But on the Bible, it was written "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers." Science later discovered that indeed the earth is round. How come the Bible has that understanding when it was written some 2,000 years ago? Science was able to explain things that are invisible, surely it can explain voices recorded from d.recorders from creepy locations on earth = you'll understand existence of the invisible.
You're all troubled by the fact that there's a multitude of religious denominations, all around the world. Only 1 is true, rest are otherwise. Dawkins stated that though science can't explain everything now, it does not mean that religious books can. If you apply that logic, let's look into this example: hundreds of years before, we know nothing about bacteria. Later man discovered the microscope, and there it was, been alive for the longest time.
Richard Dawkins is here to teach everyone who believes in him a lesson, how a soul is granted Hell. Everything mr Dawkins has said against God, damages his soul, not God. God is the Eternal Father, the life of mr dawkins is like a second, compare to the infinity of God. There will be a day that there will be no more light for mr dawkins let's pray that he should reflect and repent for his soul needs to be saved.
@wspol624 Your words my friend totally explain why atheism is the least trusted group in america, you can also add to the list the top rated comment of this video, afterall, how can ppl trust you when you tell them not to have faith?
@IloveYOUviruses Having faith in a fellow human being and having faith in a god is a BIIIIG difference. Apples and oranges actually. Humans exist, and you can gather evidence from their past deeds and actions and using that evidence you can determine whether or not they are trustworthy. Dawkins is saying faith in religion is a bad thing. Not faith in people. Way to miss the point.
I've noticed that any religious person will argue two things:
1. they will dispute evolution/the big bang/any theory you have in mind.
2. they will say that atheists are drug addicts and criminals because they have no sense of morals (stereotype)
to refute it, all you need to do is tell them to try and prove their point. When they bring up morals, say 'just because it's good doesn't mean it's right'
this way, you don't even need to bring up the fact that religious morals are corrupted anyway.
As a child I was brought up going to church. I've always been very analytical though. They used to show us a book of colors..black was evil, red was Jesus blood, yello was gold etc. The first time they showed this to me I realized that it made absolutely no sense. I questioned everything around me. I was about 8 years old at this time, and haven't fallen victim to such delusional systems reliant purely upon faith. I am a man of science and exploration.
When an animal is in its death throws, it is at its most dangerous state. It will do absolutely anything to cling to life. This is where faith is. Faith is in its death throws, but that does not mean it won't take us all down with it.
Last year i installed a new roof on a minesters house this year i am installing a new roof on his daughters house.They dont know that im a atheist and they cant tell im atheist.you woulde think if athiest were bad peaple that a preacher know right away.
WTF! I remember how i got scared when I was a child about the idea of going to hell. No fucking body well ever teach my children about hell or heaven untill they can actually question those things. I will teach them moral values, ethics, but allways encourage them to use their brains.
Dawkins is my hero! He's one of the main people who helped me think for myself. I was born and raised a protestant, I was a preacher and a worship leader, But I began to question things like never before, and here I am, a free atheiest who can enjoy life and accept that he doesn't know what happens after death. Im pretty sure that death is the end of it, but I can live with out hope in an after life. Im 23, and for 21 years I thought I knew and I would have died for my faith, ...my goodness.
Say and believe what you want its yours choice, i'll i can say is i'll see ya'll in the next life o wait i wont lol cause this guy and all of you dont think there is 1 .
@jasonflynn79 Finally you people are starting to understand at least one concept of atheism. You cannot threaten us with hell because it does not exist.
Social Darwinism has murdered more people than any crusade or inquisition. If scientists somehow believe their "science" is morally pure, will lead us out of religious fundamentalism and intolerance, they should look closely at the 20th Century and the millions upon millions that were murdered in the name of a new state, one without a God. This is not an argument for God, but only an argument against that hairbrained notion of science leading us to a better humanity.
I cant judge god by his actions, since he doesnt interact with us apparently, i can only examine the evidence for him and the actions of his followers. People like you, who deny modern science whilst taking advantage of it are hypocrites.
how about judging god by his books, people only choose few good bits from the bible while ignoring the rest, then they claim god resembles morality. Have u read the bible? god is potrayed as evil, vengeful and hateful, their are stories were god killed millions upon millions becuase he couldnt stand the thought that they pray for other gods, then at the same time he claims he created people and have a specifc plan for them, the why blame them for their action? lol hypicrates
i suggest u google " evil verses in the bible" slavery, murder of children, Murdering people because of curiosity: -For looking at/into the Ark of covenant, For looking back at Sodom Murdering people for doing the right thing: -For saving the Ark of Covenant from damage -For taking a census as ordered by God Religious intolerance Punsging,the children &grand-children of a sinner Using torture against captives, Legal rape Passages relating to slavery of females Raping female prisoners of war
Dawkins denies God, God is where people say morality comes from, so if there is no God, then morality must be thrown out the window. Why then does Dawkins continue to make so many claims about religion harming morality and whatnot. Please Dawkins, define morality before you make your moral claims. Stop assuming everyone to understand your point of view on morality and explain it. Oh wait he did, he said that there's no such thing as morality. WTF Dawkins? WTF?
@JeremiahPTTN Morality is common sense for crying out loud. We shouldn't demean humanity by saying we couldn't be moral without a supernatural overlord. Can we grow up already? Read any of Dawkin's books and you"ll have a crystal clear description of what he means.
well, you don't need to be an atheist to agree with the indoctrinating extremism within religions. most christians i know have exactly the same opinion.
however, i've left christianity, but am not falling for the this-world-is-all-there-is-science phylosophy either. it is too full of denial and indoctrination just as religion
@christianplague7 return to ? thank you, I'm leaving in peace, i do love and I don't need any God to do so...Faith = believing in things without good reason or evidence = nonsense.. S
@christianplague7 This is like saying that a non-believer is not allowed to be humble or compassionate, simply because those virtues are part of Christianity.
@christianplague7 well im glad you're wasting time of your own life "praying" to people you do not know, guess we should be glad you care enough to waste your time, i sure do not. have fun not being proved right or wrong when the lights go out.
@christianplague7 LMAO... sorry... I try always to be as respectful as I can, but this comment justm made me laugh. After I was done I felt a little sad tho... I cannot believe there is still people who say and believe those kind of comments. Please don't try to copyright Love for your so called god guy. If you really and truly believe in that and want to make a change I would suggest you try to get some evidence and strong arguments, because those lines won't make an atheist even doubt..
@christianplague7 Please stop it, lol. If you have just a single thing that proofs he existence of god, show it to me, id be delighted to see it, test it, and be amazed by it. About my blindness... its all about vision, vision is all about light being reflected by TANGIBLE objects, physical and therefore natural objects. If you are calling me blind for being unable to see god, saints, santa claus, fairies, ghosts, etc, then i must accept my retina cells are just light sensitive :P
@christianplague7 Read 1 John 2:15. "Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him." I'm confused about how the love of God is a prerequisite to loving others...? Please explain.
@christianplague7 hate? but what about Proverbs 26:24? "He that hateth dissembleth with his lips, and layeth up deceit within him; When he speaketh fair, believe him not: for there are seven abominations in his heart."
@christianplague7 No one can explain to you why it is possible to love without loving god because you would not accept it anyway, that is part of your delusion.
That is something common to all delusion is the impossibility to question it.
@christianplague7 I have read and discussed these parts of the bible with people including orthodox preists and the common point they make is that hell is mentioned relatively little compared to th emore important parts of this religion.
Its only fanatics like you who use the concept of hell to threaten people into believing.
I know that the bible tells its readers that god would be the only one worthy of passing judgement, not you.
@christianplague7 Just because I dont believe doesnt mean I dont understand, I was baptised, went to christian school, had communion and so on. I learnt a good deal about religion and then I decided that I did not believe what I was told or what I read.
Yes you do judge people, me as an atheist and even protestants calling them heretics.
Maybe I do deserve to go to hell but its not your place to say so.
Many people abandon faith because of the heresies appeared in the last centuries and because the don't like the catholic faith!
But they forget of the Orthodox Christian Faith! It is the primary christian faith! It has not changed in time! It is the same! It is 2000 years old! It is not 100 years old like many sects! And it was not invented by humans!
@christianplague7 Exactly the kind of hatred Dawkins is talking about in this video, you dont even tolerate people with a faith so simmilar to your own based on the same source.
Yes the bible and christianity are inventions of human beings, The new testimant even has authors with names.
2000 years is such a short time in the history of the world and the church has changed so much, we know this through recorded history.
But the catholics changed many things because the Patriarch of Rome was outside the borders of the Byzatine Empire and the pope had to serve the barbarian kings and in time they changed the Creed and other things!
And the protestants wanted to escape from the authority of the pope!
@christianplague7 It shuld change. The world changes, people learn, hopefully people learn to think for themselves, organisms evolve and scientific theorys change as they become more accurate. But somehow Your church claims to stay the same? CRAP! everything changes, scripture is interpreted, traditions come and go hopefully like the orthodox church in the same mannor.
Yes for the same reason. They are stupid and it entertains me. They have chosen the side with ZERO evidence and for that, I argue. They cant prove their side, so they can not win, no matter what they say. Debate all they want, the earth is not flat and there is no proof in the existence of god.
I am an atheist and a fan of Dawkins, but I did put a thumbs up to Anikonov (only to get rid of the thumbs down).
Dawkins, Hitchens, and others are of course right in most of their claims (which are far more based in evidence and logic than any dogma a religious ever dolt dreamed up). The problem comes when Dawkins claims that ALL evil comes from religion.
This only stirs up the Yahoos who then ignore what is correct about his arguments because they see this one claim as untrue and unfair.
@Linguiphile it seems to be but people like that would probably have not listened to him anyway, and by creating controversy he makes believers curious. alot of people who bought his books are christians who wanted to see another point of view
@Linguiphile Dawkins said in his book (The God Delusion) that he disliked the name of the series from the beginning. He said "Religion is not the root of *all* evil; for nothing is the root of everything".
@Linguiphile I think the main reason why Dawkins stirs up anger/resentment/disdain is because he engages people in a manner that is ideal for a scientific environment, but not good as far a social norms are concerned. Dawkins honestly lacks social skill. That's the reason why people like Carl Sagan tend NOT to generate the same response. Dawkins is confrontational, while Sagan is eloquent and charming. Sagan tended to prefer finesse over direct confrontation.
@mkpttn But unfortunately, that is how you must engage people, because he is talking to adults that claim to live logical lives with a sound mind, so he challenges their myths and they get upset, because when, as a believer, you look inward at your beliefs, then as a rational person you see the discrepancy, and thus you become uncomfortable and defensive. I feel we need more people like Dawkins and Dennett who engage ridiculous claims in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary.
@TheDurtyDeed I didn't mean to imply that Dawkins should discontinue with his approach, but if you'll notice from the many discussions on Youtube about this subject, few people will ever change their mind when confronted in the manner that Dawkins confronts people. They're more likely to become less responsive. It's not a matter of what people claim informs their decisions. Dawkins will affect people like himself, but he will not have much impact of typical believers.
@Linguiphile But see, if you pay attention he does say many times that of course good is done by believers, but his point is that in a religious-free world, evil people do evil things, and good people do good things, but with religious people, they mix all over the place, as we've seen in abundance. So correcting the religious virus will align our morals properly with the definitions of good and evil.
@Linguiphile Search for that on Wikipedia. Dawkins originally didn't want to call it the root of all evil because the bare notion that any one single unit could be the root of ALL evil is ridiculous. But channel 4, as the media whores they were, wanted to spark further controversy around the subject so the insisted on the title, Dawkins caved in since he at least wanted his show on air, that was the whole point, but insisted on adding the question mark at the end because he could not lie.
I agree. It's hard to over extend Richard Dawkin's claims any further than he himself does. Even though he is extremely intelligent, he is also extremely biased, and he is not as rational as he claims. His basis is not evidence but bias. Even a non-PhD like myself can see the inconsistency of him dismissing the beliefs of other people on the basis of insufficient scientific evidence and assuming his own beliefs to be true without providing any of the scientific evidence he demands.
Atheism is irrational by its nature. So is Richard Dawkin.
There is quite interesting reading in wikipedia about Georges Lemaitre, his big bang theory and how it was rejected by scientific community, including Albert Einstein, solely due to the fact that Georges Lemaitre was not only a professor but a prelate as well, and that the Big Bang Theory was already described in the Bible.
Nazi Germany was not christian, neither was Hitler. In Nazi Germany, the clergy were persecuted and sent to concentration camps, while the churches were closed.
Uh, yes, Nazu Germany was Christian, Half Catholic, Half Protestant, roughly, excluding the Jews. And Hitler was believed to be Christian, although at the least he was a theist, as can be noted in Mein Kampf.
About 3000 priests from 24 different countries were killed in Dachau alone.
In Pomerania, all but 20 of the 650 priests were shot or sent to concentration camps. 80% of clergy and five bishops of Warthegau were sent to camps in 1939; in Breslau - 49% killed, in Chełmno-48%.
Some of them:
*Dom Ernst Vykoukal, Czech
*Msgr. Heinrich Feuerstein, German
*Agnello von der Bosch, Belgian
*Henrik Zwaans, Dutch
*Stanislaw Bednarski, Pole
see "The Gentile Holocaust" by Thomas J. Craughwell
And here's something for you, is it mentioned WHY those Priests were killed?
Or are you just making the assumption that it was "Religious Persecution"?
Pretty sure that if any holy men died, it would have been because they stood up against Hitler's will to kill so many people. That, or The S.S. might have done them in for harboring fugitives.
Give us a why before you give us figures, and give us proof that's why it happened.
Hitler was more than likely the former than the latter, but in Mein Kampf, he mentions the will of a creator several times, which means he clearly believes in some kind of god.
The guys who made the atom bomb were scientists, but do you think they weren't under governmental pressure to build it? Under pressure to win the war? And further, who decided to actually use it? It wasn't the scientists, I'll tell you that much.
Indeed, why is that any holy men died stood up against Hitler's will? Is that because Hitler was a christian and Third Reich was founded on Christian principles?
I guess, you will be smart enough to explain me how someone (in this case - scientists) can be forced by someone (in this case - government) to build something (in this case - A-bomb) that is no one know it can even exist?
Yes they knew it could exist, they'd split atoms before, and watched the resulting explosions, they were simply looking for a way that it could be engineered into a warhead. Do you even know a damn thing about conventional weapons, or are you just being an ignorant idiot?
And as I said, it's QUITE PROBABLE that those Clergymen saw the murder of man as an abomination and stood up against it. I never said Hitler agreed with the tenets of the Bible
Old OR New Testament. However, since I've heard Christians say and I quote "You don't need to read and obey the Bible to be a Christian" then clearly, Hitler was still eligible to be one, unless you're another one who uses the "Not a real Scotsman" argument, stating that Hitler's not a real Christian, leading us to wonder what a Christian really is, because, and after all, THERE'S NO DEFINITION OF WHAT A CHRISTIAN IS.
And that's because Christians are almost extinct. Just because someone goes to church or reads the Bible doesn't make you one. There are very few left, even if people say they are one.
You are free to claim even if the definition is determined. Well, i agree with you that there is no definition for you to have because most people only go by the experience they have with one. I doubt you have come across a real Christian because you would definitely know what it is. I am one. Real Christians accept people. all people. Maybe not their beliefs or the things they do, but who they are, even if not agreed with. People judge and condemn others which is a joke. Christian or not, i car
Judging and condemnation is human nature. Not saying it's a good thing, but that shit happens. The Catholic church has condemned and judged millions and slaughtered them all because of differences in belief. Same with Islam and Judaism, less with the latter, but simply put, people kill over conflicting beliefs, mainly because they can't prove one another wrong.
explain an earlier comment. No one said Church and reading the Bible is a requirement to be a Christian. Christians that do don't know what they are talking about and prob havnt read it anyway. It's giving your life to Christ, which we believe is the only way. But in order to find that out you obviously have to read it for yourself and obey it. So as far as reading it, no. That's just a ritual. But the content is far more important to us. I'm not out to prove wrong, that's why it's faith.
Well, with that in mind, you're one of the Christians I can tolerate. The point Dawkins is getting across is that there are people that do these things and believe this way, because they're puppeted to do so by "misinterpretations". That, and because the Qu'aran is an evil evil book. The habits they speak of are medieval in origin, and far behind our current society. The thought that people still embrace these ideals is maddening.
Knowing that Muslim countries still deny the women there rights as human beings, and to so treat them as objects... to start wars and feuds over different beliefs... it's insanity, but it happens. This is what Dawkins sees as being wrong about religion, and I can't help but agree. There are people who do this, numerous amounts of them, who would be more than willing to lay down their lives for this cause. I can't even begin to understand why...
I can't agree more. And not to make a case for Christianity, but it's more than religion. it's choice and it's relationship. My one year old daughter will not be brainwashed. She will have the freedom to make a choice. Yes, I am an influence. But I am far from a manipulator. And maybe that's the difference. Violence is something we are trying to avoid, not promote. because you're right. it is insanity. And what if I am wrong about everything? ok. well, at least I cared enough to try and do right
You say you are Christian and do not condemn others - so I ask you - even though I am Atheist do you say I will NOT go to Hell? I live a life of conscience and caring for my fellow man. I do not break laws and have raised and educated my children to be productive human beings who happen to be atheistic (their choice).
In short, I have lived an exemplary life although I am an atheist.
Your faith would condemn me. If you are a true follower wouldn't you say that your God has or will condemn me?
You are right in saying that God will condemn if you don't believe in Him. But I'm saying true followers don't condemn people. God's the judge. not us. But we should love and accept all. You are an atheist. Would I hang out with you? Absolutely. People's belief system doesn't change my behavior towards them. It's just what we believe. But a lot of Christians have built a sorry rep for themselves by condemning people. That just doesn't fly. For us, not just living a good life, but livn for God.
I'll take that as a compliment, and not an insult. While I will admit I was the first to sharpen my tongue, I only did so because you spoke in a manner that showed that you know very little of what you were talking about, yet proceeded to speak as though you knew absolutely everything about it.
Further, I do so because this is an argument of fact versus belief, and if this is going to be belittled into insults then there's no point having the discussion in the first place.
If religion is the root of all evil, then there should be no evil if religion was eradicated. Does anyone honestly believe that there would be no murder, rape, and stealing (def of immorality in part 5) if everyone was an atheist?
What if the religious called atheism a virus that spreads through indoctrination of the young? All beliefs are transmitted through inculturation. We should not label any belief a virus simply because we disagree with it.
I agree. I think people respect Dr. Hawkin's PhD too much. Although respect is due because it's extremely difficult to be a professor at Oxford, his arguments are over reaching and beyond hyperbole and even exaggeration. The title of this video is the best example. His arguments are based more on bias than science or reason which he purports to be an advocate of. What is scientific or rational about the title, "The Root of All Evil - The Virus of Faith"? Sounds like Bush's "Axis of Evil."
Dawkins himself states in his book "The God Delusion" that he did not like the title from the start, saying, "Religion is not the root of all evil, for no one thing is the root of all anything."
I am not quite sure who said it, but it's a quote apt for answering your question: "With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion.":
Good thoughts, but some of Dawkin's key statements are clear opinions, not scientifically proven facts. If these are facts, what are the methods and where is the data? He has his biases. He is opposed to raising children one way because he wants them to be raised another way.
"I want to show how faith acts like a virus and infects the young, generation after generation." (1:40)
"Religion is high bound belief for beliefs sake, it's bad for our children and it's bad for you." (2:53)
This is just an FYI really, but it's impossible to prove anything with science, you can disprove, but you can never test all of the possibilities, because there may exist possibilities that we can not ever comprehend.
Dawkin's facts are that evolution happens, as we understand it, and as science has shown, evolution is 'truth'.
He is opposed to teaching children about religion because it is not backed by anything that can be scientifically shown. He opposed to showing both as equals; simply because two opposing viewpoints exist does not give them equal validity.
Dawkins is trying to show how while many of us easily dismiss say, the tooth fairy, santa, Thor, etc, as nonsensical, many people cling to an equally non sensical believe in a personal god. A god which as much evidence exists for as does for Santa Clause.
You are right. Science can only examine observable things. When we talk about any belief in God including the belief that God does not exist, there is no scientific way to prove our opinions. What we should avoid is dogmatism over beliefs, not beliefs themselves because we all have beliefs. Few things are more dangerous than the assumption that our perspective is not a perspective but absolute reality. This is Dawkins doing what he disdains of the religious.
Of course you're right on the point that Science can only examine the observable. If something is un-observable (as god is, at least in a strictly physical and evidence sense) then what allows people to believe in it? Certainly it's a nice idea, and a very comforting one at that, but I suspect many things are nice and not necessarily projecting truth.
I am sure you don't believe in other un-observable things, unicorns, etc. Why not God as well? What is the difference?
Let's put tooth fairies, Santa Claus, Thor, unicorns, and God into certain categories. Yes, these are unseen. But that does not mean they are all the same.
Some of these are openly acknowledged as fiction by their tale-bearers such as tooth fairies, Santa Claus (when we are older), unicorns, etc.
Some of these are legends such as Atlantis.
Some of these are religious mythology such as Poseidon and Thor.
Belief in God is at least a legend or a myth, it cannot intentional fiction.
Your anger makes me think he may very well be right. Your ultimately only this angry because you cant defend you religion with rationale. You only have faith. thats it. and your faith is completely dependent on where you were born. Use your brain. God gave you one to use didn't he?
why would nyou get upset over what one man says and thinks, like Gandhi said, i like christ but not your christians try to love each other and have compassion for those who are suffering because of fear and delusion.
Yes, in science class, why is it that they cannot teach science? The world is backwards in so many ways. People really need to stop braging about having a unique and superior intelligence when there are still so many crazies out there.
That's understandable, but I don't think that brainwashing their own children into believing in an invisible sky man who will send them to hell if they don't obey a strict set of outlandish rules without giving them the information and evidence they would need to make their own choice on the matter, is very good either. It's child abuse.
So if someone believed that WW2 never happened and spent all their money propagating the lie that WW2 never happened would you just let them?
There's a difference between people like Dawkins and religious people. Religious people push their beliefs on people but their beliefs are not based on any truth or evidence. Every 'belief' that Dawkins 'pushes' on people are 'beliefs' that are entirely by science and he has the evidence to show for it.
people like me were brought up believing in this, we knew no different. I eventually began reading the bible and thankfully got away from it. But that's basically how it occurs here. You are raised to believe it is correct.
That needs to stop. Teaching children about hell and damnation is the same as teaching them about monsters. How can we terrify children that way. It horrifies me.
Technology is the answer to religion. Today I can anonymously get knowledge and write my thoughts for the whole world to see without the fear of retribution. This level of freedom is unprecedented in human history. The growth of fundamentalism is the final surge of a dying fire.
But on the Bible, it was written "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers." Science later discovered that indeed the earth is round. How come the Bible has that understanding when it was written some 2,000 years ago? Science was able to explain things that are invisible, surely it can explain voices recorded from d.recorders from creepy locations on earth = you'll understand existence of the invisible.
braveeyes03 2 months ago
You're all troubled by the fact that there's a multitude of religious denominations, all around the world. Only 1 is true, rest are otherwise. Dawkins stated that though science can't explain everything now, it does not mean that religious books can. If you apply that logic, let's look into this example: hundreds of years before, we know nothing about bacteria. Later man discovered the microscope, and there it was, been alive for the longest time.
braveeyes03 2 months ago
Dawkins is straight to the point, without being a moron
Psychiatrium 3 months ago
@Psychiatrium or asshole , rather
Psychiatrium 3 months ago
Richard Dawkins is here to teach everyone who believes in him a lesson, how a soul is granted Hell. Everything mr Dawkins has said against God, damages his soul, not God. God is the Eternal Father, the life of mr dawkins is like a second, compare to the infinity of God. There will be a day that there will be no more light for mr dawkins let's pray that he should reflect and repent for his soul needs to be saved.
piesquare777 4 months ago
Comment removed
Userofname69 4 months ago
Comment removed
Userofname69 4 months ago
Love one another
But do not make a bond of love
Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls. No more Religion!!
acdc14terrace 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@wspol624 Your words my friend totally explain why atheism is the least trusted group in america, you can also add to the list the top rated comment of this video, afterall, how can ppl trust you when you tell them not to have faith?
IloveYOUviruses 5 months ago
How can ppl trust you when you tell them not to have faith?
Google: atheism least trusted group ;)
IloveYOUviruses 7 months ago
@IloveYOUviruses Having faith in a fellow human being and having faith in a god is a BIIIIG difference. Apples and oranges actually. Humans exist, and you can gather evidence from their past deeds and actions and using that evidence you can determine whether or not they are trustworthy. Dawkins is saying faith in religion is a bad thing. Not faith in people. Way to miss the point.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
Proud to be a Canadian atheist.
MonicaKn17 7 months ago
@MonicaKn17 I am an ex-muslim and I am so proud that I left Islam 3 months ago and now, I am a Turkish atheist.
freandwhickquest 5 months ago
I've noticed that any religious person will argue two things:
1. they will dispute evolution/the big bang/any theory you have in mind.
2. they will say that atheists are drug addicts and criminals because they have no sense of morals (stereotype)
to refute it, all you need to do is tell them to try and prove their point. When they bring up morals, say 'just because it's good doesn't mean it's right'
this way, you don't even need to bring up the fact that religious morals are corrupted anyway.
MonicaKn17 7 months ago
As a child I was brought up going to church. I've always been very analytical though. They used to show us a book of colors..black was evil, red was Jesus blood, yello was gold etc. The first time they showed this to me I realized that it made absolutely no sense. I questioned everything around me. I was about 8 years old at this time, and haven't fallen victim to such delusional systems reliant purely upon faith. I am a man of science and exploration.
Raedwulfiggie 8 months ago
sometimes you fight a virus with another... guide these people to eastern religions...its a start ..u cant cut off people cold turkey....
TheAUDIOARCADE 8 months ago
When an animal is in its death throws, it is at its most dangerous state. It will do absolutely anything to cling to life. This is where faith is. Faith is in its death throws, but that does not mean it won't take us all down with it.
TheCycadsAreAudible 9 months ago
Look up FunVax for the real Faith Virus....
JoeyLambardi 9 months ago
Last year i installed a new roof on a minesters house this year i am installing a new roof on his daughters house.They dont know that im a atheist and they cant tell im atheist.you woulde think if athiest were bad peaple that a preacher know right away.
billbo1154 9 months ago
They should teach all religion as literature, just like they teach Norrøn and Greek mythologi.
stesta90 1 year ago 6
I was infected by faith, but I found the world. THE WORLD. I believe the world needs to change. FUCK YOUR GOD.
fatfatat444 1 year ago 27
@fatfatat444 Welcome to the real world mate. How did you loose your shackles of religion? :)
Krygeryo 11 months ago
WTF! I remember how i got scared when I was a child about the idea of going to hell. No fucking body well ever teach my children about hell or heaven untill they can actually question those things. I will teach them moral values, ethics, but allways encourage them to use their brains.
RevInt1 1 year ago 3
Dawkins is my hero! He's one of the main people who helped me think for myself. I was born and raised a protestant, I was a preacher and a worship leader, But I began to question things like never before, and here I am, a free atheiest who can enjoy life and accept that he doesn't know what happens after death. Im pretty sure that death is the end of it, but I can live with out hope in an after life. Im 23, and for 21 years I thought I knew and I would have died for my faith, ...my goodness.
RevInt1 1 year ago 3
Fascinating stuff, thank you!
CaledoniaJMR 1 year ago 2
Say and believe what you want its yours choice, i'll i can say is i'll see ya'll in the next life o wait i wont lol cause this guy and all of you dont think there is 1 .
jasonflynn79 1 year ago
@jasonflynn79 Finally you people are starting to understand at least one concept of atheism. You cannot threaten us with hell because it does not exist.
romperstompist 10 months ago 5
Social Darwinism has murdered more people than any crusade or inquisition. If scientists somehow believe their "science" is morally pure, will lead us out of religious fundamentalism and intolerance, they should look closely at the 20th Century and the millions upon millions that were murdered in the name of a new state, one without a God. This is not an argument for God, but only an argument against that hairbrained notion of science leading us to a better humanity.
WSGAC 1 year ago
@WSGAC Actually social darwinism had nothing to do with Darwin or science. A couple of people took that name and used it to elaborate their theories.
RevInt1 1 year ago
Spend your whole life telling ppl there is no GOD sounds like hes the one whos indoctrinated and btw evolution the big bang etc etc all theories : 0
jasonflynn79 1 year ago
@jasonflynn79
Oi... Scientific theory is different from colloquial theory. Gravity is a theory too; care to start preaching intelligent falling?
Moron.
sakar181 1 year ago
@sakar181 Dont judge GOD based on what men do : 0 and better hope im wrong : )
jasonflynn79 1 year ago
@jasonflynn79
I cant judge god by his actions, since he doesnt interact with us apparently, i can only examine the evidence for him and the actions of his followers. People like you, who deny modern science whilst taking advantage of it are hypocrites.
sakar181 1 year ago
@jasonflynn79 you better hope the muslims are wrong
timmykill 1 year ago
@jasonflynn79
how about judging god by his books, people only choose few good bits from the bible while ignoring the rest, then they claim god resembles morality. Have u read the bible? god is potrayed as evil, vengeful and hateful, their are stories were god killed millions upon millions becuase he couldnt stand the thought that they pray for other gods, then at the same time he claims he created people and have a specifc plan for them, the why blame them for their action? lol hypicrates
0Justice911 1 year ago
0Justice911 1 year ago
@jasonflynn79 Nobody can judge god based on what men do because god does NOT exist.
RevInt1 1 year ago
Ali G speaks more truth than dis geezer here ...
Melchior40 1 year ago
religion is the essence of stupidity
VoyageThruTurbulence 1 year ago
Dawkins denies God, God is where people say morality comes from, so if there is no God, then morality must be thrown out the window. Why then does Dawkins continue to make so many claims about religion harming morality and whatnot. Please Dawkins, define morality before you make your moral claims. Stop assuming everyone to understand your point of view on morality and explain it. Oh wait he did, he said that there's no such thing as morality. WTF Dawkins? WTF?
JeremiahPTTN 1 year ago
@JeremiahPTTN Did you say that PEOPLE say that God is where morality comes from?
mkpttn 1 year ago
@JeremiahPTTN Morality is common sense for crying out loud. We shouldn't demean humanity by saying we couldn't be moral without a supernatural overlord. Can we grow up already? Read any of Dawkin's books and you"ll have a crystal clear description of what he means.
limitbreak323 1 year ago
sometimes dawkins looks enraged like hes gonna go for the jugular. i like his intensity.
850kell531 1 year ago
Religion is a pox on humanity
breda83 1 year ago
I watch this that in the hope that one day I may be able to disconvert someone.
Noahboah234 1 year ago
well, you don't need to be an atheist to agree with the indoctrinating extremism within religions. most christians i know have exactly the same opinion.
however, i've left christianity, but am not falling for the this-world-is-all-there-is-science phylosophy either. it is too full of denial and indoctrination just as religion
SweetSoundOfGrace 1 year ago
the kids look like criminals because their faces are blured.
Inmylifealive 1 year ago
all faith is irrational Mr Dawkins
Obelisk2290 1 year ago
Religeon is a fragile thing, it can be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense... and revived by willful ignorance
MrFlyingaussie 1 year ago
Spagetti monster bless you all !
xxRockst4r 1 year ago
@xxRockst4r Ramen.
SpartanTraining7 1 year ago
Return to God!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 Return to reason !
xxRockst4r 1 year ago
@xxRockst4r
Return to peace, love, hope and faith!
God bless you!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 return to ? thank you, I'm leaving in peace, i do love and I don't need any God to do so...Faith = believing in things without good reason or evidence = nonsense.. S
xxRockst4r 1 year ago
@xxRockst4r
If you don't love God you can't love anyone!
Don't try to explain me that you can love because it is impossible to love a human without loving our Creator!
You are blind! I am praying for you to come to God's path!
God bless you!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 a man who believes in fairytails are telling me I'm blind ? ROFL.
Sorry to disappoint you but I love my family, my friends and my Gf and I'm an atheist
xxRockst4r 1 year ago
@christianplague7 This is like saying that a non-believer is not allowed to be humble or compassionate, simply because those virtues are part of Christianity.
SpartanTraining7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 You make me less naive... Now I realize that middle ages religious extremists still exist in occident...
wXingVinny 1 year ago
@wXingVinny
Fortunatelly I don't live in occident!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 well im glad you're wasting time of your own life "praying" to people you do not know, guess we should be glad you care enough to waste your time, i sure do not. have fun not being proved right or wrong when the lights go out.
behemuth 1 year ago
@christianplague7 LMAO... sorry... I try always to be as respectful as I can, but this comment justm made me laugh. After I was done I felt a little sad tho... I cannot believe there is still people who say and believe those kind of comments. Please don't try to copyright Love for your so called god guy. If you really and truly believe in that and want to make a change I would suggest you try to get some evidence and strong arguments, because those lines won't make an atheist even doubt..
jesusgarciab 1 year ago
@jesusgarciab
Look around you and you will see enough evidence!
If you can't see then you are blind!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 Please stop it, lol. If you have just a single thing that proofs he existence of god, show it to me, id be delighted to see it, test it, and be amazed by it. About my blindness... its all about vision, vision is all about light being reflected by TANGIBLE objects, physical and therefore natural objects. If you are calling me blind for being unable to see god, saints, santa claus, fairies, ghosts, etc, then i must accept my retina cells are just light sensitive :P
jesusgarciab 1 year ago
@jesusgarciab
It's hard for me , a sinner, to explain to you!
Maybe you should talk with an orthodox priest!
But be sure that he is an orthodox priest, not catholic or protestant!
Because Orthodoxism is the only true christianity!
Catholicism and protestantism have fallen from the true light!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 owned :P
jesusgarciab 1 year ago
@christianplague7 Read 1 John 2:15. "Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him." I'm confused about how the love of God is a prerequisite to loving others...? Please explain.
Ch33seMan 1 year ago
@Ch33seMan
World= materialism, not people!
We must hate money! We must not serve the money!
Money=satan!
You don't know anyhting about christianity!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 hate? but what about Proverbs 26:24? "He that hateth dissembleth with his lips, and layeth up deceit within him; When he speaketh fair, believe him not: for there are seven abominations in his heart."
Ch33seMan 1 year ago
@Ch33seMan
What hate are you talking about?
christianplague7 1 year ago
@Ch33seMan
I was talking about hating the money!
We must not abandon the faith for money!
Many people prefer to live for money, for fun, for the pleasures of this life!
But this pleasure lasts for a short time!
If peope live only for money and if they abandon their faith for money , than they serve satan!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 No one can explain to you why it is possible to love without loving god because you would not accept it anyway, that is part of your delusion.
That is something common to all delusion is the impossibility to question it.
As you pray for us I worry for you.
Drinapropriatetouch 1 year ago
@Drinapropriatetouch
No!
You are wrong!
I am worrying for you!
You know the place for those who don't believe! It's the hell!
In hell there can't be any kind of love, but only pain!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 How do you know of this hell?
Drinapropriatetouch 1 year ago
@Drinapropriatetouch
Read the Holy Bible!
Go to an Orthodox Church!
Talk to an Orthodox priest!
And you will find out the truth! Just like me!
Believe me! You won't regret it!
At least try to talk with an Orthodox priest!
But be sure that he is Orthodox, not catholic or heretic (protestant)
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 I have read and discussed these parts of the bible with people including orthodox preists and the common point they make is that hell is mentioned relatively little compared to th emore important parts of this religion.
Its only fanatics like you who use the concept of hell to threaten people into believing.
I know that the bible tells its readers that god would be the only one worthy of passing judgement, not you.
Drinapropriatetouch 1 year ago
@Drinapropriatetouch
You don't understand nothing!
I did not judge anyone!
And how dare you say anything abiut the Bible and about the Orthodox Faith if you are a non-believer?
Return to God and abandon the satanic way of life!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@Drinapropriatetouch
You don't know anything about the Orthdox faith. nor the Bible!
In Bible it is clearly stated that hell is for those who are punished for eternity!
I do not menace you!!
I am only telling the truth!
Return to God and you will be rewarded!
It is not a lie! Read the Bible if you don't believe me!
And if you don't believe it than it's not my business! Peace!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 Just because I dont believe doesnt mean I dont understand, I was baptised, went to christian school, had communion and so on. I learnt a good deal about religion and then I decided that I did not believe what I was told or what I read.
Yes you do judge people, me as an atheist and even protestants calling them heretics.
Maybe I do deserve to go to hell but its not your place to say so.
Drinapropriatetouch 1 year ago
@Drinapropriatetouch
I did not say that you are going to hell! I do not judge!
But seriously, the protestantism is an heresy! I did not invent it!
Ask an Orthodox priest! Even a catholic priest will tell you that protestantism is an heresy!
All the heresies of the past were destroyed because the Church was powerfull in the Byzatine Empire!
But now the political leaders abandoned faith and they allow this sects to exist!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@Drinapropriatetouch
Many people abandon faith because of the heresies appeared in the last centuries and because the don't like the catholic faith!
But they forget of the Orthodox Christian Faith! It is the primary christian faith! It has not changed in time! It is the same! It is 2000 years old! It is not 100 years old like many sects! And it was not invented by humans!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 Exa
Drinapropriatetouch 1 year ago
@christianplague7 Exactly the kind of hatred Dawkins is talking about in this video, you dont even tolerate people with a faith so simmilar to your own based on the same source.
Yes the bible and christianity are inventions of human beings, The new testimant even has authors with names.
2000 years is such a short time in the history of the world and the church has changed so much, we know this through recorded history.
Drinapropriatetouch 1 year ago
@Drinapropriatetouch
The Orthodox Church did not change the faith!
The Orthodox Church did not change the Creed!
We did not change anything!
But the catholics changed many things because the Patriarch of Rome was outside the borders of the Byzatine Empire and the pope had to serve the barbarian kings and in time they changed the Creed and other things!
And the protestants wanted to escape from the authority of the pope!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 It shuld change. The world changes, people learn, hopefully people learn to think for themselves, organisms evolve and scientific theorys change as they become more accurate. But somehow Your church claims to stay the same? CRAP! everything changes, scripture is interpreted, traditions come and go hopefully like the orthodox church in the same mannor.
Would you kill for your fiath?
Drinapropriatetouch 1 year ago 16
@Drinapropriatetouch
We are taught to love our friends and brothers but also love our enemies!
Because if you only love those who love you, you receive the reward in this life!
We are taught not even to insult others!
And the reward will be great in Heavens!
Of course we don't have the right to kill!
Our Orthodox faith has not changed in time! The faith is the same!
And we would prefer to die than to loose our faith in Jesus Christ!
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7
* those who loves
christianplague7 1 year ago
@christianplague7 Fiar enough
I'm bored
Bye
Drinapropriatetouch 1 year ago
@christianplague7 Return to middle ages! :P
jesusgarciab 1 year ago
Would you argue with someone who maintains that the earth is flat?
italiaholic 1 year ago
@italiaholic
Yes for the same reason. They are stupid and it entertains me. They have chosen the side with ZERO evidence and for that, I argue. They cant prove their side, so they can not win, no matter what they say. Debate all they want, the earth is not flat and there is no proof in the existence of god.
Xamaza 1 year ago
Well said.
italiaholic 1 year ago
Fellow atheists....Why bother arguing with people who fiercely believe in ridiculous fairy tales? It only gives their tired crap legitimacy.
italiaholic 1 year ago
@italiaholic
I do it for the sheer entertainment value.
Xamaza 1 year ago
@Xamaza Well, okay. At least you're not afraid to speak out for reason and logic.
italiaholic 1 year ago
if people didnt argue against it
i would still believe it
Dreamerx47 1 year ago
Dawkins is so god damn right
TheImmigrantsong 1 year ago
Bravo Dr. Dawkins!!
NYSalsaholic 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"I'm an atheist with respect to the Judeo-Christian God, because there is not a shred of EVIDENCE in favor of the Judeo-Christian God."
~ Richard Dawkins
...Dawkins, that's because you have not visited my channel.
Eye2EyeIIIV 2 years ago
I am an atheist and a fan of Dawkins, but I did put a thumbs up to Anikonov (only to get rid of the thumbs down).
Dawkins, Hitchens, and others are of course right in most of their claims (which are far more based in evidence and logic than any dogma a religious ever dolt dreamed up). The problem comes when Dawkins claims that ALL evil comes from religion.
This only stirs up the Yahoos who then ignore what is correct about his arguments because they see this one claim as untrue and unfair.
Linguiphile 2 years ago 10
@Linguiphile it seems to be but people like that would probably have not listened to him anyway, and by creating controversy he makes believers curious. alot of people who bought his books are christians who wanted to see another point of view
Xenogamer777 1 year ago
@Linguiphile Dawkins said in his book (The God Delusion) that he disliked the name of the series from the beginning. He said "Religion is not the root of *all* evil; for nothing is the root of everything".
BurritoFamine 1 year ago
@BurritoFamine Good point.
Linguiphile 1 year ago
@Linguiphile I think the main reason why Dawkins stirs up anger/resentment/disdain is because he engages people in a manner that is ideal for a scientific environment, but not good as far a social norms are concerned. Dawkins honestly lacks social skill. That's the reason why people like Carl Sagan tend NOT to generate the same response. Dawkins is confrontational, while Sagan is eloquent and charming. Sagan tended to prefer finesse over direct confrontation.
mkpttn 1 year ago
@mkpttn But unfortunately, that is how you must engage people, because he is talking to adults that claim to live logical lives with a sound mind, so he challenges their myths and they get upset, because when, as a believer, you look inward at your beliefs, then as a rational person you see the discrepancy, and thus you become uncomfortable and defensive. I feel we need more people like Dawkins and Dennett who engage ridiculous claims in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary.
TheDurtyDeed 1 year ago
@TheDurtyDeed I didn't mean to imply that Dawkins should discontinue with his approach, but if you'll notice from the many discussions on Youtube about this subject, few people will ever change their mind when confronted in the manner that Dawkins confronts people. They're more likely to become less responsive. It's not a matter of what people claim informs their decisions. Dawkins will affect people like himself, but he will not have much impact of typical believers.
mkpttn 1 year ago
@Linguiphile But see, if you pay attention he does say many times that of course good is done by believers, but his point is that in a religious-free world, evil people do evil things, and good people do good things, but with religious people, they mix all over the place, as we've seen in abundance. So correcting the religious virus will align our morals properly with the definitions of good and evil.
TheDurtyDeed 1 year ago
@Linguiphile Search for that on Wikipedia. Dawkins originally didn't want to call it the root of all evil because the bare notion that any one single unit could be the root of ALL evil is ridiculous. But channel 4, as the media whores they were, wanted to spark further controversy around the subject so the insisted on the title, Dawkins caved in since he at least wanted his show on air, that was the whole point, but insisted on adding the question mark at the end because he could not lie.
LiBlub1 1 year ago
So, the root of all evil in the religions?
Was Dr. Josef Mengele christian or scientist?
Was Adolf Hitler a christian or an atheist?
Who were those guys who come about atomic bomb - clergy or scientists?
anikonov 2 years ago
@anikonov
I agree. It's hard to over extend Richard Dawkin's claims any further than he himself does. Even though he is extremely intelligent, he is also extremely biased, and he is not as rational as he claims. His basis is not evidence but bias. Even a non-PhD like myself can see the inconsistency of him dismissing the beliefs of other people on the basis of insufficient scientific evidence and assuming his own beliefs to be true without providing any of the scientific evidence he demands.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
@ kickingtheutubehabit
Atheism is irrational by its nature. So is Richard Dawkin.
There is quite interesting reading in wikipedia about Georges Lemaitre, his big bang theory and how it was rejected by scientific community, including Albert Einstein, solely due to the fact that Georges Lemaitre was not only a professor but a prelate as well, and that the Big Bang Theory was already described in the Bible.
anikonov 2 years ago
"Atheism is irrational by its nature. So is Richard Dawkin."
The opposing view which includes such gems as talking snakes and a man who lived in a large fish for 3 days is rational?
Kuth70 2 years ago
Are you daring to imply that snakes are lacking means of communication?
And it seems that you are sure that it was clergy who come up with idea of A-bomb?
anikonov 2 years ago
@anikonov
adolf hitler was a catholic, and nazi germany was mostly christian.
but that's beside the point
equallyeasilyfuqyou 2 years ago
@ equallyeasilyfuqyou
Nazi Germany was not christian, neither was Hitler. In Nazi Germany, the clergy were persecuted and sent to concentration camps, while the churches were closed.
anikonov 2 years ago
Uh, yes, Nazu Germany was Christian, Half Catholic, Half Protestant, roughly, excluding the Jews. And Hitler was believed to be Christian, although at the least he was a theist, as can be noted in Mein Kampf.
Hitler believed very much so in a creator.
Jinxerz010792 2 years ago
About 3000 priests from 24 different countries were killed in Dachau alone.
In Pomerania, all but 20 of the 650 priests were shot or sent to concentration camps. 80% of clergy and five bishops of Warthegau were sent to camps in 1939; in Breslau - 49% killed, in Chełmno-48%.
Some of them:
*Dom Ernst Vykoukal, Czech
*Msgr. Heinrich Feuerstein, German
*Agnello von der Bosch, Belgian
*Henrik Zwaans, Dutch
*Stanislaw Bednarski, Pole
see "The Gentile Holocaust" by Thomas J. Craughwell
anikonov 2 years ago
And here's something for you, is it mentioned WHY those Priests were killed?
Or are you just making the assumption that it was "Religious Persecution"?
Pretty sure that if any holy men died, it would have been because they stood up against Hitler's will to kill so many people. That, or The S.S. might have done them in for harboring fugitives.
Give us a why before you give us figures, and give us proof that's why it happened.
Jinxerz010792 2 years ago
Mengle was power hungry
Hitler was more than likely the former than the latter, but in Mein Kampf, he mentions the will of a creator several times, which means he clearly believes in some kind of god.
The guys who made the atom bomb were scientists, but do you think they weren't under governmental pressure to build it? Under pressure to win the war? And further, who decided to actually use it? It wasn't the scientists, I'll tell you that much.
Jinxerz010792 2 years ago
Jinxerz010792,
Indeed, why is that any holy men died stood up against Hitler's will? Is that because Hitler was a christian and Third Reich was founded on Christian principles?
I guess, you will be smart enough to explain me how someone (in this case - scientists) can be forced by someone (in this case - government) to build something (in this case - A-bomb) that is no one know it can even exist?
Give it a try!
anikonov 2 years ago
Are you just stupid or something?
Yes they knew it could exist, they'd split atoms before, and watched the resulting explosions, they were simply looking for a way that it could be engineered into a warhead. Do you even know a damn thing about conventional weapons, or are you just being an ignorant idiot?
And as I said, it's QUITE PROBABLE that those Clergymen saw the murder of man as an abomination and stood up against it. I never said Hitler agreed with the tenets of the Bible
Jinxerz010792 2 years ago
Old OR New Testament. However, since I've heard Christians say and I quote "You don't need to read and obey the Bible to be a Christian" then clearly, Hitler was still eligible to be one, unless you're another one who uses the "Not a real Scotsman" argument, stating that Hitler's not a real Christian, leading us to wonder what a Christian really is, because, and after all, THERE'S NO DEFINITION OF WHAT A CHRISTIAN IS.
Jinxerz010792 2 years ago
And that's because Christians are almost extinct. Just because someone goes to church or reads the Bible doesn't make you one. There are very few left, even if people say they are one.
flexatory 1 year ago
Not a real Scotsman argument.
If you're going to call someone a Christian, please define the term properly, otherwise we're free to claim otherwise.
Jinxerz010792 1 year ago
You are free to claim even if the definition is determined. Well, i agree with you that there is no definition for you to have because most people only go by the experience they have with one. I doubt you have come across a real Christian because you would definitely know what it is. I am one. Real Christians accept people. all people. Maybe not their beliefs or the things they do, but who they are, even if not agreed with. People judge and condemn others which is a joke. Christian or not, i car
flexatory 1 year ago
Judging and condemnation is human nature. Not saying it's a good thing, but that shit happens. The Catholic church has condemned and judged millions and slaughtered them all because of differences in belief. Same with Islam and Judaism, less with the latter, but simply put, people kill over conflicting beliefs, mainly because they can't prove one another wrong.
Jinxerz010792 1 year ago
explain an earlier comment. No one said Church and reading the Bible is a requirement to be a Christian. Christians that do don't know what they are talking about and prob havnt read it anyway. It's giving your life to Christ, which we believe is the only way. But in order to find that out you obviously have to read it for yourself and obey it. So as far as reading it, no. That's just a ritual. But the content is far more important to us. I'm not out to prove wrong, that's why it's faith.
flexatory 1 year ago
Well, with that in mind, you're one of the Christians I can tolerate. The point Dawkins is getting across is that there are people that do these things and believe this way, because they're puppeted to do so by "misinterpretations". That, and because the Qu'aran is an evil evil book. The habits they speak of are medieval in origin, and far behind our current society. The thought that people still embrace these ideals is maddening.
Jinxerz010792 1 year ago
Knowing that Muslim countries still deny the women there rights as human beings, and to so treat them as objects... to start wars and feuds over different beliefs... it's insanity, but it happens. This is what Dawkins sees as being wrong about religion, and I can't help but agree. There are people who do this, numerous amounts of them, who would be more than willing to lay down their lives for this cause. I can't even begin to understand why...
Jinxerz010792 1 year ago
I can't agree more. And not to make a case for Christianity, but it's more than religion. it's choice and it's relationship. My one year old daughter will not be brainwashed. She will have the freedom to make a choice. Yes, I am an influence. But I am far from a manipulator. And maybe that's the difference. Violence is something we are trying to avoid, not promote. because you're right. it is insanity. And what if I am wrong about everything? ok. well, at least I cared enough to try and do right
flexatory 1 year ago
@flexatory
So, you would allow that I will NOT go to Hell even though I am atheist?
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
not sure what you mean. Would allow that I will NOT? Do you mean that even though you're Atheist, you would not go to Hell? Not sure. Please clarify.
flexatory 1 year ago
You say you are Christian and do not condemn others - so I ask you - even though I am Atheist do you say I will NOT go to Hell? I live a life of conscience and caring for my fellow man. I do not break laws and have raised and educated my children to be productive human beings who happen to be atheistic (their choice).
In short, I have lived an exemplary life although I am an atheist.
Your faith would condemn me. If you are a true follower wouldn't you say that your God has or will condemn me?
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
You are right in saying that God will condemn if you don't believe in Him. But I'm saying true followers don't condemn people. God's the judge. not us. But we should love and accept all. You are an atheist. Would I hang out with you? Absolutely. People's belief system doesn't change my behavior towards them. It's just what we believe. But a lot of Christians have built a sorry rep for themselves by condemning people. That just doesn't fly. For us, not just living a good life, but livn for God.
flexatory 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003
Bravo. Being good without hoping for a reward. That is the mark of a truly good person.
crvorhees 1 year ago
Jinxerz010792,
Yes, I am stupid, ignorant idiot and the likes
But you are QUITE SOMETHING!
anikonov 2 years ago
I'll take that as a compliment, and not an insult. While I will admit I was the first to sharpen my tongue, I only did so because you spoke in a manner that showed that you know very little of what you were talking about, yet proceeded to speak as though you knew absolutely everything about it.
Further, I do so because this is an argument of fact versus belief, and if this is going to be belittled into insults then there's no point having the discussion in the first place.
Jinxerz010792 2 years ago
If religion is the root of all evil, then there should be no evil if religion was eradicated. Does anyone honestly believe that there would be no murder, rape, and stealing (def of immorality in part 5) if everyone was an atheist?
What if the religious called atheism a virus that spreads through indoctrination of the young? All beliefs are transmitted through inculturation. We should not label any belief a virus simply because we disagree with it.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Religion can not be the root of all evil. The people who created the original religious texts had to be describing the evil that already existed.
LIVEETERNALLOVE 2 years ago
I agree. I think people respect Dr. Hawkin's PhD too much. Although respect is due because it's extremely difficult to be a professor at Oxford, his arguments are over reaching and beyond hyperbole and even exaggeration. The title of this video is the best example. His arguments are based more on bias than science or reason which he purports to be an advocate of. What is scientific or rational about the title, "The Root of All Evil - The Virus of Faith"? Sounds like Bush's "Axis of Evil."
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
Dawkins himself states in his book "The God Delusion" that he did not like the title from the start, saying, "Religion is not the root of all evil, for no one thing is the root of all anything."
I am not quite sure who said it, but it's a quote apt for answering your question: "With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion.":
SCkite 2 years ago
@SCkite
Good thoughts, but some of Dawkin's key statements are clear opinions, not scientifically proven facts. If these are facts, what are the methods and where is the data? He has his biases. He is opposed to raising children one way because he wants them to be raised another way.
"I want to show how faith acts like a virus and infects the young, generation after generation." (1:40)
"Religion is high bound belief for beliefs sake, it's bad for our children and it's bad for you." (2:53)
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
@Kickingtheutubehabit
This is just an FYI really, but it's impossible to prove anything with science, you can disprove, but you can never test all of the possibilities, because there may exist possibilities that we can not ever comprehend.
Dawkin's facts are that evolution happens, as we understand it, and as science has shown, evolution is 'truth'.
SCkite 2 years ago
He is opposed to teaching children about religion because it is not backed by anything that can be scientifically shown. He opposed to showing both as equals; simply because two opposing viewpoints exist does not give them equal validity.
Dawkins is trying to show how while many of us easily dismiss say, the tooth fairy, santa, Thor, etc, as nonsensical, many people cling to an equally non sensical believe in a personal god. A god which as much evidence exists for as does for Santa Clause.
SCkite 2 years ago
@SCkite
You are right. Science can only examine observable things. When we talk about any belief in God including the belief that God does not exist, there is no scientific way to prove our opinions. What we should avoid is dogmatism over beliefs, not beliefs themselves because we all have beliefs. Few things are more dangerous than the assumption that our perspective is not a perspective but absolute reality. This is Dawkins doing what he disdains of the religious.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
@ kickingtheutubehabit
Of course you're right on the point that Science can only examine the observable. If something is un-observable (as god is, at least in a strictly physical and evidence sense) then what allows people to believe in it? Certainly it's a nice idea, and a very comforting one at that, but I suspect many things are nice and not necessarily projecting truth.
I am sure you don't believe in other un-observable things, unicorns, etc. Why not God as well? What is the difference?
SCkite 2 years ago
@SCkite
Let's put tooth fairies, Santa Claus, Thor, unicorns, and God into certain categories. Yes, these are unseen. But that does not mean they are all the same.
Some of these are openly acknowledged as fiction by their tale-bearers such as tooth fairies, Santa Claus (when we are older), unicorns, etc.
Some of these are legends such as Atlantis.
Some of these are religious mythology such as Poseidon and Thor.
Belief in God is at least a legend or a myth, it cannot intentional fiction.
kickingtheutubehabit 2 years ago
its bad for you
siliconchipped 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
why dose this bastard want to destroy our Religions go fuck your selfs you atheist assholes
abz3751678 2 years ago
Your anger makes me think he may very well be right. Your ultimately only this angry because you cant defend you religion with rationale. You only have faith. thats it. and your faith is completely dependent on where you were born. Use your brain. God gave you one to use didn't he?
stockerman77 2 years ago 2
because you fuck heads are stuffing it down your kids throats and killing non believers.
akirosette 2 years ago 4
Why does anyone questioning religion threaten you? What are you afraid of?
If it suddently became the law to worship tinkerbell, would you calmly accept it?
sarah67act 2 years ago 2
@sarah67act I worship tinkerbell, actually.
Diatonic135 1 year ago
why would nyou get upset over what one man says and thinks, like Gandhi said, i like christ but not your christians try to love each other and have compassion for those who are suffering because of fear and delusion.
secondheaven80 2 years ago
Yes, in science class, why is it that they cannot teach science? The world is backwards in so many ways. People really need to stop braging about having a unique and superior intelligence when there are still so many crazies out there.
olsen091 2 years ago
Just let people believe what they believe. You are pushing your beliefs on other people just like religon is doing.
Spade7tight7 2 years ago
That's understandable, but I don't think that brainwashing their own children into believing in an invisible sky man who will send them to hell if they don't obey a strict set of outlandish rules without giving them the information and evidence they would need to make their own choice on the matter, is very good either. It's child abuse.
7TT77 2 years ago 2
So if someone believed that WW2 never happened and spent all their money propagating the lie that WW2 never happened would you just let them?
There's a difference between people like Dawkins and religious people. Religious people push their beliefs on people but their beliefs are not based on any truth or evidence. Every 'belief' that Dawkins 'pushes' on people are 'beliefs' that are entirely by science and he has the evidence to show for it.
pensego 2 years ago
God is fake, how can you believe in god when you've never ever seen any evidence that he exist?
Xzarg 2 years ago
people like me were brought up believing in this, we knew no different. I eventually began reading the bible and thankfully got away from it. But that's basically how it occurs here. You are raised to believe it is correct.
spiritconsumer 2 years ago 5
That needs to stop. Teaching children about hell and damnation is the same as teaching them about monsters. How can we terrify children that way. It horrifies me.
sarah67act 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
ccreepyo 2 years ago
there is no proof that there is god, no reason to believe there is a such higher power, go read some books and educate yourself
wickedinsight 2 years ago 5
IMHO the fact that there is no free will could be evidence for a 'higher power'.
jigoku66 2 years ago
the only way "higher power" can be used is when referring to "To the Second Higher Power" and thats in math...............
wickedinsight 2 years ago 3
Well I just changed that. I used it referring to something else and the world didn't come to an end. lol
jigoku66 2 years ago
The fool says in his heart "there is no evidence" yet still believes.
You call us fools for merely not believing as you do?
All we ask for is evidence for your claim, not intolerant mockery because you can't produce it.
Peace
AtheistEvolution 2 years ago 3
Technology is the answer to religion. Today I can anonymously get knowledge and write my thoughts for the whole world to see without the fear of retribution. This level of freedom is unprecedented in human history. The growth of fundamentalism is the final surge of a dying fire.
dirtyharree 2 years ago 2
GREAT!
grummeper 2 years ago
Out of the 165 comments on this video, I have yet to read one that is intelligent enough to aspire to this fantastic documentary.
Penfish2k 2 years ago 7
That's youtube for ya'
technologysucks 2 years ago