He believes God doesn't exist even though it's not possible to prove that God doesn't exist & never will be. Therefore, it's an unscientific, faith based belief, but he'll mock those who take the opposite position. There's a better chance of finding evidence of existence of God than there ever will be of finding evidence of absence. Dawkins is in a belief/faith based state of mind too , he just doesn't refer to it as a religion. I think the only approach thats in line with scientific inquiry & the spirit of science would be to be agnostic, otherwise its belief & faith regardless of what side you fall on.
@@EastwoodFPS I agree. I have personal evidence of gods existence. Therefore I believe. One thing is certain aiming my thoughts and actions towards the principals of the Bible have improved my life in many ways.
What caused the universe? And was the cause an uncaused cause? If you were to give that a name, what would you call it? *Something that caused intelligible life* Ill let you come to your own conclusion
@@joe5959??? you are ignorant. There is something called science and the scientific process. That uses rational and then experiment the validity of the hypothesis. Religions are nothing more than a very poorly thought hypothesis that you were indoctrinated to believe in since you were a child. If you were born in a different family with a different religion, you would believe in that religion instead, but guess what, reality does not care in what culture you were raised. Your comment shows and proves how mentally lazy you really are.
@@joe5959You people always say such stupid shit instead of actually engaging with what was said. You're ignorant, and instead of denying that you started asking fucking moronic questions. The universe may be eternal, or may have come about from some natural cause, or sure it may have even been created, but of those options only the natural answer has evidence to support it. You used the word "cause" because you think it makes your god claim stronger, but it doesn't. If I drown in a lake, the cause of my death was water entering my lungs and making it impossible for me to breathe, and yet the water isn't intelligent, now is it? Your argument was pathetic, no one would come to the conclusion that a god exists just by reading your argument, and the best part is that even if you people could prove an intelligent mind created the universe, you'd be one tiny little fraction of a step closer to proving it was a god, or your specific god, or universe hopping pixies. Your argument wouldn't even prove the conclusion you're drawing.
Exactly, this reminds me of what Voltaire reportedly once said, "Those who can convince you with absurdities, can convince you to commit atrocities." This applies to faith perfectly.
There is the morality without god if you can't admit that then your The fool without knowledge Fools take no pleasure in learning or understanding Just there emotions views Proverbs 18:2
I could not agree more! Religion has no place in government institutions, especially our schools, poisoning the minds of the upcoming generations with nonesense
@@Logiconfire??? the crusades, hitler was a devoted christian, israel and hamas, all the terrorists attacks. what nonsense are you talking about? I guess that is your belief.
@@lb7625He was. Is just that christians distanced themselves because of the backlash, and are trying to change history. But he was christian, oh well as christian as any politician can be 😂.
@@ivanvincent7534 There's no such thing as an Atheistic belief, as Atheism stems from disbelief and skepticism more often than whatever else motivated the individual personally. And excuses wouldn't be needed if these religious texts didn't get so much wrong consistently. Even if believers were to all follow one religion, it still wouldn't work to show how that one is the truth as supported by verified credible good evidence. So, what is spirituality? On the surface, if there's any depth atall, it's a blanket term that covers over the unknown with a concept that's equally invalid. No different than a person who seen a UFO claims it was aliens from someplace else. The U in UFO means unidentified, as it isn't known and therefore cannot lead to, it's aliens as the first or best explanation for the sightings. As that would mean it's actually identified and confirmed as alien which has not been the case. 🤷🏼 How can you be so confident and comfortable being so wrong?
Is actually the opposite. Religion creates culture. And culture creates the environment that makes organised thought possible. Every city in the beginning was built around a church or holy place. University in Europe has its beginnings in monks. Those monks are the reason why we even have aristoteles. Because they transcriped his teachings in tomes. And he is the father of logic and systematic scientific thought in the west. Sorry but a dismissive white and black thinking is just the opposite of critical thinking. It's hypocritical.
@@biekgiek religion is a human universal that binds people together. It creates narrative structure which binds community's and create value structures. So yes it creates culture. One component of religion is the create of rituals. Rituals are habits of community that establish order in the community. By being believed to reflect a pattern that is outside of the community and reflect the very way reality is structured. Even in your worldview not people as such create religion. But is something that emerges in community through distrubuted cognition.
@@IbadassI I didnt? Thank you for incorrectly assuming. Lets, for arguments sake, say I havent though. Please furnish some context that would make this IN ANY WAY ACCEPTABLE to a modern educated man? You have the floor...
@@IbadassI Who created God? And if your answer is God is eternal, youre just inserting a middle man. If God can be eternal, why cant the conditions which created the universe be? Oh, who created those conditions? Well who created god? Oh God is eternal? Well the conditions which created the universe are eternal. Your argument is easily falsifiable.
@@jknowstheway1462 My, my, what a wonderful conundrum it seems you have woven. Unfortunately any other condition/particle/thing, if it can be defined, means it has limits. Limited "things" cannot be around forever in the past if we exist. Because infinitely regressing backwards would mean nothing now would happen, like you discussing this thread for example, because the primordial past would be infinitely long. Therefore there has to be an undefinable "something" that has no limits would be a necessary being.
I am a staunch Christian and I agree with him. Blind, unexamined faith can lead to terribly destructive things. If you have no reason to believe something yet do, you are going to be much more likely to lash out at the challenge instead of think through it logically. This can be seen whenever you try to argue with a dumb person.
Same here devout Catholic and I absolutely agree with this statement. My only problem with Dawkins here is that he wrongly defines faith as believing in something without evidence. That is not at all the definition of faith especially in the Christian sense. Faith came from the Greek word pistus which meant trust. Believing in something with good reason.
Let me put this straight. Do you believe a human can be born without sperm being involved? If the answer is yes, it's called faith, and it is ignorance.
@@samuelblack4792 There is only good reason to have faith if you wrongly define reasoning though. Reason requires logic, and logic requires evidence. If you don't want to use proper logic and reason, that's okay, but don't claim reason or logic The faulty logic path for faith based thinking is circular. God is real therefore x reason for belief is true. Then x reason for belief is true therefore it proves God is real. The fault lies in using an illogical poorly reasoned conclusion of "God is real = true" with no evidence/premises and using that to fill out the rest of the logical premises and conclusions truth values of your faith without ever proving it is true, then using those truth values as the premises for the argument "God is real is true" when the only reason the premises can be true is if you already determined God is real If you really think you have good reason to believe in a God you are showing an incredible lack of logic and reasoning skills. NO IDEA can be sacred if you are using reason. This means that if you cannot back up your idea with any valid evidence, it should be discarded as not supported. And affirmative claims bear the burden of proof
Agreed.The blind evil perpetrated in the name of Islam has been a curse on the world. How many innocent people have been lost in the last 30 years alone?
@@joealyjim3029 as well as in the name of "Patria". M. Dawkins is the first I've heard mentioning patriotism together with religious faith. About time someone did.
Love how you select Islam but dont mentioned the hundred of millions colonised and murdered by European Christendom from Europe to Africa to the America’s. Millions upon millions Murdered and robbed but let me guess your historical knowledge goes as far back as 9:11 Muppet
@@Programm4r Calling atheists 'religious' is a trite argument. Right up there with telling ex christian atheists they were 'never really saved'. Whatever
Dawkins is not changing anybody. It’s just a debate. Somebody who truly believes in their faith will not be moved by the musings of a mortal who believes he’s qualified to talk about a matter he has no real understanding of.
That's why it must be forbidden to teach religion to little kids at school. They'll believe whatever comes out of the mouth of an adult they respect. And most of them will still believe it as adults
@@orlandocarrillo7132 Quite the opposite; all religions should be taught, without preference or favor. The trick isn’t to tell young people what to think, or what not to think, but rather HOW to think. Teach young people how to exercise skepticism, how to critically discern truth from fiction, and then present them with ALL forms of religious material. Unreasonable beliefs will lose their hold.
quite the opposite, no religion should be taught. What could be taught is the history of religions and that is something different. There the kids will learn among other things how for example the catholic church was always a tool and worked together with the rulers as a mafia in a pursuit of power and money. They would learn why people in the former european colonies (south america, africa) believe in god. Mainly because their ancestors were threatened to death if they didn't convert. That's different than teaching religion.
@@orlandocarrillo7132 they shouldn’t teach evolution theory either because it’s based off speculation and can never be proven however they teach it like it’s a fact and also with out religion u don’t have objective morality. Atheistic beliefs will lead to more crimes because there is nothing wrong with murder rape and other things religion has said and tought objectively as evil
@@briley2177 by doing that you'll prep them readily to embrace Islam. ;) you do not want to teach your kids how to think, and how to discern truth from fiction, this is a recipe for them embracing Islam.
I don't think the concept of faith itself is bad. Atleast having faith on something like for example having faith in believing that someone will do the right or moral thing or hoping that your favourite sports team wins. Though what I'm thinking off could be classified more as hope than faith.
It would not be evil if they keep it to themselves. The evil comes from using your faith to justify violent acts against others. People are free to wallow in their ignorance as long as they stay in their own sty.
Many years ago, a pastor tried to convert me and said have faith. I told him to sell his house and bet it on a horse. He said that he doesn't know anything about the horse and then I smiled.
Yeah but that doesn't rule out the possibility of a creator. I think John Lenex said something about God acting as a sort of "logos" that set the universe in motion.
Why is it.... that whenever I watch videos discussing or debating about religion, the non-believer is always the sincere and genuine one while the believer seems not. Could just be a coincidence but... That's how it appears to me. Like the Christopher Hitchens and William Lane Craig debate.
Actually from what I hear (not coming sure though) logos was one of the first words used for God. In other words, God is the logos that started the universe. Everyone seems to forget that sometimes religion and science can go hand in hand with each other.
Or its either the greatest story ever told OR its the truth. The beautiful thing is you get to decide. Just because someone is an intellectual doesn't make them right.
@@tabithawhitaker9273 take a serious look at history, and you'll see that no matter how "beautiful" the story told by religious representatives, the truth about any religious organisation is ugly. And part of it is how the faith is used to force people into set moulds, and to define a "us"+"them" dichotomy that not only tolerates, but actively promotes hate and discrimination.
@@agnesmetanomski6730 You are mistaken God for the problems of "man" and I completely identify with that. Listen its up to you to decide but you don't get to decide for others. In my opinion God is alive and well but you obviously feel differently. Its up to you! And because its popular or trendy to hate God i expect nothing less. ✌❤🙏
@@tabithawhitaker9273 Oh,, I have no problem letting others decide whether they want to believe in some God or not. But by your own words, ie. a person does not get to decide for others what they believe in, children should not have ANY contact with any form of religion until they're 18 and can decide for themselves. And the ones usually trying to shove their opinions down the throat of others are not the ones who do not adhere to any faith, but rather the ones that do.
Richard Dawkins is the person who coined the term "meme" to describe concepts that reproduce by transmission from one mind to another. The concept of faith is one which is pathogenic but successfully reproduces despite the harm it causes to its host organism.
I totally agree with this man faith without evidence is blind faith and there is no such thing and if you do have blind faith then you are deluding yourself and those who follow you or living in a delusion State
The wrong thing you said was the word blind faith…blind faith is simply faith. Having faith is already being blind. Having faith is a delusion that was forcefully demanded and inspired by our ancient leaders in order to gain influence and power over its populations.
@@deidara_8598 Indeed, watch the part where Dawkins explains how a closed mind cannot be rationalised with or course corrected. When people believe without doubt that God is with them they can commit evils without contrition.
Absolutely..I believe this thing he said when I was a teenager My father too he read bhagvaat geeta and so did I ...but we read it as book not something thing to follow and he said that science is the highest invention or brilliancy of human mind because it let's you argue, discuss , change and adapt.
I think we need to change the word “faith” into “source: trust me bro”. I think people will catch on sooner why faith isn’t such a noble thing after all. I’d rather not know an answer to a question than to not being able to question an answer.
@@Ana_crusis The way my church defines it is: "Trust that God is who He says He is, has done all that He's promised to do, and will do all that He's promised to do." My church vehemently argues against "blind faith", which is how the term faith is often used in typical speech. "My team is losing 50-0!" "Oh, just have faith!" This usage has grossly misinterpreted the meaning of it. The first definition I gave has two parts. 1) You must know who God says He is, and determine for yourself, given your life experiences, if God's character truly sounds accurate and real in the universe we live in. 2) You must know God's promises and determine if they have truly been upheld. For example, God promised Abraham to make him a father of all the nations, going so far as to say that his descendants would outnumber thr stars in the sky and the sand on the Earth. Look at today where we now have nearly 8 billion people alive, and that doesn't even include all the other people that have lived through history. If you know His character, and you find Him to be true to His promises, then you can have faith that He will do what He says He'll do. Like when a good, faithful friend says "I'll be there", you can count on them to show up. It's not a coin toss as to whether they will or not.
@@oddatsea9398 your church's definition is blind faith. What they are saying to you is believe in a god without any evidence of his existence. That is the only position that a religious person can have. none of you have any proof or have ever had any proof that there is a God at all. If you trust that there is a God on the basis of faith alone with no evidence which is your church's definition that is exactly the same as Dawkins definition and indeed of anybody's definition because it is the standard definition of religious faith. It's no good you going on at me or other people about what God Said and what he promised to us and what Abraham is going to do because all of those things and your belief in them come after the fact that you have blind faith in god's existence. You have absolutely no evidence whatsoever for any of the things that you believe. A person's belief that their football team may finally win is quite possibly based on far more evidence than you have for the existence of God. There may be all kinds of statistics and facts about the players and their stamina, style of playing etc etc which might lead a person to think that the team will eventually score more points.
@@Ana_crusis Except, no, it's literally not blind faith. Here's the checklist detailed in case you missed it. 1) Read about His promises 2) Determine if those promises have been fulfilled, based off of your own life experiences. 3) Read about His character and actions 4) Determine if those characteristics and actions are evident in your life experiences. Even science follows a similar ruleset. 1) Hypothesize 2) Test and determine if results accurately reflect what was expected. Who drops a ball and expects it to go up? No one, because based on previous life experiences, we expect a dropped ball to fall down. I can logically prove God exists with a thought experiment. If I were a drawing in a flipbook, how would my 3D version interact with my universe (the flipbook)? Then I extrapolate that up so my 2D version becomes 3D and my 3D version becomes 4D. From this thought experiment, the fundamental, inmutable characteristics of God can be described. He would be omnipresent since He can span the entirety of the "flipbook". He would be omnipotent since He would essentially be the artist, able to draw and conjure up anything at His will. He would be omniscient since He would know the entire story of the flipbook from front the back since He drew it. He would be eternal since He exists out of our dimension of time. As stated previously, He knows the front and the back of the flipbook, the Creation and the Extinction of that universe. It'd be foolish from the artist's perspective for the drawing to deny the artist's existence. The artist created it, yet has no way of directly interjecting expect to add himself to the flipbook, like what God did when He took on flesh in the form of Jesus Christ. Other than a direct interjection like that, which still did not convince many of the people of his day, the artist would only be able to act, and from those actions, we can determine the artist's character. If the artist smites all blonde people, then we can determine the artist loathes blondes.
@@oddatsea9398 I don't need to read it you are kidding yourself . Your faith is entirely a matter of belief without evidence. And no science does not proceed in the same way at all it's actually becoming rather tiresome hearing you God botherer types constantly say this. The only reason you have some checklist that you think makes any sense at all is because you have blind faith that there is a God that the checklist applies to you have no evidence to think that, you just have faith that he exists.
Based on the comments here, very few of you are capable of processing basic logic and have just completely proven Dawkins point by twisting it to fit you're own particular narratives. SMH How many comments here do not even fit with what he actually said. 😒
Exactly. Throughout history religion (especially Christianity) has been about blind faith. They only focused on what the Bible said and completely forgot about what Jesus said.
The issue with Richard Dawkins' statement about faith as belief without evidence is that it presents a simplistic and incomplete understanding of the concept of faith and how it operates within religious traditions. Here are some specific points of critique: 1. Mischaracterization of faith: Dawkins defines faith solely as belief without evidence, implying that religious individuals and communities base their beliefs on blind acceptance or ignorance. However, this overlooks the nuanced and multifaceted nature of faith, which can involve a range of factors including personal experiences, philosophical reasoning, historical evidence, and the interpretation of sacred texts. Faith is not solely about disregarding evidence but can involve a broader spectrum of intellectual and experiential considerations. 2. Ignoring different forms of evidence: Dawkins' statement implies that faith exists in opposition to evidence and rational argumentation. However, religious individuals often interpret their religious experiences, philosophical reasoning, and community traditions as forms of evidence supporting their beliefs. While this may not align with empirical or scientific evidence, it does not mean that religious believers are devoid of all evidential considerations in forming their faith. 3. Disregard for philosophical and theological debates: Dawkins' statement dismisses the rich history of philosophical and theological engagement that has shaped religious traditions. Many religious believers have engaged in extensive debates and intellectual discourse to examine and defend their beliefs. Faith, in this context, is not an abandonment of reason but an active participation in ongoing discussions and interpretations within religious communities. 4. Oversimplification of religious discourse: Dawkins suggests that belief without evidence shuts down the possibility of argumentation and critical engagement. However, religious individuals and scholars engage in rigorous debates, apologetics, and theological discussions that involve reasoning, interpretation, and reflection. Dismissing faith as inherently non-argumentative overlooks the diversity of perspectives and the rich intellectual tradition within religious communities. 5. Neglecting personal and subjective aspects of faith: Faith is often a deeply personal and subjective experience for individuals, and it goes beyond purely intellectual reasoning. It can encompass emotional, existential, and transcendent dimensions that may not be fully captured by an evidence-based approach. Dawkins' focus on empirical evidence fails to account for the deeply personal and transformative nature of religious faith for many individuals. In summary, Dawkins' characterization of faith as belief without evidence oversimplifies the concept and fails to acknowledge the range of intellectual, experiential, and philosophical considerations that can inform religious belief. It overlooks the diversity of religious perspectives and disregards the personal, subjective, and philosophical aspects of faith that play a significant role in the lives of religious individuals and communities.
Dawkins left open the discussion concerning the nature of the "evidence" needed to support a theistic claim, dawkins is no philosopher, he attributes the words evil and good outside of their ontological sphere and there's no way an atheist can have a basic anchorage for morality, let alone a practical procedure in which we can prove the existence or non-existence of a supernatural being
Morality is most likely a mix of genetics and learned behavior with or without an explicit believe in gods. Morality is a form of sophisticated altruism, and altruism has evolved many many times in the animal kingdom. The world in which you live, where morality must come from religion, exists only between your ears.
@@09patrick22barnes95 primal consciousness is exhaustive of reality, not right or wrong, we could have solved excessive population rates if your version of impulse based morality was highly applied, we can just go back to my comment and see that i was only discussing the simple fact an atheist cannot objectively judge a moral value in hindsight, your definition of "genetics and learned behavior" morality is truely beneath my notice as it has no bases and no intrinsic purpose for all that matters, let me ask you a question you will most likely give the worst take on -what was the driving force (conceptual or impirical) that shaped human behavior and morality into the thing it is now? In other words why is it good to punish jack when he steals from john?
There is no way theists can anchor morality in God in any coherent or compelling way. Least of your problems on that front is that you can't actually demonstrate your god exits.
@@CyeOutsideri feel sorry that you got the two concepts of legitimacy and anchorage mixed up in your head, simply put, metaphysical truths are different to conceptual truths, conceptual truths are the product of talking several distinct elements into a unified whole, a metaphysical truth stands on it's own autonomously, so for you to suggest that the inability to demonstrate God (which is not true btw) can affect the sense of moral anchorage towards deity is plain pathetic
I wouldn’t say that faith is inherently evil, but I would say that it has a greater potential and proclivity for evil than any other type of thinking, because it can easily convince you for whatever reason that others deserve to die or be treated inhumanely. The worst is when you believe that someone speaks for your deity, and thus you take their word as absolute, and they can make you commit evil acts because nothing else matters in the face of your faith.
Sheep are in the many, if you would follow religion then you're already going against your God by using internet, technology and medicine. Please stop using these if you're religious and follow your faith for healing and not the devil.
@@hatoftricks7132 I don't what religion are you talking about, but I am confident its not mine. All the current science you are currently studying were invented by my religion follower in their golden age. Lol, even the numbers you are currently writing 1234567890 were invented by a Muslim Scientiest. Its okay to be ignorant, but its a huge mistake for an ignorant person to think he is all knowing :)
Yes, most people know religion is bollox. So many unfortunate people surrounded by nonsense and see no way out of it, especially when getting out of it is dangerous for your well-being. Religion poisons everything.
dont blame religion, its just human is the most wicked and devilish creature, we can use anything as a reason and tool of destruction, then act innocent and blame other
@@ryanobrien2383 yes. Teaching morality, social responsibility, self-sufficiency, tolerance, love, and faith in a loving Creator definitely makes humans worse.
@@poposheesho Yet those same values were absolutely useless in preventing the religious people from doing bad things, and I don't want to hear a platitude how they weren't the true christians.
@@thejarjosh Well unlike religion, science has to use more of a leap to figure out what kinds of people it should hate, where as religion has its own law which demands that if someone breaks it, that's who I should hate.
The thing is that even Hasan (the religious debator) even quoted Joseph Joubert in his book *win every argument* : “It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it.” So in someways he definitely agrees with dawkin here on principle, the degree is determined how staunch he is in adhering to his own faith.
@@WHATSUP7049 Is that a serious question? Literally 90% of religious people online shove their religion down people’s throats. In some countries you’re killed if you disagree with their norm.
@@yami_leke the only reason I warn people about hell is because I don’t want them to go there. Imagine you saw someone about to be run over by an 18 wheeler wouldn’t you do everything in your power to get them to move ? This is free country everybody has the right to speak their mind and everybody has the right not to listen…so there is no way anybody can shove there religion down anybody’s throat
A tool for doctrine? Most people don’t get their doctrine from their faith. They get their faith from their doctrine; which, contrary to Richard Dawkins’ assertions, requires evidence.
You either take faith in a religious figure or take faith in a scientist. Either way, you are putting your trust in someone or something you don't fully understand.
@@ptvm Exactly my point, both religion and science contain books which a person reads, yet can't verify for themselves, so faith is required in both. One can only use their logic and reasoning to determine which is the truth.
@@amounwadjaai Science doesn't provide proofs, it only gives evidence which a person can decide the truthfulness for themselves using logic: www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2017/12/14/theres-no-such-thing-as-proof-in-the-scientific-world-theres-only-evidence/amp/
And beyond your lack of understanding of science, even using your logic it is still flawed. You can become a scientist. You can't become a religious figure.
I believe one of the greatest forms of evil is ignorance and I think this is a form of that . I don't think it's people of faiths intent to implement evil but I think evil is an inevitable outcome of a perceived lack of necessity to understand or tolerate difference.
I agree. There's something about the lack of awareness, for example about God's word, that ould be filled with intrusive thoughts. With that said, I think true faith takes no effort. The evidence he's looking for is for example free will and the individual's sovereignty.
Without transcedant revelation that people are beholden to (with it a higher law), all sorts of evil takes place. If you think religion leads to evil, just wait until you see what non-religion leads to. Spoiler alert: we already know, because it's happened in the past. Millions upon millions of people die (and worse).
I'd only disagree with the 'It's private' part of the statement. Private faith? That's all you. Go for it. The problem is those who think their faith means other people have to behave a certain way. Not private.
Ignorance is a breeding ground for evil action but I don't think ignorance Itself is evil, I don't think religion should be banned I just think there should be better education in schools that makes kids open minded and respectful but also skeptical
No matter what is taught and believed, there will always be evil men doing evil things. But in order for good men to do evil things you need faith. This is a paraphrase of someone else's quote
Faith without (Dawinks approved) evidence. Evidence can literally be anything, the evidence that a person accepts as “acceptable” evidence is subjective. More Dawkins weasel words…
Mate scientific evidence isn't somthing that you "accept as true" it is true because of it's clear explainable and viewable existence. When you believe in somthing with it, all you are doing is taking a geuss at what could be *NOT AT WHAT IS* Do you understand now?
@@user-ze6yk4sd5g untrue on both accounts. “Scientific evidence” relies on man’s fallible senses. You can believe something that is objectively true, and it can actually be true. Just become something is described as “scientifically proven” means nothing.
Fools, if you buy this premise. We put faith in a hundred things every day without evidence, but these assumptions allow you to traverse your daily decision making and survive the world.
That's the thing - every day! We put faith in things that happen all the time, meaning it's very reasonable to believe they will continue to happen. Religions are not the same. They are founded on religious books which claim extraordinary events that allegedly happened once in the past and were written down. Are we supposed to believe those stories the same way we believe repetitive things of mundane life?
It's coupled with a lot more than that. It's also coupled with existential fear, stubborn ignorance and absolute loyalty. Believing something without or contrary to evidence takes extreme dedication and a good hiding place for your head
@@chadleach6009Reason is all good and all, until humans cherry pick and distort them to the point of deception. Reason is great, but we also need to uphold morals. Where does secularism base it's morals on?
One person who guided me to leave my faith is this prophet Richard Dawkins in 2008. I am an ex-Muslim and leaving Islam is the best decision I ever made.
But then, why does it matter if one chooses to believe in a religion, and lets say that, you are correct and we really do just die, and stay dead, then why would it matter what one believes, as long as your not hurting anyone, if we just end we just be dead, As you say we do?
Not all faiths. Only Abrahamic faiths based on blind beiief. Eastern faiths like Hinduism and Buddhism are based on self-exploration and discovery through meditation, and openly tell people "don't believe anything till you have experienced it yourself."
Fundly enough data shows that ppl with blind faith are way more happy than those without, is because they don’t have to question everything, only a brain drain that hasn’t changed a damn thing, in reality if it had changed things for the better then the earth wouldn’t be in the mess it’s in, wouldve remained pristine…the words becoming civilised all illusion … yet we all love Richard … a plus
What a baseless and utterly false opinion. People do things for all reasons. If one did not have religion to justify their evil then they’d find another justification. The problem isn’t religion. It’s people. Smh.
@@philscott3759 and? Your point is moronic because it still proves my point, PEOPLE are the problem. So blaming religion like Dawkins here is what’s called a CONFLATION. Lol SMFH 🤦♂️
The problem is people, but religion makes that problem worse. It clearly is the case that religious people routinely commit atrocities thinking they're doing gods work. One example is the Catholic Chuch banning condoms in the context of third world countries experiencing AIDS epidemics. How many have people died needless, cruel, painful deaths because of that preachment? That's a crime only religion could commit.
Richard Dawkin's worldview includes faith in: 1) Materialism - the view that the material is all that exisrs. (What evidence does he have for this proposition?) 2) Scientism - the view that truth can only be known if it's scientifically verified (what evidence does he have for this proposition?) 3) Moral Relativism - the view individual people or societies determine moral standards (what evidence does he have for this proposition?) 4) Atheism - the view that what is ultimate is impersonal (what evidence does he have for this proposition?) 5) Uniformitarianism - the view that the laws of physics were the same in the distant past as they are now (what evidence does he have for this proposition?) Etc, etc... I could list many more. In my experience, no one has more BLIND faith than atheists do. They just don't realize it because they conflate their unjustified beliefs with facts / reality itself all the time.
The devil is an admirable figure he is like prometheus who was cursed for rebelling against the tyrannical god zeus who like yahweh was a rapist and murderer
Brainwashing. Religious people can’t quite grasp the fact that they’ve been brainwashed. Religious people are the perfect example of how brainwashing works. Brainwashing is not just about tricking the mind its about making you desire to believe what you’ve been taught is correct no matter what, no matter what logic says, no matter what the truth is, they’ve branded it under the disguise of having faith. Religions are proven to be ancient brainwashing tools used by past leaders to provide them influence and power over its population. “If you don’t do this in a certain way you will go to hell”, “If you don’t this do this in a certain way it’s a sin and god will find you punishment”. “If you do this in a certain way god will reward you”, “If you do this in a certain way god will save you”. its an almost perfect scheme. Today humans still create this brainwashing techniques but we don’t call it religion any longer and we don’t based it upon the fictional and the spiritual any longer. I know what you religion folks are thinking right now god will send people in your life to test your faith and you shall not cede to it you must keep believing, you must keep believing, you must keep believing always no matter what or god will find you punishment. Thats is one of the most impressive principles of brainwashing at its finest the people who created religion knew precisely what they were doing. Always prepare them for the inevitable confrontation with people who will speak truth to them that is one of the most important rules of brainwashing. It’s astonishing and terrifying at the same time. I know that the grand majority of religious people will chose to ignore and not take this statement to heart as it takes a ridiculous amount of mental strength, suffering and determination to undo brainwashing. Most individuals as an innate defense mechanism will never allow themselves to be subjugated to such process they will chose to ignore it like a kid would ignore a warning from their teacher. Because the truth of human kind is that as long as they feel happy and safe they will most of the time chose to ignore the truth. And thats why usually the ignorants are also the happiest but bottom line you are still living under a lie a safe delusion. But then you also understand why modern nations such as western countries, China, Russia and Japan and every country and society that doesn’t have its political and educational system attached to a fictional and old minded brainwashing scheme of centuries ago is so much more developed than countries whose education and politics is bound to religion such as most Muslim countries for example…Modern societies of today in the west, China, Russia, Japan and others of the sort its about innovation of ideas while others such as in the middle east it’s about preservation of ancient ideas. Muslim countries will always be far below the rest of the world in science, societal development and general quality of life as long as they don’t realize that religion was made to be appreciated and not followed blindly like a cult. You are only gonna push yourself down as long as you keep preserving ideas of centuries ago completely outdated for todays reality and needs. Innovation is the birth of new information and information is the source of power and there is barely to almost none of it in Muslim middle eastern countries pushed by their enforcement of religion in both politics and education.
@SilentNoise Dawkins said that if he is in a situation where he cant convince someone that this person is wrong because that person does not think the by Dawkins prefered way it means that person is evil. And the thing is that if anyone is only allowed to think in the parameters which you define, you are always right. In essence Dawkins said: The way i see the world is the right way and everyone who disagrees is automaticly evil. Which is the essence of fashism.
I have a hard time seeing why people claim this guy was so incredibly intelligent, when to me his thought process is erratic and irrational. Logic is not the friend of atheism.
@SilentNoise I ready your verbose reply twice to try to understand your frame of reference. I conclude that you for some reason started from a place of confusion and you've simply moved deeper into a confused state. Number one WHO doesn't know Richard Dawkins, the most famous atheist in the world, barring every dictatorial/murderous communist leader. Number two, I know I come from a position of privilege as my parents raised me to know and love God. But to live In a world, surrounded by the evidence of the existence of God, including both undeniable natural and archaeological evidence and reject Him out of hand, is illogical. People choose within themselves to seek truth or arrogantly choose their "truth". Dawkins rejected God and you also are choosing currently to set Him aside despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I find it ludicrous that you take your time to lecture me on being rigid in my beliefs. You can't even see that you are foisting your ignorance on me. Keep in mind, the same fire that consumes poor Dick Dawkins, waits patiently for you. Might want to reconsider your dismissal of your Creator.
It has more evidence than any other scientific field, mountains of it. Where did you go to school....Mars? The Theory of Evolution is based on nothing BUT evidence. That's how Theories are born...evidence.
He doesn’t think you’re evil. Just that faith is evil. Faith is a terrible pathway to truth. A Christian’s faith is indistinguishable from the faith of a Muslim. If you care what is actually true, you wouldn’t use faith.
@@Ryan-nt9ib You’re way off on this one. Besides, atheism involves faith too. Don’t you have faith that the chair you sit on won’t break or turn into a plant or fly away? Science requires faith. The scientific method even requires faith. Atheism is dying, my guy.
@@DeAngelo77 In a strong field in this video’s comment section, you might have just uttered the dumbest comment. Atheism requires no faith. Do you need faith to not believe in Bigfoot? Do you need faith to not accept the religious claims of other religions you don’t believe in? I have trust my chair will hold. That’s not faith. There’s an actual difference between the colloquial use of faith and religious faith. Don’t combined the two out of convenience. Anyone who says “science requires faith” or the “scientific method requires faith” is an ignoramus to the highest degree. Btw statistically, atheism is growing. I know you’re grasping to have some semblance of an argument, but no need to lie.
@@karlmason6145 how are you to claim something is evil without the existence of God don’t you need both to explain each concept. I mean if he’s saying you can get evil things from the miss use of religion yah I would agree with that but I think that validates a god if people can exploit it.
@@ThePaintedHope how is that it seems like you wouldn’t bring good or evil up at all if you don’t believe in God if your an atheist shouldn’t you think it doesn’t matter either way. I mean if you don’t believe in anything what’s the point of argument anyway
@@bottomline7923 yes I do believe it takes more faith to believe in evolution go ahead mock me laugh at me I get it to believe that something came from nothing betta fish crawled out of the sea along with another fish turned into a giraffe turned into a monkey evolved into a man without proof which I know you don't believe and here you are today takes faith and you have been lied to and deceived about this whole topic it's time to open your eyes and seek the truth you'll be amazed at what you find I wish you the best and save your snide remarks I've heard them all
@@bobbycarlucci6158 I wasn't mocking you and I don't think my remark was snide. Mocking and snide are things seem to be your court. I was politely suggesting something instead of saying flat out that your remark was.... well, it was many things but smart. The fact is, there is ample evidence to support evolution, zero to support the notion of an all seeing, all knowing creator. Faith is about belief, science is about evidence and facts. Sadly, too many Christians want to make faith about proof because science and morals have brought some of the most standard teachings under question. Slavery, flat earth and the age of the earth are just a few.. I'd suggest that you are likely easily offended because truth sings in your heart..
“Science investigates, religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge which is power, religion gives man wisdom which is control. Science deals mainly with facts, religion deals mainly with values. The two are not rivals” -Christian Minister Dr Martin Luther King Jr
You don't have to accept my personal faith, but I also don't have to accept your denial of my personal faith. It is why these conversations really need never happen in the first place. What I do in private with my faith is my own biz and what you do in private with your atheism is yours.
2. Universe: The Big Bang Theory In Surah Al-Anbya, Allah (SWT) also states: “Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them” (Quran, 21:30
Again, in Surah Al-Anbya, Allah (SWT) says: “The Day when We will fold the heaven like the folding of a [written] sheet for the records. As We began the first creation, We will repeat it. [That is] a promise binding upon Us. Indeed, We will do it” (Quran, 21:104). This fits in with the theory of Big Crunch which talks about how the universe will be pulled back into the black holes and again form a tiny mass [4].
In Surah Al-Anbya, it states “And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all [heavenly bodies] in an orbit are swimming” (Quran, 21:33). Although it was only a widespread belief in the 20th century amongst the astronomers, today it is a well-established fact that the Sun, the Moon, and all the other bodies in the Universe are moving in an orbit and constantly moving, not stationary [9] as commonly thought before.
In Surah Adh-Dhariyat, Allah (SWT) says “And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander” (Quran, 51:47). According to the prominent physicist Stephen Hawking in his book ‘A Brief History of Time’, “The discovery that the universe is expanding was one of the great intellectual revolutions of the 20th century” [11],
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
He never said religion, he said “belief without evidence.” Meaning Ignorance.
I believe Socrates is quoted to say ignorance is the only evil.
He believes God doesn't exist even though it's not possible to prove that God doesn't exist & never will be. Therefore, it's an unscientific, faith based belief, but he'll mock those who take the opposite position. There's a better chance of finding evidence of existence of God than there ever will be of finding evidence of absence. Dawkins is in a belief/faith based state of mind too , he just doesn't refer to it as a religion. I think the only approach thats in line with scientific inquiry & the spirit of science would be to be agnostic, otherwise its belief & faith regardless of what side you fall on.
@@EastwoodFPS I agree. I have personal evidence of gods existence. Therefore I believe. One thing is certain aiming my thoughts and actions towards the principals of the Bible have improved my life in many ways.
@@coachcoty6806 what is you personal evidence ?
@@bahaahussein6450 I guess we'll never know.
@@bahaahussein6450 What is Islam's evidence that Allah exists?
There is no evidence only stories.
Same in the Bible.
You get the point
Believing in something without evidence is called "Ignorance". Plain and simple
What caused the universe? And was the cause an uncaused cause?
If you were to give that a name, what would you call it? *Something that caused intelligible life*
Ill let you come to your own conclusion
@@joe5959??? you are ignorant. There is something called science and the scientific process. That uses rational and then experiment the validity of the hypothesis.
Religions are nothing more than a very poorly thought hypothesis that you were indoctrinated to believe in since you were a child. If you were born in a different family with a different religion, you would believe in that religion instead, but guess what, reality does not care in what culture you were raised.
Your comment shows and proves how mentally lazy you really are.
@@joe5959You people always say such stupid shit instead of actually engaging with what was said. You're ignorant, and instead of denying that you started asking fucking moronic questions. The universe may be eternal, or may have come about from some natural cause, or sure it may have even been created, but of those options only the natural answer has evidence to support it. You used the word "cause" because you think it makes your god claim stronger, but it doesn't. If I drown in a lake, the cause of my death was water entering my lungs and making it impossible for me to breathe, and yet the water isn't intelligent, now is it? Your argument was pathetic, no one would come to the conclusion that a god exists just by reading your argument, and the best part is that even if you people could prove an intelligent mind created the universe, you'd be one tiny little fraction of a step closer to proving it was a god, or your specific god, or universe hopping pixies. Your argument wouldn't even prove the conclusion you're drawing.
I have no idea what caused the universe, just like all the other people in the world. So giving it names would be foolish.@@joe5959
Good thing that’s not how the Christian faith works
Exactly, this reminds me of what Voltaire reportedly once said, "Those who can convince you with absurdities, can convince you to commit atrocities." This applies to faith perfectly.
Total non sequitur. Totally incoherent. Much like Dick Dawkins.
@@nomadforchrist4337 You know, it might do you good to approach such difficult matters excluding contempt and prejudice.
@@nomadforchrist4337 sounds a lot like ‚I don’t believe in logic so I’m just gonna deny it‘ 😂
@@IrakleiosTheGreat that's neither contempt not prejudice. Simply truth. That was easy.
@@nomadforchrist4337 So name-calling and tantrums are part of the truth now? Fascinating!
This is why we must keep religion out of government and public schools.
we should also keep you out of public schools too nonsayyyyy
Ya replace it with LGBTQ right fuck up our kids minds allow abortions also I say you would agree
There is the morality without god if you can't admit that then your
The fool without knowledge
Fools take no pleasure in learning or understanding
Just there emotions views
Proverbs 18:2
I could not agree more! Religion has no place in government institutions, especially our schools, poisoning the minds of the upcoming generations with nonesense
Start with secular humanism.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
-Voltaire
The majority of atrocities are committed by atheist totalitarians.
@@Logiconfire??? the crusades, hitler was a devoted christian, israel and hamas, all the terrorists attacks. what nonsense are you talking about? I guess that is your belief.
@janparchanski9242No one cares. Voltaire is constantly quoted by atheists. What's pathetic is that you think anyone gives a shit what you think.
@@ngpb17hitler was absolutely not a devoted christian
@@lb7625He was. Is just that christians distanced themselves because of the backlash, and are trying to change history. But he was christian, oh well as christian as any politician can be 😂.
The problem with Mr. Dawkins is that he does not realize most people are not nearly as smart as he is
There no evidence to back up most of his claims
Exactly he is very smart.
@@jjjjj2220 Name one
@@brandonn6099
That something is "evil".
@@abhmd4481 Elaborate
I'm surprised Dawkins stayed for the interview despite the host claiming that muhammed split the moon into two
Why would he leave instead of arguing such a stupid claim?
Its not like it'll ever be followed by, "And let's go investigate it to show it's factually accurate information"..😅
Not to any degree ever.
@@ivanvincent7534
There's no such thing as an Atheistic belief, as Atheism stems from disbelief and skepticism more often than whatever else motivated the individual personally.
And excuses wouldn't be needed if these religious texts didn't get so much wrong consistently. Even if believers were to all follow one religion, it still wouldn't work to show how that one is the truth as supported by verified credible good evidence.
So, what is spirituality?
On the surface, if there's any depth atall, it's a blanket term that covers over the unknown with a concept that's equally invalid.
No different than a person who seen a UFO claims it was aliens from someplace else.
The U in UFO means unidentified, as it isn't known and therefore cannot lead to, it's aliens as the first or best explanation for the sightings. As that would mean it's actually identified and confirmed as alien which has not been the case. 🤷🏼
How can you be so confident and comfortable being so wrong?
Hezoyam@ when you are just hater you open your mouth like that who said and believe Mohamed did that what liare u r😂😂😂😂
@@ivanvincent7534loser ahh comment
Organized religion is for people who, unlike mister Dawkins can't think for themselves.
So true.
Is actually the opposite. Religion creates culture. And culture creates the environment that makes organised thought possible. Every city in the beginning was built around a church or holy place. University in Europe has its beginnings in monks. Those monks are the reason why we even have aristoteles. Because they transcriped his teachings in tomes. And he is the father of logic and systematic scientific thought in the west. Sorry but a dismissive white and black thinking is just the opposite of critical thinking. It's hypocritical.
@@simbabwe2907 Religion does not create culture, people create culture. Religion is a component of culture, but it is still human created.
It’s the easy way out. No work, no thought, just a happy warm cloak of delusion.
@@biekgiek religion is a human universal that binds people together. It creates narrative structure which binds community's and create value structures. So yes it creates culture. One component of religion is the create of rituals. Rituals are habits of community that establish order in the community. By being believed to reflect a pattern that is outside of the community and reflect the very way reality is structured. Even in your worldview not people as such create religion. But is something that emerges in community through distrubuted cognition.
How Medhi Hasan has had a career post this is stunning.
It's because you only saw one side, not the whole interview.
@@IbadassI I didnt? Thank you for incorrectly assuming. Lets, for arguments sake, say I havent though. Please furnish some context that would make this IN ANY WAY ACCEPTABLE to a modern educated man? You have the floor...
@@jknowstheway1462 Wait until you realise there can be only one ultimate uncreated cause, otherwise nothing would have ever happened.
@@IbadassI Who created God?
And if your answer is God is eternal, youre just inserting a middle man. If God can be eternal, why cant the conditions which created the universe be?
Oh, who created those conditions? Well who created god? Oh God is eternal? Well the conditions which created the universe are eternal.
Your argument is easily falsifiable.
@@jknowstheway1462 My, my, what a wonderful conundrum it seems you have woven. Unfortunately any other condition/particle/thing, if it can be defined, means it has limits.
Limited "things" cannot be around forever in the past if we exist. Because infinitely regressing backwards would mean nothing now would happen, like you discussing this thread for example, because the primordial past would be infinitely long. Therefore there has to be an undefinable "something" that has no limits would be a necessary being.
Well said. Basically faith becomes anti criticism. Without criticism there can be no way to improve.
I am a staunch Christian and I agree with him. Blind, unexamined faith can lead to terribly destructive things. If you have no reason to believe something yet do, you are going to be much more likely to lash out at the challenge instead of think through it logically. This can be seen whenever you try to argue with a dumb person.
Same here devout Catholic and I absolutely agree with this statement. My only problem with Dawkins here is that he wrongly defines faith as believing in something without evidence. That is not at all the definition of faith especially in the Christian sense. Faith came from the Greek word pistus which meant trust. Believing in something with good reason.
@@petermuneme25 Yep, agreed. Many atheists seem to wrongly define faith.
Let me put this straight. Do you believe a human can be born without sperm being involved? If the answer is yes, it's called faith, and it is ignorance.
@@samuelblack4792 There is only good reason to have faith if you wrongly define reasoning though. Reason requires logic, and logic requires evidence. If you don't want to use proper logic and reason, that's okay, but don't claim reason or logic
The faulty logic path for faith based thinking is circular.
God is real therefore x reason for belief is true.
Then x reason for belief is true therefore it proves God is real.
The fault lies in using an illogical poorly reasoned conclusion of "God is real = true" with no evidence/premises and using that to fill out the rest of the logical premises and conclusions truth values of your faith without ever proving it is true, then using those truth values as the premises for the argument "God is real is true" when the only reason the premises can be true is if you already determined God is real
If you really think you have good reason to believe in a God you are showing an incredible lack of logic and reasoning skills. NO IDEA can be sacred if you are using reason. This means that if you cannot back up your idea with any valid evidence, it should be discarded as not supported. And affirmative claims bear the burden of proof
@@dxfifa Leftists and socialists operate without reason or logic to support their desired policies all the time.
Religion is the worst thing to happen to humanity
Humanity is the worst thing to happen to humanity.
Ik this was a year ago but I agree it causes useless and meaningless conflicts division and hate
Agreed.The blind evil perpetrated in the name of Islam has been a curse on the world. How many innocent people have been lost in the last 30 years alone?
Not to mention the evils perpetrated in the name of christianity, judaism, facism, socialism, social progressivism etc.
@@joealyjim3029 as well as in the name of "Patria". M. Dawkins is the first I've heard mentioning patriotism together with religious faith. About time someone did.
Love how you select Islam but dont mentioned the hundred of millions colonised and murdered by European Christendom from Europe to Africa to the America’s.
Millions upon millions
Murdered and robbed but let me guess your historical knowledge goes as far back as 9:11
Muppet
@@agnesmetanomski6730 You haven't studied much, have you?
@@lealvazquezosvaldo8431 Oh? How do you come to this conclusion?
Extremely well put and So True Richard Dawkins..!
Every Middle Eastern should watch this interview. Respect to Richard from Persia/Iran.
Great thinker and he's absolutely right.
He just described any given cult of political personality.
Especially when religious 'faith' fuels it.
The mix is toxic beyond belief
Nothing is more toxic than New Atheism.
@@Programm4r Toxic to the nonsense of religious dogma? Absolutely correct.
@@outermarker5801 religious atheist toxic to those of other religions. Ironic.
@@Programm4r Calling atheists 'religious' is a trite argument. Right up there with telling ex christian atheists they were 'never really saved'.
Whatever
@@Programm4r Dunce.
The interviewer thinks a man on a winged horse rose to heaven! Don't waste time with idiots, they may pull you down.
Exactly
I bet you believe the earth is a spinning ball !!
@@kamjoe380ah a Flat Earther... are you a Creationist as well?
@@kamjoe380it is
Exactly, fuck ‘em.
He's speaking facts, the generations ahead shall wonder how religion was ever a thing.
I'm glad Dawkins always gets them.
every generation has predicted this from the beginning of recorded history. ironically, there is no evidence that this can or would happen.
Yeah, but remember what John Lenox said.
Dawkin 💪 love from India 🇮🇳 💝 . Keep going uncle you changing many people
Only the no brainers
@@thewellwishers1266 Theists are No-Brainers
@@thewellwishers1266your statement quite funny
@@thewellwishers1266 You mean the religious? Why, yes!
Dawkins is not changing anybody. It’s just a debate. Somebody who truly believes in their faith will not be moved by the musings of a mortal who believes he’s qualified to talk about a matter he has no real understanding of.
The sad thing I see on this debate is that a even a great thinker and scholar as Mehdi Hasan can fall prey to early indoctrination
That's why it must be forbidden to teach religion to little kids at school. They'll believe whatever comes out of the mouth of an adult they respect. And most of them will still believe it as adults
@@orlandocarrillo7132
Quite the opposite; all religions should be taught, without preference or favor. The trick isn’t to tell young people what to think, or what not to think, but rather HOW to think. Teach young people how to exercise skepticism, how to critically discern truth from fiction, and then present them with ALL forms of religious material. Unreasonable beliefs will lose their hold.
quite the opposite, no religion should be taught. What could be taught is the history of religions and that is something different. There the kids will learn among other things how for example the catholic church was always a tool and worked together with the rulers as a mafia in a pursuit of power and money. They would learn why people in the former european colonies (south america, africa) believe in god. Mainly because their ancestors were threatened to death if they didn't convert. That's different than teaching religion.
@@orlandocarrillo7132 they shouldn’t teach evolution theory either because it’s based off speculation and can never be proven however they teach it like it’s a fact and also with out religion u don’t have objective morality. Atheistic beliefs will lead to more crimes because there is nothing wrong with murder rape and other things religion has said and tought objectively as evil
@@briley2177 by doing that you'll prep them readily to embrace Islam. ;) you do not want to teach your kids how to think, and how to discern truth from fiction, this is a recipe for them embracing Islam.
I like this man more and more every time I see a video of him
Mahdi is brilliant right?
Ikr, Dawkins isn’t great for no reason.
people actually get triggered by dawkins
People get triggered when they call out that the "belief" that something can come from nothing. 🤷🏾♂️
@@ghulamsarwar687 exactly, the interviewer got caught red handed lol.
I don't think the concept of faith itself is bad. Atleast having faith on something like for example having faith in believing that someone will do the right or moral thing or hoping that your favourite sports team wins. Though what I'm thinking off could be classified more as hope than faith.
It would not be evil if they keep it to themselves. The evil comes from using your faith to justify violent acts against others.
People are free to wallow in their ignorance as long as they stay in their own sty.
Many years ago, a pastor tried to convert me and said have faith. I told him to sell his house and bet it on a horse. He said that he doesn't know anything about the horse and then I smiled.
That’s brilliant
r/ThatHappened
Proud of yourself?
Nice hehe
Oh but shouldn’t we instinctively trust religious people even though they have all sinned and been forgiven? Evil.
Richard Dawkins is the man of rationale. We need more of him and more like him in our world.
I mean, except that his statement that belief without evidence is evil is itself a belief without evidence.
Yeah but that doesn't rule out the possibility of a creator. I think John Lenex said something about God acting as a sort of "logos" that set the universe in motion.
@@Deadite_Scholar I totally agree with Richard Dawkins. Belief without proof is evil.
Professor Dr. Dawkins is fully true
professor Dawkins is brilliant and hopefully he will help eradicate us of superstitious nonsense!
Like apes turning into men. What a load lol.
You’ll be saying that when hell😅
Evidence isn't just evident in the physical or 3d realm, evidence can be logic, evidence can be energy towards something
Why is it.... that whenever I watch videos discussing or debating about religion, the non-believer is always the sincere and genuine one while the believer seems not. Could just be a coincidence but... That's how it appears to me. Like the Christopher Hitchens and William Lane Craig debate.
The delusion shows in the face of rationality
RELIGION & POLITICS are the 2 main items dividing the humans
It's a complicated world and people want simple answers.
No, people want ultimate answers.
@@nathanrobbins7668 If an "ultimate" answer was very complicated they would reject it for a simple answer.
Actually from what I hear (not coming sure though) logos was one of the first words used for God. In other words, God is the logos that started the universe. Everyone seems to forget that sometimes religion and science can go hand in hand with each other.
ignorance is bad but the true evil on earth are the ones running the show! and they are not ignorant.
EXACTLY!!
"Faith is comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate" 💚I have to steal that one!
Or its either the greatest story ever told OR its the truth. The beautiful thing is you get to decide. Just because someone is an intellectual doesn't make them right.
@@tabithawhitaker9273 take a serious look at history, and you'll see that no matter how "beautiful" the story told by religious representatives, the truth about any religious organisation is ugly. And part of it is how the faith is used to force people into set moulds, and to define a "us"+"them" dichotomy that not only tolerates, but actively promotes hate and discrimination.
@@agnesmetanomski6730 You are mistaken God for the problems of "man" and I completely identify with that. Listen its up to you to decide but you don't get to decide for others. In my opinion God is alive and well but you obviously feel differently. Its up to you! And because its popular or trendy to hate God i expect nothing less. ✌❤🙏
@@tabithawhitaker9273 Oh,, I have no problem letting others decide whether they want to believe in some God or not. But by your own words, ie. a person does not get to decide for others what they believe in, children should not have ANY contact with any form of religion until they're 18 and can decide for themselves.
And the ones usually trying to shove their opinions down the throat of others are not the ones who do not adhere to any faith, but rather the ones that do.
Richard Dawkins is the person who coined the term "meme" to describe concepts that reproduce by transmission from one mind to another. The concept of faith is one which is pathogenic but successfully reproduces despite the harm it causes to its host organism.
this is why people of religion get mad at modern day things because they feel they are being forced lol but they do it to others just the same.
I totally agree with this man faith without evidence is blind faith and there is no such thing and if you do have blind faith then you are deluding yourself and those who follow you or living in a delusion State
🎯
Come back to islam
@Fides Non Sequitur faith, without purpose, and truth, is nothing anyone could have faith in anything, does not make it true so come back to islam
The wrong thing you said was the word blind faith…blind faith is simply faith. Having faith is already being blind. Having faith is a delusion that was forcefully demanded and inspired by our ancient leaders in order to gain influence and power over its populations.
I agree with Richard Dawson a 100%
Who’s that?
Faith is not belief without evidence - that's superstition. Faith is trusting in what you have found reasonable to believe in.
It's _evil_ to believe something without evidence? That's absurd.
I believe my god has tasked me to eradicate you.
Did you watch the video?
@@TurinTuramber Yes, and that's exactly what he says in the video
@@deidara_8598 Indeed, watch the part where Dawkins explains how a closed mind cannot be rationalised with or course corrected. When people believe without doubt that God is with them they can commit evils without contrition.
What he explains is that faith itself leads to evil. It doesn't mean people who have faith are evil. As Christians say, hate the sin, love the sinner.
Absolutely..I believe this thing he said when I was a teenager
My father too he read bhagvaat geeta and so did I ...but we read it as book not something thing to follow and he said that science is the highest invention or brilliancy of human mind because it let's you argue, discuss , change and adapt.
This man has successfully escaped the major matrix of humanity
AGREED!!!
Yeah but what if the matrix is our home ?
Except he hasn't.
@Awoken777If the matrix were a thing literally fucking everything is part of the matrix
...by joining an even bigger one?
I think we need to change the word “faith” into “source: trust me bro”.
I think people will catch on sooner why faith isn’t such a noble thing after all.
I’d rather not know an answer to a question than to not being able to question an answer.
BRAVO!!!
Well said
Well said
If people can not argue the truth, they will fight over it.
Religon is holding us back in the modern age
💯
A pretty interesting interpretation of the word "faith"
I would say that's a standard definition of faith. belief in something without evidence.
@@Ana_crusis The way my church defines it is:
"Trust that God is who He says He is, has done all that He's promised to do, and will do all that He's promised to do."
My church vehemently argues against "blind faith", which is how the term faith is often used in typical speech.
"My team is losing 50-0!" "Oh, just have faith!"
This usage has grossly misinterpreted the meaning of it. The first definition I gave has two parts.
1) You must know who God says He is, and determine for yourself, given your life experiences, if God's character truly sounds accurate and real in the universe we live in.
2) You must know God's promises and determine if they have truly been upheld. For example, God promised Abraham to make him a father of all the nations, going so far as to say that his descendants would outnumber thr stars in the sky and the sand on the Earth. Look at today where we now have nearly 8 billion people alive, and that doesn't even include all the other people that have lived through history.
If you know His character, and you find Him to be true to His promises, then you can have faith that He will do what He says He'll do. Like when a good, faithful friend says "I'll be there", you can count on them to show up. It's not a coin toss as to whether they will or not.
@@oddatsea9398 your church's definition is blind faith. What they are saying to you is believe in a god without any evidence of his existence. That is the only position that a religious person can have. none of you have any proof or have ever had any proof that there is a God at all. If you trust that there is a God on the basis of faith alone with no evidence which is your church's definition that is exactly the same as Dawkins definition and indeed of anybody's definition because it is the standard definition of religious faith. It's no good you going on at me or other people about what God Said and what he promised to us and what Abraham is going to do because all of those things and your belief in them come after the fact that you have blind faith in god's existence. You have absolutely no evidence whatsoever for any of the things that you believe.
A person's belief that their football team may finally win is quite possibly based on far more evidence than you have for the existence of God. There may be all kinds of statistics and facts about the players and their stamina, style of playing etc etc which might lead a person to think that the team will eventually score more points.
@@Ana_crusis Except, no, it's literally not blind faith. Here's the checklist detailed in case you missed it.
1) Read about His promises
2) Determine if those promises have been fulfilled, based off of your own life experiences.
3) Read about His character and actions
4) Determine if those characteristics and actions are evident in your life experiences.
Even science follows a similar ruleset.
1) Hypothesize
2) Test and determine if results accurately reflect what was expected.
Who drops a ball and expects it to go up? No one, because based on previous life experiences, we expect a dropped ball to fall down.
I can logically prove God exists with a thought experiment. If I were a drawing in a flipbook, how would my 3D version interact with my universe (the flipbook)? Then I extrapolate that up so my 2D version becomes 3D and my 3D version becomes 4D. From this thought experiment, the fundamental, inmutable characteristics of God can be described. He would be omnipresent since He can span the entirety of the "flipbook". He would be omnipotent since He would essentially be the artist, able to draw and conjure up anything at His will. He would be omniscient since He would know the entire story of the flipbook from front the back since He drew it. He would be eternal since He exists out of our dimension of time. As stated previously, He knows the front and the back of the flipbook, the Creation and the Extinction of that universe. It'd be foolish from the artist's perspective for the drawing to deny the artist's existence. The artist created it, yet has no way of directly interjecting expect to add himself to the flipbook, like what God did when He took on flesh in the form of Jesus Christ. Other than a direct interjection like that, which still did not convince many of the people of his day, the artist would only be able to act, and from those actions, we can determine the artist's character. If the artist smites all blonde people, then we can determine the artist loathes blondes.
@@oddatsea9398 I don't need to read it you are kidding yourself . Your faith is entirely a matter of belief without evidence.
And no science does not proceed in the same way at all it's actually becoming rather tiresome hearing you God botherer types constantly say this.
The only reason you have some checklist that you think makes any sense at all is because you have blind faith that there is a God that the checklist applies to you have no evidence to think that, you just have faith that he exists.
Based on the comments here, very few of you are capable of processing basic logic and have just completely proven Dawkins point by twisting it to fit you're own particular narratives. SMH How many comments here do not even fit with what he actually said. 😒
You should know by now that strawmanning is all they've got.
@@Tretas. lol. Ya I know. But I gotta keep trying! 😆😁 Throw enough, often enough.... maybe someday it'll set in. Cheers 🍻 I still miss Hitchens
@@Tretas. And the projecting!? Like half the time they're just explaining their own illogical views...
so true
@@krisjohansen9132 me too
He who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.
Exactly. Throughout history religion (especially Christianity) has been about blind faith. They only focused on what the Bible said and completely forgot about what Jesus said.
The issue with Richard Dawkins' statement about faith as belief without evidence is that it presents a simplistic and incomplete understanding of the concept of faith and how it operates within religious traditions. Here are some specific points of critique:
1. Mischaracterization of faith: Dawkins defines faith solely as belief without evidence, implying that religious individuals and communities base their beliefs on blind acceptance or ignorance. However, this overlooks the nuanced and multifaceted nature of faith, which can involve a range of factors including personal experiences, philosophical reasoning, historical evidence, and the interpretation of sacred texts. Faith is not solely about disregarding evidence but can involve a broader spectrum of intellectual and experiential considerations.
2. Ignoring different forms of evidence: Dawkins' statement implies that faith exists in opposition to evidence and rational argumentation. However, religious individuals often interpret their religious experiences, philosophical reasoning, and community traditions as forms of evidence supporting their beliefs. While this may not align with empirical or scientific evidence, it does not mean that religious believers are devoid of all evidential considerations in forming their faith.
3. Disregard for philosophical and theological debates: Dawkins' statement dismisses the rich history of philosophical and theological engagement that has shaped religious traditions. Many religious believers have engaged in extensive debates and intellectual discourse to examine and defend their beliefs. Faith, in this context, is not an abandonment of reason but an active participation in ongoing discussions and interpretations within religious communities.
4. Oversimplification of religious discourse: Dawkins suggests that belief without evidence shuts down the possibility of argumentation and critical engagement. However, religious individuals and scholars engage in rigorous debates, apologetics, and theological discussions that involve reasoning, interpretation, and reflection. Dismissing faith as inherently non-argumentative overlooks the diversity of perspectives and the rich intellectual tradition within religious communities.
5. Neglecting personal and subjective aspects of faith: Faith is often a deeply personal and subjective experience for individuals, and it goes beyond purely intellectual reasoning. It can encompass emotional, existential, and transcendent dimensions that may not be fully captured by an evidence-based approach. Dawkins' focus on empirical evidence fails to account for the deeply personal and transformative nature of religious faith for many individuals.
In summary, Dawkins' characterization of faith as belief without evidence oversimplifies the concept and fails to acknowledge the range of intellectual, experiential, and philosophical considerations that can inform religious belief. It overlooks the diversity of religious perspectives and disregards the personal, subjective, and philosophical aspects of faith that play a significant role in the lives of religious individuals and communities.
Beautifully put.
How can something as beautiful as Richard Dawkins have evolved naturally ?
Survival of the fittest
@@PhantomAyz he ai’t exactly fit.
@@theservantsresource3565 Well he is surviving
@@PhantomAyzlol good one
@@PhantomAyzthan explain how butterfly’s and dragon fly’s such delicate creature survived
Dawkins left open the discussion concerning the nature of the "evidence" needed to support a theistic claim, dawkins is no philosopher, he attributes the words evil and good outside of their ontological sphere and there's no way an atheist can have a basic anchorage for morality, let alone a practical procedure in which we can prove the existence or non-existence of a supernatural being
Morality is most likely a mix of genetics and learned behavior with or without an explicit believe in gods.
Morality is a form of sophisticated altruism, and altruism has evolved many many times in the animal kingdom.
The world in which you live, where morality must come from religion, exists only between your ears.
@@09patrick22barnes95 primal consciousness is exhaustive of reality, not right or wrong, we could have solved excessive population rates if your version of impulse based morality was highly applied, we can just go back to my comment and see that i was only discussing the simple fact an atheist cannot objectively judge a moral value in hindsight, your definition of "genetics and learned behavior" morality is truely beneath my notice as it has no bases and no intrinsic purpose for all that matters, let me ask you a question you will most likely give the worst take on
-what was the driving force (conceptual or impirical) that shaped human behavior and morality into the thing it is now? In other words why is it good to punish jack when he steals from john?
There is no way theists can anchor morality in God in any coherent or compelling way. Least of your problems on that front is that you can't actually demonstrate your god exits.
@@CyeOutsideri feel sorry that you got the two concepts of legitimacy and anchorage mixed up in your head, simply put, metaphysical truths are different to conceptual truths, conceptual truths are the product of talking several distinct elements into a unified whole, a metaphysical truth stands on it's own autonomously, so for you to suggest that the inability to demonstrate God (which is not true btw) can affect the sense of moral anchorage towards deity is plain pathetic
I wouldn’t say that faith is inherently evil, but I would say that it has a greater potential and proclivity for evil than any other type of thinking, because it can easily convince you for whatever reason that others deserve to die or be treated inhumanely.
The worst is when you believe that someone speaks for your deity, and thus you take their word as absolute, and they can make you commit evil acts because nothing else matters in the face of your faith.
Religion is the bane of civilization
Wow, I was going to make some argument. But after reading the comments, I found out I don't need to. People already have great awareness 👏
Sheep are in the many, if you would follow religion then you're already going against your God by using internet, technology and medicine. Please stop using these if you're religious and follow your faith for healing and not the devil.
@@hatoftricks7132 I don't what religion are you talking about, but I am confident its not mine. All the current science you are currently studying were invented by my religion follower in their golden age. Lol, even the numbers you are currently writing 1234567890 were invented by a Muslim Scientiest.
Its okay to be ignorant, but its a huge mistake for an ignorant person to think he is all knowing :)
Here is a tiny food of thoughts and a simple search in youtube would have saved both of us a lot of hustle
ruclips.net/video/JZDe9DCx7Wk/видео.html
Only some people.
Yes, most people know religion is bollox. So many unfortunate people surrounded by nonsense and see no way out of it, especially when getting out of it is dangerous for your well-being. Religion poisons everything.
Idk, I don’t think this line of thinking is as smart as I used to think it was.
You think its point is to sound smart?
Facts. I was thinking the exact same thing. It’s smart to young edgy teenagers.
@@leonfrancis3418 sound smart, no.
Be smart, yes.
@@DeAngelo77 exactly.
It's not smart. It's just logic.
dont blame religion, its just human is the most wicked and devilish creature, we can use anything as a reason and tool of destruction, then act innocent and blame other
That’s the point, human nature is made worse by religion.
@@ryanobrien2383 yes. Teaching morality, social responsibility, self-sufficiency, tolerance, love, and faith in a loving Creator definitely makes humans worse.
@@ryanobrien2383 And science.
@@poposheesho Yet those same values were absolutely useless in preventing the religious people from doing bad things, and I don't want to hear a platitude how they weren't the true christians.
@@thejarjosh Well unlike religion, science has to use more of a leap to figure out what kinds of people it should hate, where as religion has its own law which demands that if someone breaks it, that's who I should hate.
The thing is that even Hasan (the religious debator) even quoted Joseph Joubert in his book *win every argument* : “It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it.” So in someways he definitely agrees with dawkin here on principle, the degree is determined how staunch he is in adhering to his own faith.
If its private then how is it evil. If your forcing it on someone else or your using it as a tool for doctrine then thats evil
How do you force your faith on someone else ?
@@WHATSUP7049 Is that a serious question? Literally 90% of religious people online shove their religion down people’s throats. In some countries you’re killed if you disagree with their norm.
@@yami_leke the only reason I warn people about hell is because I don’t want them to go there. Imagine you saw someone about to be run over by an 18 wheeler wouldn’t you do everything in your power to get them to move ?
This is free country everybody has the right to speak their mind and everybody has the right not to listen…so there is no way anybody can shove there religion down anybody’s throat
@@WHATSUP7049 by holding sword to their necks. That's how Christianity spread and even more so for the desert death cult.
A tool for doctrine? Most people don’t get their doctrine from their faith. They get their faith from their doctrine; which, contrary to Richard Dawkins’ assertions, requires evidence.
You either take faith in a religious figure or take faith in a scientist. Either way, you are putting your trust in someone or something you don't fully understand.
But if you read a few books you can see that the scientist is correct. Whereas you cannot do that with a religious figure.
@@ptvm Exactly my point, both religion and science contain books which a person reads, yet can't verify for themselves, so faith is required in both. One can only use their logic and reasoning to determine which is the truth.
@@paradise4213 you clearly have no idea how science works
@@amounwadjaai Science doesn't provide proofs, it only gives evidence which a person can decide the truthfulness for themselves using logic:
www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2017/12/14/theres-no-such-thing-as-proof-in-the-scientific-world-theres-only-evidence/amp/
And beyond your lack of understanding of science, even using your logic it is still flawed. You can become a scientist. You can't become a religious figure.
I believe one of the greatest forms of evil is ignorance and I think this is a form of that . I don't think it's people of faiths intent to implement evil but I think evil is an inevitable outcome of a perceived lack of necessity to understand or tolerate difference.
I agree. There's something about the lack of awareness, for example about God's word, that ould be filled with intrusive thoughts.
With that said, I think true faith takes no effort.
The evidence he's looking for is for example free will and the individual's sovereignty.
Without transcedant revelation that people are beholden to (with it a higher law), all sorts of evil takes place. If you think religion leads to evil, just wait until you see what non-religion leads to. Spoiler alert: we already know, because it's happened in the past. Millions upon millions of people die (and worse).
I'd only disagree with the 'It's private' part of the statement.
Private faith? That's all you. Go for it.
The problem is those who think their faith means other people have to behave a certain way. Not private.
Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the EVIDENCE of things not seen.
Poetry != Truth.
Ah yes, the Bible is true because it says so in the Bible!
No substance
I mean I belive that other humans experiencing somewhat simular emotions to me, but I don't have evidence for that
Well said Richard sir
So how is it evil if there is no morality?
@@mickski548explain your question pls
@@mr.meowbartholomewherberttheth I sense Mick is an apologist, but i will withhold until further info from him
@@FactStorm what
It isnt evil if you keep it to yourself. It is evil when you force it on others.
Idk about evil, but I suppose it’s less than optimal.
Ignorance is a breeding ground for evil action but I don't think ignorance Itself is evil, I don't think religion should be banned I just think there should be better education in schools that makes kids open minded and respectful but also skeptical
Religions are like guns. Good sometimes and bad other times
Faith literally means to have belief in God with plenty of evidence you are very blinded.
@@NewLifeFromTheWayofTruth Defined by who? Have you checked with a dictionary?
@@NewLifeFromTheWayofTruthyou have no idea what faith is and there is no evidence of God
@@NewLifeFromTheWayofTruth
then it wouldn’t be faith anymore, would it?
ruclips.net/video/MDbiqlhAirE/видео.html
No matter what is taught and believed, there will always be evil men doing evil things. But in order for good men to do evil things you need faith.
This is a paraphrase of someone else's quote
The fallacies run even deeper when they respond “well the earth and life itself is evidence that their is a god”
Faith without (Dawinks approved) evidence. Evidence can literally be anything, the evidence that a person accepts as “acceptable” evidence is subjective. More Dawkins weasel words…
Mate scientific evidence isn't somthing that you "accept as true" it is true because of it's clear explainable and viewable existence.
When you believe in somthing with it, all you are doing is taking a geuss at what could be *NOT AT WHAT IS*
Do you understand now?
Oo name calling 😆 touched a nerve 🤣
So if i say pinochio is real does that mean he is.
'Evidence can be anything'
-Religious person 2022.
SMFH.
@@user-ze6yk4sd5g untrue on both accounts.
“Scientific evidence” relies on man’s fallible senses. You can believe something that is objectively true, and it can actually be true. Just become something is described as “scientifically proven” means nothing.
Fools, if you buy this premise. We put faith in a hundred things every day without evidence, but these assumptions allow you to traverse your daily decision making and survive the world.
Your confusing trust with faith.
Secondly, even if that is the case, true two wrongs don’t make a right.
That's the thing - every day! We put faith in things that happen all the time, meaning it's very reasonable to believe they will continue to happen. Religions are not the same. They are founded on religious books which claim extraordinary events that allegedly happened once in the past and were written down. Are we supposed to believe those stories the same way we believe repetitive things of mundane life?
Faith has to be coupled with LOVE and HOPE..
It's coupled with a lot more than that. It's also coupled with existential fear, stubborn ignorance and absolute loyalty. Believing something without or contrary to evidence takes extreme dedication and a good hiding place for your head
I don't mean that in a bad way. Real faith is something to be encouraged. I am not a person of faith. But I admire the dedication it takes
Reason does not, it can stand on its own.
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire
@@chadleach6009Reason is all good and all, until humans cherry pick and distort them to the point of deception. Reason is great, but we also need to uphold morals. Where does secularism base it's morals on?
One person who guided me to leave my faith is this prophet Richard Dawkins in 2008. I am an ex-Muslim and leaving Islam is the best decision I ever made.
❤
Spot on
Eucharistic Miracle in Poland 2008. Circumstantial evidence for God.
Making major life decisions based on superstition IS idiotic
But then, why does it matter if one chooses to believe in a religion, and lets say that, you are correct and we really do just die, and stay dead, then why would it matter what one believes, as long as your not hurting anyone, if we just end we just be dead, As you say we do?
Religion has and still is one of humanities biggest killers.
Not all faiths. Only Abrahamic faiths based on blind beiief. Eastern faiths like Hinduism and Buddhism are based on self-exploration and discovery through meditation, and openly tell people "don't believe anything till you have experienced it yourself."
Good point!
Faith in 2023 is an embarrassment to humanity. Shame
Just consoom product and get excited for new product
Fact. Religion has no evidence
Reddit comment
@@joe5959 more like, brain existing in skull comment.
@@joe5959just because it’s an atheist comment doesn’t mean it’s a Reddit comment 😂 no more RUclips for you
There's no hate like Christian love.
Define love
Hate is your food.
Fundly enough data shows that ppl with blind faith are way more happy than those without, is because they don’t have to question everything, only a brain drain that hasn’t changed a damn thing, in reality if it had changed things for the better then the earth wouldn’t be in the mess it’s in, wouldve remained pristine…the words becoming civilised all illusion … yet we all love Richard … a plus
He's speaking from a place of faith.
Faith what you use when you don't have a good reason ....
Scientists do not have faith.
They have faith in theories until their faith wavers to a better belief.😂😂
Classic Dawkins: Invoke Evil (a theistic concept) to debunk religion. 😂
Evil is a moral concept. And guess what, your nonsense traditions don't have a monopoly on morality.
What a baseless and utterly false opinion. People do things for all reasons. If one did not have religion to justify their evil then they’d find another justification.
The problem isn’t religion. It’s people. Smh.
Who tf do you think invented religion? SMFH.
@@philscott3759 and? Your point is moronic because it still proves my point, PEOPLE are the problem. So blaming religion like Dawkins here is what’s called a CONFLATION. Lol
SMFH 🤦♂️
@@philscott3759 then you're just proving his point.
The problem is people, but religion makes that problem worse. It clearly is the case that religious people routinely commit atrocities thinking they're doing gods work.
One example is the Catholic Chuch banning condoms in the context of third world countries experiencing AIDS epidemics.
How many have people died needless, cruel, painful deaths because of that preachment?
That's a crime only religion could commit.
Richard Dawkin's worldview includes faith in:
1) Materialism - the view that the material is all that exisrs. (What evidence does he have for this proposition?)
2) Scientism - the view that truth can only be known if it's scientifically verified (what evidence does he have for this proposition?)
3) Moral Relativism - the view individual people or societies determine moral standards (what evidence does he have for this proposition?)
4) Atheism - the view that what is ultimate is impersonal (what evidence does he have for this proposition?)
5) Uniformitarianism - the view that the laws of physics were the same in the distant past as they are now (what evidence does he have for this proposition?)
Etc, etc... I could list many more.
In my experience, no one has more BLIND faith than atheists do. They just don't realize it because they conflate their unjustified beliefs with facts / reality itself all the time.
This guy is the devil's wet dream.
The devil is an admirable figure he is like prometheus who was cursed for rebelling against the tyrannical god zeus who like yahweh was a rapist and murderer
"Devil" is religion too
Brainwashing. Religious people can’t quite grasp the fact that they’ve been brainwashed. Religious people are the perfect example of how brainwashing works. Brainwashing is not just about tricking the mind its about making you desire to believe what you’ve been taught is correct no matter what, no matter what logic says, no matter what the truth is, they’ve branded it under the disguise of having faith. Religions are proven to be ancient brainwashing tools used by past leaders to provide them influence and power over its population. “If you don’t do this in a certain way you will go to hell”, “If you don’t this do this in a certain way it’s a sin and god will find you punishment”. “If you do this in a certain way god will reward you”, “If you do this in a certain way god will save you”. its an almost perfect scheme. Today humans still create this brainwashing techniques but we don’t call it religion any longer and we don’t based it upon the fictional and the spiritual any longer. I know what you religion folks are thinking right now god will send people in your life to test your faith and you shall not cede to it you must keep believing, you must keep believing, you must keep believing always no matter what or god will find you punishment. Thats is one of the most impressive principles of brainwashing at its finest the people who created religion knew precisely what they were doing. Always prepare them for the inevitable confrontation with people who will speak truth to them that is one of the most important rules of brainwashing. It’s astonishing and terrifying at the same time. I know that the grand majority of religious people will chose to ignore and not take this statement to heart as it takes a ridiculous amount of mental strength, suffering and determination to undo brainwashing. Most individuals as an innate defense mechanism will never allow themselves to be subjugated to such process they will chose to ignore it like a kid would ignore a warning from their teacher. Because the truth of human kind is that as long as they feel happy and safe they will most of the time chose to ignore the truth. And thats why usually the ignorants are also the happiest but bottom line you are still living under a lie a safe delusion. But then you also understand why modern nations such as western countries, China, Russia and Japan and every country and society that doesn’t have its political and educational system attached to a fictional and old minded brainwashing scheme of centuries ago is so much more developed than countries whose education and politics is bound to religion such as most Muslim countries for example…Modern societies of today in the west, China, Russia, Japan and others of the sort its about innovation of ideas while others such as in the middle east it’s about preservation of ancient ideas. Muslim countries will always be far below the rest of the world in science, societal development and general quality of life as long as they don’t realize that religion was made to be appreciated and not followed blindly like a cult. You are only gonna push yourself down as long as you keep preserving ideas of centuries ago completely outdated for todays reality and needs. Innovation is the birth of new information and information is the source of power and there is barely to almost none of it in Muslim middle eastern countries pushed by their enforcement of religion in both politics and education.
Delusional clown here.
LoooooL. His definition of evil is if he can't make me think he is right and i am wrong. LooooooL
@SilentNoise Maybe because i'm german and english is a second language 🤷♂️
@SilentNoise Dawkins said that if he is in a situation where he cant convince someone that this person is wrong because that person does not think the by Dawkins prefered way it means that person is evil.
And the thing is that if anyone is only allowed to think in the parameters which you define, you are always right. In essence Dawkins said: The way i see the world is the right way and everyone who disagrees is automaticly evil. Which is the essence of fashism.
I have a hard time seeing why people claim this guy was so incredibly intelligent, when to me his thought process is erratic and irrational. Logic is not the friend of atheism.
@SilentNoise Listen to him again. I asure u. Thats excactly what he thinks.
@SilentNoise I ready your verbose reply twice to try to understand your frame of reference. I conclude that you for some reason started from a place of confusion and you've simply moved deeper into a confused state. Number one WHO doesn't know Richard Dawkins, the most famous atheist in the world, barring every dictatorial/murderous communist leader. Number two, I know I come from a position of privilege as my parents raised me to know and love God. But to live In a world, surrounded by the evidence of the existence of God, including both undeniable natural and archaeological evidence and reject Him out of hand, is illogical. People choose within themselves to seek truth or arrogantly choose their "truth". Dawkins rejected God and you also are choosing currently to set Him aside despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I find it ludicrous that you take your time to lecture me on being rigid in my beliefs. You can't even see that you are foisting your ignorance on me. Keep in mind, the same fire that consumes poor Dick Dawkins, waits patiently for you. Might want to reconsider your dismissal of your Creator.
He is like garlic to a vampire for the incredulous religious simpletons. Good man.
Believing in Evolution is absolutely a religion based on faith. You cannot test it scientifically either.
It has more evidence than any other scientific field, mountains of it. Where did you go to school....Mars? The Theory of Evolution is based on nothing BUT evidence. That's how Theories are born...evidence.
we are all born as atheist until someone starts telling us lies
That’s just wrong, people who haven’t considered the question are called innocents
Ohh and we’re all born anarchists until someone starts telling us lies
Oh, someone I don’t know thinks I’m evil because I don’t share his views. And ?
He doesn’t think you’re evil. Just that faith is evil. Faith is a terrible pathway to truth. A Christian’s faith is indistinguishable from the faith of a Muslim. If you care what is actually true, you wouldn’t use faith.
@@Ryan-nt9ib You’re way off on this one. Besides, atheism involves faith too. Don’t you have faith that the chair you sit on won’t break or turn into a plant or fly away? Science requires faith. The scientific method even requires faith. Atheism is dying, my guy.
@@DeAngelo77 In a strong field in this video’s comment section, you might have just uttered the dumbest comment. Atheism requires no faith. Do you need faith to not believe in Bigfoot? Do you need faith to not accept the religious claims of other religions you don’t believe in? I have trust my chair will hold. That’s not faith. There’s an actual difference between the colloquial use of faith and religious faith. Don’t combined the two out of convenience. Anyone who says “science requires faith” or the “scientific method requires faith” is an ignoramus to the highest degree. Btw statistically, atheism is growing. I know you’re grasping to have some semblance of an argument, but no need to lie.
@@Ryan-nt9ib He doesn’t think I’m evil, Im just following evil beliefs and practices., tomato, tomato.
@@christiandanareally3285 Hate the sin, but love the sinner right?
Well you need the component of faith to claim what someone believes is evil so it sounds like he has more faith than I do
Bad strawman.
Very bad strawman. Good and evil are a question of morality. They still exist without faith
He is not claiming to knows what religious people believe they have told him!
@@karlmason6145 how are you to claim something is evil without the existence of God don’t you need both to explain each concept. I mean if he’s saying you can get evil things from the miss use of religion yah I would agree with that but I think that validates a god if people can exploit it.
@@ThePaintedHope how is that it seems like you wouldn’t bring good or evil up at all if you don’t believe in God if your an atheist shouldn’t you think it doesn’t matter either way. I mean if you don’t believe in anything what’s the point of argument anyway
If anyone is upset by this….plug your ears and just repeat your mantra, “my book says it is so”
Oh so you mean like evolution?
What? Do you think evolution is about faith?
@@bottomline7923 yes I do believe it takes more faith to believe in evolution go ahead mock me laugh at me I get it to believe that something came from nothing betta fish crawled out of the sea along with another fish turned into a giraffe turned into a monkey evolved into a man without proof which I know you don't believe and here you are today takes faith and you have been lied to and deceived about this whole topic it's time to open your eyes and seek the truth you'll be amazed at what you find I wish you the best and save your snide remarks I've heard them all
@@bobbycarlucci6158 I wasn't mocking you and I don't think my remark was snide. Mocking and snide are things seem to be your court. I was politely suggesting something instead of saying flat out that your remark was.... well, it was many things but smart. The fact is, there is ample evidence to support evolution, zero to support the notion of an all seeing, all knowing creator. Faith is about belief, science is about evidence and facts. Sadly, too many Christians want to make faith about proof because science and morals have brought some of the most standard teachings under question. Slavery, flat earth and the age of the earth are just a few.. I'd suggest that you are likely easily offended because truth sings in your heart..
“Science investigates, religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge which is power, religion gives man wisdom which is control. Science deals mainly with facts, religion deals mainly with values. The two are not rivals”
-Christian Minister Dr Martin Luther King Jr
You don't have to accept my personal faith, but I also don't have to accept your denial of my personal faith. It is why these conversations really need never happen in the first place. What I do in private with my faith is my own biz and what you do in private with your atheism is yours.
2. Universe: The Big Bang Theory
In Surah Al-Anbya, Allah (SWT) also states: “Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them” (Quran, 21:30
Again, in Surah Al-Anbya, Allah (SWT) says: “The Day when We will fold the heaven like the folding of a [written] sheet for the records. As We began the first creation, We will repeat it. [That is] a promise binding upon Us. Indeed, We will do it” (Quran, 21:104). This fits in with the theory of Big Crunch which talks about how the universe will be pulled back into the black holes and again form a tiny mass [4].
In Surah Al-Anbya, it states “And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all [heavenly bodies] in an orbit are swimming” (Quran, 21:33). Although it was only a widespread belief in the 20th century amongst the astronomers, today it is a well-established fact that the Sun, the Moon, and all the other bodies in the Universe are moving in an orbit and constantly moving, not stationary [9] as commonly thought before.
In Surah Adh-Dhariyat, Allah (SWT) says “And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander” (Quran, 51:47). According to the prominent physicist Stephen Hawking in his book ‘A Brief History of Time’, “The discovery that the universe is expanding was one of the great intellectual revolutions of the 20th century” [11],
Faith is a means of a way to control people to do evil things.
As a muslim he is right
Religion is like smoking, we know its bad, but so many are hooked to it and very difficult to eradicate.
After I turned atheist, religious people became excruciatingly ridiculous for some reason. I don't know if I'm the only one who feels this way.