuts!!! “Matter follows the laws of science.” No, D’Souza, the the laws of matter are written in function of how that matter behaves! This guy is a hoot!!! 😂😂😂
He opens with “I don’t believe in unicorns, but I’m not militant about it.” As if there’s no difference regarding theists which are CONSTANTLY trying to put the rest of us under theocracy, Western democracies included. So right off the bat you see that either many elementary school children have a stronger intellect than him, or he’s disgustingly dishonest, or both.
If you believe kids are inherently moral, than you've never seen kids play and you most likely don't remember what it was like when you were a kid. Kids need to be taught the golden rule, because when we're born we don't have the ability to think outside ourselves. Your brain isn't finished developing until around 25 to 30 years old. This is simply a fact. This is why we have sayings like "acting like a child" and so on.
If a debater raises his Voice in counterargument like Dinesh, it almost a sure thing that is he walking on shakey grounds and compensates the weakness of his position by shouting.
That is true with someone, out of desperation and lack of ability to argue their point but it is not necessarily true when faced with a debate with an absurdly unreasonable opponent.
Saying that morality was due to Christianity is false since Buddhist who do not believe in God are good people as will as the Hindus which are more in number.
I have heard apologists literally say that Christianity was the start of civilisation and that no civilisation existed before Christianity arrived. When asked about China, the apologist started to say "China wasn't civili- er.." and then after being prompted again by the interviewer, changed it hastily to "Christianity made China better than it was!" and wouldn't be drawn on the original claim. Admittedly the apologist in question wasn't someone who could pull a crowd like these two debaters could, but it does make one wonder how widespread this sort of opinion is.
No Christian says that without Christianity there's no Morality They say without God there's no Morality God is the source of Morality As Dawkins says there's no right or wrong no good or evil just blind pitiless indifference If you're an Athiest there's no such thing as Human Rights
@@danielanthony8373 You should tune into the AXP 27/7 channel sometime. We get a large number of Christians calling in saying that without Christianity there is no morality. On the other hand, atheism and secular humanism has a solid grounding to human rights and respect for each other. Far better than "God said so." in fact. Let's try and avoid making sweeping claims like "No Christian says!" shall we?
And Christianity is inherently amoral…hence the mental gymnastics decent christians ( I m not including D’Souza in that bunch, he has always been a bona fide douche bag) have to do to explain how their scriptures are just misinterpreted.
The level of atheism throughout the rest of the developed world refutes any argument that religion is somehow a moral necessity, Countries like Norway, Iceland, Australia, Canada, Sweden, Switzerland, Belgium, Japan, the Netherlands, Denmark and the United Kingdom are among the least religious societies on Earth. According to the United Nations’ Human Development Report (2005) they are also the healthiest, as indicated by measures of life expectancy, adult literacy, per capita income, educational attainment, gender equality, homicide rate and infant mortality. Conversely, the 50 nations now ranked lowest in terms of human development are unwaveringly religious. Other analyses paint the same picture: The United States is unique among wealthy democracies in its level of religious literalism and opposition to evolutionary theory; it is also uniquely beleaguered by high rates of homicide, abortion, teen pregnancy, STD infection and infant mortality. The same comparison holds true within the United States itself: Southern and Midwestern states, characterized by the highest levels of religious superstition and hostility to evolutionary theory, are especially plagued by the above indicators of societal dysfunction, while the comparatively secular states of the Northeast conform to European norms. Of course, correlational data of this sort do not resolve questions of causality--belief in God may lead to societal dysfunction; societal dysfunction may foster a belief in God; each factor may enable the other; or both may spring from some deeper source of mischief. Leaving aside the issue of cause and effect, these facts prove that atheism is perfectly compatible with the basic aspirations of a civil society; they also prove, conclusively, that religious faith does nothing to ensure a society’s health.
You defeated you own augment all those countries are westernized countries for the most part which was influenced by Christainity also the nordic countries are operating on ideology of the tribe they hve small populations and see them self as Vikings and thus why the work together, this does not apply in non homogeneous countries with large populations. Also very high rates of suicide, alcoholism, depression and these countries are not reproducing so will die out if they dnt turn it around quick in some cases too late. They also engage in weird practices like beastily. Sweden was the rape capital in europe and look at the rapes in western europe. The safest country in europe is Poland which is a Christain country and Hungary and that euro stat data, jokes on you.😂
Fanaticism is a dangerous attitude of an individual or society because it uses passion, an extreme form of emotion, assumes an attitude of inflexibility or rigidity, and a surrender of rational coldheaded thinking and is very evident in deeply religious people more than to atheists or to people of not the re!igious bent.
Cont....and further, because this emotional attachment or involvement to their faith would tend to diminish and at worst, corrupt their ability to think rationally and logically so giving to charity is an emotional, religious and laudable act in the true spirit of Love thy neighbor as yourself teaching of Jesus. This act is also logical because it promotes goodwill that keeps people working together cordially and brings peace which is a desirable political with great economic advantages.
Uh, Guy, are you trying to draw people away from God as a religious activist, just declaring to the world your new stand on religion or just trying to convince yourself you are doing the "right" thing?
36:00 David Hume's "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion" was published in 1779. Still we have to head those creationist claims - i.e. having been disproved almost 300 yrs ago - over, and over, and over, and over again from D'Souza. What an utter ignorance.
Dinesh is dishonest, twists, distorts, and counts on the gullible ignorant people that are easily impressed by Dinesh pretending that some problems can not be overcome and makes ridiculous comparison to try to make people laugh at what should instead has been a quest for facts. Dinesh relies on incredibalism. Very dishonest character.
Dinesh dishonest? You have no idea what you're talking about. Still, Christianity (not Catholics or Muslims) has brought more good into the world than atheism!
@@rusmeister7144 Look up the definition of straw man argument. Dinesh instead of acknowledging that a claim he made was debunked, he changes the subject to become about something else and then attacks that.
@@rusmeister7144Look at the rebuttals section of this very video. One would have to be pretty damn stupid to not see how dishonest Dinesh is. He states lies, makes false claims, needs to be constantly corrected, and yet will not acknowledge when he was wrong, which is pretty much all the time (being wrong that is). I mean, come, on, already! Seriously! You really can't see how utterly obviously dishonest Dinesh is? Hello, mcfly ! Anybody in there, knock knock !
The sort of "love" you get when you're absolutely convinced you're correct about everything. Incredible arrogance. "I'll pray for you." And of course "You'll burn in hell!" despite their holey fables explicitly saying to not take pleasure in the downfall, misfortune or suffering of others.
What has Christianity given us besides Universal Human Rights Equality of the sexes Separation of Church and State Social justice Social Welfare Hospitals Orphanages Aged Care Mandatory Education Universal law Librilism Modernity Monasteries the forerunners to Universities the Scientific Revolution The Industrial Revolution The Magna Carta The US Constitution
Yep, it's called our conscience. Buthat's talking about laws, not the grace of Jesus' sacrifice. But how are we going to know the free gift of salvation that Jesus offers to us if there is no gospel being preached around the world, or as Jesus said, Matt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Our consciences aren't going to tell us that!
@@jbooks888 Mine tells me to do quite the opposite and leave people alone rather than trying to tell others how to live their lives. By the way, how is it a free gift of salvation if we're required to do something to claim it?
@@tehspamgozehere If I offer you a free can of coke, you still have to take it from me and drink it! You should think before you post because that was the dumbest post I've read all week!
The average person isnt very bright, and Hitchens is using too many words that they don't know. Either that or people are determined to try to believe what they think they should in order to avoid damnation. Because all of D'Souza's talking points were fallacious logic. all of it. There's no reason that anyone should dismiss what HItchens says here and take D'Souza's side, especially after this debate.
I would say the same of Hitchens’. But Chesterton was the real man Hitchens raged against, could never fully understand and could never defeat, though he railed against him. I think the essential problem of the atheists is that they want to pretend that intelligent Christian arguments don’t exist. CS Lewis began with the moral law; there has never been a good refutation of that. The upshot is that it is useless to try to speak truth to people that have determined in advance not to hear it. Luckily for us, the men who built Western civilization, the very thing the atheist takes for granted, pretty much all believed in the Christian God, with very few exceptions, and those late in the game (the 18th century and beyond). It would make a man look foolish to pretend that Thomas Aquinas or Dr Samuel Johnson, Newton, and others were fools. It would be like pretending that Einstein was an idiot because his worldview didn’t agree with yours. Conversely, I don’t think Hitchens was an idiot. But he himself could not get past his own high-school ideas, and holding them dogmatically, made it impossible for him to critically challenge his own ideas.
I think be best Christian “debater” I’ve seen is Cliffe Knechtle. He can actually navigate a conversation and give intelligent responses instead of going in circles following a script like people like WLC.
@@Twist52 I personally have read a lot from WLC. He wiped the floor with Hitchens in their debate. And other philosophers like Plantinga, Swinburne, Pruss are brilliant. Also scientists like Francis Collins and Luke Barnes. Cliffe is ok bur expand your horizons and learn philosophy.
@@philamras3732 WLC spent half that debate saying there was no evidence for atheism after Hitchens had already established why atheism requires zero evidence
@@Twist52 Hitchens did not successfully adress many of Craig's arguments. Alex O' Conner made a video on this called the sophistry of hitchens. Also every worldview requires defending. If you believe there is no God or it is unlikely one exists, you must provide justification. Again, Graham Oppy mentioned this on the Alex O' Conner's podcast.
I hate DD's attempts to tell atheists what they believe, getting it wrong at almost every turn. The Stalin, Hitler, Mao....did their deeds as a matter of atheism is one of the dumbest non-arguments that apologists have ever come up with.
What gets me is they assume any that aren't believers of the big three are automatically atheist. Almost seems like Christianity is the biggest atheist religion out there when they worship the death of their god... (even though they are non-Jews worshiping a Jew, but that's another argument to be had)
Yeah, I'm confused about that too. The point is not that atheist regimes don't commit horrible things, but that nobody's commiting these things in the name of atheism. Nobody's sending people to camps, in the name of absence of god. They do it in the name of a person, that replaces the position of god on earth, i.e. the tyrant.
@@alexerr_wolf Yes, they are doing it in the name of atheism! If they are atheists, they are doing it in the name of atheism! WAKE UP! Or maybe you would prefer "doing it because they are atheists" ?
@@alexerr_wolf The explanation is quite simple. While you are technically right that the atheist regimes did not do their evils in the name of atheism as such, it was the inevitable outcome of the meaning of atheist philosophy applied to human nature. The elimination of responsibility after death for evils committed in life removes restraint from doing evil which would otherwise be present. If there is no hereafter, if YOLO is true, then (to the person who doesn’t think it through, and most don’t, certainly not the tyrants), then why shouldn’t a person with power, will and desire exercise it to maximize his power and pleasure in the here and now? Atheist philosophy offers no reason to restrain oneself, although some might try to offer reasons on the basis of their personal opinions or desires, the tyrant can literally say, “To hell, or rather, the GULAG with you”. And so in the absence of a solid basis for moral law outside of the individual and his perceptions, no one could tell an atheist ruler that there is a power over him and that he will face punishment and cannot escape it, even in death. He will just laugh at it just as you all are laughing here. Abolish God, and the state becomes the god, and the head of state can and will do what he will, even over your objections, and that is what happened in the USSR, China, Cambodia and so on. The atheist regimes made the worst depravations of Christian rulers look like baby games.
Its so sad that people actually agree with Dinesh on anything. Every argument he had was bad. He purposly misunderstood so many points just to have an argument. Theres a difference between teaching a child about gravity and indoctrinating them into believing in something that has no evidence by using fear and coercion.
The problem with Mr. D'Souza's arguments to me is when you listen to a point, such as that of the "Wish Fulfillment world" and why no one would ever create that. Well one can't help then think, those that wish to control people through hell and the comfort of heaven would create such a thing. Just because hell is tacked on does not mean such a thing can't come from a human mind. None of his points leave me without the thought of an alternative. Really, it just helps you continue what he refuses to say.
There is no way of distinguishing god/gods from Nature, except that we can actually observe Nature. Meaning Naturalism is the best explanation we have.
The Bible has a lot of explanations about spiritual matters. Science can't go there. Nor can it speak of origins of life and the cosmos. It just doesn't have the means to observe it!
@@jbooks888 that's nonsense , science is the only method we have to distinguish between what's imaginary and what's in the real world , if you have another method ... , please provide me one ... so now we've established That , which you already knew Before you posted this nonsensical comment , that science IS the only method we have for Anything ... quantum fields ARE eternal , haven't been created , CAN create space-time AND we know ... THEY EXIST and can do this ... we have actual evidence for this now You come along with your little stories about a ''mind'' outside of space-time that made a choice to create a universe , without ANY evidence what so ever ... and YOU ... expect US ... to believe ... ... you ... ? that seems rather weird to me , not to you ... ? no ... ? nothing ... ? ok then ... have a nice life , you ... and i hope your children enjoy Theirs , as well i hope you sometime in your life , figure out that decrees , dictations and commandments WILL NEVER BE ANY FORM OF MORALITY , not subjective morality and DEFINITELY NOT objective morality , the word ''objective'' means >>> without opinion / NO MIND / MIND INDEPENDENT decrees , dictations and commandments will NEVER BE MIND INDEPENDENT , they are all words associated with slaveryand/or having a master ... objective morality can ONLY be grounded by an atheist , EVER , in the history past and to come , for all time , i'll explain , objective ( mind independent ) morality can ONLY come from something that is ''without opinion'' , like a law of physics ( like gravity is ) , if ''morality'' is just another quantum field , that permeates the universe , like gravity does and is just as ''mild'' as gravity is , it would not Force us to obey it , like gravity doesn't ( we can just jump up ) , our brains and bodies are receivers of the mild law of gravity , so can they be receivers for a law of morality , which IS the consensus in physics , mind you , exactly what i just said IS the consensus , i'm not lying about that , this is actually how the majority of the EXPERTS in the fields of this study think about it , which are about 70+% atheists and 60% of those believe in actual Physical Objective Morality , which goes nicely with the fact that EVERY branch of science ... thinks everything IS physical and material , nothing else , also consensus about that ... this is just a little taste of how religion is just SO wrong to do to people like you , it's a complete LIE and the most horrible thing you can DO to a person ... we have EVIDENCE and FOLLOW the evidence where it leads , not the other way around and stick your own head up your ass , plus teach your children ... to do the same ... , THAT's what bugs me the most about all this , the children who don't have a choice , LIKE YOU ... DIDN'T !
The alternative explanation is that by replacing slaves by paid employees, the owners of capital relinquished responsibility for the persons of their workers.
Neither parents or schools should be "instructing" on religious views in a free and open society....it should be up to the individual when their brain is fully developed.....they should abstain from controlled substances and any other thing that can leave the individual detrimentally affected if something goes according to anything other than "the plan/curriculum..."
Dinesh should make the point: Christianity is not an ideology it is Church. And Church is a communion of love with Christ as well as our neighbour. If Christianity becomes an ideology then its adherents may become capable of the most heinous crimes while having their consciense "protected" from guilt. That is what happened in the West after it seceded from the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church I.e. the Orthodox Church. Hence, the Church should be judged by those of its members who have tried to commune in love rather than adhere individually and antisocially with a "christian" ideology. By those who have achieved union with God's love and grace I.e. saints. Some of whom performed countless miracles accepted and testified to by people of all social and educational strata.
Perhaps I missed it, but Hitchen's didn't quite go far enough, to my mind, in his rebuttal to D'Souza's "fine tuning" question. D'Souza imagines a universe which is purposefully following the laws of physics, while it is more reasonable to assert that the laws of physics simply reflect how our universe behaves. And while Hitchens did point out that all other planets, as far as we can tell, cannot support life as we know it. He even agrees with D'Souza that life on even our planet survives on a knife's edge. I would have liked him to expound on the concept of anthropocentrism which he mentioned. It is the height of hubris to suggest that life, specifically human life, exists on this planet by design because it allows us to exist. It is far more reasonable to argue that life would not be supported on our planet, as is the case with other planets, if as D'Souza said, "the parameters were a little different". We are simply fortunate that the parameters were not different (if living on a planet constantly at war can be considered "fortunate"). It's luck. Not design by a supernatural entity. It could be, but it is not reasonable to assume it is.
Australian aboriginal culture had neither slavery nor servitude and are the oldest living culture on earth. It was not an inherent human trait cleansed by christianity.
Australian aborigines didn't have a single coherant culture, but rather had a tremendous diversity of tribal type.. er.. culture-ettes, I suppose. They were never a unified people. The recent movement to try and rename all landmarks based on "the aboriginal language" has helped to illustrate that. There were thousands of languages, not just one. And tribes had different names for the same feature. Overlapping territory and similar make it a hot mess. Especially when three groups all insist on their name for such and such a river be used, despite that river running through land claimed by twenty different groups. Still, I'm pretty sure there was never any slavery adoption in general so your point stands for the most part.
Hunter gathers didn't have slavery as it is not practical in that firm of life but there are alot of downsides to hunter gatherering and the vast majirity of humanity would die if we resumed it. Servitude is debatable if you can be punished for going against tribal belifs theres coersed obedience
In reading the comments section, (after I watched the whole video), I can only come up with one conclusion. Everyone has their likes and dislikes, as well as their beliefs and disbeliefs. It seems to me that many thought this was a battle to change "the other side's mind". In reality, (as I see it), it was just a debate between two very educated individuals, on a very difficult subject, that was designed to inform and provoke thought. Nothing more.
@@andjunglepunkthirteen760 Hahahaha. Actually I have been pretty aggressive at times during my life. However, I have learned in over 66 years that if something does not effect me, change my life or I don't have any control over I just aint going to worry about it. Fair enuff ?
To belief that God created the universe is false. Here is why. A designer would use raw materials but does not create the raw materials. A designer create for the purposes of resolving problems. Like for instance a professional mechanical engineer would not only be accepted for a due to his narrative of his qualification of previous assume achievement since those could be fake but must prove himself of resolving actual problems on the job. If in reality he is not good he would be fired In the same way giiven that there is an assumed designer of the universe, let us verify if he truly is by resolving huge complex multitude of problems that humanity is facing. Ever since until today we could not see problems being intervened. That is the reason why the majority of philosophers, scientists and other intellectuals dismissed this concept of a designer. The Wright brothers invented aeroplanes and contributed progress to the world. Thomas Edison invented electricity and the world benefited. Religion must therefore give proof. Show proof that your calmed designer is making anything which resolves problems of the world. Show data that people could verify that your designer is powerful, resolving terrible problems of people. Show data of your claims that that one you adore is merciful that he save people from dreadful situation like a child being raped and killed, families buried by buildings due to earth quakes. Do not fool people with your claims that just because you don't understand, it must be God. That is irrational and you are making forceful insistence of your unsupported claims.
Thats because Hitchens is evil and made various blasphemous statements about God and Jesus. I would have attacked him also, but alas, he's in hell now, so I can't.
Maybe because Christianity gave us Universal Human Rights Equality of the sexes Separation of Church and State Social justice Social Welfare Hospitals Orphanages Aged Care Mandatory Education Universal law Librilism Modernity Due Process Monasteries the forerunners to Universities the Scientific Revolution The Industrial Revolution The Magna Carta The US Constitution So if you're an Athiest you cannot believe that Human Rights exist as this a Metaphysical Concept derived from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs
i bearly made it 5 minutes into this video and i already cant stand the fallacies and strawmaning taking place by the hateful theists.these debates are like watching a narcissistic parent try and control their 18+ year old child.
1:02:22 Give or take a few seconds, "It was christ who invented that", meaning compassion for the other guy. This is a statement which is 100%, factually, historically inaccurate. Both the Egyptian Book of the Dead and Confucius, well before Jesus and the influence of Abrahamic religions in other parts of the world, stated versions of the golden rule which can be interpreted to mean, etymologically, the exact same vibration-based action, from one entity to another. The best Dinesh could say in this scenario is that Christianity had the largest influence of spreading that message throughout the world to affect human behavior over the last 2000 years as an influence of one of the world's major religions. That could be debated, how different ideas and people and norms and trends and cultural beliefs affect human consciousness. Absolutely, that can be discussed. That said, it is a false and misleading foundation to say that this ethic did not exist and does not "truly" exist outside of Christianity. A phrase I have coined which I believe sums it up (and if you want to debate it, I'm more than happy to) is this: Morality precedes dogma.
It begins and ends with the acceptance of an idea which is clearly a reflection of the human ego. Religion isn't real in any literal or physical sense, but it may just actually be yet another evolutionary manifestation that just helps human beings to survive.
Do you believe in Human Rights ?? I assume you do This came from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs How do you get Human Rights from Athiesm ? As Dawkins says there's no right or wrong good or evil just blind pitiless indifference
That we MUST overcome. Imagine if the churches still had power over civilization, we'd still think a lot of wrong things. "Flat-earth, and, geocentric" among other stupid ideas.
"I'm like a mosquito in a nudist camp, I don't know where to start!" Dinesh, you said something very funny, here, dedicate yourself to these things and leave the serious things alone
I came here after Alex's murder of this guy just to find out that Dinesh has been this way for over a decade, if anything his arguments have somehow gotten even worse
One does not have to believe in the dogma of religions but a smart person will conclude there is not a creator of life what we see is illogical. Bad mouthing the 10 commandments and people that believe in a higher being or beings qualifies as evil.
How people squander their life on disputes like this one is beyond me. Initially Jesus was not a follower of any religion. Jesus never claimed to be a Jew because he was born in Judea. While atheists deny the existence of God, they debate religion nonstop throughout their lives. Here, the only thing that is true is that God has no affiliation with either atheism or religion.
What a profoundly incorrect, self-important and stupid post People have discussions like this to avoid making embarrassingly ignorant pseudo-intellectual garbage statements like the one you just made.
@@Twist52 Absense of belief rather than 'lack', but that's being extra pedantic for the sake of trying to be extra clear to people who think 'lack' means 'some but not enough'. Otherwise, yeah. The only reason we don't have a-unicornists or a-toothfairyists is that no one is trying to make it mandatory to believe in unicorns or tooth fairies.
@@Twist52there is a burden of proof for atheism, if there is no God then atheist must believe that life had to have originated from non-life. Either that or there is no origin to life and just simply always was. Alright cool, prove that. You cannot do that, because throughout ALL of observable time there has not once been an instance of life being created from non-life and it has never been something scientists have been able to do in their labs. There has also never been an instance of life that has no discernible origin. Atheism is just another religion where the scientists are the gods and people will just believe whatever theories or hypotheses they come up with without actually digging deeper. All under the guise of being the “logical” ones driven by nothing but “facts”
Dinesh is under too much western influence. There are religions out there that are more compassionate than Christianity. Buddhists, Jains follow that. A large part of Hindu scriptures is on love, sacrifice for the larger good, forgiveness and compassion. If any other culture or country with a different religion/culture went to war, occupied and ruled for centuries other parts of the world won't you be discussing about it today? So, it is by chance.
Hitchens misread his bible. Joshua 5:13 says the Captain of the host of the Lord (Yeshua) won at Jericho not Joshua. His unkind Vaudevillian style puts me off. D'Souza's honesty & truthfulness won the day. Debate is not only a discussion, it's a search for truth. Shalom.
I REALLY like Dinesh D'Souza, and have followed him for many many years. But I am wholly against him in this particular debate, and I want you to notice when he is speaking about the lack of deaths from christianity, that he ignores places like Ireland, Serbia and the multitude of places around the world where people have historically been slaughtered in the name of religion. As Christopher Hitchens himself said, Dinesh D'Souza is one of the most formidable debaters of our times, but he missteps many times in this instance. for instance, how comical is it, for a christian to bring up facts as their rallying cry, when their ENTIRE foundation of belief system is based on FAITH???? The act of believing in the absence of fact. Yet, he starts his second round by accusing CH of not using any factual evidence to affirm his stances. Lol. This is extremely hypocritical, and comical at best. Then in his next stance, Dinesh says that there is no sadomasochism in god offering us free will. So what does he call burning in hell for eternity??? Because that sounds pretty much like sadomasochism to me. As much as I like Dinesh, he misstepped many times in this debate. I am firmly on the side of Mr. Hitchens, and find his points of view to be much more salient, convincing and realistic.
I agree with you on one level, and disagree with you on some others. Christianity--religion, moreover--has been a civilizing force, in that it is a cultural glue that unifies groups. Beyond that however, I'm not so sure. First off, even if religion does that, that has no bearing on whether or not it's true, or if there are alternative frames of mind or government which might be better suited for civilization. A moral code like christianity is often a benefit and a comfort to someone lacking guidance, but that does not mean that there are not other forms of guidance better suited for the reality we now better understand. I believe this is the heart of the saying, 'where religion ends is where philosophy begins'.
7:15 WERE! WE were all brainwashed from brith! Holidays to keep reminding us all year long!! UNTILL THEY, WE as humans GREW UP! And left childish notions behind!
How do you explain the many thousands of true conversions people make in adulthood? Like myself at age 24. My life was transformed completely. I now have a peace I never knew before and I am still going strong at 65 yo, my faith and relationship with God growing every day. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN IT? Are we all dilusional? I mean, can a delusion or psychosis or whatever last 40+ years?
@@jbooks888 that's on you ! Perhaps if you understood reality your life would have been better, Your relationship with what? His master plan, or you don't subscribe to A religion, just A god? If it's christianity, tell me about your awakening? What did it! Why A him? Your mother gave birth to you!
@@jbooks888 68 and I read Real history! The sun older then the earth! Geniuses wrong! An almighty would need Anne? You do know her? We humans created vaccines to keep you alive! It has made it so, That we tripled the world's population in less then 100 years! We found helium on the sun before earth FACT! Not a very good response for someone so saved, enlighten? Anton petrov, watch his show! 👋
I hate to the bone the behavior Dinesh and other christians show up as in 41. Could you stop talking? Of course. Let us think about what he have not mentioned. You asked me to stop! That is the civility of atheist!. I do not know where Dinesh were raised but this low blow tactic is such a scar on the debate :(
@@RadwynAlthor Agreed. He would go absolutely balistic against the authoritarian modern left. And being and old school journalist he would loathe the current crop of propagandists.
Two minutes in and i am shocked, that anyone can celebrate Dinesh. People who belive in Unicorns are not doing all the horrible things to other people, that religious people do for over 2k years. Sadly i'm not allowed to allaborate.
As an Athiest then how do you believe in Human Rights ?? If you do believe in Human Rights you believe in a Metaphysical Concept from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs that you cannot prove with a materialistic worldview Your worldview is incoherent and inconsistent
Please watch and share with others my five brief videos in which I present examples of scientific facts contained in the Bible. And today's scientists agree with those facts!
"Christopher Hitchens died of complications from esophageal cancer. He was diagnosed with the disease in June 2010 and succumbed to it on December 15, 2011, at the age of 62." I felt sad when I read that, not just because of his terrible death, but because he had no hope of eternal life.
That's where you are mistaken. Hitch WILL live "forever"....in the writings, and debates such as this, that he so generously left behind. MY teen age sons will teach THIER sons of this great man...and so on and so on....sound familiar?
@@traviskeeler5655 Nope. Forever is quite a stretch of your imagination. In your stardust's (hitchens) world view nothing lasts forever because everything changes as a result of evolution. The more time passes the more his teachings and writings are, and will be, debunked. So no, he only lives in your faint memory which will soon be gone when you meet the same end as your atheist idol. Your concept of Hitchens living forever through his writings & videos is flawed. What good is that when Hitchens himself is doomed? As the law of entropy applies to all things, his writings and videos will eventually be destroyed by time.
DSouza is completely dishonest in his presentation. He uses the 2 excuses that all religious people make: (1) you can't prove god does not exist and: (2) science has shown us that we and the universe are so wonderous that only a god could have created it. This is the same nonsense that caused the Catholic church to try Galileo for heresy because he discovered that we revolve around the sun and are not the center of the universe. If you need religion to lead a moral life, you are a weak, corrupted person with no morals. If you believe out of fear of dying, you are a coward.
Do you believe in Human Rights ?? A Metaphysical Concept derived from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs Athiests cannot believe in Human Rights Explain how you get Human Rights from an Athiestic Materialistic World View ?? As Dawkins says there's no right or wrong good or evil just blind pitiless indifference
Apologists keep trying to do that, and keep being corrected. It's unclear whether Hitler himself was an atheist or a Catholic, but he was certainly supported by the Catholics and often said the Nazi party was doing "Gods work" and similar. The only pro-atheist point I've heard was a claim that he once expressed contempt for the church in conversation one time.
Hitler and the NAZIs hated Christianity Hitler said Christianity was weak and feeble and if he could choose a Religion for Germany it would be Islam That's why the Islamic world were his Allies Heinrich Himler was in charge of creating a New Religion for Germany a Neo Pagan Religion They estimated it would take 50 years
@@danielanthony8373 You are misinformed. The Catholic Church are not going to be saying prayers on Hitlers birthday by holy order if he's an atheist, I'm sorry to say. His personal views are impossible to tell, but he was officially a Catholic on paper and frequently wrote and spoke about doing Gods holy work. Whether he believed in his heart of hearts is immaterial at that point.
Dinesh acts dishonestly in this debate. He is deliberately obtuse to many issues. For example, he assigns the many horrors of Stalin and Mao to their atheism. Christopher has already stated that atheism is not a belief system. It is simply withholding belief in the absence of evidence. You can be an atheist Republican or atheist Democrat. You can be an atheist free market capitalist, libertarian, socialist or communist. It’s like saying if you’re not circumcised, then you are responsible and subscribe to the belief systems of everyone evil who is not a Christian or Jew….even when their belief systems are conflicting and mutually exclusive.
I Couldn't Help But Wonder Why Christopher Passed Up The Opportunity Here To Offer Copies Of His Own Books To Sell And Sign. I'm Sure He Wasn't Desperate For The Money, But Being Available To Perhaps Clear Up A Misunderstanding Or Two Seems As If It Would Have Held Some Value. Perhaps He Had Grown So Irritated By The Self-Proclaimed "Mosquito" Dinesh' Repulsive Presence That It Just Wasn't Worth It. Regardless, You, Christopher, Sir, Remain Deeply Loved And Respected, And Most Sorely Missed. As For Dinesh, Thankfully, There Are Effective Eradicant Sprays For His Type.
sapiens have been around for at least 3 million years( rounded cranium associated with homo species), This was not know at the time of this debate took place, We also now know that homo sapiens are the result of interbreeding bye no less than 6-8 hominid species over hundreds of thousands years.
I would definitely like to live in a community with Christians or Jews or Buddhists or Thiests compared to living in a community of Athiests I guarantee the Athiests in the comments section would agree
Much rather live in a community that does not actual call themselves any of them. I am atheist but am not 'an atheist' as I do not belong an structure or community of 'atheist' and do not know if one actually exists.
I practically live in a secular community. You don't really see or hear religion in your everyday life in this part of the world. And its great so no thanks to any supernatural beliefs.
Yes, convicted for donating too much money to someone, actually he was speaking too much smack about the wrong people, that's why they bothered to do it. But he was pardoned, so there's that. Only one of the two gentlemen in that debate has admitting to practising anal sex, yeah, there's that.
@@mashah1085 Here's the thing about Letitia James' prosecution. TRUMP BROKE NO LAWS and did not defraud anyone! They want to stop him being re-elected by putting him in jail! That was her mission statement. Yeah Trump pardoned him because it was an extremely harsh penalty for what he did. A fine would have been enough.
@@mashah1085 do you believe there is such thing as an unjust law? Oh wait, you're an atheist, so your concept of justice and morality is built upon a house of cards.
In short.. Yes. Many apologists and fundamentalists believe that the so-called 'laws of nature' were set in place by a higher power like our laws about which side of the road to drive on and similar. They have trouble with the idea that the laws of nature are descriptive, not prescriptive. They describe what is there. They do not dictate what should be there.
The magic is Time space energy matter coming into existence out of nothing Presto then you have a Universe that has the odds of existing the way this one does as 1 in 10 to the power of 180 The amount of atoms in the universe is 1 to the power of 10 to the power of 80
@@danielanthony8373 You keep misrepresenting the other side of the argument. The Big Bang model does not say anything about anything coming from nothing. Quit with the strawman arguments, even if it IS unintentional. The argument from big numbers is impressively unimpressive also. Would you like to try again?
I suppose you could say everyone uses a certain amount of faith but faith is about trusting something to be true and a supposition of good reasons to hold that trust. Even if theists were miraculously correct, none can effectively state their reasonable case for placing trust that some kind of supernatural being exists. Dinesh talks about natural laws as though they are authoritative, when if you are into studying the laws of nature come to understand them as descriptive as we are doing the describing. Atoms are not listening nor obeying, they are doing what the physical properties allow, properties that appear natural, not supernatural.
There are natural laws moral laws mathematical laws physical laws but no Law Giver There's a genetic code embedded in all life but no code writer There's structure and design in the universe but no designer There is a creation but no Creator If you believe in Human Rights you believe in a Metaphysical Concept that is derived from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs You cannot get Human Rights from a Materialistic Athiestic World View
@@danielanthony8373 There are authoritative laws that require the invention of the laws to be followed, but there are mostly descriptive laws that lack this requirement. There are codes that require a coder, but there are natural patterns that don't. Intelligence is a natural property that eventually emerged. We can identify this property of intelligence here on earth that can create a bird's nest, beaver's dam or an automobile. The reason that the watch on the beach stands out is because it requires the property of intelligence, the beach or forest does not. If the actual property of intelligence was found in everything, there would be no "natural" that describes things lacking the property of intelligence. If nothing is natural and everything is created, we would be debating Gods vs advanced aliens where the difference would be does the intelligence have limitations. There does seem to be limitations and even an abandonment of Gods or aliens involved in this world. Seeing a God at work is equivalent to seeing a good luck charm bringing good luck, we are met with excuses and denials of reality.
He received 8 months for $10,000 campaign donation over the legal amout No one has ever received this for this amount A donation to Hillary Clinton $200,000 over received a fine Because he criticized Obama and made a doco about it the State threw him in jail You should be worried about this
D' souse didn't get zilch for legitimate argument for ' the bible ...thing e except excuses , worse than wicked , promulgating proven Crual delusion/ LIES ! .
I confess I wrongly judged CH as dying in a state of unbelief. In his last moments of his life he may have repented of his sins and trusted in Jesus Christ as his savior and Lord??? If that be the case, he is now happy and very much alive in Heaven!!!
Atheism isn't a religion. And there are FAR more than two to worry about. Not so simple, I'm afraid. But it could be made simple. Just stop trying to force people to believe in anything by law and only teach what can be shown with at least some evidence.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
Dinesh can hardly be described as an intellectual heavyweight.
there is no such thing as a "christian intellectual" it just doesn't sound and work right..
♦"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."
♦"Religion is founded on the fear & gullibility of many & the cleverness of few."
♦"Only fools revere the supernatural bs just bc a book says it's the holy truth."
♦"The delusional religious fools are cocksure & the intelligent full of doubt."
♦"The religious believe by the millions what only lunatics believe on their own."
♦"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
♦"It's difficult to free the religious fools from the chains they revere."
♦“To have faith is precisely to lose one's mind so as to win God.”
♦"The death of dogma is the birth of morality."
♦"Religion fools many bc human brain is susceptible to pareidolia & apophenia."
♦"There is no objective order or structure in the world except what we give it."
♦"Morality is an evolutionary process. Jesus & authors of Bible didn't know slavery is immoral, but today we know slavery is immoral."
Christopher Hitchens is missed in our time, when fundamentalists of all religions and denominations threaten the very foundations of liberal democracy. He was such an extraordinary intellectual.
Sad that he is dead, But of course if you stand this path until You reach the end of your life. You will be reunited. If you could hear him now he would tell you he was wrong.
And he knew that GK Chesterton was the greatest threat to his own worldview. Even on his deathbed, he still struggled with him
@@georgepoe1283prove it
you guys of course gonna miss him for a while , and soon he will be forgotten just like others before him , on both left and right , by the way
@@georgepoe1283what a stupid statement...
Hitchens makes me proud to be British
Same!
@@matthewwilson1860 he was an alcoholic, ego maniac, narcissistic Buffon , in love with his own voice .. the few good things he did were overshadowed by his desire to bully , not a good human being !!!!! Athirst ? However did you figure that one out . DUH !!!!!
I love British people, their accent is one of the best im my opinion. Hitchens makes me proud to be a Christian. He is one of the reasons I studied the Bible and found peace in the Lord Jesus Christ.
@@Viosified
🤭 Whatever helps you sleep dude.
@@kevinedwards9573 oh, I have sweet dreams, too. 😇
Charity does not originate with religion. But rather, the idea of community and honor.
I agree, and disagree with so many theism ideas, I don't need any basis for altruism, but it makes sense , long before theism, to help others, and there are many logical reasons for this. I am not 'militant', nor do I consider Hitchens or most others, but, adamant and logical. So many points made that just do not make sense, but, are based on the 'mystery of faith'. I care not at all to rob anyone of the comfort of their beliefs, but, I do profess , according to logic. I would not debate anyone that I thought needed the crutch or comfort of beliefs in any religion though.
Shirley 0strickland
Charity begins with compassion, and compassion began from biological imperatives beneficial to the species.
Charity begins at home....🙏
Dinesh never fails to fail
Yes he's such a happy nonjudgmental Christian.
Is the D'Souza gentleman considered an "intellectual" in the United States? I sure hope not. If so, the Conservative intellectuals have migrated far from the days of William F. Buckley, Jr.
Dinesh trounced Hitchens, you are not smart enough to realize it. Obviously you didn't understand what either of them were saying. Hitchens kept conflating religion with Islam, Christianity with Islam, Catholicism with Christianity and just using whatever one he wanted when it suited him. VERY dishonest.
You sheep are just so gullible,,,,religion is philosophy for the less gifted
Dinesh is brilliant. He brought out the big guns in the opening statement- the ones that REALLY show how ignorant an atheist has to be, and still no rebuttal 😂
D’Souza has always been, and remains till this day, a terrible debater. His inability to convincingly articulate a reasonable argument with a logically sequential conclusion coupled with a cognitive bias whereby he grossly overestimates his knowledge and competence in most, not to say all, domains he debates, makes it painful to listen. And then to go against an intellectual juggernaut like Hitchens?!?! Nuts!!!
“Matter follows the laws of science.” No, D’Souza, the the laws of matter are written in function of how that matter behaves! This guy is a hoot!!! 😂😂😂
I miss you Mr Hitchens. I would say that we need you now more than ever but that could be said for every time in history.
This Danesh guy is ridiculous. These aren't serious arguments, are they?...
Religion is ridiculous....Dinesh and others like him are experts in capitalizing on it
@@ol_dirty_dirty yep, spot on. It's extremely sinister.
He is a convicted felon, pardoned by tRump. He created 2000 Mules, a fantasy proved utterly and completely made up. 100% false. That's D'Souza.
He opens with “I don’t believe in unicorns, but I’m not militant about it.”
As if there’s no difference regarding theists which are CONSTANTLY trying to put the rest of us under theocracy,
Western democracies included.
So right off the bat you see that either many elementary school children have a stronger intellect than him, or he’s disgustingly dishonest, or both.
If you believe kids are inherently moral, than you've never seen kids play and you most likely don't remember what it was like when you were a kid. Kids need to be taught the golden rule, because when we're born we don't have the ability to think outside ourselves. Your brain isn't finished developing until around 25 to 30 years old. This is simply a fact. This is why we have sayings like "acting like a child" and so on.
My meanest and most petty time was my youth
@@RadwynAlthor So someone that is mean or petty doesn't know the difference between right and wrong?
I believe some kids are probably inherently moral, some... not so much.
@@joeshoe6184 my 5vyear old cousin is smacking his little brother with a remote
True. I remember the very day my mother taught me the Golden Rule, probably the best thing to come from religion.
Dinesh isn’t good at these. This was barely even a debate for Hitchens, he just ran right through him while nursing a casual buzz.
If a debater raises his Voice in counterargument like Dinesh,
it almost a sure thing that is he walking on shakey grounds
and compensates the weakness of his position by shouting.
William lane craig is the worst for this 😂
He didn't raise his voice once. He spoke loud and clear the whole time.
That is true with someone, out of desperation and lack of ability to argue their point but it is not necessarily true when faced with a debate with an absurdly unreasonable opponent.
Saying that morality was due to Christianity is false since Buddhist who do not believe in God are good people as will as the Hindus which are more in number.
I have heard apologists literally say that Christianity was the start of civilisation and that no civilisation existed before Christianity arrived. When asked about China, the apologist started to say "China wasn't civili- er.." and then after being prompted again by the interviewer, changed it hastily to "Christianity made China better than it was!" and wouldn't be drawn on the original claim. Admittedly the apologist in question wasn't someone who could pull a crowd like these two debaters could, but it does make one wonder how widespread this sort of opinion is.
No Christian says that without Christianity there's no Morality
They say without God there's no Morality
God is the source of Morality
As Dawkins says there's no right or wrong no good or evil just blind pitiless indifference
If you're an Athiest there's no such thing as Human Rights
@@danielanthony8373 You should tune into the AXP 27/7 channel sometime. We get a large number of Christians calling in saying that without Christianity there is no morality. On the other hand, atheism and secular humanism has a solid grounding to human rights and respect for each other. Far better than "God said so." in fact. Let's try and avoid making sweeping claims like "No Christian says!" shall we?
And Christianity is inherently amoral…hence the mental gymnastics decent christians ( I m not including D’Souza in that bunch, he has always been a bona fide douche bag) have to do to explain how their scriptures are just misinterpreted.
@@tehspamgozehere if someone played a bad cover music doesnt mean the original music is bad. Fix your logic
The level of atheism throughout the rest of the developed world refutes any argument that religion is somehow a moral necessity, Countries like Norway, Iceland, Australia, Canada, Sweden, Switzerland, Belgium, Japan, the Netherlands, Denmark and the United Kingdom are among the least religious societies on Earth. According to the United Nations’ Human Development Report (2005) they are also the healthiest, as indicated by measures of life expectancy, adult literacy, per capita income, educational attainment, gender equality, homicide rate and infant mortality. Conversely, the 50 nations now ranked lowest in terms of human development are unwaveringly religious. Other analyses paint the same picture: The United States is unique among wealthy democracies in its level of religious literalism and opposition to evolutionary theory; it is also uniquely beleaguered by high rates of homicide, abortion, teen pregnancy, STD infection and infant mortality. The same comparison holds true within the United States itself: Southern and Midwestern states, characterized by the highest levels of religious superstition and hostility to evolutionary theory, are especially plagued by the above indicators of societal dysfunction, while the comparatively secular states of the Northeast conform to European norms. Of course, correlational data of this sort do not resolve questions of causality--belief in God may lead to societal dysfunction; societal dysfunction may foster a belief in God; each factor may enable the other; or both may spring from some deeper source of mischief. Leaving aside the issue of cause and effect, these facts prove that atheism is perfectly compatible with the basic aspirations of a civil society; they also prove, conclusively, that religious faith does nothing to ensure a society’s health.
You defeated you own augment all those countries are westernized countries for the most part which was influenced by Christainity also the nordic countries are operating on ideology of the tribe they hve small populations and see them self as Vikings and thus why the work together, this does not apply in non homogeneous countries with large populations. Also very high rates of suicide, alcoholism, depression and these countries are not reproducing so will die out if they dnt turn it around quick in some cases too late. They also engage in weird practices like beastily. Sweden was the rape capital in europe and look at the rapes in western europe. The safest country in europe is Poland which is a Christain country and Hungary and that euro stat data, jokes on you.😂
Fanaticism is a dangerous attitude of an individual or society because it uses passion, an extreme form of emotion, assumes an attitude of inflexibility or rigidity, and a surrender of rational coldheaded thinking and is very evident in deeply religious people more than to atheists or to people of not the re!igious bent.
Cont....and further, because this emotional attachment or involvement to their faith would tend to diminish and at worst, corrupt their ability to think
rationally and logically so giving to charity is an emotional, religious and laudable act in the true spirit of Love thy neighbor as yourself teaching of Jesus. This act is also logical because it promotes goodwill that keeps people working together cordially and brings peace which is a desirable political with great economic advantages.
Should be...political move or strategy.....
Uh, Guy, are you trying to draw people away from God as a religious activist, just declaring to the world your new stand on religion or just trying to convince yourself you are doing the "right" thing?
Damn I miss Hitchens…
36:00 David Hume's "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion" was published in 1779. Still we have to head those creationist claims - i.e. having been disproved almost 300 yrs ago - over, and over, and over, and over again from D'Souza. What an utter ignorance.
Dinesh is dishonest, twists, distorts, and counts on the gullible ignorant people that are easily impressed by Dinesh pretending that some problems can not be overcome and makes ridiculous comparison to try to make people laugh at what should instead has been a quest for facts. Dinesh relies on incredibalism. Very dishonest character.
Dinesh dishonest? You have no idea what you're talking about. Still, Christianity (not Catholics or Muslims) has brought more good into the world than atheism!
Interesting claims. What do you think to be “dishonest”?
@@rusmeister7144 Look up the definition of straw man argument. Dinesh instead of acknowledging that a claim he made was debunked, he changes the subject to become about something else and then attacks that.
@@Antiorganizer OK. Where exactly does he do that? Can you give an example?
@@rusmeister7144Look at the rebuttals section of this very video. One would have to be pretty damn stupid to not see how dishonest Dinesh is. He states lies, makes false claims, needs to be constantly corrected, and yet will not acknowledge when he was wrong, which is pretty much all the time (being wrong that is).
I mean, come, on, already! Seriously! You really can't see how utterly obviously dishonest Dinesh is? Hello, mcfly ! Anybody in there, knock knock !
Christian love is the strongest hate out there
The sort of "love" you get when you're absolutely convinced you're correct about everything. Incredible arrogance. "I'll pray for you." And of course "You'll burn in hell!" despite their holey fables explicitly saying to not take pleasure in the downfall, misfortune or suffering of others.
What has Christianity given us besides Universal Human Rights Equality of the sexes Separation of Church and State Social justice Social Welfare Hospitals Orphanages Aged Care Mandatory Education Universal law Librilism Modernity Monasteries the forerunners to Universities the Scientific Revolution The Industrial Revolution The Magna Carta The US Constitution
Most atheist claims we came from nothing. They probably think about it with nothing in their brain 😂
Dinesh misses the morality argument. It’s because clearly the Bible says we were made in the image of God with the laws written on our hearts
Ah! You’ve managed to completely miss it as well!
Yep, it's called our conscience. Buthat's talking about laws, not the grace of Jesus' sacrifice. But how are we going to know the free gift of salvation that Jesus offers to us if there is no gospel being preached around the world, or as Jesus said,
Matt 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Our consciences aren't going to tell us that!
@@jbooks888 Mine tells me to do quite the opposite and leave people alone rather than trying to tell others how to live their lives. By the way, how is it a free gift of salvation if we're required to do something to claim it?
@@tehspamgozehere If I offer you a free can of coke, you still have to take it from me and drink it! You should think before you post because that was the dumbest post I've read all week!
@@tehspamgozehere Suit yourself. Live your life however you see fit.
The average person isnt very bright, and Hitchens is using too many words that they don't know. Either that or people are determined to try to believe what they think they should in order to avoid damnation. Because all of D'Souza's talking points were fallacious logic. all of it. There's no reason that anyone should dismiss what HItchens says here and take D'Souza's side, especially after this debate.
Dear Christians, is this the best guy you got? Dineshs' arguments sound like 10 year olds school debate.
I would say the same of Hitchens’. But Chesterton was the real man Hitchens raged against, could never fully understand and could never defeat, though he railed against him.
I think the essential problem of the atheists is that they want to pretend that intelligent Christian arguments don’t exist. CS Lewis began with the moral law; there has never been a good refutation of that.
The upshot is that it is useless to try to speak truth to people that have determined in advance not to hear it. Luckily for us, the men who built Western civilization, the very thing the atheist takes for granted, pretty much all believed in the Christian God, with very few exceptions, and those late in the game (the 18th century and beyond). It would make a man look foolish to pretend that Thomas Aquinas or Dr Samuel Johnson, Newton, and others were fools. It would be like pretending that Einstein was an idiot because his worldview didn’t agree with yours.
Conversely, I don’t think Hitchens was an idiot. But he himself could not get past his own high-school ideas, and holding them dogmatically, made it impossible for him to critically challenge his own ideas.
I think be best Christian “debater” I’ve seen is Cliffe Knechtle. He can actually navigate a conversation and give intelligent responses instead of going in circles following a script like people like WLC.
@@Twist52 I personally have read a lot from WLC. He wiped the floor with Hitchens in their debate. And other philosophers like Plantinga, Swinburne, Pruss are brilliant. Also scientists like Francis Collins and Luke Barnes. Cliffe is ok bur expand your horizons and learn philosophy.
@@philamras3732 WLC spent half that debate saying there was no evidence for atheism after Hitchens had already established why atheism requires zero evidence
@@Twist52 Hitchens did not successfully adress many of Craig's arguments. Alex O' Conner made a video on this called the sophistry of hitchens. Also every worldview requires defending. If you believe there is no God or it is unlikely one exists, you must provide justification. Again, Graham Oppy mentioned this on the Alex O' Conner's podcast.
I hate DD's attempts to tell atheists what they believe, getting it wrong at almost every turn. The Stalin, Hitler, Mao....did their deeds as a matter of atheism is one of the dumbest non-arguments that apologists have ever come up with.
Although the atheists do the same
What gets me is they assume any that aren't believers of the big three are automatically atheist. Almost seems like Christianity is the biggest atheist religion out there when they worship the death of their god... (even though they are non-Jews worshiping a Jew, but that's another argument to be had)
Yeah, I'm confused about that too. The point is not that atheist regimes don't commit horrible things, but that nobody's commiting these things in the name of atheism. Nobody's sending people to camps, in the name of absence of god. They do it in the name of a person, that replaces the position of god on earth, i.e. the tyrant.
@@alexerr_wolf Yes, they are doing it in the name of atheism! If they are atheists, they are doing it in the name of atheism! WAKE UP! Or maybe you would prefer "doing it because they are atheists" ?
@@alexerr_wolf The explanation is quite simple. While you are technically right that the atheist regimes did not do their evils in the name of atheism as such, it was the inevitable outcome of the meaning of atheist philosophy applied to human nature. The elimination of responsibility after death for evils committed in life removes restraint from doing evil which would otherwise be present. If there is no hereafter, if YOLO is true, then (to the person who doesn’t think it through, and most don’t, certainly not the tyrants), then why shouldn’t a person with power, will and desire exercise it to maximize his power and pleasure in the here and now? Atheist philosophy offers no reason to restrain oneself, although some might try to offer reasons on the basis of their personal opinions or desires, the tyrant can literally say, “To hell, or rather, the GULAG with you”. And so in the absence of a solid basis for moral law outside of the individual and his perceptions, no one could tell an atheist ruler that there is a power over him and that he will face punishment and cannot escape it, even in death. He will just laugh at it just as you all are laughing here. Abolish God, and the state becomes the god, and the head of state can and will do what he will, even over your objections, and that is what happened in the USSR, China, Cambodia and so on. The atheist regimes made the worst depravations of Christian rulers look like baby games.
Its so sad that people actually agree with Dinesh on anything. Every argument he had was bad. He purposly misunderstood so many points just to have an argument. Theres a difference between teaching a child about gravity and indoctrinating them into believing in something that has no evidence by using fear and coercion.
I know that you can't hear me Christopher (Because you are Dead),but M8 - You are a Legend!. Thankyou.
The problem with Mr. D'Souza's arguments to me is when you listen to a point, such as that of the "Wish Fulfillment world" and why no one would ever create that. Well one can't help then think, those that wish to control people through hell and the comfort of heaven would create such a thing. Just because hell is tacked on does not mean such a thing can't come from a human mind. None of his points leave me without the thought of an alternative. Really, it just helps you continue what he refuses to say.
There is no way of distinguishing god/gods from Nature, except that we can actually observe Nature. Meaning Naturalism is the best explanation we have.
The Bible has a lot of explanations about spiritual matters. Science can't go there. Nor can it speak of origins of life and the cosmos. It just doesn't have the means to observe it!
@@jbooks888 So does the Hindu religion. But you'll discard that one with no explanation why christianity is better as an explanation.
@@jbooks888 that's nonsense , science is the only method we have to distinguish between what's imaginary and what's in the real world ,
if you have another method ... , please provide me one ...
so now we've established That , which you already knew Before you posted this nonsensical comment , that science IS the only method we have for Anything ...
quantum fields ARE eternal , haven't been created , CAN create space-time AND we know ... THEY EXIST and can do this ...
we have actual evidence for this
now You come along with your little stories about a ''mind'' outside of space-time that made a choice to create a universe , without ANY evidence what so ever ...
and YOU ... expect US ... to believe ... ... you ... ? that seems rather weird to me , not to you ... ? no ... ? nothing ... ? ok then ...
have a nice life , you ... and i hope your children enjoy Theirs , as well
i hope you sometime in your life , figure out that decrees , dictations and commandments WILL NEVER BE ANY FORM OF MORALITY ,
not subjective morality and DEFINITELY NOT objective morality , the word ''objective'' means >>> without opinion / NO MIND / MIND INDEPENDENT
decrees , dictations and commandments will NEVER BE MIND INDEPENDENT , they are all words associated with slaveryand/or having a master ...
objective morality can ONLY be grounded by an atheist , EVER , in the history past and to come , for all time , i'll explain ,
objective ( mind independent ) morality can ONLY come from something that is ''without opinion'' , like a law of physics ( like gravity is ) ,
if ''morality'' is just another quantum field , that permeates the universe , like gravity does and is just as ''mild'' as gravity is ,
it would not Force us to obey it , like gravity doesn't ( we can just jump up ) ,
our brains and bodies are receivers of the mild law of gravity , so can they be receivers for a law of morality , which IS the consensus in physics , mind you ,
exactly what i just said IS the consensus , i'm not lying about that , this is actually how the majority of the EXPERTS in the fields of this study think about it ,
which are about 70+% atheists and 60% of those believe in actual Physical Objective Morality ,
which goes nicely with the fact that EVERY branch of science ... thinks everything IS physical and material , nothing else , also consensus about that ...
this is just a little taste of how religion is just SO wrong to do to people like you , it's a complete LIE and the most horrible thing you can DO to a person ...
we have EVIDENCE and FOLLOW the evidence where it leads , not the other way around and stick your own head up your ass ,
plus teach your children ... to do the same ... , THAT's what bugs me the most about all this , the children who don't have a choice , LIKE YOU ... DIDN'T !
The alternative explanation is that by replacing slaves by paid employees, the owners of capital relinquished responsibility for the persons of their workers.
Neither parents or schools should be "instructing" on religious views in a free and open society....it should be up to the individual when their brain is fully developed.....they should abstain from controlled substances and any other thing that can leave the individual detrimentally affected if something goes according to anything other than "the plan/curriculum..."
hitchens looks so amused the whole time, as if entertaining the fairytales of a toddler
Because that's exactly what he's doing.
Dinesh should make the point: Christianity is not an ideology it is Church. And Church is a communion of love with Christ as well as our neighbour. If Christianity becomes an ideology then its adherents may become capable of the most heinous crimes while having their consciense "protected" from guilt. That is what happened in the West after it seceded from the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church I.e. the Orthodox Church.
Hence, the Church should be judged by those of its members who have tried to commune in love rather than adhere individually and antisocially with a "christian" ideology. By those who have achieved union with God's love and grace I.e. saints. Some of whom performed countless miracles accepted and testified to by people of all social and educational strata.
Hitchens killed dsousas career…then Alex O’Connor finished him off 15 years later
Souza is a Portuguese surname. Where is this guy from? Timor do Leste?
He's of Indian heritage, probably from Goa, the Portugese colonised part of India
Dinesh is not Portuguese. He's from Mumbai. How do you think he got the Portuguese surname?
Perhaps I missed it, but Hitchen's didn't quite go far enough, to my mind, in his rebuttal to D'Souza's "fine tuning" question. D'Souza imagines a universe which is purposefully following the laws of physics, while it is more reasonable to assert that the laws of physics simply reflect how our universe behaves. And while Hitchens did point out that all other planets, as far as we can tell, cannot support life as we know it. He even agrees with D'Souza that life on even our planet survives on a knife's edge. I would have liked him to expound on the concept of anthropocentrism which he mentioned. It is the height of hubris to suggest that life, specifically human life, exists on this planet by design because it allows us to exist. It is far more reasonable to argue that life would not be supported on our planet, as is the case with other planets, if as D'Souza said, "the parameters were a little different". We are simply fortunate that the parameters were not different (if living on a planet constantly at war can be considered "fortunate"). It's luck. Not design by a supernatural entity. It could be, but it is not reasonable to assume it is.
Australian aboriginal culture had neither slavery nor servitude and are the oldest living culture on earth. It was not an inherent human trait cleansed by christianity.
Australian aborigines didn't have a single coherant culture, but rather had a tremendous diversity of tribal type.. er.. culture-ettes, I suppose. They were never a unified people. The recent movement to try and rename all landmarks based on "the aboriginal language" has helped to illustrate that. There were thousands of languages, not just one. And tribes had different names for the same feature. Overlapping territory and similar make it a hot mess. Especially when three groups all insist on their name for such and such a river be used, despite that river running through land claimed by twenty different groups. Still, I'm pretty sure there was never any slavery adoption in general so your point stands for the most part.
Hunter gathers didn't have slavery as it is not practical in that firm of life but there are alot of downsides to hunter gatherering and the vast majirity of humanity would die if we resumed it. Servitude is debatable if you can be punished for going against tribal belifs theres coersed obedience
In reading the comments section, (after I watched the whole video), I can only come up with one conclusion. Everyone has their likes and dislikes, as well as their beliefs and disbeliefs. It seems to me that many thought this was a battle to change "the other side's mind". In reality, (as I see it), it was just a debate between two very educated individuals, on a very difficult subject, that was designed to inform and provoke thought. Nothing more.
Could you be any more passive?
@@andjunglepunkthirteen760 Hahahaha. Actually I have been pretty aggressive at times during my life. However, I have learned in over 66 years that if something does not effect me, change my life or I don't have any control over I just aint going to worry about it. Fair enuff ?
@@andjunglepunkthirteen760 Yeah, I noticed there weren't any Hitchslaps in this one, you guys seem to like.
@@williamlilleston1595 desousa may be educacted, but his dishonesty goes way too far to be placed in the same category as hitchens.
@@orojas1113 Opinions vary. You are entitled to yours as I am to mine. I'm good with that.
Awareness is known by awareness alone...
To belief that God created the universe is false. Here is why.
A designer would use raw materials but does not create the raw materials.
A designer create for the purposes of resolving problems. Like for instance a professional mechanical engineer would not only be accepted for a due to his narrative of his qualification of previous assume achievement since those could be fake but must prove himself of resolving actual problems on the job. If in reality he is not good he would be fired
In the same way giiven that there is an assumed designer of the universe, let us verify if he truly is by resolving huge complex multitude of problems that humanity is facing. Ever since until today we could not see problems being intervened.
That is the reason why the majority of philosophers, scientists and other intellectuals dismissed this concept of a designer.
The Wright brothers invented aeroplanes and contributed progress to the world.
Thomas Edison invented electricity and the world benefited.
Religion must therefore give proof.
Show proof that your calmed designer is making anything which resolves problems of the world.
Show data that people could verify that your designer is powerful, resolving terrible problems of people.
Show data of your claims that that one you adore is merciful that he save people from dreadful situation like a child being raped and killed, families buried by buildings due to earth quakes.
Do not fool people with your claims that just because you don't understand, it must be God. That is irrational and you are making forceful insistence of your unsupported claims.
Thank you, that is interesting.
D'Souza seems more concerned about attacking Hitchens and atheists then expounding his viewpoints about why god and religion are real and necessary.
Thats because Hitchens is evil and made various blasphemous statements about God and Jesus. I would have attacked him also, but alas, he's in hell now, so I can't.
@@jbooks888 Your comment is really showing Christian love isn't it?
Depressingly common. This tactic goes a long way to explaining why most people have a very warped idea of what an atheist is.
Maybe because Christianity gave us Universal Human Rights Equality of the sexes Separation of Church and State Social justice Social Welfare Hospitals Orphanages Aged Care Mandatory Education Universal law Librilism Modernity Due Process Monasteries the forerunners to Universities the Scientific Revolution The Industrial Revolution The Magna Carta The US Constitution
So if you're an Athiest you cannot believe that Human Rights exist as this a Metaphysical Concept derived from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs
@@AXKfUN9mnot the double but the triple standard shifted off yourself and onto the unbeliever? Your morals are genius.
“Light might travel faster on some distant star. So it’s reasonable to believe that virgins can give birth and dead people can walk again on Earth.”
i bearly made it 5 minutes into this video and i already cant stand the fallacies and strawmaning taking place by the hateful theists.these debates are like watching a narcissistic parent try and control their 18+ year old child.
1:02:22 Give or take a few seconds, "It was christ who invented that", meaning compassion for the other guy.
This is a statement which is 100%, factually, historically inaccurate. Both the Egyptian Book of the Dead and Confucius, well before Jesus and the influence of Abrahamic religions in other parts of the world, stated versions of the golden rule which can be interpreted to mean, etymologically, the exact same vibration-based action, from one entity to another.
The best Dinesh could say in this scenario is that Christianity had the largest influence of spreading that message throughout the world to affect human behavior over the last 2000 years as an influence of one of the world's major religions. That could be debated, how different ideas and people and norms and trends and cultural beliefs affect human consciousness. Absolutely, that can be discussed.
That said, it is a false and misleading foundation to say that this ethic did not exist and does not "truly" exist outside of Christianity. A phrase I have coined which I believe sums it up (and if you want to debate it, I'm more than happy to) is this: Morality precedes dogma.
It begins and ends with the acceptance of an idea which is clearly a reflection of the human ego. Religion isn't real in any literal or physical sense, but it may just actually be yet another evolutionary manifestation that just helps human beings to survive.
Do you believe in Human Rights ??
I assume you do
This came from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs
How do you get Human Rights from Athiesm ?
As Dawkins says there's no right or wrong good or evil just blind pitiless indifference
But thats just ur opinion right
That we MUST overcome. Imagine if the churches still had power over civilization, we'd still think a lot of wrong things. "Flat-earth, and, geocentric" among other stupid ideas.
@@Lost_Delos if there is no god the world will be like GTA V
@manicksgaming6949 That's funny because there isn't, and it isn't.
Dinesh is so WRONG I don’t know where to begin! . . . . He called Sam Harris a Biologist???? He’s a Neuroscientist⁉️
Neuroscience is a branch of biology BIG RED EXCLAMATION + BIG RED QUESTION
D'Souza comes out as a joke in front of Hitchens
But hitchen us obese and cigarette addict
"I'm like a mosquito in a nudist camp, I don't know where to start!" Dinesh, you said something very funny, here, dedicate yourself to these things and leave the serious things alone
I came here after Alex's murder of this guy just to find out that Dinesh has been this way for over a decade, if anything his arguments have somehow gotten even worse
Give an example
One does not have to believe in the dogma of religions but a smart person will conclude there is not a creator of life what we see is illogical. Bad mouthing the 10 commandments and people that believe in a higher being or beings qualifies as evil.
How people squander their life on disputes like this one is beyond me.
Initially Jesus was not a follower of any religion.
Jesus never claimed to be a Jew because he was born in Judea.
While atheists deny the existence of God, they debate religion nonstop throughout their lives.
Here, the only thing that is true is that God has no affiliation with either atheism or religion.
What a profoundly incorrect, self-important and stupid post
People have discussions like this to avoid making embarrassingly ignorant pseudo-intellectual garbage statements like the one you just made.
There is no “God”
The religious still, after all these years, still don't u derstand that ATHEISM ISNT A THING.
Trolling?
@@jbooks888I think he just means Atheism is a lack of belief. There’s zero burden of proof or any rules to atheism like there is for theology.
@@Twist52 Absense of belief rather than 'lack', but that's being extra pedantic for the sake of trying to be extra clear to people who think 'lack' means 'some but not enough'. Otherwise, yeah. The only reason we don't have a-unicornists or a-toothfairyists is that no one is trying to make it mandatory to believe in unicorns or tooth fairies.
@@Twist52there is a burden of proof for atheism, if there is no God then atheist must believe that life had to have originated from non-life. Either that or there is no origin to life and just simply always was.
Alright cool, prove that.
You cannot do that, because throughout ALL of observable time there has not once been an instance of life being created from non-life and it has never been something scientists have been able to do in their labs. There has also never been an instance of life that has no discernible origin.
Atheism is just another religion where the scientists are the gods and people will just believe whatever theories or hypotheses they come up with without actually digging deeper. All under the guise of being the “logical” ones driven by nothing but “facts”
If i was Christopher i would refuse to go to this debates. , like that in my opinion i would answer more then if i was thear..
….i heard once from someone who I admire💭💭💭” …he had a Disclosure Agreement with God”
Christopher Hitchens is unmatched as usual 😊
Unmatched hack
He's got a beef with God coz his Mum ran off with a Pastor then she committed suicide
@@danielanthony8373He mopped the floor with Dinesh. If you had your critical facilities of thinking for yourself instead, you'd realize that.
Following Jesus brings you to truth, eternal love and blessings. Saying no to Jesus takes you from truth, eternal love and blessings. CHOOSE WISELY!!!
Dinesh is under too much western influence. There are religions out there that are more compassionate than Christianity. Buddhists, Jains follow that. A large part of Hindu scriptures is on love, sacrifice for the larger good, forgiveness and compassion. If any other culture or country with a different religion/culture went to war, occupied and ruled for centuries other parts of the world won't you be discussing about it today? So, it is by chance.
Hitchens misread his bible. Joshua 5:13 says the Captain of the host of the Lord (Yeshua) won at Jericho not Joshua. His unkind Vaudevillian style puts me off. D'Souza's honesty & truthfulness won the day. Debate is not only a discussion, it's a search for truth. Shalom.
I REALLY like Dinesh D'Souza, and have followed him for many many years. But I am wholly against him in this particular debate, and I want you to notice when he is speaking about the lack of deaths from christianity, that he ignores places like Ireland, Serbia and the multitude of places around the world where people have historically been slaughtered in the name of religion. As Christopher Hitchens himself said, Dinesh D'Souza is one of the most formidable debaters of our times, but he missteps many times in this instance. for instance, how comical is it, for a christian to bring up facts as their rallying cry, when their ENTIRE foundation of belief system is based on FAITH???? The act of believing in the absence of fact. Yet, he starts his second round by accusing CH of not using any factual evidence to affirm his stances. Lol. This is extremely hypocritical, and comical at best. Then in his next stance, Dinesh says that there is no sadomasochism in god offering us free will. So what does he call burning in hell for eternity??? Because that sounds pretty much like sadomasochism to me. As much as I like Dinesh, he misstepped many times in this debate. I am firmly on the side of Mr. Hitchens, and find his points of view to be much more salient, convincing and realistic.
I believe that Dinesh is right. Christianity in its pure form was and is a civilizing force. It chips away the primitive/primal aspects of our nature.
I agree with you on one level, and disagree with you on some others. Christianity--religion, moreover--has been a civilizing force, in that it is a cultural glue that unifies groups. Beyond that however, I'm not so sure. First off, even if religion does that, that has no bearing on whether or not it's true, or if there are alternative frames of mind or government which might be better suited for civilization. A moral code like christianity is often a benefit and a comfort to someone lacking guidance, but that does not mean that there are not other forms of guidance better suited for the reality we now better understand. I believe this is the heart of the saying, 'where religion ends is where philosophy begins'.
7:15 WERE!
WE were all brainwashed from brith! Holidays to keep reminding us all year long!!
UNTILL THEY, WE as humans GREW UP! And left childish notions behind!
How do you explain the many thousands of true conversions people make in adulthood? Like myself at age 24. My life was transformed completely. I now have a peace I never knew before and I am still going strong at 65 yo, my faith and relationship with God growing every day. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN IT? Are we all dilusional? I mean, can a delusion or psychosis or whatever last 40+ years?
@@jbooks888 that's on you ! Perhaps if you understood reality your life would have been better,
Your relationship with what? His master plan, or you don't subscribe to A religion, just A god?
If it's christianity, tell me about your awakening?
What did it! Why A him?
Your mother gave birth to you!
@@pfflyer3381 NO! It's on YOU! How do you explain it?
@@pfflyer3381 Oh never mind - I just read all of your reply... how old are you? 13?
@@jbooks888 68 and I read Real history!
The sun older then the earth! Geniuses wrong!
An almighty would need Anne? You do know her? We humans created vaccines to keep you alive! It has made it so, That we tripled the world's population in less then 100 years! We found helium on the sun before earth FACT!
Not a very good response for someone so saved, enlighten?
Anton petrov, watch his show! 👋
Listening to Dinesh gives me a head ache, he doesn't understand what atheists believe or lack thereof.
I hate to the bone the behavior Dinesh and other christians show up as in 41. Could you stop talking? Of course. Let us think about what he have not mentioned. You asked me to stop! That is the civility of atheist!. I do not know where Dinesh were raised but this low blow tactic is such a scar on the debate :(
I always wondered what Christopher would have thought of Trump and his followers. I know his bother, Peter, doesn't think much of Trump.
He'd have more words for thev alk of the left I think
@@RadwynAlthor
Agreed. He would go absolutely balistic against the authoritarian modern left. And being and old school journalist he would loathe the current crop of propagandists.
You know they've lost the argument when they go to the default losing position of ad hominem? The snake oil stops working?
Two minutes in and i am shocked, that anyone can celebrate Dinesh. People who belive in Unicorns are not doing all the horrible things to other people, that religious people do for over 2k years. Sadly i'm not allowed to allaborate.
Endless Creationist nonsense by DeSouza, a man for whom logic and reality are as vague and mysterious as the phony God he chooses to believe in!
As an Athiest then how do you believe in Human Rights ??
If you do believe in Human Rights you believe in a Metaphysical Concept from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs that you cannot prove with a materialistic worldview
Your worldview is incoherent and inconsistent
Hitchens drinking a beer makes him the winner
This debate was set up to be ridiculously unfair to D’Souza. I mean Hitchens has a British accent!
Yes, he’s also got the devastating advantage of being right.
@@averagebiker1🔥🔥🔥
Dinesh is still standing there. All these talks have never helped him
Please watch and share with others my five brief videos in which I present examples of scientific facts contained in the Bible. And today's scientists agree with those facts!
"Christopher Hitchens died of complications from esophageal cancer. He was diagnosed with the disease in June 2010 and succumbed to it on December 15, 2011, at the age of 62." I felt sad when I read that, not just because of his terrible death, but because he had no hope of eternal life.
That's where you are mistaken. Hitch WILL live "forever"....in the writings, and debates such as this, that he so generously left behind. MY teen age sons will teach THIER sons of this great man...and so on and so on....sound familiar?
@@traviskeeler5655 Nope. Forever is quite a stretch of your imagination. In your stardust's (hitchens) world view nothing lasts forever because everything changes as a result of evolution. The more time passes the more his teachings and writings are, and will be, debunked. So no, he only lives in your faint memory which will soon be gone when you meet the same end as your atheist idol. Your concept of Hitchens living forever through his writings & videos is flawed. What good is that when Hitchens himself is doomed? As the law of entropy applies to all things, his writings and videos will eventually be destroyed by time.
Do you know someone who has lived eternal?
@@gbtusa1325 yes
@@Viosified care to tell me who? If your response is Jesus, please keep it to yourself.
DSouza is completely dishonest in his presentation. He uses the 2 excuses that all religious people make: (1) you can't prove god does not exist and: (2) science has shown us that we and the universe are so wonderous that only a god could have created it. This is the same nonsense that caused the Catholic church to try Galileo for heresy because he discovered that we revolve around the sun and are not the center of the universe. If you need religion to lead a moral life, you are a weak, corrupted person with no morals. If you believe out of fear of dying, you are a coward.
You're a very good writer. Thank you.
Do you believe in Human Rights ??
A Metaphysical Concept derived from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs
Athiests cannot believe in Human Rights
Explain how you get Human Rights from an Athiestic Materialistic World View ??
As Dawkins says there's no right or wrong good or evil just blind pitiless indifference
D'Souza needs his head read. He's still alive I take it?
Unfortunately. Alex O'connor wiped the floor with him a few days ago. Heritage 🤣
Hitler talks about God in the book Mein Kampf.
Look at the trees.
Hey, it's pre-criminal conviction and pre-divorce (you know, forbidden by Christianity) D'Souza!
Dinesh- paving the way for more atheists
He's really calling Hitler an atheist? 😂
Apologists keep trying to do that, and keep being corrected. It's unclear whether Hitler himself was an atheist or a Catholic, but he was certainly supported by the Catholics and often said the Nazi party was doing "Gods work" and similar. The only pro-atheist point I've heard was a claim that he once expressed contempt for the church in conversation one time.
@@tehspamgozehere lol I mean didn't he express Christian values? I need to do a Hitler study and brush up.
Hitler and the NAZIs hated Christianity
Hitler said Christianity was weak and feeble and if he could choose a Religion for Germany it would be Islam That's why the Islamic world were his Allies
Heinrich Himler was in charge of creating a New Religion for Germany a Neo Pagan Religion They estimated it would take 50 years
Yes Hitler was an Athiest
Most of the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials when asked said they were Athiests
@@danielanthony8373 You are misinformed. The Catholic Church are not going to be saying prayers on Hitlers birthday by holy order if he's an atheist, I'm sorry to say. His personal views are impossible to tell, but he was officially a Catholic on paper and frequently wrote and spoke about doing Gods holy work. Whether he believed in his heart of hearts is immaterial at that point.
When you defend Roman Catholicism and don't use presuppositional apologetic
And apologizing for Roman Catholicism
Dinesh acts dishonestly in this debate. He is deliberately obtuse to many issues. For example, he assigns the many horrors of Stalin and Mao to their atheism. Christopher has already stated that atheism is not a belief system. It is simply withholding belief in the absence of evidence. You can be an atheist Republican or atheist Democrat. You can be an atheist free market capitalist, libertarian, socialist or communist. It’s like saying if you’re not circumcised, then you are responsible and subscribe to the belief systems of everyone evil who is not a Christian or Jew….even when their belief systems are conflicting and mutually exclusive.
Dinesh is a 🤡
I Couldn't Help But Wonder Why Christopher Passed Up The Opportunity Here To Offer Copies Of His Own Books To Sell And Sign. I'm Sure He Wasn't Desperate For The Money, But Being Available To Perhaps Clear Up A Misunderstanding Or Two Seems As If It Would Have Held Some Value. Perhaps He Had Grown So Irritated By The Self-Proclaimed "Mosquito" Dinesh' Repulsive Presence That It Just Wasn't Worth It. Regardless, You, Christopher, Sir, Remain Deeply Loved And Respected, And Most Sorely Missed. As For Dinesh, Thankfully, There Are Effective Eradicant Sprays For His Type.
Hitchens cannot make an intelligent argument. In fact he cannot even speak without booze.
Two great men of our time . Christopher RIP .
Two? Who is the other one? Dinesh is the idiot that made the 2000 mules show and an avid trump supporter
My hero Christopher Hitchens didn't look up to his game here : ( feeling his health maybe
sapiens have been around for at least 3 million years( rounded cranium associated with homo species), This was not know at the time of this debate took place,
We also now know that homo sapiens are the result of interbreeding bye no less than 6-8 hominid species over hundreds of thousands years.
I would definitely like to live in a community with Christians or Jews or Buddhists or Thiests compared to living in a community of Athiests
I guarantee the Athiests in the comments section would agree
Much rather live in a community that does not actual call themselves any of them. I am atheist but am not 'an atheist' as I do not belong an structure or community of 'atheist' and do not know if one actually exists.
I practically live in a secular community. You don't really see or hear religion in your everyday life in this part of the world. And its great so no thanks to any supernatural beliefs.
Northern Europe? It's about 50/50 i think.
Holy shit, talk about David and Goliath.
D' Souza for d.j.t./ maga % / FASCISM ! ...STATEMENT ....Really ! .
Only one of the two gentlemen in that debate..is a convicted felon. And it's not the atheist.
Yes, convicted for donating too much money to someone, actually he was speaking too much smack about the wrong people, that's why they bothered to do it. But he was pardoned, so there's that. Only one of the two gentlemen in that debate has admitting to practising anal sex, yeah, there's that.
@@jbooks888 1. So laws don't apply if you like the person? 2. Who pardoned him? A future convicted felon?
@@mashah1085 Here's the thing about Letitia James' prosecution. TRUMP BROKE NO LAWS and did not defraud anyone! They want to stop him being re-elected by putting him in jail! That was her mission statement. Yeah Trump pardoned him because it was an extremely harsh penalty for what he did. A fine would have been enough.
@@mashah1085 do you believe there is such thing as an unjust law?
Oh wait, you're an atheist, so your concept of justice and morality is built upon a house of cards.
The Founding Father's committed High Treason
What's your point peanut ?
Dinesh is a fundamentalist and biblical literalist professor.
And a convicted felon.
Dinesh always starts with personal attacks. So unChristian of him
Does Dinesh think that the "laws" of nature are the law...except when we need to insert magic here and there?
In short.. Yes. Many apologists and fundamentalists believe that the so-called 'laws of nature' were set in place by a higher power like our laws about which side of the road to drive on and similar. They have trouble with the idea that the laws of nature are descriptive, not prescriptive. They describe what is there. They do not dictate what should be there.
The magic is Time space energy matter coming into existence out of nothing
Presto then you have a Universe that has the odds of existing the way this one does as 1 in 10 to the power of 180
The amount of atoms in the universe is 1 to the power of 10 to the power of 80
@@danielanthony8373 You keep misrepresenting the other side of the argument. The Big Bang model does not say anything about anything coming from nothing. Quit with the strawman arguments, even if it IS unintentional. The argument from big numbers is impressively unimpressive also. Would you like to try again?
I suppose you could say everyone uses a certain amount of faith but faith is about trusting something to be true and a supposition of good reasons to hold that trust. Even if theists were miraculously correct, none can effectively state their reasonable case for placing trust that some kind of supernatural being exists. Dinesh talks about natural laws as though they are authoritative, when if you are into studying the laws of nature come to understand them as descriptive as we are doing the describing. Atoms are not listening nor obeying, they are doing what the physical properties allow, properties that appear natural, not supernatural.
There are natural laws moral laws mathematical laws physical laws but no Law Giver
There's a genetic code embedded in all life but no code writer
There's structure and design in the universe but no designer
There is a creation but no Creator
If you believe in Human Rights you believe in a Metaphysical Concept that is derived from Judeo Christian Values and Beliefs
You cannot get Human Rights from a Materialistic Athiestic World View
@@danielanthony8373 There are authoritative laws that require the invention of the laws to be followed, but there are mostly descriptive laws that lack this requirement. There are codes that require a coder, but there are natural patterns that don't. Intelligence is a natural property that eventually emerged. We can identify this property of intelligence here on earth that can create a bird's nest, beaver's dam or an automobile. The reason that the watch on the beach stands out is because it requires the property of intelligence, the beach or forest does not. If the actual property of intelligence was found in everything, there would be no "natural" that describes things lacking the property of intelligence. If nothing is natural and everything is created, we would be debating Gods vs advanced aliens where the difference would be does the intelligence have limitations. There does seem to be limitations and even an abandonment of Gods or aliens involved in this world. Seeing a God at work is equivalent to seeing a good luck charm bringing good luck, we are met with excuses and denials of reality.
Dinesh is so insufferable. I can’t believe he is still debating with the same cringy technique.
Dinesh is a criminal. He was sentenced for financial fraud. Such a "good" believer.
He received 8 months for $10,000 campaign donation over the legal amout
No one has ever received this for this amount
A donation to Hillary Clinton $200,000 over received a fine
Because he criticized Obama and made a doco about it the State threw him in jail
You should be worried about this
I don't understand why the mediocre D'Souza got to share the stage with hitchens. He's so far out of his depth 😂
If you think this is sad, watch Hitch destroy Douglas Wilson. It was embarrassing. Or even worse, Frank Turkic (or something close to that).
This debate with the Hitch and this god bothered. Is embarrassing.maths not a strong point for the botherer
D' souse didn't get zilch for legitimate argument for ' the bible ...thing e except excuses , worse than wicked , promulgating proven Crual delusion/ LIES ! .
Dinesh D'Souza LIAR FOR INSANITY.
I confess I wrongly judged CH as dying in a state of unbelief. In his last moments of his life he may have repented of his sins and trusted in Jesus Christ as his savior and Lord??? If that be the case, he is now happy and very much alive in Heaven!!!
Simple.....2 religiions. Take your pick
Atheism isn't a religion. And there are FAR more than two to worry about. Not so simple, I'm afraid. But it could be made simple. Just stop trying to force people to believe in anything by law and only teach what can be shown with at least some evidence.
This place is democrat la la land.