This video is more nonsensical than the naive question it responds to....Dawkins and the poster of this video could have replied with more tact and humility if they possessed it...Perhaps some honest evaluation of human falability, the imperfect nature of science, or irrelevance of science when determining the existence of God might have been in order? But Dawkins has a totally unscientific agenda... that of Atheism (capitalized intentionally) as opposed to atheism.
@splinterbyrd Why should our government take religious peoples feelings into consideration when our founding fathers, and everyone that died in the revolutionary war, fought for the separation of church and state. You make it sound as if there would be a new piece of legislation put in place that would actually impact said religious people, but the freedom to at least have a civil union with the same rights as a marriage, should be available to all men and women, who were created equal.
@splinterbyrd Nobody is "right," which is exactly why religious legislation, specifically in regards to things like gay marriage, should not be allowed.
@miguel33to You would be right if introducing gay marriage had no other consequences, but religious people feel it would; it would alter the nature and quality of our society; and thus have an effect upon them. why should laws alter to the detriment of others? which is precisley what gay people would say in reply of course, a circular argument.
Im hearing what you're saying, I just can't see a way through which will keep both sides happy that's all :0)
I concede that reason and science cannot take any informed person further than agnosticism. I say that belief in God is a choice. I choose to believe fundamentally that I wish to live in an ordered and purposeful universe, rather than to exist in a meaningless, random and pointless chaos in which my life and actions have no meaning beyond their immediate and observable effects. But I add that belief that there is no God is, equally, a choice. Why can't many atheists understand this I ask?
@venetianmask88 Do you Really think that to live with religion is to live in order and purposeful universe? Religion's saying that it has all the answers-while you're just not allowed to ask questions. Science prove that our universe is much greater and beautiful than anyone imagine!It gives the opposite of random,and simple explanations!It says that all the world's meaning is nothing compared to what's out there! so,if you want to believe in a tiny god that know only you'r world-you're welcome!
@venetianmask88 Do you Really think that to live with religion is to live in order and purposeful universe? Religion's saying that it has all the answers-while you're just not allowed to ask questions. Science prove that our universe is much greater and beautiful than anyone imagine!It gives the opposite of random,and simple explanations!It says that all the world's meaning is nothing compared to what's out there! so,if you want to believe in a tiny god that know only you'r world-you're welcome!
I can't stand to listen to any more of this, you just go on and on asking stupid questions in a very boring way. Those questions do not have an ancient, spiritual book which records them to be fact. Nor does anyone in the enture world believe any of those things are true, except the belief in God, or another god, or gods. Let's see if you can prove to me that the world isn't flat, and that it's a sphere. I know full well what the scientists say, but let's see how you do.
@KlaasJanG Dawkins answered it within 0:15 seconds in the initital video "we could all be wrong". The real question is how to we go about determing whats right and what appears to be more likely, based on the evidence we can find around us.
What if I decided to grow wings? What if cows entered the water and decided to grow gills. What if we could create life from non-life? What if we knew exactly what gravity is? What if we knew that all decay rates haven’t remained constant for billions of years? What if Piltdown man wasn’t a farce? What if the science community knew why there are males and females? What if the million year old extinct coelacanth fish has been found alive and un-evolved… hhmmm.forget that last one.
Great video, at a critical level , your delivery could be a bit better but I cannot find any other fault . (I have been spoiled with ThereminTrees and QualiaSoup)
Straight from google: "Omnibenevolence (from Latin omni- meaning "all", and benevolent, meaning "good")[1] is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as "unlimited or infinite benevolence". It is often held to be impossible, or at least improbable, for a deity to exhibit such property along side omniscience and omnipotence as a result of the problem of evil."
As for the world's age: The bible doesn't claim it outright, but it implies it, and it is widly accepted among creationist christians
@TheoryOfThought Can you state that The Bible implies it? Where in it does it do that? I am curious? Also, where in the Bible does it say God is omnivenevolent anyways?
@VickEqualsCheat So he's not omnibenevolent? He's all powerful, and all knowing, but doesn't give a crap about humanity?
The bible does say that he loves us very much, in which the same problem occurs... why create a world in which he knows people are going to suffer? why allow the suffering? Free will? And yet he supposedly killed everybody in the world in the Noah's Arc story, why would he care about free will if he just kills us all now and then?
@TheoryOfThought Who said he didn't give a crap about humanity? Why have free will and allow suffering? I don't know, I am not God. As I said again, I am not God. God can do as He pleases.
@VickEqualsCheat You believe in a god of contradictions then? Not just because of the bible that you haven't read, but because some of the people around you believe in him too?
Or do you have a better reason? I've tried to explain my lack of belief, so explain to me why you belief in him so much, despite everything.
@TheoryOfThought Why do you keep saying I haven't read it, when you admitted you haven't read it? I don't get it. I have never even stated that I believe in God in this debate, yet you keep assuming, which I pointed out that you do earlier. But yes, I believe in God. How is God a God of contradictions? Because you heard people say it? Can you point out the contradictions in The Bible?
@VickEqualsCheat Still with that? No, I can't point them out in the bible. I could point you to people who could though. I also can't radiometrically date the age of the earth myself, but I could point you some people who could do that too. so far, niether of these people have been disproven, so I'll take their words on both subjects.
@TheoryOfThought Anyone can 'point you to someone' or say such a thing. If they can prove to me this, then why don't you just say what they said to prove me wrong? You use one example and base that on proof. That's like me saying, there is proof by people that Noah's Ark was found in Iran. All of my questions posed, you still could not give me proof to refute one of them. If you can give me some proof, and I can't dispute it, congrats, but until then, you have not proved anything.
@VickEqualsCheat Sure, I'll just type out everything a scientist said in an hour-long explanation of how the universe is flat, will continue expanding forever, and can feasably have been created out of 'nothing' (a.k.a the big bang)
Or... I could post a link, he explains it better than me. Actually, I'll post several links. If you would be so kind as to re-state your questions, in point form, I will post a video answering, or directly answer each of them.
@VickEqualsCheat And as for the implication, the bible gives it's own little version of history. Adam's son does this, HIS son does that, his cousin did this, blah blah blah, oh no everybody dies... then Noah's children do this and that, up until you reach the times of jesus. It's not a long history spanning billions, or even millions of years.
@TheoryOfThought The problem with the logic you have used is you still haven't proved to me any of your accusations. You are basing your logic on videos you have watched, and opinions of people, with no factual evidence to disprove, it is just hearsay.
@VickEqualsCheat You still haven't told me that you've read the bible, so aren't you basing your mistrust of my information on hearsay yourself? If you have read the bible, then tell me that what I've heard is wrong.
I've also based my logic on reason, propibility, continuity (example: three people saying the same thing, not just one person), scientific evidence such as the age of the earth, and what I know of the world around me: little things like parting water is impossible, let alone a sea.
@TheoryOfThought Sounds like most of what your reasoning is based off, is videos that are biased towards one side. My advice to you, is to read the Book your trying to disprove so much, instead of trying to prove it wrong, by what you have seen and heard.
@VickEqualsCheat If I did read the bible, I'd know more about it than you do. Read it yourself sometime. and humans haven't lived for billions of years, but if god created the earth, and god created humans, why would god wait over 4 billion years to do it? Or does god see 4 billion years as just one of those 6 days? and the other 9 billion years of universe before the earth were the other 4 days?
@TheoryOfThought 'If you read the Bible, you'd know more about it that I do.' Hmm,,, Again, this is hearsay, with no proof backing this statement. Assuming God waited over 4 billions years, why couldn't He do that? As I stated, again, He is God. What don't you get about it, He can do what He wants, even if we don't get it, because we are nothing compared to Him.
@VickEqualsCheat I've given you my reasoning on why I don't believe in god. Some of it based on scientific proof, some of it based on reasoning, much of it based on what I've heard others say. Now give me your reasons, and while your at it, tell me, instead of making me guess: Have you read the bible?
If you do not answer, or avoid the question, I will assume you are simply too embaressed to admit that you did not either.
@VickEqualsCheat Because I asked you so many questions, repeatedly, but you failed to prove any of your claims. I answered so many of yours. So when I asked you to prove so and so wrong, and you failed to do so, you kept asking more to me. It's your time to answer one of my questions in regards to supplying evidence to disprove what I said.
@VickEqualsCheat And i've watched christian videos too... only they usually say things like "what came first, the chicken or the egg" and end with "I guess neither came first, because obviously GOD created them!" when simple evolution answers that question.
Your arguments still don't address that Richard didn't answer the question. You just came up with silly questions that don't seem rational, comparing them to the one asked of Richard Dawkins, making the question seem irrational. That's besides the point, he still didn't answer the question. To answer the question from a non-biased and logical view, if Richard Dawkins is wrong, and Christianity is right, he faces a righteous God that will judge him as an unbeliever and face judgment.
@VickEqualsCheat THE POINT that you seem to be missing is: There are THOUSANDS of different religions... And just because you happen to have been brought up as a christian, doesn't make it the correct one, if indeed any of them are right at all. What is richard is wrong? Then it really depends on who is right, doesn't it? What if the christians are wrong? And better yet, the athiests are wrong too? Then what Mr. "better safe than sorry"? Then you'll go to islamic hell on top of your wasted life.
@TheoryOfThought Obviously, you failed to understand that I understand this, and I acknowledged that silly questions that seemed irrational as a way of asking back, to point his opinion that he believes the 'simple' question directed at him is as well. Regardless of this, as I must recapitulate, is he still did not answer the question.
@VickEqualsCheat Going back to Dawkin's answer... Well, if he's wrong, he'll burn in hell if the christians are right, won't he? That's your answer. He has about the same chance as any christian has of being wrong however, so joining a religion just to be 'safe in case he is wrong' Is a pretty stupid idea...which is what the questioner was getting at, if you didn't know.
And if you look at the SCIENCE he's probably right, which makes the whole thing irrelivent anyways.
@TheoryOfThought Well, the fact is, he didn't answer the question, whether he thought it was silly or whatever. And yes, you are right, that is the answer that I hinted at in one of my comments below, without being as blunt as you are, which I'm not criticizing your direct honesty. Well, science doesn't disprove or prove if God is real, it just proves how complex the universe is.
@VickEqualsCheat science also gives answers (or possibilities) as to how it got so complex that contradicts most religions. Okay, fine, perhaps there is a god, or gods... but it's definately not the god of the bible, that particular god has been disproven.
@VickEqualsCheat well, if you take the bible at face value, you'd have to believe in creationism (disproven) and noah's arc (an impossibility) and a bunch of other things that don't make sense or are otherwise false. Slavery, rape, murder, that is what the god of the bible approves of... and yet one of his commandments is supposedly 'thou shall not kill'!
@TheoryOfThought Since you claim creationism is disproven, can you prove this? Also, the reason as to why Noah's Ark is an impossibility.. In addition to this, can you tell me the verses in the Old Testament relating to this, and give me the verses as proof and explain to me your logic on the matter?
@VickEqualsCheat I'd just be repeating 30 other videos I've found online. I'm an 18 year old highschool student, I can't claim to be a master of science, and I've never read past the third page in the bible. HOWEVER, before you use that to claim i'm a stupid sheep & follower: would you try to claim that million year old dinosaur fossils are 3000 years old, or don't exist at all? There's creationism disproven.
@TheoryOfThought Ok, what definition of Creationism? "Creationism is the religious belief[1] that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural being, most often referring to the Abrahamic God." With that definition, that doesn't disprove creationism.
That same god's specific myth of creationism includes Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden, and all of this taking place only a few thousand years ago... which has been proven false. Do you believe in some other form of creationism? why do you believe in it?
@TheoryOfThought Again, where is the proof, you have not provided any reason to your accusations. How is that proven false? I believe that the Earth is millions of years old, but how does that disprove all of what you have said?
@VickEqualsCheat Furthermore, Noah's Arc, among the impossibility of animals cooperating and not killing each other, demands that we believe only Noah and his family survived, as everything else died. That would imply a lot of incest from there till now. (for the animals too) It also states that Noah was over a thousand years old, and this all took place only a few thousand years ago... and yet no traces of this world-wide flood can be found.
@TheoryOfThought Really? No traces? You sure about that? Do you deny that a world wide flood never occurred? By what science has proved it impossible? Noah was not stated as over a thousand years old. Assuming incest occurred, how does the disprove the flood and the Ark?
@VickEqualsCheat There are traces of floods... sure. but a world-wide flood? the water came from nowhere, and magically dissapeared? wouldn't there be billions of dead animals and such? rainwater would mix with seawater, potentially killing all sea-life too. The last time death was evident was when the dinosaurs and millions of other species died out... not due to a flood either.
@VickEqualsCheat And, assuming incest occured, we'd all have defects and be mentally retarded. without a large genetic pool, the same genes would repeat themselves, and develop flaws.
@VickEqualsCheat Noah's family were the only people to survive the flood. EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD WAS CORRUPT AND HAD TO DIE, or so the bible claims. If Noah's family were the only people left, the obvious explanation for why we all exist is incest.
Or did God take some more ribs to create women for them? I've never heard anybody cite that passage in the bible, but perhaps you'd know.
Though I'm under the impression you didn't read it either, so probably not.
@VickEqualsCheat As for there being no rape, murder and slavery in the bible... if you're asking me about it, then you obviously haven't read it either. If you had read it, you wouldn't ask me to find them for you, or else you'd outright claim that those verses don't exist.
@TheoryOfThought When did I say were was no rape, murder, and slavery in the Bible? You just admitted to not reading it. If I had read it, why can't I ask you to use verses to support your evidence and interpreation regarding it?
@VickEqualsCheat And if the bible is so contradictory and filled with lies, what grounds do you have for saying that an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent god wrote it? The very idea of such a god 'the three omni's) is a proven impossibility in society today!
@TheoryOfThought If a God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent... Ok... Is He is Omnipotent he can do anything, like you said. Correct. If He knows everything, cool, He knows everything. If he is infinitely loving, wow, more power to Him. So what do you define as love anyways? If you had a child that killed your wife, and smothered your brother, hypothetically, you'd love him enough to not punish him? God is God, He can do what He wishes.
@VickEqualsCheat I never said love, I said caring... as in, wanting what's best for them. Sure, you'd punish a child, but an infinate punishment? a never-ending punishment? 'punishment' only exists so that the punisher can learn their lesson and then return to being productive. in what reality is hell what's best for a person? In what reality would a loving and all-powerful god let starving, unbaptised children go to hell? And yes, the do go to hell, thanks to 'original sin' (adam and eve)
@TheoryOfThought Yes you used all-caring. That's not the definition of omnibenevolent. I never said hell was best for the person. Who said an unbaptized child was going to hell?
@VickEqualsCheat Who said they don't? Find me something that says unbaptized children DON'T go to hell, otherwise I'll assume they do, as the point of baptism is to remove original sin, and having sin is what sends them to hell.
and 'all caring' isn't omnibenevolent, in fact it's but small part of omnibenevolence... 'o.b.' is caring and more. Somebody who is caring and loving and self-sacrificing would not send unbaptized-but-otherwise-innocent children to hell for eternity.
@TheoryOfThought I think its interesting yet ironic...Christians think they are 100% correct and don't believe they are wrong? Or atleast for the most part? But it seems like Dawkins is not open at all to the possibility that he is wrong. The exact same thing that Christians in that regard are doing.
@TheoryOfThought The fact that you made that reply to illesshinythings shows to me that you jump to complusions, before the facts. Be careful with that kind of thinking. And how do you know I was brought up as a christian? Were you watching me grow up?
@VickEqualsCheat "By 'hatch that egg' do you mean 'figure it out'?"
Following that, the only thing I COULD do was jump to conclusions, or do you know something about him I don't?
The 6-pack and game thing was patially a joke, it was more symbolic of friends just hanging out.
No, I don't know you were brought up as a christian... maybe you are islamic or something else, maybe you converted, beats me, but that makes you more the exception, not the rule.
@VickEqualsCheat You think all the christans in America are right, and all the muslims in the east are just stupid? There are so many christians in America because people are constantly being influenced by christian society... Just like how people are influenced by islam in the Middle-East. It's not just a coincidence.
Well either your not extremely religious, he's more of an agnostic athiest, not totally against religion, or both of you are just really awesome and religion just doesn't seem to matter when he brings over a 6-pack in time for the game on sunday.
It's not like religion SHOULD be a barrier between people in the first place anyways.
What if you're wrong? How is one person's anything right? Let's all be realistic - you're full of tar. Now I could be right or I could be wrong. Are you full of tar? I don't fucking know you never told me if you were!
Here is an answer: Everyone has their own beliefs. Leave people alone you trolls. Refer to Chris Crocker.
Dawkins reveres rational thought however not all people do - this is what I feel he doesn't seem to understand. Like understanding a different cultures if you don't use language that each culture understands the entire exercise could very well be a waste of time, many beliefs are irrational but that doesn't mean there is not a reason for people to adopt these beliefs and often I believe this is to do with the psychology of a human being....
How proud atheists can be, how clever. If they're wrong then they'd have to admit that "clever" gets them jack squat, that their brains are tiny and fallible like everyone else's. At best if they're honest they have to say, "I don't know." They also sometimes say, "I'm willing to listen but you'll have to prove your assertions." That's fair.
Few atheists find God without asking Him to help. But why would they? "An atheist can't find God for the same reason that a thief can't find a policeman."
I don't think people think he didn't answer the question...I think they just didn't get the answer they wanted. It's a circular argument that will go on forever.
fair enough. But science is the study of wot ifs? as a scientist he should be able to accept a hypothesis for wot it is. It is not a statement of fact. People assume if one (me?) accepts there are things we do not know then I am making a case for god and ignoring science but Im not sure thats wot im doing. It certainly isnt my intention. Dawkins abandons scientific process and applys his personal beliefs. science is not the opposite of god. and god is just a word and not the truth of things
those assumptions are true though.. much easier to support them logically than the antithesis of them.. subjectvisim and relativism are for ignorant atheists..
I get his premise that he thinks its very unlikely. However, the question was for him to consider the POSSIBILITY of being wrong. I'm an agnostic and I still am critical of him not considering the possibility. I've always found his work to be shit from a philosophical perspective.
@kubrox91 I think he probably just didn't want to say "well then, if the god is the Christian god, I guess I will go to hell", because that (or parts of it) would inevitably be taken as a soundbite and used against him by Christians. If he were willing to say that, he could use that to say "and what a hateful god, if he would do that".
If my toaster is a mind control device I am horibly underutilizing it.
14. if Islam is true then I am in a lot of trouble and I will be making appologies for numberious nasty comments after my death to said prophet at that time. Sorry didn't have space for all 20 questions.Never decide that someone else is stupid simply for having a different viewpoint.
What if there is no god, and you waist your life, praying - not doing anything about it yourself. What if there is no god, and you waist your life, going to church - not helping people that needs it?
If there exist 2 possibilities: 1. "a" is true when "b" is false and 2. "b" is true when "a" is false, logically "a" and "b" cannot both be true. The girl, although not the brightest, asked a valid question. Dawkins gave an irrelevant answer. He tried to draw comparisons between ridiculous fantasies and the theory of creationism. Not to say that god is an old man with a beard, but to completely ignore the existence of a first "substance" is heinous. That first substance must be god.
Ok, I'm looking at a can of Pepsi and somebody created that can of pepsi. You believe it, because its right in front of you just like the sky and the trees. The only difference is that nobody knows who or what created the sky and trees. Why are atheists so afraid to admit that there is at least a chance of a divine creator?
@tofee35 Atheists aren't afraid to admit that there is a chance of a divine creator. Atheists simply believe (logically) that such a chance is at best small, and that the chance that any specific religion is correct is logically much smaller. Why are religious people so afraid to admit that there is at least a chance (and a good chance at that) that their chosen belief system might be wrong?
Uh... don't you guys think that an intelligent guy like Dawkins should be able to answer a simple question like "What if you're wrong?"
"what if there are invisible pink elephants everywhere. What if you are wrong about there not being invisible pink elephants everywhere?"
Than I might get trampled. But I highly doubt that is the case. Its not hard to answer! Instead he blabbers on about how we don't actually believe anything, its just when we were born...etc. Doesn't that worry anyone?
I have to be humble because i don't remember if i was there, ;) but the enlightenment was a movement to free the mind, and in so doing, free the person from bondage of tyranny ( all types.) However, to take it further and say God does not exist, without ever having experienced God or even defined it seems absurd. No Scientist worth his merit would ever say something does not exist. Even Dawkins admits this.His answer to the little girl was childish and nasty, and showed how unprepared he was.
@CIA182 "The enlightenment" didn't directly give Dawkins (or anyone) permission to think differently, & no one needs to ask "the enlightenment" for permission to "take it further." Perhaps we should ask you?
- So, no one can say God doesn't exist until they've experienced Him?! Because you allege that there's something to experience?
- What's nasty about pointing out the provincial nature of a provincial question? (The point: WHY is doubting YOUR belief different from discounting ANY belief?)
Spouting nonsense about pink elephants is no answer. If he is wrong at the very least he would have missed the peace of know Jesus as his personal savior. At the most if he is wrong he will burn in HELL . Not so much fun . . .
@Elementer117 There is nothing 'badass' about that question. What it translates to is "I'm gonna laugh at you when I'm up in heaven because I believed and you didn't"
It kinda is. Atheist can't disprove God, they can't explain how the universe was created, and there are just as many gaps and contradictions in evolution as there is creation. Whoever's right is right.
@64AF I never said Dawkins is wrong. I'm just saying he needs to admit at the possibility that he's wrong instead of being an egotistical asshole. There's always a possibility that one can be wrong, especially when it comes to matters involving the existence of God. Just because you don't see him, that doesn't mean he isn't there. You can see an atom, yet I'm pretty sure they're there.
@Elementer117 Why is there a greater possibility of being wrong in matters involving the existence of God? Of all the things to risk being wrong about, every invisible and possible or impossible fantasy, fear, hallucination or threat, why so much greater a possibility of being wrong regarding God, EXCEPT for the fact that you (or whoever) believes it can't be wrong?
Because a divine creator is a extremely likely. Unlike invisible purple dinosaurs, a being that created the entire Universe is just as likely as a random ass big bang from nothing.
No, I am sorry but you obviously do not know what "likely" is. It is not likely a invisible unicorn king lives on the top of mount everest, therefore it is not likely a supernatural power caused the big bang.
What do unicorns have to do with anything? Stop making stupid-ass comparisons. And if that's the case, what caused the Big Bang? Please, enlighten me, because believing that it "just happened" is just as--if not more--crazy as believing a divine creator did it.
@Elementer117 We don't really know what caused the 'big bang'. There are hypotheses. But do you know? Why do you assume it was your god, rather than any other god? Or a deistic god. Have you even any evidence for a personal god?
HOW about this. Let the gays be gays, christians be christians, atheists be atheists, and rebecca black be rebecca black. We are products of our own personal experiences, please don't judge others. The onlything that should really matter is that we always have the freedom and opportunity to change or seek a new path.
seriously dude!!!! what if pink elephants existed? are you serious..if those things existed or not the bottom line is if they posed any kind of a problem i would act accordingly..your vid is just you rambling on about nuthin..this is so idiotic..for real..and your stumped? your video has stumped me..so whats your POINT!!!! YOU HAVE NONE!!!1
This is stupid. I liked Dawkins response because how do you really answer What if your wrong? to me he answered the question by saying if your wrong then your wrong and its not your fault because it was the way you were raised. seriously what else could he have said to that question. and if a god does exist then he will more then likely forgive you because you believe what you believe because the way you are raised.
The Flying Spaghetti monster wasn't an arbitrary question to demonstrate an alternative intelligent belief to Christianity; or any other religion. The intent of this question, as quoted by Dawkins, was intended with an agenda to remove the concept of "intelligent design" out of our education system. Why not research it?
I have a video on my channel called "Flying Spaghetti Monsters " .. why not look that up? No work on your part. Just grab a bag of popcorn and watch it.
so, if the answer doesn't matter, why is he up there trying to convince people he 's right, and anyone who thinks differently, is wrong? I don't think dawkins is a truthful man. Whatever he believes. But who cares...
@CheckYourFactsPlease- He could've gave an opinionated answer. But no, instead he blabbered the what if scenario. Hid like a little stumped, confused boy.
He /did/ answer the question; just indirectly. He's saying it doesn't matter whether he's right or wrong. In other words, get on with your lives people.
The answer to the question: 'What if you're wrong?' is: You lose everything
It goes both ways. If you believe in God, and you follow all the rules and restrictions of a relgion (religions all seem to have far more 'thou shalt nots' than 'thou mays'), then if you're wrong, and there's no God, and there wasn't any reason for you to do that, then you made a lot of decisions against what you really wanted, and you lost a lot of opportunities. You lost life
@DarthRaukrist you forget that theres an equal possibility that the true god is testing us to see who is strong minded enough to deny religion and will punish all christians to an eternity in hell...
@papasee no. God may test souls to be daring and not follow the masses..but he wouldn't phrase the test in such a way to make everyone reject him. if he did that, and then surprise Toto pulls the curtain and we see the man behind it, then pretty much everyone, atheist and religious, will almost 100% guaranteed turn against God and delberately join Satan's army. I mean seriously, there's no way your idea wouldn't piss everyone off a LOT.
however, if you meant it as a joke, then its kinda funny
@DarthRaukrist God can do what the fudge he wants would you care if you pissed everyone off with your test, I suspect, if there is one, life after death and a God isn't purely about human punishment and reward. what would be the point? There would have to be some higher purpose. Maybe an army of intellectuals to help god make universe mark 2?
@papasee God CAN do whatever he wants, but I would presume that God would know how to achieve a goal, and that any test he set would be designed to actually achieve his goal. If he DOESN'T want everybody to openly rebel against him, then he WOULDN'T do what you suggested. If he DOES, then he MIGHT.
I dont think even a billion billion humans could make universe mark 1. not even a trillion trillion would be enough for mark 2. if there is one in planning, then it will be all God, like the first one
@papasee I also dont think its all about punishment and reward. A good deal of it should be joyous celebration. Unfortunately, there are some people that can never be pleased with that, will always find something to complain about. you know the type. everyone's met at least one. Its not that they dont have a right to be happy, everyone WANTS them to have fun with everybody else. but these 'party poopers' in the end only bring everyone else down, and you have to eventually draw a line.
@papasee and say that they should either join the party and have fun like everyone else, or they should go, and you should close the door behind them. When I hear about Christians saying God gives everyone a chance, thats how I picture it, and I'm hoping it'll be a really cool party and everyone WILL decide to check their attitude at the door. There's about 100% chance that everything you've Heard about God doesn't do justice to the Truth. Kind of like movie reviews. Dont judge it till you see.
The question... "what if your wrong?" can be turned right back around on the Christians with extra insight: What if Christians are wrong Muslims are right? Ahhhh. So now there IS a consequence for being a Christian. Anyone can ask any of these type of questions and make Pascal's wager an obvious blunder of logic.
There is no answer to the question because the answer would be the same answer you would give if someone asked: "what if there are invisible pink elephants everywhere. What if you are wrong about there not being invisible pink elephants everywhere?" The question is unanswerable because the answer could be anything and none would be relevant.
@CheckYourFactsPlease I don't want an argument but I think that asking Dawkins "What if you're wrong?" is more accurately put in the same place as asking: "What if Earth wasn't the center of the universe?", "What if the Earth wasn't flat?", and "What if the holocaust happened?". The question was legitimate since it was on a highly argued issue.
What you guys missed was the context of the question. The person asking it was a christian asking what if he was wrong and Christians were right, so he answered the question in context. He basically said that the question was totally invalid and impossible to answer, which it is. There is no way to know what would happen if he was wrong because it could be absolutely anything from any religion or anything period. continued above...
To be a xian, you must believe that an invisible deity had to sacrifice itself unto itself, to appease itself, so as to save us from itself. And we're the ones whose position is unbelievable, irrational, laughable? Cognitive dissonance, much? ; )
It is an extremely difficult and scary question for an atheist to answer, hence all the convoluted ramblings. As a theist I can answer that if I am wrong then I will end up as lifeless dirt. That wasn't that hard now.
This video is more nonsensical than the naive question it responds to....Dawkins and the poster of this video could have replied with more tact and humility if they possessed it...Perhaps some honest evaluation of human falability, the imperfect nature of science, or irrelevance of science when determining the existence of God might have been in order? But Dawkins has a totally unscientific agenda... that of Atheism (capitalized intentionally) as opposed to atheism.
todogfw 1 week ago 2
@splinterbyrd Why should our government take religious peoples feelings into consideration when our founding fathers, and everyone that died in the revolutionary war, fought for the separation of church and state. You make it sound as if there would be a new piece of legislation put in place that would actually impact said religious people, but the freedom to at least have a civil union with the same rights as a marriage, should be available to all men and women, who were created equal.
miguel33to 1 week ago
Why is 'what if anything' a genuine question?
splinterbyrd 1 week ago
@venetianmask88 why can't religious people understand that their beliefs should not influence our laws or be imposed on others?
miguel33to 1 week ago
@miguel33to Because the absence of such laws imposes on themselves. Who's right?
splinterbyrd 1 week ago
@splinterbyrd Nobody is "right," which is exactly why religious legislation, specifically in regards to things like gay marriage, should not be allowed.
miguel33to 1 week ago
@miguel33to You would be right if introducing gay marriage had no other consequences, but religious people feel it would; it would alter the nature and quality of our society; and thus have an effect upon them. why should laws alter to the detriment of others? which is precisley what gay people would say in reply of course, a circular argument.
Im hearing what you're saying, I just can't see a way through which will keep both sides happy that's all :0)
splinterbyrd 1 week ago
I concede that reason and science cannot take any informed person further than agnosticism. I say that belief in God is a choice. I choose to believe fundamentally that I wish to live in an ordered and purposeful universe, rather than to exist in a meaningless, random and pointless chaos in which my life and actions have no meaning beyond their immediate and observable effects. But I add that belief that there is no God is, equally, a choice. Why can't many atheists understand this I ask?
venetianmask88 2 weeks ago
@venetianmask88 Do you Really think that to live with religion is to live in order and purposeful universe? Religion's saying that it has all the answers-while you're just not allowed to ask questions. Science prove that our universe is much greater and beautiful than anyone imagine!It gives the opposite of random,and simple explanations!It says that all the world's meaning is nothing compared to what's out there! so,if you want to believe in a tiny god that know only you'r world-you're welcome!
omrialkabetz 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@venetianmask88 Do you Really think that to live with religion is to live in order and purposeful universe? Religion's saying that it has all the answers-while you're just not allowed to ask questions. Science prove that our universe is much greater and beautiful than anyone imagine!It gives the opposite of random,and simple explanations!It says that all the world's meaning is nothing compared to what's out there! so,if you want to believe in a tiny god that know only you'r world-you're welcome!
omrialkabetz 1 week ago
I can't stand to listen to any more of this, you just go on and on asking stupid questions in a very boring way. Those questions do not have an ancient, spiritual book which records them to be fact. Nor does anyone in the enture world believe any of those things are true, except the belief in God, or another god, or gods. Let's see if you can prove to me that the world isn't flat, and that it's a sphere. I know full well what the scientists say, but let's see how you do.
BingoGIggleGoober 2 weeks ago
The answer to any of these questions: "Then it is, as it always undoubtedly has been, and will forever be."
xdrslash 3 weeks ago
He did answer the question, just not directly. He was pointing out how ridiculous the question was.
dabomb1357 3 weeks ago
Still, he didn't answered her question.
KlaasJanG 3 weeks ago
@KlaasJanG Dawkins answered it within 0:15 seconds in the initital video "we could all be wrong". The real question is how to we go about determing whats right and what appears to be more likely, based on the evidence we can find around us.
lynus111 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What if I decided to grow wings? What if cows entered the water and decided to grow gills. What if we could create life from non-life? What if we knew exactly what gravity is? What if we knew that all decay rates haven’t remained constant for billions of years? What if Piltdown man wasn’t a farce? What if the science community knew why there are males and females? What if the million year old extinct coelacanth fish has been found alive and un-evolved… hhmmm.forget that last one.
dreigel411Vin 1 month ago
Comment removed
dreigel411Vin 1 month ago
What is he is wrong?
Your reply here is a ridicolus as Dawkins.
Rangegrrl 1 month ago
@Rangegrrl Learn to write in proper English before commenting.
ZeroHour999 1 month ago
Great video, at a critical level , your delivery could be a bit better but I cannot find any other fault . (I have been spoiled with ThereminTrees and QualiaSoup)
CryptSphinx 1 month ago
Straight from google: "Omnibenevolence (from Latin omni- meaning "all", and benevolent, meaning "good")[1] is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as "unlimited or infinite benevolence". It is often held to be impossible, or at least improbable, for a deity to exhibit such property along side omniscience and omnipotence as a result of the problem of evil."
As for the world's age: The bible doesn't claim it outright, but it implies it, and it is widly accepted among creationist christians
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Can you state that The Bible implies it? Where in it does it do that? I am curious? Also, where in the Bible does it say God is omnivenevolent anyways?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat So he's not omnibenevolent? He's all powerful, and all knowing, but doesn't give a crap about humanity?
The bible does say that he loves us very much, in which the same problem occurs... why create a world in which he knows people are going to suffer? why allow the suffering? Free will? And yet he supposedly killed everybody in the world in the Noah's Arc story, why would he care about free will if he just kills us all now and then?
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Who said he didn't give a crap about humanity? Why have free will and allow suffering? I don't know, I am not God. As I said again, I am not God. God can do as He pleases.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You believe in a god of contradictions then? Not just because of the bible that you haven't read, but because some of the people around you believe in him too?
Or do you have a better reason? I've tried to explain my lack of belief, so explain to me why you belief in him so much, despite everything.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Why do you keep saying I haven't read it, when you admitted you haven't read it? I don't get it. I have never even stated that I believe in God in this debate, yet you keep assuming, which I pointed out that you do earlier. But yes, I believe in God. How is God a God of contradictions? Because you heard people say it? Can you point out the contradictions in The Bible?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Still with that? No, I can't point them out in the bible. I could point you to people who could though. I also can't radiometrically date the age of the earth myself, but I could point you some people who could do that too. so far, niether of these people have been disproven, so I'll take their words on both subjects.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Anyone can 'point you to someone' or say such a thing. If they can prove to me this, then why don't you just say what they said to prove me wrong? You use one example and base that on proof. That's like me saying, there is proof by people that Noah's Ark was found in Iran. All of my questions posed, you still could not give me proof to refute one of them. If you can give me some proof, and I can't dispute it, congrats, but until then, you have not proved anything.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Sure, I'll just type out everything a scientist said in an hour-long explanation of how the universe is flat, will continue expanding forever, and can feasably have been created out of 'nothing' (a.k.a the big bang)
Or... I could post a link, he explains it better than me. Actually, I'll post several links. If you would be so kind as to re-state your questions, in point form, I will post a video answering, or directly answer each of them.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought sorry, I won't actually 'post a video', I will only post a link to an existing video that was not written by me.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought You can private message me, that'd probably be more convenient.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
I will look at these with an open mind, as always, buddy.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat And as for the implication, the bible gives it's own little version of history. Adam's son does this, HIS son does that, his cousin did this, blah blah blah, oh no everybody dies... then Noah's children do this and that, up until you reach the times of jesus. It's not a long history spanning billions, or even millions of years.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Who said humans have lived for billions of years?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought The problem with the logic you have used is you still haven't proved to me any of your accusations. You are basing your logic on videos you have watched, and opinions of people, with no factual evidence to disprove, it is just hearsay.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You still haven't told me that you've read the bible, so aren't you basing your mistrust of my information on hearsay yourself? If you have read the bible, then tell me that what I've heard is wrong.
I've also based my logic on reason, propibility, continuity (example: three people saying the same thing, not just one person), scientific evidence such as the age of the earth, and what I know of the world around me: little things like parting water is impossible, let alone a sea.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Sounds like most of what your reasoning is based off, is videos that are biased towards one side. My advice to you, is to read the Book your trying to disprove so much, instead of trying to prove it wrong, by what you have seen and heard.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat If I did read the bible, I'd know more about it than you do. Read it yourself sometime. and humans haven't lived for billions of years, but if god created the earth, and god created humans, why would god wait over 4 billion years to do it? Or does god see 4 billion years as just one of those 6 days? and the other 9 billion years of universe before the earth were the other 4 days?
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought 'If you read the Bible, you'd know more about it that I do.' Hmm,,, Again, this is hearsay, with no proof backing this statement. Assuming God waited over 4 billions years, why couldn't He do that? As I stated, again, He is God. What don't you get about it, He can do what He wants, even if we don't get it, because we are nothing compared to Him.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat I've given you my reasoning on why I don't believe in god. Some of it based on scientific proof, some of it based on reasoning, much of it based on what I've heard others say. Now give me your reasons, and while your at it, tell me, instead of making me guess: Have you read the bible?
If you do not answer, or avoid the question, I will assume you are simply too embaressed to admit that you did not either.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought I have read the Bible. Until you can disprove anything I said, I will not answer any other questions you shoot at me.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Because I asked you so many questions, repeatedly, but you failed to prove any of your claims. I answered so many of yours. So when I asked you to prove so and so wrong, and you failed to do so, you kept asking more to me. It's your time to answer one of my questions in regards to supplying evidence to disprove what I said.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat And i've watched christian videos too... only they usually say things like "what came first, the chicken or the egg" and end with "I guess neither came first, because obviously GOD created them!" when simple evolution answers that question.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
Your arguments still don't address that Richard didn't answer the question. You just came up with silly questions that don't seem rational, comparing them to the one asked of Richard Dawkins, making the question seem irrational. That's besides the point, he still didn't answer the question. To answer the question from a non-biased and logical view, if Richard Dawkins is wrong, and Christianity is right, he faces a righteous God that will judge him as an unbeliever and face judgment.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat THE POINT that you seem to be missing is: There are THOUSANDS of different religions... And just because you happen to have been brought up as a christian, doesn't make it the correct one, if indeed any of them are right at all. What is richard is wrong? Then it really depends on who is right, doesn't it? What if the christians are wrong? And better yet, the athiests are wrong too? Then what Mr. "better safe than sorry"? Then you'll go to islamic hell on top of your wasted life.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Obviously, you failed to understand that I understand this, and I acknowledged that silly questions that seemed irrational as a way of asking back, to point his opinion that he believes the 'simple' question directed at him is as well. Regardless of this, as I must recapitulate, is he still did not answer the question.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Going back to Dawkin's answer... Well, if he's wrong, he'll burn in hell if the christians are right, won't he? That's your answer. He has about the same chance as any christian has of being wrong however, so joining a religion just to be 'safe in case he is wrong' Is a pretty stupid idea...which is what the questioner was getting at, if you didn't know.
And if you look at the SCIENCE he's probably right, which makes the whole thing irrelivent anyways.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Well, the fact is, he didn't answer the question, whether he thought it was silly or whatever. And yes, you are right, that is the answer that I hinted at in one of my comments below, without being as blunt as you are, which I'm not criticizing your direct honesty. Well, science doesn't disprove or prove if God is real, it just proves how complex the universe is.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat science also gives answers (or possibilities) as to how it got so complex that contradicts most religions. Okay, fine, perhaps there is a god, or gods... but it's definately not the god of the bible, that particular god has been disproven.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought How so?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat well, if you take the bible at face value, you'd have to believe in creationism (disproven) and noah's arc (an impossibility) and a bunch of other things that don't make sense or are otherwise false. Slavery, rape, murder, that is what the god of the bible approves of... and yet one of his commandments is supposedly 'thou shall not kill'!
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Since you claim creationism is disproven, can you prove this? Also, the reason as to why Noah's Ark is an impossibility.. In addition to this, can you tell me the verses in the Old Testament relating to this, and give me the verses as proof and explain to me your logic on the matter?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat I'd just be repeating 30 other videos I've found online. I'm an 18 year old highschool student, I can't claim to be a master of science, and I've never read past the third page in the bible. HOWEVER, before you use that to claim i'm a stupid sheep & follower: would you try to claim that million year old dinosaur fossils are 3000 years old, or don't exist at all? There's creationism disproven.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Ok, what definition of Creationism? "Creationism is the religious belief[1] that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural being, most often referring to the Abrahamic God." With that definition, that doesn't disprove creationism.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat 'Most often referring to the Abrahamic God'
That same god's specific myth of creationism includes Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden, and all of this taking place only a few thousand years ago... which has been proven false. Do you believe in some other form of creationism? why do you believe in it?
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Again, where is the proof, you have not provided any reason to your accusations. How is that proven false? I believe that the Earth is millions of years old, but how does that disprove all of what you have said?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You believe the world is millions of years old?
It's approximately 4.5 billion years old, actually...
whereas the bible claims the world is but a few thousand.
the age of the earth contradicts what the bible says, proving the bible false, meaning their god either lied, or didn't write it at all.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Sorry, my fault, my mistake, you are right it is that old. And the Bible never claims its a few thousand.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Furthermore, Noah's Arc, among the impossibility of animals cooperating and not killing each other, demands that we believe only Noah and his family survived, as everything else died. That would imply a lot of incest from there till now. (for the animals too) It also states that Noah was over a thousand years old, and this all took place only a few thousand years ago... and yet no traces of this world-wide flood can be found.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Really? No traces? You sure about that? Do you deny that a world wide flood never occurred? By what science has proved it impossible? Noah was not stated as over a thousand years old. Assuming incest occurred, how does the disprove the flood and the Ark?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat There are traces of floods... sure. but a world-wide flood? the water came from nowhere, and magically dissapeared? wouldn't there be billions of dead animals and such? rainwater would mix with seawater, potentially killing all sea-life too. The last time death was evident was when the dinosaurs and millions of other species died out... not due to a flood either.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat And, assuming incest occured, we'd all have defects and be mentally retarded. without a large genetic pool, the same genes would repeat themselves, and develop flaws.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Ok.. So, how do you know this? How do you know such excessive incest was occurring?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Noah's family were the only people to survive the flood. EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD WAS CORRUPT AND HAD TO DIE, or so the bible claims. If Noah's family were the only people left, the obvious explanation for why we all exist is incest.
Or did God take some more ribs to create women for them? I've never heard anybody cite that passage in the bible, but perhaps you'd know.
Though I'm under the impression you didn't read it either, so probably not.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought So, how did humans pro-create in the first place?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat As for there being no rape, murder and slavery in the bible... if you're asking me about it, then you obviously haven't read it either. If you had read it, you wouldn't ask me to find them for you, or else you'd outright claim that those verses don't exist.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought When did I say were was no rape, murder, and slavery in the Bible? You just admitted to not reading it. If I had read it, why can't I ask you to use verses to support your evidence and interpreation regarding it?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat And if the bible is so contradictory and filled with lies, what grounds do you have for saying that an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent god wrote it? The very idea of such a god 'the three omni's) is a proven impossibility in society today!
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought How so?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Again, just repeating, though this is pure reasoning, no supposed facts...
An omnipotent god can do anything
An omniscient god knows everything
An omnibenevolent god is infinately caring
Yet such a god tests us all constantly, and sends us to hell?
Such a god punishes us for what he knew adam and eve were going to do before he even created them?
Such a god created the devil, and allows him to manipulate us?
Such a god is either powerless, clueless, or does not care.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought If a God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent... Ok... Is He is Omnipotent he can do anything, like you said. Correct. If He knows everything, cool, He knows everything. If he is infinitely loving, wow, more power to Him. So what do you define as love anyways? If you had a child that killed your wife, and smothered your brother, hypothetically, you'd love him enough to not punish him? God is God, He can do what He wishes.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat I never said love, I said caring... as in, wanting what's best for them. Sure, you'd punish a child, but an infinate punishment? a never-ending punishment? 'punishment' only exists so that the punisher can learn their lesson and then return to being productive. in what reality is hell what's best for a person? In what reality would a loving and all-powerful god let starving, unbaptised children go to hell? And yes, the do go to hell, thanks to 'original sin' (adam and eve)
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Yes you used all-caring. That's not the definition of omnibenevolent. I never said hell was best for the person. Who said an unbaptized child was going to hell?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Who said they don't? Find me something that says unbaptized children DON'T go to hell, otherwise I'll assume they do, as the point of baptism is to remove original sin, and having sin is what sends them to hell.
and 'all caring' isn't omnibenevolent, in fact it's but small part of omnibenevolence... 'o.b.' is caring and more. Somebody who is caring and loving and self-sacrificing would not send unbaptized-but-otherwise-innocent children to hell for eternity.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought Answer my question first. Who said unbaptized children go to hell? All-loving is omnibenevolent.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought I think its interesting yet ironic...Christians think they are 100% correct and don't believe they are wrong? Or atleast for the most part? But it seems like Dawkins is not open at all to the possibility that he is wrong. The exact same thing that Christians in that regard are doing.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@TheoryOfThought The fact that you made that reply to illesshinythings shows to me that you jump to complusions, before the facts. Be careful with that kind of thinking. And how do you know I was brought up as a christian? Were you watching me grow up?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat conclusions*
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat "By 'hatch that egg' do you mean 'figure it out'?"
Following that, the only thing I COULD do was jump to conclusions, or do you know something about him I don't?
The 6-pack and game thing was patially a joke, it was more symbolic of friends just hanging out.
No, I don't know you were brought up as a christian... maybe you are islamic or something else, maybe you converted, beats me, but that makes you more the exception, not the rule.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
I think its not really a rule, its more of a stereotype.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You think all the christans in America are right, and all the muslims in the east are just stupid? There are so many christians in America because people are constantly being influenced by christian society... Just like how people are influenced by islam in the Middle-East. It's not just a coincidence.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
I'm a Christian who is friends with an Atheist.
Hatch that egg.
ilikesshinythings 1 month ago
@ilikesshinythings By 'hatch that egg' do you mean 'figure it out'?
Well either your not extremely religious, he's more of an agnostic athiest, not totally against religion, or both of you are just really awesome and religion just doesn't seem to matter when he brings over a 6-pack in time for the game on sunday.
It's not like religion SHOULD be a barrier between people in the first place anyways.
TheoryOfThought 1 month ago
What if you're wrong? How is one person's anything right? Let's all be realistic - you're full of tar. Now I could be right or I could be wrong. Are you full of tar? I don't fucking know you never told me if you were!
Here is an answer: Everyone has their own beliefs. Leave people alone you trolls. Refer to Chris Crocker.
ilikesshinythings 1 month ago
Dawkins reveres rational thought however not all people do - this is what I feel he doesn't seem to understand. Like understanding a different cultures if you don't use language that each culture understands the entire exercise could very well be a waste of time, many beliefs are irrational but that doesn't mean there is not a reason for people to adopt these beliefs and often I believe this is to do with the psychology of a human being....
av12345tube 1 month ago
How proud atheists can be, how clever. If they're wrong then they'd have to admit that "clever" gets them jack squat, that their brains are tiny and fallible like everyone else's. At best if they're honest they have to say, "I don't know." They also sometimes say, "I'm willing to listen but you'll have to prove your assertions." That's fair.
Few atheists find God without asking Him to help. But why would they? "An atheist can't find God for the same reason that a thief can't find a policeman."
MisterMikeIn3D 2 months ago
Sub for the tie.
ThegodisAbraxas 2 months ago
I don't think people think he didn't answer the question...I think they just didn't get the answer they wanted. It's a circular argument that will go on forever.
ErizotDread 2 months ago
There is an answer, assuming the Christian faith is correct.
PR0L0GIC89 2 months ago
don't understand what is the point of this
hellcielo 2 months ago
fair enough. But science is the study of wot ifs? as a scientist he should be able to accept a hypothesis for wot it is. It is not a statement of fact. People assume if one (me?) accepts there are things we do not know then I am making a case for god and ignoring science but Im not sure thats wot im doing. It certainly isnt my intention. Dawkins abandons scientific process and applys his personal beliefs. science is not the opposite of god. and god is just a word and not the truth of things
huepix 2 months ago
>paper doors >bamboo flooring >kneeling on pillow
This taste, its of a weeaboo
TheMovieCave 2 months ago
those assumptions are true though.. much easier to support them logically than the antithesis of them.. subjectvisim and relativism are for ignorant atheists..
jugjugsthekoolaidman 3 months ago
Mr favorite part was 4:21
DRUM57IX 3 months ago
@DRUM57IX My favorite part was disliking this comment
brace110 2 months ago
I get his premise that he thinks its very unlikely. However, the question was for him to consider the POSSIBILITY of being wrong. I'm an agnostic and I still am critical of him not considering the possibility. I've always found his work to be shit from a philosophical perspective.
kubrox91 3 months ago
@kubrox91 I think he probably just didn't want to say "well then, if the god is the Christian god, I guess I will go to hell", because that (or parts of it) would inevitably be taken as a soundbite and used against him by Christians. If he were willing to say that, he could use that to say "and what a hateful god, if he would do that".
mk2escortvan 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I keep my question. How many gods exist?
2001ANTLEITE 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I believe she asked one question not 20, but
If my toaster is a mind control device I am horibly underutilizing it.
14. if Islam is true then I am in a lot of trouble and I will be making appologies for numberious nasty comments after my death to said prophet at that time. Sorry didn't have space for all 20 questions.Never decide that someone else is stupid simply for having a different viewpoint.
theyaden 4 months ago
Comment removed
theyaden 4 months ago
What if there is no god, and you waist your life, praying - not doing anything about it yourself. What if there is no god, and you waist your life, going to church - not helping people that needs it?
Allankj 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How many gods exist?
2001ANTLEITE 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It still doesn't answer the question...
doritisfat 4 months ago
If there exist 2 possibilities: 1. "a" is true when "b" is false and 2. "b" is true when "a" is false, logically "a" and "b" cannot both be true. The girl, although not the brightest, asked a valid question. Dawkins gave an irrelevant answer. He tried to draw comparisons between ridiculous fantasies and the theory of creationism. Not to say that god is an old man with a beard, but to completely ignore the existence of a first "substance" is heinous. That first substance must be god.
hoelzemanj 4 months ago
What are you talking about?
Ok, I'm looking at a can of Pepsi and somebody created that can of pepsi. You believe it, because its right in front of you just like the sky and the trees. The only difference is that nobody knows who or what created the sky and trees. Why are atheists so afraid to admit that there is at least a chance of a divine creator?
tofee35 4 months ago 2
@tofee35 Atheists aren't afraid to admit that there is a chance of a divine creator. Atheists simply believe (logically) that such a chance is at best small, and that the chance that any specific religion is correct is logically much smaller. Why are religious people so afraid to admit that there is at least a chance (and a good chance at that) that their chosen belief system might be wrong?
ZhabatheHutt 4 months ago 2
One could equate all organized religions to a Chain Letter. "Send this message to at least 10 people in the next hour or you go straight to hell"
vicko5000 4 months ago
What if you have autism?
MrGhumana 4 months ago
what if we imagine ridiculous assumptions to be true and then ask others what if those assumptions are true?
I wouldn't answer such a non-question either...WTF for? lol
07087joenj 5 months ago
The penguins on Pluto are clearly visible. At least to me.
crapatev 5 months ago
Uh... don't you guys think that an intelligent guy like Dawkins should be able to answer a simple question like "What if you're wrong?"
"what if there are invisible pink elephants everywhere. What if you are wrong about there not being invisible pink elephants everywhere?"
Than I might get trampled. But I highly doubt that is the case. Its not hard to answer! Instead he blabbers on about how we don't actually believe anything, its just when we were born...etc. Doesn't that worry anyone?
thedarkyobo 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« Doesn't that worry anyone? »
Do you see the point of the argument against the question?
XGralgrathor 5 months ago
I have to be humble because i don't remember if i was there, ;) but the enlightenment was a movement to free the mind, and in so doing, free the person from bondage of tyranny ( all types.) However, to take it further and say God does not exist, without ever having experienced God or even defined it seems absurd. No Scientist worth his merit would ever say something does not exist. Even Dawkins admits this.His answer to the little girl was childish and nasty, and showed how unprepared he was.
CIA182 5 months ago
@CIA182 "The enlightenment" didn't directly give Dawkins (or anyone) permission to think differently, & no one needs to ask "the enlightenment" for permission to "take it further." Perhaps we should ask you?
- So, no one can say God doesn't exist until they've experienced Him?! Because you allege that there's something to experience?
- What's nasty about pointing out the provincial nature of a provincial question? (The point: WHY is doubting YOUR belief different from discounting ANY belief?)
KnowKnot 5 months ago
This is not your question to answer...Get OFF the Sir Richard "GAYLORD" Dawkins bandwagon! LOL! ;-)
advantage73 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You still don't answer the question.
Jammernca 6 months ago
Spouting nonsense about pink elephants is no answer. If he is wrong at the very least he would have missed the peace of know Jesus as his personal savior. At the most if he is wrong he will burn in HELL . Not so much fun . . .
katavenger 6 months ago
This logic is stupid. You fail at making an argument. She asked a badass question he couldn't answer.
"What if you're wrong?"
"Then I'm wrong."
That's the simplest answer. That's the ONLY right answer.
Elementer117 6 months ago
@Elementer117 There is nothing 'badass' about that question. What it translates to is "I'm gonna laugh at you when I'm up in heaven because I believed and you didn't"
metavhysics 6 months ago
@metavhysics
It kinda is. Atheist can't disprove God, they can't explain how the universe was created, and there are just as many gaps and contradictions in evolution as there is creation. Whoever's right is right.
Elementer117 6 months ago
Comment removed
64AF 5 months ago
@64AF I never said Dawkins is wrong. I'm just saying he needs to admit at the possibility that he's wrong instead of being an egotistical asshole. There's always a possibility that one can be wrong, especially when it comes to matters involving the existence of God. Just because you don't see him, that doesn't mean he isn't there. You can see an atom, yet I'm pretty sure they're there.
Elementer117 5 months ago
@Elementer117 Why is there a greater possibility of being wrong in matters involving the existence of God? Of all the things to risk being wrong about, every invisible and possible or impossible fantasy, fear, hallucination or threat, why so much greater a possibility of being wrong regarding God, EXCEPT for the fact that you (or whoever) believes it can't be wrong?
KnowKnot 5 months ago
@KnowKnot
Because a divine creator is a extremely likely. Unlike invisible purple dinosaurs, a being that created the entire Universe is just as likely as a random ass big bang from nothing.
Elementer117 5 months ago
@Elementer117
No, I am sorry but you obviously do not know what "likely" is. It is not likely a invisible unicorn king lives on the top of mount everest, therefore it is not likely a supernatural power caused the big bang.
inarko 3 months ago
@inarko
What do unicorns have to do with anything? Stop making stupid-ass comparisons. And if that's the case, what caused the Big Bang? Please, enlighten me, because believing that it "just happened" is just as--if not more--crazy as believing a divine creator did it.
And I wrote that a month ago, so you're late.
Elementer117 3 months ago
@Elementer117 We don't really know what caused the 'big bang'. There are hypotheses. But do you know? Why do you assume it was your god, rather than any other god? Or a deistic god. Have you even any evidence for a personal god?
mk2escortvan 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mk2escortvan
"Why do you assume it was your god, rather than any other god? Or a deistic god. Have you even any evidence for a personal god?"
Who said I believed in a personal God? When did I say I could prove God exists?
Elementer117 2 months ago
HOW about this. Let the gays be gays, christians be christians, atheists be atheists, and rebecca black be rebecca black. We are products of our own personal experiences, please don't judge others. The onlything that should really matter is that we always have the freedom and opportunity to change or seek a new path.
tucense 6 months ago 2
seriously dude!!!! what if pink elephants existed? are you serious..if those things existed or not the bottom line is if they posed any kind of a problem i would act accordingly..your vid is just you rambling on about nuthin..this is so idiotic..for real..and your stumped? your video has stumped me..so whats your POINT!!!! YOU HAVE NONE!!!1
fefeforever1961 6 months ago
This is stupid. I liked Dawkins response because how do you really answer What if your wrong? to me he answered the question by saying if your wrong then your wrong and its not your fault because it was the way you were raised. seriously what else could he have said to that question. and if a god does exist then he will more then likely forgive you because you believe what you believe because the way you are raised.
avaathome15 7 months ago 4
Comment removed
avaathome15 7 months ago
a stupid question gets a stupid answer
metavhysics 7 months ago 10
what if i'm wrong? then i go to hell because god hates people who don't believe in him
metavhysics 7 months ago 3
@metavhysics
great answer - demonstrate god exists hell exists and I will consider it
pinball1970 6 months ago
@metavhysics ...... i suggest it wasn't a dumb answer at all. it was a brilliant answer! and, just maybe, that girl learned something from it.,
theID2 2 months ago
@metavhysics Yeah, what a stupid question. I mean, how can Dawkins be wrong? Derp.
FranTheTrickster 1 month ago
The Flying Spaghetti monster wasn't an arbitrary question to demonstrate an alternative intelligent belief to Christianity; or any other religion. The intent of this question, as quoted by Dawkins, was intended with an agenda to remove the concept of "intelligent design" out of our education system. Why not research it?
I have a video on my channel called "Flying Spaghetti Monsters " .. why not look that up? No work on your part. Just grab a bag of popcorn and watch it.
pbatusa 7 months ago
The earth's rotation is slowing down. What if I'm right?
pbatusa 7 months ago
The old Pascal's wager: /watch?v=v9WRG4e6m2s
anonimoculto 7 months ago
so, if the answer doesn't matter, why is he up there trying to convince people he 's right, and anyone who thinks differently, is wrong? I don't think dawkins is a truthful man. Whatever he believes. But who cares...
jef108 8 months ago
@CheckYourFactsPlease- He could've gave an opinionated answer. But no, instead he blabbered the what if scenario. Hid like a little stumped, confused boy.
13vj000371 8 months ago
He /did/ answer the question; just indirectly. He's saying it doesn't matter whether he's right or wrong. In other words, get on with your lives people.
boredtodeath55 8 months ago
The answer to the question: 'What if you're wrong?' is: You lose everything
It goes both ways. If you believe in God, and you follow all the rules and restrictions of a relgion (religions all seem to have far more 'thou shalt nots' than 'thou mays'), then if you're wrong, and there's no God, and there wasn't any reason for you to do that, then you made a lot of decisions against what you really wanted, and you lost a lot of opportunities. You lost life
If an atheist is wrong, they're damned
DarthRaukrist 8 months ago
@DarthRaukrist you forget that theres an equal possibility that the true god is testing us to see who is strong minded enough to deny religion and will punish all christians to an eternity in hell...
Just playing devils advocate
papasee 8 months ago
@papasee no. God may test souls to be daring and not follow the masses..but he wouldn't phrase the test in such a way to make everyone reject him. if he did that, and then surprise Toto pulls the curtain and we see the man behind it, then pretty much everyone, atheist and religious, will almost 100% guaranteed turn against God and delberately join Satan's army. I mean seriously, there's no way your idea wouldn't piss everyone off a LOT.
however, if you meant it as a joke, then its kinda funny
DarthRaukrist 8 months ago
@DarthRaukrist God can do what the fudge he wants would you care if you pissed everyone off with your test, I suspect, if there is one, life after death and a God isn't purely about human punishment and reward. what would be the point? There would have to be some higher purpose. Maybe an army of intellectuals to help god make universe mark 2?
papasee 8 months ago
@papasee God CAN do whatever he wants, but I would presume that God would know how to achieve a goal, and that any test he set would be designed to actually achieve his goal. If he DOESN'T want everybody to openly rebel against him, then he WOULDN'T do what you suggested. If he DOES, then he MIGHT.
I dont think even a billion billion humans could make universe mark 1. not even a trillion trillion would be enough for mark 2. if there is one in planning, then it will be all God, like the first one
DarthRaukrist 8 months ago
@papasee I also dont think its all about punishment and reward. A good deal of it should be joyous celebration. Unfortunately, there are some people that can never be pleased with that, will always find something to complain about. you know the type. everyone's met at least one. Its not that they dont have a right to be happy, everyone WANTS them to have fun with everybody else. but these 'party poopers' in the end only bring everyone else down, and you have to eventually draw a line.
DarthRaukrist 8 months ago
@papasee and say that they should either join the party and have fun like everyone else, or they should go, and you should close the door behind them. When I hear about Christians saying God gives everyone a chance, thats how I picture it, and I'm hoping it'll be a really cool party and everyone WILL decide to check their attitude at the door. There's about 100% chance that everything you've Heard about God doesn't do justice to the Truth. Kind of like movie reviews. Dont judge it till you see.
DarthRaukrist 8 months ago
@DarthRaukrist "If an atheist is wrong, they're damned" That should have been Dawkins response.
VaticansHolocaust 8 months ago
The question... "what if your wrong?" can be turned right back around on the Christians with extra insight: What if Christians are wrong Muslims are right? Ahhhh. So now there IS a consequence for being a Christian. Anyone can ask any of these type of questions and make Pascal's wager an obvious blunder of logic.
itirnitii 8 months ago
There is no answer to the question because the answer would be the same answer you would give if someone asked: "what if there are invisible pink elephants everywhere. What if you are wrong about there not being invisible pink elephants everywhere?" The question is unanswerable because the answer could be anything and none would be relevant.
CheckYourFactsPlease 9 months ago 35
@CheckYourFactsPlease I don't want an argument but I think that asking Dawkins "What if you're wrong?" is more accurately put in the same place as asking: "What if Earth wasn't the center of the universe?", "What if the Earth wasn't flat?", and "What if the holocaust happened?". The question was legitimate since it was on a highly argued issue.
FongLin100 8 months ago
@CheckYourFactsPlease The difference is that no one is claiming that invisible pink elephants exists.
What people claim is that things from the sky came down and interacted with man throughout history.
People make similar claims now as well, but science brushes those off as nonsense just like they do religion.
The connection is rather obvious, and logical. It's surprising not many people understand it.
Zementkopf1 7 months ago
@CheckYourFactsPlease Excellent way of explaining it. I was just going to say "Stop talking, you're fucking stupid".
Viktir666 5 months ago
What you guys missed was the context of the question. The person asking it was a christian asking what if he was wrong and Christians were right, so he answered the question in context. He basically said that the question was totally invalid and impossible to answer, which it is. There is no way to know what would happen if he was wrong because it could be absolutely anything from any religion or anything period. continued above...
CheckYourFactsPlease 9 months ago
I suspiciously eyed my toaster when you asked that..
grauekatze 9 months ago
To be a xian, you must believe that an invisible deity had to sacrifice itself unto itself, to appease itself, so as to save us from itself. And we're the ones whose position is unbelievable, irrational, laughable? Cognitive dissonance, much? ; )
yeshuahfullofit 9 months ago
This guy's obviously in Japan. I'm waiting for him to slide the door japanese style and leave.
K9Zangetsu 9 months ago
It is an extremely difficult and scary question for an atheist to answer, hence all the convoluted ramblings. As a theist I can answer that if I am wrong then I will end up as lifeless dirt. That wasn't that hard now.
ozredneck22 9 months ago
@ozredneck22 Yeah, all I heard was what if this and what if that and went WAY off topic. Still didnt answer the question.
thetxaggie 9 months ago
@ozredneck22
As an atheist I'd answer "I don't know". Because I really don't, but it would be very interesting to find out, right?
grauekatze 9 months ago