It's because he's a proper philosopher, we're trained to give our opponents the best version of their argument, in order to be a good thinker you always have to be your own devils advocate
That’s also the exact reason he’ll never be a christian so long as he remains this way. An ideology that demands control of your very thoughts is a classic philosophical trapping.
I'm an atheist myself. Alex o Connor has helped me better understand Christianity than many other channels both on the internet and in real life. His presence in this online discussion is a very welcome one!
Yes he is much different from the Dawkins and Hitchens kind of atheist. Growing up watching Hitchens debates Alex reintroduced my to the possibility of God.
@not1207 I see the argument as such: 1. Some people argue that our rationality, our ability to grasp the "truth" of the world, is a byproduct of evolution. 2. This suggests that this aspect of rationality has not evolved for its capacity to grasp truth, but for its survivability. 3. These reasoning steps strike a legitimate blow to our capacity to trust our own reasoning, as our reasoning would not be optimized for getting to the truth, but just to be better at staying alive. 4. This includes, ironically if I might say, evolution. Resulting in a semi-paradox, that we used reasoning to come to a conclusion that undermines our reasoning... 5. (Implied) As we believe our reasoning capacity to be sound, we have good reason to suggest that there is more to our minds than it just being the product of evolution. This conclusion does not bring you directly to the existence of God, but might imply something along the lines of a soul or something similar. Hope I was able to represent this argument well!
If you want to have productive conversations with Christians, and if you want to make arguments that actually make us think, keep watching Alex. I get how good it feels to watch the New Atheist types DEMOLISH strawmen and OWN the low hanging fruit, but this is a serious topic for grown-ups so let's all treat it like one.
I'm Christian i concour Alex is harder to argue against as he plays our position closer to what it actually is The new atheists, I read all four of the horse men's books. I left just thinking they don't understand Christianity and hates God and wants to mock religion ( not very empathetic) So ironically I was more in believe after reading Dawkins, Harris, hitchins( all though I liked him better then the others) and Dennit I probably should read again to be honest So the strongest arguments are not ones that don't mock and strawman but attack our actual arguments and I prefer Alex over new atheists every day of the week
Alex really feels like a true inbetween of theist and atheist. He actually pokes holes in both sides, unwilling to give ground to bad philosophical arguments from his own side, and feeling unconvinced by Christianity/Theism
@@killapollo4853Atheist is not a label any Atheist should have to hold, but is the label given to us by Theist. “In fact, "atheism" is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a "non-astrologer" or a "non-alchemist." We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.” - Sam Harris
It’s just because he is intellectually honest and has a strong desire to know the truth rather than cherry picking information to suit his narrative. He doesn’t pretend to know things we can’t prove, so although he’s an atheist he always strongly considers both sides of every argument.
Saying that Alex O'Connor has an inner Christian is to imply that he is- on the inside- a christian, which of course he is not. He simply is not ignorant of Christian argumentation and is honest enough to express his true understanding of those arguments rather than straw Manning them like some others would do
@@aisthpaoitht Goal post moving there, and you will have to produce some credible objective evidence for your spurious claim as others claim your alleged god is so omni everything complicated.
I'm a current atheist who used to have an anti-theist stance (and by that I mean in a literal sense, a deep hatred for Christian people, not Christianity itself) because of what Christians sometimes think about things like slavery and genocide and the existence of evil and suffering. Alex has helped me to realize that I shouldn't seek quarrels with people over thought and that thoughts aren't crime. So much of what Christians DO rather than SAY, directly negates any of these thoughts they may have religiously and I've become much less cynical and pessimistic in the realization that we're all just looking for answers and meaning in life. Excellent commentary by the way, I think you did Alex and any potential atheist viewers justice with this video.
Alex is a brilliant orator with an exceptional ability to research and prepare. He often understands his opponent’s arguments better than they do, effortlessly dismantling their points with precision and insight. His skill and intellect make him absolutely fascinating to watch.
I think it's less of Alex channeling an "inner christian", and more the idea that he likes ideas clarified , and is genuinely curious. As an atheist myself, I often cringe when I hear bad arguments against the existence of "God".
"When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, ‘You are not far from the kingdom of God.’" (Mk 12:34) I vividly imagine Jesus giving a similar response to Alex O'Connor. If truly the hiddenness of God is the decisive part that keeps him from becoming a Christian then I believe this is for a purpose and God wants him to be in just the place he is for the time being, but eventually will reveal Himself to him in a clear and unmistakable way. Let's thank God for who Alex is and what he does and let's pray that--"God willing"--the missing part will be given and received when the time is ripe. Just imagine Alex O'Connor as kind of a new C.S. Lewis (whom he seems to know and understand very well, by the way)--what a blessing could he be to the world!
Or god has already shown him, but he doesn't see. like the concution jesus made many times over, if you don't want to believe then you won't believe, if you want to believe to eagerly you'll be deceived. Jordan is just way too catious, as he already understood this point from around the start of his yourny. Which does make him lose the obvious.
The issue I find with this line of reasoning is that it assumes people who die without finding god are those who were not willing, something that is just patently false. There are plenty of people like Alex and me who have grown up in religious environments and moved away from it, but always willing to be proven false. Yet many of these people have died as nonbelievers. And the idea that these people were just all lying. Every. Single. One. And in actuality they didn’t want to know the truth is asinine and just a spit in the face of the character of these people.
@@_Sloppyham At first I wondered which of my statements you might have misunderstood because this is definitely nothing I would argue for. But I see that you must refer to @flyshy8806's comment. I, for one, believe in a God that wants to be found by everyone and takes into account all the seemingly insuperable intellectual and existential difficulties which keep people away from faith in Him. Above all, I believe in a God who loves every person and leads them on different paths towards Himself, according to both our specific personality and a higher purpose He wants to fulfill with us in human history because it's never about ourselves alone. So I think the main thing is remaining open to what Life is calling us to. I have high regards for people like Alex and you who, despite lacking the gratification of a direct experience of God's presence and love, keep seeking the truth and preserve an openness towards faith. Do I believe then that everyone who dies as a nonbeliever actually didn't seek the truth? Certainly not. It's not up to me to judge other people. Nobody knows what was going on in their hearts. On the other hand, I do believe you will eventually reach a point (more likely even several points) where it's up to your decision whether you want to trust the evidence at hand or not. Nobody can be proven into faith. Just as nobody can be proven into a loving relationship. There is always something venturous about those things, like a stepping out into the twilight of uncertain knowing, underpinned by hope. I wish you all the best for your journey.
@@_Sloppyhamyou’re clearly right, i’ll begin by saying that. hear me out: suppose you die, and then god sits there and decides whether you go to heaven or to hell. he looks at you, you look at him, and he asks you whether you believe in him. do you say yes? that might not be how it happens, but i believe something happens after death that allows for good people like yourself and alex who never acquired the belief in God to get to where everyone else is going. i believe this type of thing isnt in the bible because it would make a life in submission to Jesus practically pointless to a lot of people
@ yeah, the Bible tries to circumvent this by saying everyone is without excuse in life. But I’ve talked about that. I probably wouldn’t say “yes” because I don’t know what that entails. I would now believe there’s some form of life after death and it seems like an intelligent being plays a major part of it, but beyond that I would have to say no until more information is given, much less consider it worthy of worship. I don’t know what your beliefs system is (it doesn’t seem to be Christianity?), but I’d have to wonder in that situation why it even matters to know god at all. Well, I guess there’s Heaven and Hell. But if just telling a dude you don’t believe he exists out of pettiness or spite deserves eternal Hell I’d have to question the…morals of such a being.
I've never listened to this Glen Scrivener before. He's unusually good at summing up the progress of an argument between two parties, as a third party.
I am a Christian & I love listening to Alex. I think he is a brilliant mind. I genuinely hope that he comes to know God & experiences the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ & watch as his whole life & ideologies change.
I am an atheist & i love listening to . I think he is a brilliant mind. I genuinely hope that he leaves his Christianity and experiences the power of humans driven by collective empathy and appreciation of their one and only life. Your message totally makes sense as i would have thought the EXACT same thing when i was a christian, but i would bet my only life that your wish won't be happening since he's too intellectually honest to accept christianity!
@illbeasty3643 I think you're better off sticking to Jordan, atleast he pretends to believe, and gives word salads that no one understands, but you lot can clap to as a win. Sooner or later, people have to realise that to believe these things, you are some what deluded, and it's not your fault. Its why I hate childhood indoctrination, it can take a lifetime to undo, and in many cases it's never undone.
Alex has done so much good to bring both sides to conversation. As an atheist, one of my greatest fears is both parties will vilify the other party to the point that conversation can no longer happen.
I fear that conversation is mostly useless. How many change their minds eitherway? Preventing childhood indoctrination, making an ideology culturally and socially unpalatable, and presenting superior alternatives are more impactful, I suspect.
@@someonesomeone25 I mean good luck achieving those things without talking things through first. I dont imagine the religious folk will roll over and accept a ban on teaching children religion.
@@someonesomeone25 Atheism is growing in most first world countries since people are becoming more well off. Im not familiar with UK law though, what legislation have they passed over there that has suppressed religion?
@ThisDonut Off the top.of my head, I think there's regulation on cults like scientologists; certain things have to be taught in schools (no escaping Darwin); hate speech laws can be used against homophobic or sexist preaching; anti-radicalisation programmes are enforced at every educational level to watch out for extremist stuff; you're pretty much strong armed into paying for a TV license which will fund more stuff against.religion than for; there's major restrictions on religious broadcasting; and a few other minor bits and bobs. But most of the success has come.from a combination of social change (esp around sex), continual ridicule of religion in the media, and lots of high profile new atheist types like Dawkins and Hitchens doing their thing. All useful stuff. Long way to go, though.
When Alex questions Richard about his statement about having solved the problem of life, Dawkins is not rowing back as you suggest. It is simply that what Dawkins originally meant by solving the problem of life wasn't necessarily clearly communicated. By context you can tell that what he obviously means is solving the problem of the complexity of life, then Alex asks a separate question about the origins of Life at which point Dawkins immediately and unhesitatingly answers that they do not know about that . Alex didn't catch Dawkins off kilter, he simply misunderstood him
15 дней назад+2
Alex is the best person to blend philosophy and theology I’ve seen recently. Everything from his demeanour and inquisitive nature makes his very much likeable from both sides of the argument. I hope to hear more of this type of conversation
This video is great, and I was impressed by your meaningful commentary. So many Christian channels suffer from lack of substance outside of the clips they show. Keep it up!
He acts as a philosopher should. However, anyone who believes this means he’s “close” to being a Christian doesn’t listen to him closely. He knows too much to fall into a mythical trap.
He might fall into some sort of Jungian reinterpretation of Christianity though. To be fair, if you read the injunctions in the Gospels and look at the actions if most so-called "Christians" these days then you'll find that the two so rarely align that I don't think we should be calling them Christians... We should just be calling them religious hypocrites.
@@malikaix8 Alex: "I don't _really_ know what's "up" and nor do you because there is no universally agreed upon inertial reference frame from which to ask that question. Besides the various air molecules in the atmosphere, the next-proximate _thing_ that is "up" to _me_ right _now_ is the ceiling of this room. But, of course, _above_ that there is a roof. And above that roof are the stars, and _above_ those are other galaxies, and then the CMB radiation, and (presumably) the Big Bang, and (presumably) nothing-all roads lead back to mereological nihilism."
Thank you for this wonderful and detailed video! In the end I've come to realise how much I appreciate Alex. He's such a dear and bright young soul and as a Christian I really do wish for him to meet the living God, our Lord Jesus Christ and to finally find his purpose and happiness! He most certainly deserves it! May God bless him!
Ive been a Christian for over 40 years, but I have never been very dogmatic. Like at all. And in the past ten years I find myself unable to identify with modern Christians. So it's been hard finding channels that I can identify with, but Alex's is one of if not the best that I have come across. I love how inquisitive he is, and the lengths he will go to, to understand a different perspective or pov is astounding. He never strikes me as someone who deals in absolutes. He's a truth seeker, and a very self-aware one at that!
I was actually thinking about this earlier that Alex is a really good God advocate. When people say they don't believer in God because they can't see him it is a silly reason, and Alex (as an agnostic) likes to point that out to other non christians/non religious
Alex was one of the best channels I found when I started leaving the faith because his understanding of Christianity is so well versed and understanding of what it's like to be a person in a church
Alex is remarkable because he engages with every idea and topic with deep respect and a genuine desire for understanding. His intellectual curiosity drives him to seek the truth collaboratively, sharing and drawing insights from other fine minds, and without ego. It’s a privilege to witness his emergence at such a young age; his contributions and evolution promise to engage and inspire us for many years ahead.
This is your best ever shining moment among many, Glen! Truly sparkling mind. Beautifully done! So encouraging after watching Alex's recent talk with Fthr Gregory Pines, asking the great question about hiddenness and hearing no relevant answer before giving up half way through. Alex articulates these huge fundamental concerns about Christian faith so clearly, I would love to hear your response to Alex's questions in that conversation and your attempt to.do them justice (maybe help me see the relevance, if any of Fthr Gregory's answers).Thanks so much for lifting my spirits up again with your brilliant analyses and warm heart. We can all pray for Alex and the many honest, enquiring skeptics like him.
Praying for this man to have the scales lifted from his eyes! Could you guys also pray for my brother Logan and his wife to know Jesus? This reignited my fervency to pray for those who do not know Jesus!
You will know them by their fruits. Alex produces more, real fruit than a lot of Christian commentators out there. I’ve been saying for a long time now that he exemplifies Christianity better than most Christians.
What he is essentially doing is helping theists become better theists and atheists be better atheists. If we all grow intellectually together with dialectical discourse the world would be a much better place to live in for people of all beliefs. 🙏
After so many years of fooling around, I I really loved the way Alex cornered JP and went for the jugular with a serious question, it was like 4D chess
Alex became a role model of mine, I'm an atheist myself but I've conducted my debates against theists in a way that is respectful enough that I became their go-to atheist when they want an atheists perspective on some certain topics. Don't get me wrong, there are times that I will be like Woodford on certain occasions, depending what kind of arguments or counter arguments I am presented with, or if the other person intentionally making dishonest statements. I can tolerate people who are genuinely dumb or just ignorant on certain topics, what I can't stand is someone who's playing dumb. One of the most important lesson that I've learned watching Alex is that, in order to be able to genuinely understand the others perspective/views/idea, you have to be able to steelman their position genuinely without making unnecessary assumptions that will make their case weak. I'm also a fan of Peterson but I'm having difficulty wit him saying that "...there's no pulling-out of historical Jesus..." because that could imply that the existence of Jesus Christ is not really clear even amongst scholars or archaeologists. I think Peterson's hesitation comes from the fact that he is still holding on a little bit of skepticism himself about the resurrection of Christ, and by extension the existence of God (as understood by most Christians), put simply I think Peterson is still at the crossroad of becoming a theist or atheist deep down there. Destiny is someone who has no business talking to Alex, he is just wasting Alex's time. Oh, and one more thing, labeling Alex's attitude as "inner-Christian" implies that only Christians practices honest discussion or it is inherently a Christian-thing to conduct yourself in an honest discussion. If anything, Alex is exhibiting what true secularists are.
I have watched Alex since he was 16.He is really seeking the truth.I pray that he will have the divine intervention that he is looking for because he worked so hard for it
He has truth, he is just good at understanding people and arguing in good faith by negotiating with the best possible interpretation of the information given. That does not mean he is searching for excuses to be a christian, he would very much become christian if there was a good reason to. Unfortunately, thete hardly is one
I'm alot like Alex. I used to believe and stopped believing once I discovered Alex and I started watching various debates with other christians and atheists debates. After years of being an atheist, and after a traumatic event, I'm forced to seek as I need hope. So I'm currently seeking and many of my issues are same or similar to Alex. I want to know the truth and so does Alex, same with understanding. It's so hard to be a christian if you cant believe or understand. I hate it when Christians say you're choosing not to believe and go hell. So insensitive because I've tried so hard for years and it's very draining. I love Alex, he has such a good heart and like me genuinely just wants to know.
Totally agree. I’m reading a book by a very thoughtful Christian called Rupert Shortt. He has an interesting line about how seeking happens - for anything. “It’s less that we think our way into a new way of living. More often we live our way into a new way of thinking.” I think there are loads of examples of that, whether it’s about vegetarianism, environmentalism, or faith. There’s something about joining a group of people and finding that your beliefs start aligning. It’s for that reason that newcomers to our church are not interrogated about their current beliefs. We love that they’ve joined us. And we offer thoughtful ways that they can wrestle with matters of faith. But I think for most people believing comes after belonging. All of which is to say, maybe find a church where you can wrestle these things through? (My two cents, unasked for, sorry!)
I'm all to aware how the human brain can convince itself into believing in something if it wants to. Having a deep desire, or need to believe something, whatever the reason, e.g. comfort, hope, we can become bias and take information that we want and be ignorant of the stuff we dont want. I had a bad event that happened to me recently, I've endured so many traumas but this last one involved someone I loved and they suffered because I put so much trust in this person and dispite it being obvious the professional was wrong and I was right, I became ignorant of my own thoughts because I guess I wanted the professional to be right as it was the nicest, most comforting outcome and just became disillusioned. I stopped questioning as much and put all my trust in this professional, causing my loved one who I was responsible for, to suffering incredible amounts. So I am careful, I want to believe there is a good God, and that we will reunite with loved ones, but I dont want to believe it because it comforts me and make life more bearable, I want to believe because I know 100% its true. I struggle with the moral dilemmas in the bible but i am finding more answers over time. But a big stumbling block for me other than non belief is, I wish I hadnt been born and struggle to be grateful for being forced into existence, into a human body that is by nature no matter what going to sin at some point, even if that sin is only a thought. Then I am to be punished for being by nature unable not to sin or even have choice to be put here in the first place, the same person who put me in this position is the one that is offering to save me from being punished for how he made me that I could not avoid. Analogy, scientist creates baby in a lab, he then poisons the baby so that it is sick and will suffer immeasurable pain for a very long time, but the scientist says to the child once old enough, that he can take away this future torture by given him the antidote, all he has to do is be grateful for the antidote, love and worship him. This isnt even with the complication of unbelief and seems obvious to say ok I will take the antidote to avoid this threat of torture. But that's only to save yourself and not true gratitude of someone that saved you without being the same one that poisoned you. Then how do you love the person that did this, you cant make real feelings of love and gratitude and then worship is hypocritical if you arent truelly grateful and feel true love. I just cant understand the concept of being saved and I hope my analogy helps you understand where I'm coming from. I've used several analogies in the past. But this and full belief and morals of God are my biggest sticking points. Thank you for reading. I am genuinely seeking and am like Alex in wanting to find the truth.
@@HumbleBee123 An honest seeker like you is always worthy of admiration. Your analogy is interesting. As a Hindu who follows the pluralistic philosophy of Swami Vivekananda and Mahatma Gandhi (that says that multiple paths can lead to God), I can try answering based upon my (limited) understanding of Christianity. In your analogy, we have a being who creates an innocent sentient being and then needlessly makes them suffer before returning them to their previous state. I am not sure if this applies to the Christian conception of God. According to Christianity, the evil in the world is due to our sins. Sure, God could have made us perfect beings, but I think that God wants people to freely choose Him and reject evil. There is both beauty and value in doing the right thing even when the temptation to act in an immoral way is present. There is something priceless about the journey of spiritual upliftment and liberation from our bonds. Wouldn't you say that most people would intuitively respect a poor person who feels tempted to steal but controls his negative desire more than a rich person who never, ever has the urge to steal? Finally, I think that spirituality is ultimately about experience. I have read countless arguments against and in favour of (various forms of) theism. Each of them seem quite convincing from their perspectives, and I believe that this is why reason can only take us so far. Pascal's Wager may be useful here, but what matters is being experientially connected with the Divine. Each of us have a unique path before us. I hope and pray that you will find yours. In my view, faith is more than intellectual assent. So many people claim to be faithful, and yet, their hearts are tainted with greed, hatred, and pettiness. Due to this, I would argue that many atheists are actually closer to God than a lot of the theists. Let me end with the words of Mahatma Gandhi: "I believe in the truth of all religions of the world. And since my youth upward, it has been a humble but persistent effort on my to understand the truth of all the religions of the world, and adopt and assimilate in my own thought, word, and deed all that I have found to be best in those religions. The faith that I profess not only permits me to do so but renders it obligatory for me to take the best from whatsoever source it may come." -Harijan, 1934 "Jesus expressed as no other could the spirit and will of God. It is in this sense that I see him and recognize as the Son of God. And because the life of Jesus has the significance and the transcendence to which I have alluded, I believe that he belongs not solely to Christianity but to the entire world, to all races and people. It matters little under what flag, name or doctrine they may work, profess a faith or worship a God inherited from their ancestors." -My Religion Namaste and love from India! 🙏🇮🇳☮️☮️
@@SpeakLifeMedia That's great. I agree. For example, many Christians see a decline in church attendance, and see this as the cause of social isolation. Because religion is a great social glue that fosters social bonds. And while I don't say this is false, I don't think it's necessarily true either. It's more of an unproven hypothesis, since you can flip the cause and effect around and still get solid logic: People might just be getting more isolated from each other and THEREFORE become less religious, because they affectively don't see the church's utility in fostering and reinforcing social bonds anymore. People like simple narratives that hook into their pre-existing beliefs to explain multi-faceted cultural phenomena. But society is rarely as simple as a simple cause-and-effect explanation.
Thanks so much @humblebee123. You’re right not to want to believe something unless it’s true. My advice is not to try forcing yourself to believe something untrue but to point to the conditions under which any of us come to believe anything. It’s usually in the context of life in community. On the subject of how we come into this world. You’re right that we didn’t choose existence. For me though that points to the fact that choice cannot be the ultimate value. I didn’t choose to be born but my parents cared enough to have me. Care, more than choice, is at the heart of life. And biblically the story is not that God poisons us then cures us. The story is that God clearly warns us Not to eat the poison (forbidden fruit). But humanity is always prizing choice over care. We decided (and continue to decide) we’d rather decide than depend. This is the poison we have chosen. And the antidote is, by the nature of the case, to return to the Lord who gives life and depend on him. It’s not that God injects us with poison and then promises to give the antidote if only we grovel sufficiently (and pretend to love him for his salvation). We come into this world utterly needy - physically And spiritually. We are born hungry, weak, dependent, carrying any number of gene deletions, diseases and predispositions to fatal conditions. We’re born dying. That’s a physical truth and the Bible says there’s a parallel spiritual truth. Just as our physical life, health and protection must come from outside ourselves, so our spiritual life, health and protection must come from beyond. God offers life from the outside to those who are needy.
saying "The universe is God" is the same as saying "The universe is the universe". Leaves zero room for any God of religion as one of the premises are that no patterns outside of the natural law can be found
@@Raadpensionaris yeah, the issue is that my critique primarily concerns Destiny’s refusal to engage with any substance. His dismissiveness is used as a crutch to not provide substance and give the impression that he has the high ground. That’s not a minor or marginal problem and It’s not merely that I don’t like his tone
@@Jbaggy8 Destiny is capable of having a good faith substantive debate if his opponent is careful not to antagonize him in any way, a great example being his debate with Ben Shapiro. He just has such a hair-trigger when it comes to his defensiveness, as soon as a debate opponent expresses any emotional reaction or steps out of the bounds of strict civility, even if in jest, Destiny just goes off and starts resorting to his more underhanded and annoying debate tactics that end any substantive exchange of ideas. I think he also intentionally ramps up the aggressively confrontational rhetoric in less formal non-debate streaming settings simply because he thinks it's more entertaining, which to be fair, it sometimes is.
I don't think I've ever seen someone I resonate with like this Alex fellow. These are same style of thinking and questioning that I do (not claiming that we are comparable in intelligence or something, not trying to make myself sound great, I mean the 'perspective' on things so to speak.) I feel like me and him could talk at length about nearly anything. But he's definitely got communication skills I don't have and I definitely admire.
Alex O'connor is great, he's atheist and he discusses his problems with thiesm without acting like a reddit atheist as some people in this space like to do. I'm an atheist but I appreciate the respect he shows when he's discussing any of the topics he talks about
Thank you for this video. I watched your interview with Nala and loved her story. Praise be to God! When I saw her back on the Whatever podcast, I had to watch and so hoped and expected her to have the chance to redeem herself. It was disheartening to see her character attacked and her conversion distorted/dismissed. How do we know she is not lying, in addition to the reasons Knowles stated? Because God is able to do the impossible and turn liars into lights that shine His love in a dark world. Glory be to Jesus!
Alex O'Connor is one of my favorite living public intellectuals. It blows my mind that he's so young. I think he could have confidently stood on the same stage as Christopher Hitchens and bandied words. If you ever want to see something both amusing and unfortunate, look for Alex's video where he has a conversation with Chris' living brother. Obviously not cut from the same cloth.
I think I remember Alex once saying that he wants to be a Christian but just can’t quite get there. He didn’t exactly elaborate why but I imagine when he is around atheists he becomes more Christian because there atheist does not understand Christianity. But if he’s around a Christian that doesn’t understand science/ethics or even Christianity he becomes more like an atheist
1:02 Well done. Although I skipped through most of your comments on the segments I listened to some. I wanted to hear the clips you presented of Mr. O'Connor. He is a polite and reasonable man who appears sincerely to be searching and testing to find God. We can only pray God reveals himself to him as he revealed himself to Peter.
Its very simple. Alex has studied philosophy and theology at university and has a way better understanding on them than most people. So he is able to effortlessly describe religious positions. That doesn’t mean he is on the verge on becoming a Christian; he clearly maintained his atheism; but simply that he truly understands Christianity ad atheism so that he can argue for both if he wants
I'm ashamed to admit that I feel like Alex is more of a Christian than I am. Not in the sense that he believes in God more than I do, but in the notion of how much time and diligence he has poured into seeking God and his genuine pursuit of Truth. I feel like the sibling in the parable of the Prodigal Son.
(55:10) Alex: “I’m not sure that you can create your own meaning in a fundamental sense… I’m always suspicious of this concept.” Konstantine: “Why’s that?” Alex: “I think everything you’ve just said already presupposes an underlying value judgement.” Konstantine: “No, no, no, no, no…” Alex: *provides two examples of different self-constructed ‘meaning’ one might choose for living their life* “-you’d be committed to the view that both of those lives are as meaningful as each other.” Konstantine: “No-I didn’t say that. They’re not AS meaningful as each other…” ^Well, well, well… That sure sounds a whole lot like Alex’s very first point was right on the money after all: “I think everything you’ve just said already presupposes an UNDERLYING VALUE JUDGEMENT” [i.e. ‘this way of living a life is more/less meaningful than that’].
Alex is certainly skilled at level inquiry and transparent honesty. Lots to unpack here, but referring to his kind and unbiased inquiry as his "inner Christian" is hijacking honest and friendly discourse and labeling it Christian. It feels more Atheistic to me. An appreciation of life as it is and not magically enhanced by wishful dogma.
Alex O Connor has a talent for academics; no doubt. My advice for fellows such as him who are influenced by paradoxical and contradictive Hitchens and Dennett is that he should truly be a credible emboldened humanitarian (if Christians or religious minorities are doing a terrible job as humanitarians) in Britain to cause change whereas it is a mess and cesspool of disgraced societal issues. Fix your house and affairs first before lecture others. Dr Jordan Peterson is the only atheist humanitarian I can take seriously
We either feel God's presence and support in our lives, or we don't. It would be arrogance to tell someone who has their prayers answered in an amazing way - that it was all just co-incidence. At the end of the day, Heavenly Father reads hearts. It is up to Him who to help further His purposes - believer or not ❤
I'm genuinely curious, what would you qualify as a prayer answered in an amazing way. I think it's fair to say that if one's prayers are demonstrably answered then it would qualify as good evidence. However I often find a huge flaw in this, when it comes to the type of prayer, and the rate to which these prayers are answered. I do believe that what people call answered prayers are often times coincidences because 90% of times when a specific prayer is made, it fails. But people tend to ignore that and take the 10% of the time when it works to deem it a success overall. So, to you, what counts as an answered prayer?
One of the reasons that he is effective is his approach. He argues a point in such a way as it might convince someone away from their view and towards his. The way to do it is to argue from within. For instance, you accept their claim, at least for the point of argument, then explain why he still has a problem with it im even if he accepts the claim. To do so you also need to understand the opposition to your view and not rely on logical fallacies, especially strawman. In fact he usually tries to steelman the opposing argument. Too often apologists strawman atheists as if there is anything unifilying about atheist outside of a shared non-belief in God ir any gods/goddeses. A while back he had to stop himself before responding to a list of questions about atheists because it was supernatural in nature. He recalled that being an atheist is not necessarily rejection of the supernatural merely God or any gods/goddeses. So, he had to change it from an answer from an atheist to an answer from a naturalist.
Alex seem to be really open minded, and I think that this is one of the greatest virtues of a human being. I mean, not so many people will study IN DEPTH what they disagree with to better formulate their points
Been watching Alex O Conmir from his Cosmic Skeptic days. What i love is that he doesn't debate in his recent but does discussions. He gives both sides a shot. Also the second argument given is fully semantics on what god is. In the definition given i would say i believe in a god like that but the definition is also just "everything" so why not just say nature. This also breaks apart god being supernatural as it pins god as a natural being thus it is why Alex brought this argument up at the end of a discussion.
@@MoNtYbOy101 I don't mean close in the sense of understanding christianity well. I wouldn't say Bart Ehrman is close for example. I mean close in the sense of not being closed-minded and being open to the supernatural. If God tommorow were to cause a clear supernatural event in his life I think he may convert on the spot. I don't think that's the case for, say, Dawkins.
I'm a Christian (I was an athiest up until around 40) and Alex is sometimes reffered to by theists as a Christian apologist in training for a reason. 😅 He does a fantastic job with arguing for theism and a great job arguing for Christian theology. So far every issue that I've seen him have is not only genuine but of the highest quality. They're the ones that are the hardest to grapple with. He occasionally feeds into the cynical side of atheism when he's soley adressing other agnostics and athiests but overall he's very respectful when it matters. Definitely NOT low hanging fruit. The young man is very bright. He's become my favorite agnostic debater by far.
@@CynHicks The thing is, I think most agnostic-atheist are more like Alex, less like Richard Dawkins or Matt Dillihunty. Not on the same intellectual level or as articulate, but in temperament. It's the online spaces which have skewed the images of the non-believer and painted us as angry, aggressive, combative. I mean, those exist also, but you don't hear them, because most are arguing in public, online spaces 😋
@dogsandyoga1743 My (still 🙏) agnostic, longtime friend is just like this. We can talk theology for hours. It's never disrespectful and always genuine. There's many of him out there. He'll share the occasional, athiest lowbrow meme with me to poke at me, but it's meant in love. He thinks I'm delusional. 😅 Oh, and he can't stand Matt or Dawkins. We both used to be fans of Matt (I was a Dawkins fan for a minute) but... He watches some of he theological channels, Mike Winger being one he likes, but he hardly ever comments and if he does it's always respectful. I think that this is most non-believers. They have the "of you have nothing nice to say..." philosophy in life.
God made Alex, gifted him, and motivates him, all to work for his purpose. God is not obligated to save him just because he has used him. But that does not mean God may not save him.
Well that’s a fucked up pov, isn’t it? “I’m gonna use this guy to get a bunch of people to follow me, but I’m not gonna reveal myself to him. And it’s ok because I will have manipulated him into believing that he deserves to go to hell anyway by the time he dies”
@@johntrevett2944 ah yes "you were never a real Christian" this has done to the ebionites, Marcionites, etc. Cmon mate, heresiology? Really? "lmao" , I say, "lol"
Scripture and history are filled with examples of people who made an initial positive response to Christ only to fall away later. In the parable of the sower and the seed, some of the seed sprung up quickly, only to wither away or be choked out by weeds. “As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away. As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful” (Matthew 13:20-22). But the seed (the gospel) sown on good soil brings forth fruit for harvest. In the initial stages, it might be very difficult to tell which plants will make it or not. Time reveals the truth.
Glen, your thoughts on balancing spiritual books that feed your soul (Tozer, Spurgeon, Bunyan, Baxter, Edwards) versus apologetic books (Aristotle, Aquinas, Chesterton, Lewis)?
I know I'm not Glen, but I would encourage you to pursue apologetics in a devotional way. It will still strengthen your ability to defend the faith to questioning believers and nonbelievers, but at the same time will feed your soul. Think about how the divinity of Christ, his humanity, his historicity transforms you and His presence is with you. I find apologetic study really encouraging, that God is with me and His Spirit revitalizes my soul. Devotional and contemplative works are great as well!
@@RickyNicks7 true, but if there is some truth in Aristotle's work that points to knowledge of who God is, I think that is something where you can see God's common grace working even if he didn't recognize Him fully.
@ my problem with reading too much apologetics is this, it makes my soul lean: “He is a deduction from evidence which they consider adequate; but He remains personally unknown to the individual. “He must be,” they say, “therefore, we believe He is.” Others do not go even so far as this; they know of Him only by hearsay. …They do not know God in personal experience” -A.W. Tozer
The chimney comment is good. Still operates within the framework of physicalism, but sometimes you have to use analogies in that framework to help one grasp the underlying concepts
32:20 From my perspective, the answer to that has no real scientific value beyond mere understanding unless we intend to use such knowledge. Meaning, unless we intend to become life creators the knowledge fits into the "ok, so niw we now" category.
16:02 Regarding the resurrection and not all people believing it was Jesus, is it just possible that 'Jesus the man' was still in the tomb but the words of the alleged 'Christ/Anointed One' were now being spoken by a physically different human and THAT is what people resonated with as being 'Jesus resurrected'...? Without disrespecting the Christian teachings (or any humanist based teachings from any world view, religious or otherwise), the idea of a man continuing the teachings in a 'Christ like way' after the death of the original human source (half human according to doctrine but we can accept or ignore that bit!) would seem like a more plausible, non laws of physics altering explanation to people 'seeing Christ (not necessarily Jesus)' after the crucifixion.
I often wonder and now I realize. No matter How smart you are, How intellectual you are, you wouldn't believe or even understand the resurrection if God wouldn't reveal himself. Emmaus story reveal so much layers after watching these intellectual speakers on YT.
@someonesomeone25 No, I believe the bible because it is truth. Scripture tells us of the human condition and the only cure, the cross of Jesus Christ who died for our sins and Rose again for our justification.
I disagree with your framing of these instances as “Alex’s inner Christian coming out.” Even though you clarify that he is an atheist and has many arguments against Christianity, framing it this way still implies that there is a Christian somewhere within Alex, or that Alex in some regards acts very much like a Christian or has values or beliefs like a Christian. Now, while his beliefs and actions certainly have some overlap with those of some Christians (it’s worth reminding people that Christians are a vast and incredibly varied group in themselves, I think you mean that Alex here acts similar to the Christians in your personal social circle), I think this framing obfuscates why this is happening, or wants to ignore why in order to fill it is with “he’s a Christian at heart, to some degree.” Alex is a philosopher, and a talented one at that. He makes an effort to understand the arguments of people he does not agree with, but more importantly he makes an effort to understand WHY they are used. As such he can bring them up when he finds it relevant as a challenge, even if he does not agree with the argument himself or has counters for. This is especially true in his interview settings, where his goal is to politely push guests on their beliefs to get more information, often from their own worldview or views adjacent to it. This is what he does with Peterson. He knows Peterson calls himself a Christian, and that Christians look to him, and so he uses things that a Christian would believe or argue to see whether Peterson agrees with those ideas. It’s the mark of a good philosopher and interviewer, not “his inner Christian coming out.” Edit: it’s worth checking out Alex’s talk with Destiny after this where they discuss Peterson, and Alex talks about his approach here. He knows that both Christians and Atheists want clear answers out of Peterson, and his goal is to work toward them. Edit 2: Jeez, I just got the the 3rd example, and holy moly I don’t think you understood it much. That particular moment was Alex and Destiny just hanging out in an open slot before an actual program, meming around. Destiny being dismissive of the ideas is not him “having anger issues,” he’s joking around and being purposefully blunt, while Alex is acting like Jordan Peterson (whom he knows Destiny is not a big fan of) and drawing on his experience engaging with people like that to make lofty grand arguments and feign offense at Destiny’s bluntness. The whole thing is both of them playing things up to be funny, not Alex seriously making arguments to try to challenge Destiny.
On your last point. It contested whether Shakespeare even existed or if he was multiple people etc, because you need other corroborating information to determine the existence of the author. (Which was kind of Alex's point)
i firmly do believe that in ten, twenty or thirty years, alex will be considered the new cs lewis. he looks like he's just like a fish, waiting to be hooked for the love of God and be brought to the surface of light
@livingthedream8539 no, but there does need to be an ultimate authority in order for there to be absolute standards. So what standards do you base your morality on so that you could say that slavery and genocide are objectively bad?
@ “but there does need to be a ultimate authority standards” No…! It don’t. Different cultures have different standards of morality. Is slavery and genocide morally bad to you?. My self preservation tells me I don’t want that to myself. I never need any god concept to act with reason to my standards of morality. If you say that morality is imposed to me by your god I have to ask you about my free will.
Re: Chapter 9 "Meaning" By framing 'meaning' as objective (re: the comparison between counting blades of grass vs donating to Oxfam as they are objectively equivalent) it invites the idea that there must be something above to 'give' that meaning but it is far more subjective than that just like individuals have different dietary requirements/allergies etc - it is not a 'one size fits all' proposition. We are creatures governed by self interest (it goes beyond just self preservation) and if a particular action subjectively generates a pleasurable chemical response (dopamine, hormone, etc) then that individual is likely to want to partake in that activity again. It is quite possible that a person with extreme autism/Asperger's or a related condition may feel an overwhelming compulsion to count those blades of grass and by doing so they receive that dopamine hit. Or, on the flip side of that, they feel anxious by NOT counting the blades for whatever reason and self preservation would dictate that one would do whatever was necessary to avoid that negative sensation. 'Meaning' can also be, again subjectively, derived by a 3rd party from the actions of another despite the original person's intent or potential lack of consideration for others' response at all.
@@prayerjoseph9776 if you've ever done something that you felt was worthwhile that you felt was meaningful but somebody else thought you were wasting your time then you'd understand that meaning is entirely subjective. There is only an 'ultimate point' if there is an overall entity responsible but we are constantly told by religious people that we 'have free will' and so our actions are own responsibility and whatever motivates us into those actions we derive meaning from so it is completely subjective.
@@LittleMAC78 Isn't that everything in life? What's the point? We all die tomorrow. Not Christianity. We have a relationship, one which is not dictated, with God, the ultimate point. Everything without God is by definition meaningless.
It's because he's a proper philosopher, we're trained to give our opponents the best version of their argument, in order to be a good thinker you always have to be your own devils advocate
I couldn't agree more.
That’s also the exact reason he’ll never be a christian so long as he remains this way. An ideology that demands control of your very thoughts is a classic philosophical trapping.
In fact the Devil has been known to speak 99,5 % truth. The toxic cloven hoof are the rest 0,5 %.
Exactly!
Or God's Advocate, as the case may be ✝
I'm an atheist myself. Alex o Connor has helped me better understand Christianity than many other channels both on the internet and in real life. His presence in this online discussion is a very welcome one!
Yes he is much different from the Dawkins and Hitchens kind of atheist. Growing up watching Hitchens debates Alex reintroduced my to the possibility of God.
could someone explain how point 8, argument from reason, is an argument for the existence of God?I struggle to see the link
@not1207 I see the argument as such:
1. Some people argue that our rationality, our ability to grasp the "truth" of the world, is a byproduct of evolution.
2. This suggests that this aspect of rationality has not evolved for its capacity to grasp truth, but for its survivability.
3. These reasoning steps strike a legitimate blow to our capacity to trust our own reasoning, as our reasoning would not be optimized for getting to the truth, but just to be better at staying alive.
4. This includes, ironically if I might say, evolution. Resulting in a semi-paradox, that we used reasoning to come to a conclusion that undermines our reasoning...
5. (Implied) As we believe our reasoning capacity to be sound, we have good reason to suggest that there is more to our minds than it just being the product of evolution.
This conclusion does not bring you directly to the existence of God, but might imply something along the lines of a soul or something similar.
Hope I was able to represent this argument well!
If you want to have productive conversations with Christians, and if you want to make arguments that actually make us think, keep watching Alex. I get how good it feels to watch the New Atheist types DEMOLISH strawmen and OWN the low hanging fruit, but this is a serious topic for grown-ups so let's all treat it like one.
I'm Christian i concour Alex is harder to argue against as he plays our position closer to what it actually is
The new atheists, I read all four of the horse men's books. I left just thinking they don't understand Christianity and hates God and wants to mock religion ( not very empathetic)
So ironically I was more in believe after reading Dawkins, Harris, hitchins( all though I liked him better then the others) and Dennit I probably should read again to be honest
So the strongest arguments are not ones that don't mock and strawman but attack our actual arguments and I prefer Alex over new atheists every day of the week
Alex really feels like a true inbetween of theist and atheist. He actually pokes holes in both sides, unwilling to give ground to bad philosophical arguments from his own side, and feeling unconvinced by Christianity/Theism
An authentic agnostic.
He also has described himself as a reluctant atheist.
@@killapollo4853Atheist is not a label any Atheist should have to hold, but is the label given to us by Theist.
“In fact, "atheism" is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a "non-astrologer" or a "non-alchemist." We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.”
- Sam Harris
It’s just because he is intellectually honest and has a strong desire to know the truth rather than cherry picking information to suit his narrative. He doesn’t pretend to know things we can’t prove, so although he’s an atheist he always strongly considers both sides of every argument.
He's not "in-between", he's an atheist.
Saying that Alex O'Connor has an inner Christian is to imply that he is- on the inside- a christian, which of course he is not. He simply is not ignorant of Christian argumentation and is honest enough to express his true understanding of those arguments rather than straw Manning them like some others would do
He is an implicit Christian because he worships Truth. Truth is God. God is Truth.
@@aisthpaoitht Truth is one sided. There are many sides to the alleged gods.
@alanmill793 yes, God is divinely simple. Truth.
@@aisthpaoitht Goal post moving there, and you will have to produce some credible objective evidence for your spurious claim as others claim your alleged god is so omni everything complicated.
@@alanmill793 what goalposts were moved?
I'm a current atheist who used to have an anti-theist stance (and by that I mean in a literal sense, a deep hatred for Christian people, not Christianity itself) because of what Christians sometimes think about things like slavery and genocide and the existence of evil and suffering. Alex has helped me to realize that I shouldn't seek quarrels with people over thought and that thoughts aren't crime. So much of what Christians DO rather than SAY, directly negates any of these thoughts they may have religiously and I've become much less cynical and pessimistic in the realization that we're all just looking for answers and meaning in life. Excellent commentary by the way, I think you did Alex and any potential atheist viewers justice with this video.
Thanks!
Alex is a brilliant orator with an exceptional ability to research and prepare. He often understands his opponent’s arguments better than they do, effortlessly dismantling their points with precision and insight. His skill and intellect make him absolutely fascinating to watch.
He's a midwot
I think it's less of Alex channeling an "inner christian", and more the idea that he likes ideas clarified , and is genuinely curious.
As an atheist myself, I often cringe when I hear bad arguments against the existence of "God".
God willing, his curiosity takes him where he would like to be!
You did not choose to be an atheist. You were hardwired by the same ideology which is trying to replace you.
You were hardwired to be an atheist by the same ideology which wants to supersede you.
You were hardwired to be an atheist by the same teaching that is trying to supplant you.
You were hardwired to be an atheist by the same ideology which is trying to supplant you.
Alex O'Connor has grown so much from the smug style which he started with. If that was my son I would be so proud
Yeas, he is a much better actor now
@@alena-qu9vj 🤣
@@arhabersham I'm 5'8 and black. If Alex were my son, I'd have a lot of questions for my wife 🤣
@@dogsandyoga1743at least youd know how Joseph felt.
Joseph: I TOLD YOU I TOLD I TOLD YOU BRO *throws child
"When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, ‘You are not far from the kingdom of God.’" (Mk 12:34) I vividly imagine Jesus giving a similar response to Alex O'Connor. If truly the hiddenness of God is the decisive part that keeps him from becoming a Christian then I believe this is for a purpose and God wants him to be in just the place he is for the time being, but eventually will reveal Himself to him in a clear and unmistakable way. Let's thank God for who Alex is and what he does and let's pray that--"God willing"--the missing part will be given and received when the time is ripe. Just imagine Alex O'Connor as kind of a new C.S. Lewis (whom he seems to know and understand very well, by the way)--what a blessing could he be to the world!
Or god has already shown him, but he doesn't see.
like the concution jesus made many times over, if you don't want to believe then you won't believe, if you want to believe to eagerly you'll be deceived.
Jordan is just way too catious, as he already understood this point from around the start of his yourny. Which does make him lose the obvious.
The issue I find with this line of reasoning is that it assumes people who die without finding god are those who were not willing, something that is just patently false. There are plenty of people like Alex and me who have grown up in religious environments and moved away from it, but always willing to be proven false. Yet many of these people have died as nonbelievers. And the idea that these people were just all lying. Every. Single. One. And in actuality they didn’t want to know the truth is asinine and just a spit in the face of the character of these people.
@@_Sloppyham At first I wondered which of my statements you might have misunderstood because this is definitely nothing I would argue for. But I see that you must refer to @flyshy8806's comment. I, for one, believe in a God that wants to be found by everyone and takes into account all the seemingly insuperable intellectual and existential difficulties which keep people away from faith in Him. Above all, I believe in a God who loves every person and leads them on different paths towards Himself, according to both our specific personality and a higher purpose He wants to fulfill with us in human history because it's never about ourselves alone. So I think the main thing is remaining open to what Life is calling us to. I have high regards for people like Alex and you who, despite lacking the gratification of a direct experience of God's presence and love, keep seeking the truth and preserve an openness towards faith.
Do I believe then that everyone who dies as a nonbeliever actually didn't seek the truth? Certainly not. It's not up to me to judge other people. Nobody knows what was going on in their hearts. On the other hand, I do believe you will eventually reach a point (more likely even several points) where it's up to your decision whether you want to trust the evidence at hand or not. Nobody can be proven into faith. Just as nobody can be proven into a loving relationship. There is always something venturous about those things, like a stepping out into the twilight of uncertain knowing, underpinned by hope. I wish you all the best for your journey.
@@_Sloppyhamyou’re clearly right, i’ll begin by saying that. hear me out: suppose you die, and then god sits there and decides whether you go to heaven or to hell. he looks at you, you look at him, and he asks you whether you believe in him. do you say yes? that might not be how it happens, but i believe something happens after death that allows for good people like yourself and alex who never acquired the belief in God to get to where everyone else is going. i believe this type of thing isnt in the bible because it would make a life in submission to Jesus practically pointless to a lot of people
@ yeah, the Bible tries to circumvent this by saying everyone is without excuse in life. But I’ve talked about that. I probably wouldn’t say “yes” because I don’t know what that entails. I would now believe there’s some form of life after death and it seems like an intelligent being plays a major part of it, but beyond that I would have to say no until more information is given, much less consider it worthy of worship.
I don’t know what your beliefs system is (it doesn’t seem to be Christianity?), but I’d have to wonder in that situation why it even matters to know god at all. Well, I guess there’s Heaven and Hell. But if just telling a dude you don’t believe he exists out of pettiness or spite deserves eternal Hell I’d have to question the…morals of such a being.
I've never listened to this Glen Scrivener before. He's unusually good at summing up the progress of an argument between two parties, as a third party.
I am a Christian & I love listening to Alex. I think he is a brilliant mind. I genuinely hope that he comes to know God & experiences the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ & watch as his whole life & ideologies change.
highly doubt thats going to happen
I am an atheist & i love listening to . I think he is a brilliant mind. I genuinely hope that he leaves his Christianity and experiences the power of humans driven by collective empathy and appreciation of their one and only life.
Your message totally makes sense as i would have thought the EXACT same thing when i was a christian, but i would bet my only life that your wish won't be happening since he's too intellectually honest to accept christianity!
@illbeasty3643 I think you're better off sticking to Jordan, atleast he pretends to believe, and gives word salads that no one understands, but you lot can clap to as a win.
Sooner or later, people have to realise that to believe these things, you are some what deluded, and it's not your fault.
Its why I hate childhood indoctrination, it can take a lifetime to undo, and in many cases it's never undone.
Alex has done so much good to bring both sides to conversation. As an atheist, one of my greatest fears is both parties will vilify the other party to the point that conversation can no longer happen.
I fear that conversation is mostly useless. How many change their minds eitherway?
Preventing childhood indoctrination, making an ideology culturally and socially unpalatable, and presenting superior alternatives are more impactful, I suspect.
@@someonesomeone25 I mean good luck achieving those things without talking things through first. I dont imagine the religious folk will roll over and accept a ban on teaching children religion.
@ThisDonut We are getting there. Atheism growing well in the UK.
@@someonesomeone25 Atheism is growing in most first world countries since people are becoming more well off. Im not familiar with UK law though, what legislation have they passed over there that has suppressed religion?
@ThisDonut Off the top.of my head, I think there's regulation on cults like scientologists; certain things have to be taught in schools (no escaping Darwin); hate speech laws can be used against homophobic or sexist preaching; anti-radicalisation programmes are enforced at every educational level to watch out for extremist stuff; you're pretty much strong armed into paying for a TV license which will fund more stuff against.religion than for; there's major restrictions on religious broadcasting; and a few other minor bits and bobs.
But most of the success has come.from a combination of social change (esp around sex), continual ridicule of religion in the media, and lots of high profile new atheist types like Dawkins and Hitchens doing their thing. All useful stuff.
Long way to go, though.
When Alex questions Richard about his statement about having solved the problem of life, Dawkins is not rowing back as you suggest. It is simply that what Dawkins originally meant by solving the problem of life wasn't necessarily clearly communicated. By context you can tell that what he obviously means is solving the problem of the complexity of life, then Alex asks a separate question about the origins of Life at which point Dawkins immediately and unhesitatingly answers that they do not know about that . Alex didn't catch Dawkins off kilter, he simply misunderstood him
Alex is the best person to blend philosophy and theology I’ve seen recently. Everything from his demeanour and inquisitive nature makes his very much likeable from both sides of the argument. I hope to hear more of this type of conversation
This video is great, and I was impressed by your meaningful commentary. So many Christian channels suffer from lack of substance outside of the clips they show. Keep it up!
Thanks
True.
He acts as a philosopher should. However, anyone who believes this means he’s “close” to being a Christian doesn’t listen to him closely. He knows too much to fall into a mythical trap.
He might fall into some sort of Jungian reinterpretation of Christianity though. To be fair, if you read the injunctions in the Gospels and look at the actions if most so-called "Christians" these days then you'll find that the two so rarely align that I don't think we should be calling them Christians... We should just be calling them religious hypocrites.
@@I-am-Hrut you know whats up
@@malikaix8 Alex: "I don't _really_ know what's "up" and nor do you because there is no universally agreed upon inertial reference frame from which to ask that question. Besides the various air molecules in the atmosphere, the next-proximate _thing_ that is "up" to _me_ right _now_ is the ceiling of this room. But, of course, _above_ that there is a roof. And above that roof are the stars, and _above_ those are other galaxies, and then the CMB radiation, and (presumably) the Big Bang, and (presumably) nothing-all roads lead back to mereological nihilism."
Thank you for this wonderful and detailed video! In the end I've come to realise how much I appreciate Alex. He's such a dear and bright young soul and as a Christian I really do wish for him to meet the living God, our Lord Jesus Christ and to finally find his purpose and happiness! He most certainly deserves it! May God bless him!
Ive been a Christian for over 40 years, but I have never been very dogmatic. Like at all. And in the past ten years I find myself unable to identify with modern Christians. So it's been hard finding channels that I can identify with, but Alex's is one of if not the best that I have come across. I love how inquisitive he is, and the lengths he will go to, to understand a different perspective or pov is astounding. He never strikes me as someone who deals in absolutes. He's a truth seeker, and a very self-aware one at that!
I was actually thinking about this earlier that Alex is a really good God advocate. When people say they don't believer in God because they can't see him it is a silly reason, and Alex (as an agnostic) likes to point that out to other non christians/non religious
That is why nobody says it outside of apologists trying to strawman the argument.@@Reece-3601
@@michaelnewsham1412 still, it's an incredibly silly reason
Alex was one of the best channels I found when I started leaving the faith because his understanding of Christianity is so well versed and understanding of what it's like to be a person in a church
Alex is remarkable because he engages with every idea and topic with deep respect and a genuine desire for understanding. His intellectual curiosity drives him to seek the truth collaboratively, sharing and drawing insights from other fine minds, and without ego. It’s a privilege to witness his emergence at such a young age; his contributions and evolution promise to engage and inspire us for many years ahead.
Came from Gavin Ortlund! You were a great recommendation
Love Gavin
I love Alex for his intellectual integrity. This video was superb. I'd love to see him sit down with you, Glen.
im a christian, i think Alex O'connor is awesome
Super solid video, highlights the best of Alex that I've seen, with clear explanations.
This is your best ever shining moment among many, Glen! Truly sparkling mind. Beautifully done! So encouraging after watching Alex's recent talk with Fthr Gregory Pines, asking the great question about hiddenness and hearing no relevant answer before giving up half way through. Alex articulates these huge fundamental concerns about Christian faith so clearly, I would love to hear your response to Alex's questions in that conversation and your attempt to.do them justice (maybe help me see the relevance, if any of Fthr Gregory's answers).Thanks so much for lifting my spirits up again with your brilliant analyses and warm heart. We can all pray for Alex and the many honest, enquiring skeptics like him.
Praying for this man to have the scales lifted from his eyes!
Could you guys also pray for my brother Logan and his wife to know Jesus? This reignited my fervency to pray for those who do not know Jesus!
Destiny isn’t smart enough to realise what happened.
DDS as bad as TDS lol
he very much realized
You will know them by their fruits. Alex produces more, real fruit than a lot of Christian commentators out there. I’ve been saying for a long time now that he exemplifies Christianity better than most Christians.
Alex fan here. Awesome video, made it to the end.
Great vid man! Only just found ya but I'm glad I did
Appreciate it!
What he is essentially doing is helping theists become better theists and atheists be better atheists. If we all grow intellectually together with dialectical discourse the world would be a much better place to live in for people of all beliefs. 🙏
After so many years of fooling around, I I really loved the way Alex cornered JP and went for the jugular with a serious question, it was like 4D chess
What a perfect gospel speaker he will make
Alex became a role model of mine, I'm an atheist myself but I've conducted my debates against theists in a way that is respectful enough that I became their go-to atheist when they want an atheists perspective on some certain topics. Don't get me wrong, there are times that I will be like Woodford on certain occasions, depending what kind of arguments or counter arguments I am presented with, or if the other person intentionally making dishonest statements. I can tolerate people who are genuinely dumb or just ignorant on certain topics, what I can't stand is someone who's playing dumb. One of the most important lesson that I've learned watching Alex is that, in order to be able to genuinely understand the others perspective/views/idea, you have to be able to steelman their position genuinely without making unnecessary assumptions that will make their case weak.
I'm also a fan of Peterson but I'm having difficulty wit him saying that "...there's no pulling-out of historical Jesus..." because that could imply that the existence of Jesus Christ is not really clear even amongst scholars or archaeologists. I think Peterson's hesitation comes from the fact that he is still holding on a little bit of skepticism himself about the resurrection of Christ, and by extension the existence of God (as understood by most Christians), put simply I think Peterson is still at the crossroad of becoming a theist or atheist deep down there.
Destiny is someone who has no business talking to Alex, he is just wasting Alex's time.
Oh, and one more thing, labeling Alex's attitude as "inner-Christian" implies that only Christians practices honest discussion or it is inherently a Christian-thing to conduct yourself in an honest discussion. If anything, Alex is exhibiting what true secularists are.
I am a Deist, and I love Alex. He's so young yet a rigorously intelligent person, and an excellent speaker/debater. I'm always impressed by him!
I have watched Alex since he was 16.He is really seeking the truth.I pray that he will have the divine intervention that he is looking for because he worked so hard for it
I really hope he doesn't fall into any such delusion or illusion.
I hope and pray he finds truth whatever it may be
He has truth, he is just good at understanding people and arguing in good faith by negotiating with the best possible interpretation of the information given. That does not mean he is searching for excuses to be a christian, he would very much become christian if there was a good reason to. Unfortunately, thete hardly is one
@ the wan said he desires to be Christian.He is seeking the truth.Let him find it.don’t speak for him.
@@someonesomeone25If he ends up becoming Christian, a person like Alex would be able to properly argue why it is not delusion.
Bold! I like it! :)
I'm alot like Alex. I used to believe and stopped believing once I discovered Alex and I started watching various debates with other christians and atheists debates.
After years of being an atheist, and after a traumatic event, I'm forced to seek as I need hope. So I'm currently seeking and many of my issues are same or similar to Alex.
I want to know the truth and so does Alex, same with understanding.
It's so hard to be a christian if you cant believe or understand. I hate it when Christians say you're choosing not to believe and go hell. So insensitive because I've tried so hard for years and it's very draining. I love Alex, he has such a good heart and like me genuinely just wants to know.
Totally agree. I’m reading a book by a very thoughtful Christian called Rupert Shortt. He has an interesting line about how seeking happens - for anything. “It’s less that we think our way into a new way of living. More often we live our way into a new way of thinking.” I think there are loads of examples of that, whether it’s about vegetarianism, environmentalism, or faith. There’s something about joining a group of people and finding that your beliefs start aligning. It’s for that reason that newcomers to our church are not interrogated about their current beliefs. We love that they’ve joined us. And we offer thoughtful ways that they can wrestle with matters of faith. But I think for most people believing comes after belonging.
All of which is to say, maybe find a church where you can wrestle these things through?
(My two cents, unasked for, sorry!)
I'm all to aware how the human brain can convince itself into believing in something if it wants to. Having a deep desire, or need to believe something, whatever the reason, e.g. comfort, hope, we can become bias and take information that we want and be ignorant of the stuff we dont want.
I had a bad event that happened to me recently, I've endured so many traumas but this last one involved someone I loved and they suffered because I put so much trust in this person and dispite it being obvious the professional was wrong and I was right, I became ignorant of my own thoughts because I guess I wanted the professional to be right as it was the nicest, most comforting outcome and just became disillusioned. I stopped questioning as much and put all my trust in this professional, causing my loved one who I was responsible for, to suffering incredible amounts.
So I am careful, I want to believe there is a good God, and that we will reunite with loved ones, but I dont want to believe it because it comforts me and make life more bearable, I want to believe because I know 100% its true.
I struggle with the moral dilemmas in the bible but i am finding more answers over time.
But a big stumbling block for me other than non belief is, I wish I hadnt been born and struggle to be grateful for being forced into existence, into a human body that is by nature no matter what going to sin at some point, even if that sin is only a thought. Then I am to be punished for being by nature unable not to sin or even have choice to be put here in the first place, the same person who put me in this position is the one that is offering to save me from being punished for how he made me that I could not avoid.
Analogy, scientist creates baby in a lab, he then poisons the baby so that it is sick and will suffer immeasurable pain for a very long time, but the scientist says to the child once old enough, that he can take away this future torture by given him the antidote, all he has to do is be grateful for the antidote, love and worship him.
This isnt even with the complication of unbelief and seems obvious to say ok I will take the antidote to avoid this threat of torture. But that's only to save yourself and not true gratitude of someone that saved you without being the same one that poisoned you. Then how do you love the person that did this, you cant make real feelings of love and gratitude and then worship is hypocritical if you arent truelly grateful and feel true love.
I just cant understand the concept of being saved and I hope my analogy helps you understand where I'm coming from. I've used several analogies in the past. But this and full belief and morals of God are my biggest sticking points.
Thank you for reading. I am genuinely seeking and am like Alex in wanting to find the truth.
@@HumbleBee123 An honest seeker like you is always worthy of admiration.
Your analogy is interesting. As a Hindu who follows the pluralistic philosophy of Swami Vivekananda and Mahatma Gandhi (that says that multiple paths can lead to God), I can try answering based upon my (limited) understanding of Christianity.
In your analogy, we have a being who creates an innocent sentient being and then needlessly makes them suffer before returning them to their previous state. I am not sure if this applies to the Christian conception of God. According to Christianity, the evil in the world is due to our sins. Sure, God could have made us perfect beings, but I think that God wants people to freely choose Him and reject evil. There is both beauty and value in doing the right thing even when the temptation to act in an immoral way is present. There is something priceless about the journey of spiritual upliftment and liberation from our bonds. Wouldn't you say that most people would intuitively respect a poor person who feels tempted to steal but controls his negative desire more than a rich person who never, ever has the urge to steal?
Finally, I think that spirituality is ultimately about experience. I have read countless arguments against and in favour of (various forms of) theism. Each of them seem quite convincing from their perspectives, and I believe that this is why reason can only take us so far. Pascal's Wager may be useful here, but what matters is being experientially connected with the Divine.
Each of us have a unique path before us. I hope and pray that you will find yours. In my view, faith is more than intellectual assent. So many people claim to be faithful, and yet, their hearts are tainted with greed, hatred, and pettiness. Due to this, I would argue that many atheists are actually closer to God than a lot of the theists.
Let me end with the words of Mahatma Gandhi:
"I believe in the truth of all religions of the world. And since my youth upward, it has been a humble but persistent effort on my to understand the truth of all the religions of the world, and adopt and assimilate in my own thought, word, and deed all that I have found to be best in those religions. The faith that I profess not only permits me to do so but renders it obligatory for me to take the best from whatsoever source it may come."
-Harijan, 1934
"Jesus expressed as no other could the spirit and will of God. It is in this sense that I see him and recognize as the Son of God. And because the life of Jesus has the significance and the transcendence to which I have alluded, I believe that he belongs not solely to Christianity but to the entire world, to all races and people. It matters little under what flag, name or doctrine they may work, profess a faith or worship a God inherited from their ancestors."
-My Religion
Namaste and love from India! 🙏🇮🇳☮️☮️
@@SpeakLifeMedia That's great. I agree. For example, many Christians see a decline in church attendance, and see this as the cause of social isolation. Because religion is a great social glue that fosters social bonds. And while I don't say this is false, I don't think it's necessarily true either. It's more of an unproven hypothesis, since you can flip the cause and effect around and still get solid logic: People might just be getting more isolated from each other and THEREFORE become less religious, because they affectively don't see the church's utility in fostering and reinforcing social bonds anymore.
People like simple narratives that hook into their pre-existing beliefs to explain multi-faceted cultural phenomena. But society is rarely as simple as a simple cause-and-effect explanation.
Thanks so much @humblebee123. You’re right not to want to believe something unless it’s true. My advice is not to try forcing yourself to believe something untrue but to point to the conditions under which any of us come to believe anything. It’s usually in the context of life in community.
On the subject of how we come into this world. You’re right that we didn’t choose existence. For me though that points to the fact that choice cannot be the ultimate value. I didn’t choose to be born but my parents cared enough to have me. Care, more than choice, is at the heart of life.
And biblically the story is not that God poisons us then cures us. The story is that God clearly warns us Not to eat the poison (forbidden fruit). But humanity is always prizing choice over care. We decided (and continue to decide) we’d rather decide than depend. This is the poison we have chosen. And the antidote is, by the nature of the case, to return to the Lord who gives life and depend on him. It’s not that God injects us with poison and then promises to give the antidote if only we grovel sufficiently (and pretend to love him for his salvation). We come into this world utterly needy - physically And spiritually. We are born hungry, weak, dependent, carrying any number of gene deletions, diseases and predispositions to fatal conditions. We’re born dying. That’s a physical truth and the Bible says there’s a parallel spiritual truth. Just as our physical life, health and protection must come from outside ourselves, so our spiritual life, health and protection must come from beyond. God offers life from the outside to those who are needy.
He does better than most Christians, because most Christians would want to quote scripture to back up every point they make.
Loved the content, my friend. Liked and subbed. God bless.
"Inner christian" is such bs. Playing devils advocate doesnt mean you secretly hold that view.
This is very common with this guy's views. He wrote a whole book about it.
ironic phrasing
Defend the bibles slavery.
Slavery is based.
I feel like anyone speaking to Destiny just needs to repeat this phrase over and over: “your belligerent dismissiveness is not an intellectual virtue”
He did not go into the question as he finds it boring. He knows Alex understand the ridiculousness of the argument.
saying "The universe is God" is the same as saying "The universe is the universe". Leaves zero room for any God of religion as one of the premises are that no patterns outside of the natural law can be found
Almost everytime somebody critiques him it isn't about substance
@@Raadpensionaris yeah, the issue is that my critique primarily concerns Destiny’s refusal to engage with any substance. His dismissiveness is used as a crutch to not provide substance and give the impression that he has the high ground. That’s not a minor or marginal problem and It’s not merely that I don’t like his tone
@@Jbaggy8 Destiny is capable of having a good faith substantive debate if his opponent is careful not to antagonize him in any way, a great example being his debate with Ben Shapiro. He just has such a hair-trigger when it comes to his defensiveness, as soon as a debate opponent expresses any emotional reaction or steps out of the bounds of strict civility, even if in jest, Destiny just goes off and starts resorting to his more underhanded and annoying debate tactics that end any substantive exchange of ideas. I think he also intentionally ramps up the aggressively confrontational rhetoric in less formal non-debate streaming settings simply because he thinks it's more entertaining, which to be fair, it sometimes is.
Great video, really enjoyed it 🙏
I don't think I've ever seen someone I resonate with like this Alex fellow. These are same style of thinking and questioning that I do (not claiming that we are comparable in intelligence or something, not trying to make myself sound great, I mean the 'perspective' on things so to speak.) I feel like me and him could talk at length about nearly anything. But he's definitely got communication skills I don't have and I definitely admire.
New subscriber here! Brilliant video!
Alex O'connor is great, he's atheist and he discusses his problems with thiesm without acting like a reddit atheist as some people in this space like to do. I'm an atheist but I appreciate the respect he shows when he's discussing any of the topics he talks about
Thank you for this video. I watched your interview with Nala and loved her story. Praise be to God! When I saw her back on the Whatever podcast, I had to watch and so hoped and expected her to have the chance to redeem herself. It was disheartening to see her character attacked and her conversion distorted/dismissed. How do we know she is not lying, in addition to the reasons Knowles stated? Because God is able to do the impossible and turn liars into lights that shine His love in a dark world. Glory be to Jesus!
Alex O'Connor is one of my favorite living public intellectuals. It blows my mind that he's so young. I think he could have confidently stood on the same stage as Christopher Hitchens and bandied words. If you ever want to see something both amusing and unfortunate, look for Alex's video where he has a conversation with Chris' living brother. Obviously not cut from the same cloth.
Great Video! Good job.
Excellent video. Brilliant rather. Host as O'Connor.
I think I remember Alex once saying that he wants to be a Christian but just can’t quite get there. He didn’t exactly elaborate why but I imagine when he is around atheists he becomes more Christian because there atheist does not understand Christianity. But if he’s around a Christian that doesn’t understand science/ethics or even Christianity he becomes more like an atheist
I think similar things with Tom Holland, although he's further along than Alex as he attends church services
@@HearGodsWord Alex attends church services too...
just like Tolstoy
1:02 Well done. Although I skipped through most of your comments on the segments I listened to some. I wanted to hear the clips you presented of Mr. O'Connor. He is a polite and reasonable man who appears sincerely to be searching and testing to find God. We can only pray God reveals himself to him as he revealed himself to Peter.
Its very simple. Alex has studied philosophy and theology at university and has a way better understanding on them than most people. So he is able to effortlessly describe religious positions. That doesn’t mean he is on the verge on becoming a Christian; he clearly maintained his atheism; but simply that he truly understands Christianity ad atheism so that he can argue for both if he wants
I'm ashamed to admit that I feel like Alex is more of a Christian than I am. Not in the sense that he believes in God more than I do, but in the notion of how much time and diligence he has poured into seeking God and his genuine pursuit of Truth. I feel like the sibling in the parable of the Prodigal Son.
as an atheist Alex has helped me understand christianity more than any preacher
(55:10) Alex: “I’m not sure that you can create your own meaning in a fundamental sense… I’m always suspicious of this concept.”
Konstantine: “Why’s that?”
Alex: “I think everything you’ve just said already presupposes an underlying value judgement.”
Konstantine: “No, no, no, no, no…”
Alex: *provides two examples of different self-constructed ‘meaning’ one might choose for living their life*
“-you’d be committed to the view that both of those lives are as meaningful as each other.”
Konstantine: “No-I didn’t say that. They’re not AS meaningful as each other…”
^Well, well, well… That sure sounds a whole lot like Alex’s very first point was right on the money after all: “I think everything you’ve just said already presupposes an UNDERLYING VALUE JUDGEMENT” [i.e. ‘this way of living a life is more/less meaningful than that’].
Alex is certainly skilled at level inquiry and transparent honesty. Lots to unpack here, but referring to his kind and unbiased inquiry as his "inner Christian" is hijacking honest and friendly discourse and labeling it Christian. It feels more Atheistic to me. An appreciation of life as it is and not magically enhanced by wishful dogma.
Really interesting vid
Loved the podcast with Dawkins. It really was the student becoming the Master.
Very interesting content
This is fricken awesome
Alex O Connor has a talent for academics; no doubt. My advice for fellows such as him who are influenced by paradoxical and contradictive Hitchens and Dennett is that he should truly be a credible emboldened humanitarian (if Christians or religious minorities are doing a terrible job as humanitarians) in Britain to cause change whereas it is a mess and cesspool of disgraced societal issues. Fix your house and affairs first before lecture others. Dr Jordan Peterson is the only atheist humanitarian I can take seriously
God is using them to plant seeds even though they themselves are not believers.
I don’t particularly need any seeds but my missing limb. All god’s miracles that one we still can’t count on .
Exposing the intellectual failures of nonbelievers doesn't make you a believer. It doesn't even make you close.
We either feel God's presence and support in our lives, or we don't. It would be arrogance to tell someone who has their prayers answered in an amazing way - that it was all just co-incidence. At the end of the day, Heavenly Father reads hearts. It is up to Him who to help further His purposes - believer or not ❤
😂
I'm genuinely curious, what would you qualify as a prayer answered in an amazing way.
I think it's fair to say that if one's prayers are demonstrably answered then it would qualify as good evidence.
However I often find a huge flaw in this, when it comes to the type of prayer, and the rate to which these prayers are answered.
I do believe that what people call answered prayers are often times coincidences because 90% of times when a specific prayer is made, it fails. But people tend to ignore that and take the 10% of the time when it works to deem it a success overall.
So, to you, what counts as an answered prayer?
@ArcherMVMaster 😂😂😂🤣 Bro you were not supposed to say this part 😂
@@g1lbert68lol aight I'll turn myself in to the police then 😄
@@ArcherMVMaster I'm guessing you're a logical person 🤣🤣. prayers is basically wishing
One of the reasons that he is effective is his approach. He argues a point in such a way as it might convince someone away from their view and towards his. The way to do it is to argue from within. For instance, you accept their claim, at least for the point of argument, then explain why he still has a problem with it im even if he accepts the claim. To do so you also need to understand the opposition to your view and not rely on logical fallacies, especially strawman. In fact he usually tries to steelman the opposing argument.
Too often apologists strawman atheists as if there is anything unifilying about atheist outside of a shared non-belief in God ir any gods/goddeses. A while back he had to stop himself before responding to a list of questions about atheists because it was supernatural in nature. He recalled that being an atheist is not necessarily rejection of the supernatural merely God or any gods/goddeses. So, he had to change it from an answer from an atheist to an answer from a naturalist.
Cosmic Saint, God willing
I am a skeptical hindu, but I love Alex O' corner, he is really good at confrontation.❤
Alex seem to be really open minded, and I think that this is one of the greatest virtues of a human being.
I mean, not so many people will study IN DEPTH what they disagree with to better formulate their points
in destinys defence he wasnt mad, he just enjoys edgy gamer humor
Been watching Alex O Conmir from his Cosmic Skeptic days. What i love is that he doesn't debate in his recent but does discussions. He gives both sides a shot.
Also the second argument given is fully semantics on what god is. In the definition given i would say i believe in a god like that but the definition is also just "everything" so why not just say nature. This also breaks apart god being supernatural as it pins god as a natural being thus it is why Alex brought this argument up at the end of a discussion.
Good video
This is great!
I think this should be a call to pray for Alex O'Connor. He is close.
He definitely isn't close, but God is a God of miracles 🙏
@Stephen-gn2br
He doesn't seem to be in as much of a state of mind to ignore miracles now though. I think that makes him close.
Usually natural disaster will awake your supernatural interest-in help and answers.
He’s not remotely close, he just understands Christianity better than a lot of “apologists”
@@MoNtYbOy101
I don't mean close in the sense of understanding christianity well.
I wouldn't say Bart Ehrman is close for example. I mean close in the sense of not being closed-minded and being open to the supernatural.
If God tommorow were to cause a clear supernatural event in his life I think he may convert on the spot. I don't think that's the case for, say, Dawkins.
I'm a Christian (I was an athiest up until around 40) and Alex is sometimes reffered to by theists as a Christian apologist in training for a reason. 😅
He does a fantastic job with arguing for theism and a great job arguing for Christian theology. So far every issue that I've seen him have is not only genuine but of the highest quality. They're the ones that are the hardest to grapple with. He occasionally feeds into the cynical side of atheism when he's soley adressing other agnostics and athiests but overall he's very respectful when it matters. Definitely NOT low hanging fruit. The young man is very bright. He's become my favorite agnostic debater by far.
Yep. Expect him to come out wearing a monk's robe- he'll go for the smells and bells aspect.
@@CynHicks The thing is, I think most agnostic-atheist are more like Alex, less like Richard Dawkins or Matt Dillihunty. Not on the same intellectual level or as articulate, but in temperament.
It's the online spaces which have skewed the images of the non-believer and painted us as angry, aggressive, combative.
I mean, those exist also, but you don't hear them, because most are arguing in public, online spaces 😋
@dogsandyoga1743 My (still 🙏) agnostic, longtime friend is just like this. We can talk theology for hours. It's never disrespectful and always genuine. There's many of him out there. He'll share the occasional, athiest lowbrow meme with me to poke at me, but it's meant in love. He thinks I'm delusional. 😅
Oh, and he can't stand Matt or Dawkins. We both used to be fans of Matt (I was a Dawkins fan for a minute) but...
He watches some of he theological channels, Mike Winger being one he likes, but he hardly ever comments and if he does it's always respectful. I think that this is most non-believers. They have the "of you have nothing nice to say..." philosophy in life.
Btw, have you tried connecting with Alex O Conner in a live discussion? That would be great
God made Alex, gifted him, and motivates him, all to work for his purpose. God is not obligated to save him just because he has used him. But that does not mean God may not save him.
Well that’s a fucked up pov, isn’t it?
“I’m gonna use this guy to get a bunch of people to follow me, but I’m not gonna reveal myself to him. And it’s ok because I will have manipulated him into believing that he deserves to go to hell anyway by the time he dies”
Alex helped pull me and my friends out of Christianity. I am thankful for him.
You were never born again. You played religion for a time but ended up showing your true colors
@@johntrevett2944 ah yes "you were never a real Christian" this has done to the ebionites, Marcionites, etc. Cmon mate, heresiology? Really? "lmao" , I say, "lol"
Scripture and history are filled with examples of people who made an initial positive response to Christ only to fall away later. In the parable of the sower and the seed, some of the seed sprung up quickly, only to wither away or be choked out by weeds. “As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away. As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful” (Matthew 13:20-22). But the seed (the gospel) sown on good soil brings forth fruit for harvest. In the initial stages, it might be very difficult to tell which plants will make it or not. Time reveals the truth.
@@johntrevett2944 It's a false religion. Obviously people are going to fall away from it.
@@johntrevett2944 such wisdom, such truth, such power🙌🏼
I think Alex would take issue with your bit at the end. You seem to give a solution to divine hiddenness, a solution Alex has found to be false.
Glen, your thoughts on balancing spiritual books that feed your soul (Tozer, Spurgeon, Bunyan, Baxter, Edwards) versus apologetic books (Aristotle, Aquinas, Chesterton, Lewis)?
I know I'm not Glen, but I would encourage you to pursue apologetics in a devotional way. It will still strengthen your ability to defend the faith to questioning believers and nonbelievers, but at the same time will feed your soul. Think about how the divinity of Christ, his humanity, his historicity transforms you and His presence is with you. I find apologetic study really encouraging, that God is with me and His Spirit revitalizes my soul. Devotional and contemplative works are great as well!
@ i understand but Tozer and Aristotle are a world apart and the apologetics will never nourish my soul like devotional books would.
@@RickyNicks7 true, but if there is some truth in Aristotle's work that points to knowledge of who God is, I think that is something where you can see God's common grace working even if he didn't recognize Him fully.
@ my problem with reading too much apologetics is this, it makes my soul lean:
“He is a deduction from evidence which they consider adequate; but He remains personally unknown to the individual. “He must be,” they say, “therefore, we believe He is.” Others do not go even so far as this; they know of Him only by hearsay. …They do not know God in personal experience”
-A.W. Tozer
Tozer said somewhere, “People talk about God as if all He had to do was exist.”
The chimney comment is good. Still operates within the framework of physicalism, but sometimes you have to use analogies in that framework to help one grasp the underlying concepts
Would you do a debate with Alex? Not just a soft ball discussion, a challenging debate where you go into depth into two or three questions.
32:20 From my perspective, the answer to that has no real scientific value beyond mere understanding unless we intend to use such knowledge. Meaning, unless we intend to become life creators the knowledge fits into the "ok, so niw we now" category.
Agreed, he’s the best
Another worthy mention is Alex's discussion with Peter Boghossian.
Gotta love Richard Dawkins accidentally denying Shakespear.
I don't think you realize that both alex and destiny are trolling lol
16:02 Regarding the resurrection and not all people believing it was Jesus, is it just possible that 'Jesus the man' was still in the tomb but the words of the alleged 'Christ/Anointed One' were now being spoken by a physically different human and THAT is what people resonated with as being 'Jesus resurrected'...?
Without disrespecting the Christian teachings (or any humanist based teachings from any world view, religious or otherwise), the idea of a man continuing the teachings in a 'Christ like way' after the death of the original human source (half human according to doctrine but we can accept or ignore that bit!) would seem like a more plausible, non laws of physics altering explanation to people 'seeing Christ (not necessarily Jesus)' after the crucifixion.
I often wonder and now I realize. No matter How smart you are, How intellectual you are, you wouldn't believe or even understand the resurrection if God wouldn't reveal himself. Emmaus story reveal so much layers after watching these intellectual speakers on YT.
CS Lewis’ most reluctant convert seems quite appropriate for Alex
He has also set eternity in the human heart; yet no one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end.
Why think that?
@someonesomeone25 Lewis's argument for desire around 44 minute mark.
@@johnsteele870 Lewis' argument convinces you of the Christian God and bible? Fair enough.
@someonesomeone25 No, I believe the bible because it is truth. Scripture tells us of the human condition and the only cure, the cross of Jesus Christ who died for our sins and Rose again for our justification.
@@johnsteele870 So you believe the bible because what it says resonated with you?
I disagree with your framing of these instances as “Alex’s inner Christian coming out.” Even though you clarify that he is an atheist and has many arguments against Christianity, framing it this way still implies that there is a Christian somewhere within Alex, or that Alex in some regards acts very much like a Christian or has values or beliefs like a Christian.
Now, while his beliefs and actions certainly have some overlap with those of some Christians (it’s worth reminding people that Christians are a vast and incredibly varied group in themselves, I think you mean that Alex here acts similar to the Christians in your personal social circle), I think this framing obfuscates why this is happening, or wants to ignore why in order to fill it is with “he’s a Christian at heart, to some degree.”
Alex is a philosopher, and a talented one at that. He makes an effort to understand the arguments of people he does not agree with, but more importantly he makes an effort to understand WHY they are used. As such he can bring them up when he finds it relevant as a challenge, even if he does not agree with the argument himself or has counters for. This is especially true in his interview settings, where his goal is to politely push guests on their beliefs to get more information, often from their own worldview or views adjacent to it. This is what he does with Peterson. He knows Peterson calls himself a Christian, and that Christians look to him, and so he uses things that a Christian would believe or argue to see whether Peterson agrees with those ideas. It’s the mark of a good philosopher and interviewer, not “his inner Christian coming out.”
Edit: it’s worth checking out Alex’s talk with Destiny after this where they discuss Peterson, and Alex talks about his approach here. He knows that both Christians and Atheists want clear answers out of Peterson, and his goal is to work toward them.
Edit 2: Jeez, I just got the the 3rd example, and holy moly I don’t think you understood it much. That particular moment was Alex and Destiny just hanging out in an open slot before an actual program, meming around. Destiny being dismissive of the ideas is not him “having anger issues,” he’s joking around and being purposefully blunt, while Alex is acting like Jordan Peterson (whom he knows Destiny is not a big fan of) and drawing on his experience engaging with people like that to make lofty grand arguments and feign offense at Destiny’s bluntness. The whole thing is both of them playing things up to be funny, not Alex seriously making arguments to try to challenge Destiny.
On your last point. It contested whether Shakespeare even existed or if he was multiple people etc, because you need other corroborating information to determine the existence of the author.
(Which was kind of Alex's point)
I believe Alex O'Connor is the Paul in the making.
I'm back again here twice just to see the JP impersonation at 18:36 🤣
i firmly do believe that in ten, twenty or thirty years, alex will be considered the new cs lewis. he looks like he's just like a fish, waiting to be hooked for the love of God and be brought to the surface of light
Alex is only open to the idea of a God if that God agrees with his own standard of morality. 🙏 he comes to truth
That’s why Alex is my god. Alex don’t endorse slavery and genocide .
@livingthedream8539 by what standard do you call either of those things bad?
@@tonyabrown7796 Please, don’t tell me I need god to have morality as clearly my morality is not to god standards
@livingthedream8539 no, but there does need to be an ultimate authority in order for there to be absolute standards. So what standards do you base your morality on so that you could say that slavery and genocide are objectively bad?
@ “but there does need to be a ultimate authority standards” No…! It don’t. Different cultures have different standards of morality. Is slavery and genocide morally bad to you?. My self preservation tells me I don’t want that to myself. I never need any god concept to act with reason to my standards of morality. If you say that morality is imposed to me by your god I have to ask you about my free will.
When Alex is around christians he plays devil’s advocate, when he’s around atheists he plays God’s advocate 😂
Re: Chapter 9 "Meaning"
By framing 'meaning' as objective (re: the comparison between counting blades of grass vs donating to Oxfam as they are objectively equivalent) it invites the idea that there must be something above to 'give' that meaning but it is far more subjective than that just like individuals have different dietary requirements/allergies etc - it is not a 'one size fits all' proposition.
We are creatures governed by self interest (it goes beyond just self preservation) and if a particular action subjectively generates a pleasurable chemical response (dopamine, hormone, etc) then that individual is likely to want to partake in that activity again.
It is quite possible that a person with extreme autism/Asperger's or a related condition may feel an overwhelming compulsion to count those blades of grass and by doing so they receive that dopamine hit. Or, on the flip side of that, they feel anxious by NOT counting the blades for whatever reason and self preservation would dictate that one would do whatever was necessary to avoid that negative sensation.
'Meaning' can also be, again subjectively, derived by a 3rd party from the actions of another despite the original person's intent or potential lack of consideration for others' response at all.
You are not talking about 'meaning' then.
How would you define 'meaning'?
@@LittleMAC78 Ultimate point.
@@prayerjoseph9776 if you've ever done something that you felt was worthwhile that you felt was meaningful but somebody else thought you were wasting your time then you'd understand that meaning is entirely subjective.
There is only an 'ultimate point' if there is an overall entity responsible but we are constantly told by religious people that we 'have free will' and so our actions are own responsibility and whatever motivates us into those actions we derive meaning from so it is completely subjective.
@@LittleMAC78 Isn't that everything in life? What's the point? We all die tomorrow.
Not Christianity. We have a relationship, one which is not dictated, with God, the ultimate point. Everything without God is by definition meaningless.