Are you a creationist? Of course you don’t have to answer. I’m just curious.

@@gatolf2 most Reformed Christians are also young earth creationists because it's what the Bible plainly teaches, and many ministries over the last half century have done great work to expose the false naturalistic assumptions of secular scientists

Another Encore with Mr "People Burgers" PLS.

@@horrificpleasantry9474 I agree. But I’ve seen many good apologists that still believe the old earth. I’m a YEC.

Stupid question are your books available on kobo format?

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

@@Lombokstrait1 this isn't a good argument. You have simply assumed that you're correct that God doesn't exist. But you haven't proven it, so your claim about Biblical morality being subjective doesn't logically follow. It's a bare assertion/begging the question fallacy

@@horrificpleasantry9474 It is a great argument. Because it is true. The bible is not divine. All religions are created by man. I can prove it by pointing out that the bible is a mess. It has false prophecies, contradictions, superstitious blather. It is poorly written. Boring. Redundant. Long winded. An all knowing, all powerful god (if it existed) would've inspired a much better book. The stories are piss poor too.

@@Lombokstrait1 So, when society decides that it is ok to throw homosexuals off of buildings as happens in strict fundamentalist Islamic countries, that’s ok because their society agrees it’s ok? Of, to bring it to the democratic west, let’s say an American state puts the question on a ballot and 70% of the voters agree that abortions are morally wrong and then the state passes legislation banning abortions as morally wrong, you would favour such a practice? You would agree then that abortions are morally wrong because the majority says so? Then, in time the will of the people changes and they decide abortions are morally acceptable, and they therefore become morally acceptable? Then, after more time, the will of the people changes again and abortions are once again banned. Do you honestly believe that in such a scenario abortions could go from morally wrong, to morally good and then back to morally wrong again? Would you be willing to agree to whatever the fickle masses tell you is morally right and wrong? What if society decided that disabled people should be euthanized? For the greater good and to spare them further suffering, of course.

@@Lombokstrait1 gotta stop you right there. Atheism is false so none of your comments matter. Is it annoying when people just assume you're wrong/they're right without proving it?

That was awesome.

Same

You would lose your sanity to be indoctrinated.*

I think you're correct insofar as his stated beliefs. However, we should also judge by his actions. Pragmatists can only sit on the fence for so long before God wobbles the fence and we're made to jump on one side or the other.

The rejection of bullshit is the beginning of wisdom.

@@arthura.2587 Boy you sound like you really know a lot.

@@SummumBonum. about the extent of ur voluminous vocabulary obviously... what say ye?

@@mitchelll3879 I can't make sense of your comment.

​@@SummumBonum. Thought you did something 🤡

That's not true. Often when you let somebody know you're atheist They believe simply with this statement you are a immoral.

That's what it sounds like to me, basically the G7, G8, G20, United Nations etc come together and announce the new morality for the next 12 months.

Can we start referring to him only as British athiest guy now? Like how Neil Degrasse Tyson is sometimes called black science man

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

@@Lombokstrait1 but “democracy and society” don’t exist everywhere. Most nations aren’t a democracy. Most undeveloped nations aren’t an organized “society”. There is no “collective” essentially outside of the western nations in many nations

Yea xDDDD

@@Goldni8372 most non western countries are the ones that are most dominated by religion. What does that tell you?

@@zeek8918 all societies are dominated by religion. If you can't see that covid cult and woke-ism are manifesting as state religions then you're just in stubborn denial.

It's called ignorance

If your morality contradicts anothers, then who's it correct? And if they are implanted by the same being, then why are they different, shouldnt they be universal? And if an individual can decide for themseleves what is moral, then aren't you only as moral as you are immoral in anothers eyes, and visca versa?

Excuse me where does he says that? look most humans dont like pain we dont need a God telling us to avoid it, most humans feel empathy too wich makes us want to avoid the suffering of others this behavior can be seen in humans whom never heard about Jesus and even other species, that's how evolution builds social species, but I know you will reject that because christians dont like reading about evolution because it doesnt make them feel warm and fuzzy inside like the idea of seeing grandma in heaven someday.

@@enmanuelsan Thats a sweeping generalization. You might be referring to creationist, but the biggest Christian churches on the planet; Catholic and Orthodox have no problem with evolution, it doesnt do away with God at all. If you look at the practices of the ancient world, the Jews stand out as different because God gave them His moral law at Mount Sinai. That is where the modren and western world was born. This is why I would argue, it isnt implanted generally but only after a person is born again. And that law is referenced in constitutions around the world and if you look at what happens when we abandon those values in the modern world such as with Nazi Germany or the USSR, the results speak for themselves. So clearly if left to our own devices we get it wrong and cant decide on a universal morality.

@@enmanuelsan 9:45 ✌️

“Hyper intellectuals”?

@@GeorgeEH In their own minds.

@@GeorgeEH LMBO

@@MichaelJones-xz8mm Dawkins, sure. Joe? - no. He regularly tells people that he’s an intellectual chimp that knows nothing.

Professing to be wise they became fools

No kidding.

No, a foolish thinker

Rogan's still so steeped in Christianity that he doesn't recognize how literally out of the world it is.

He had Seth Dillon from the Babylon Bee on, and Seth was able to talk about why abortion is evil.

I can relate, I used to think atheists like this used to have good points but now I just laugh at how stupid they are, pretty much every professional philosopher just laughs at people like Dawkins and the sad thing is other laymen believe them because of Dawkins scientific credentials

So that’s the new thing “ when I was an Atheist”???

Doug is not being much more sane. He says atheist can be moral while he watches two men explain their idolatry and hatred for Christ. The Western church has rejected Christ when the adopted the lie of freedom of Religion.

Jesus endorsed Slavery disgusting and worse than an idiot for those who worship him!!!!😮😮😮

I like the way you put this. Thanks!

So true and couldn't agree more. I can relate to similar experience when talking with Atheists. They always resort to “morality is subjective” near the end of the conversation. Oddly enough this is the same argument pedophiles give when convicted.

For me, as a humanist - morality is rooted in human well-being. Of course I will have a subjective view of what constitutes human well-being, but that is no different from Christians saying that the nature of God is their standard, but they all have a subjective view of what that nature is. So both sides have an absolute standard, but a subjective view of what that absolute standard constitutes. By what standard? By that standard.

@@Faust2Dr well being? So what is your objective standard of well being? And which well being law and where does the source of well being come from? Did well being law exist before humans existed? To some it’s their well being to destroy the weak person, you know survival of the fittest. When we say it is God, God has written right and wrong through inspiration of the Holy Spirit in the Bible, which both Christian, Jews and Muslim accept the Old Testament as Gods word, we just have different interpretations of the Old Testament. You have nothing to point to.

@@Faust2Dr Thank you for sharing. My only disagreement would be that in Christianity there is a basis for objective morality to exist. Atheism provides no basis for even the existence of an objective morality, because it’s materialist at its core. Morality is immaterial. So “morality” goes no further than the opinion of an evolved fish. There is no objective standard to misinterpret as “wrong” in that worldview. Humans may misinterpret Gods standard, but the standard is objective and outside of man. Any Godless worldview provides no basis for even the existence of objective morality. Human flourishing is just a preferred set of values, but does not contain any basis for it to actually be good or bad, just preferred by some. And not preferred by many who would say human flourishing is actually bad.

Firmly planted in cheese and wine parties

@@nancyf5777 Pantheism is anti-scientific. The Creator and the created are separate things. 1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause. 2. The universe began to exist. 3. The universe has a cause. 4. That cause is God. God is, by definition, the uncaused, eternal, necessary Cause of the universe.

Often angrily? Who do you think makes up 99% of prison inmates? I'll give you a clue, it isn't atheists.

@@hectorespinoza3446 On your atheistic worldview, is anger objectively bad? By what standard do you, based on your atheism, consider people who are in prison objectively bad? There are many innocent people in prison: should they be angry?

@@justin10292000 No emotion is outright bad, all emotions are normal. I base my standards on what society as a collective deems bad. Although murder and rape have always been bad...unless you're religious. Of course someone unrightfully incarcerated should be upset/angry.

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

@@Lombokstrait1 you're literally restating the things Dawkins said in the video which Wilson just dis assembled 😂

@@dianeenyi2849 No I'm not. I'm stating it quite differently. And I dismantled Doug's argument. Can you read?

@@dianeenyi2849 Charlie commits a fallacy by assuming what he needs to prove: that God doesn't exist. Then he concludes from this that our morality is subjective. The conclusion doesn't follow

@@Lombokstrait1 you would have a point if your assumption were true, but it's not. Pretty glaring error

"you're a slave to whom you obey." We have slavery everywhere. Especially considering that biblical slaves were given equal rights to citizens when it came to bodily harm, they could marry, they were given free food and housing AND a daily wage, debt cancellation, and guaranteed work for a 6 year contract term. Like modern employment but much better in principle.

Facts! But slavery still exists in the West though. It's given different labels: prison, porn industries, prostitution, taxes etc

Underrated comment

Because RD walked right into it.

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 that's a straw man if I ever saw one. We *never* said that we can meet that moral standard. The word of God says that we *can't* meet that standard. And *that* is the entire reason we need Jesus. And while we rely *entirely* on Jesus for our salvation when we stand before God after we die, we are still called to follow in Christ's example while we are here on earth. We are saved by faith, changed by Christ, and our faith is then completed by an outward change of actions caused by a change of motivations, which was caused by a change of heart. "You will know them by their fruit." But we never claimed to be perfect, nor will we be until after we die, which is when God completes His work in us.

I’m the same with Chesterton lol

Lol, I've never understood that. When he said "debates in government" to help determine morality I just about lost it. That's the kind of stuff trolls say

I'm English and I agree. His theories are very airy fairy.

@@MrCharlieC23 do we get all the rejected Brits here In America? Like when Britain emptied its prisons and started sending criminals here by the boatload and we had to start firing on them to get them to stop?

@@scottwall8419 I guess you get a bit of everything there considering you are a land of immigrants - and that's with no disrespect.

😂yes

That "thing" can perhaps give a standard, but then morality is arbitrary, not objective

Exactly. The reason it doesn't work is because one must ask, what defines human flourishing? Aka, by what standard do you label something as human flourishing? And why is human flourishing a good thing? It's just pushing the argument down another rung but you still haven't reached the ground you're resting on yet.

@@jeremyedgar7123 yeah the environmentalists literally don't care about human flourishing at all

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

Doug does have a hearty laugh.

@@Lombokstrait1 how many times did you post this? Are we at 20 yet? Anyway, this guy assumes what he needs to prove and everything he says afterwards is arbitrary and unproven

No today is better because they have Kool-aid hair.

This is a case of someone who is absolutely very intelligent - no doubt about that, shown to be an absolute stupid idiot at the same exact time. "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools". This is that case if there ever was one!

@@joeadrian2860 It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

@Kenny Bugh um no. It would if the bible were legitimate. The is the trap door to Doug's thought process. The bible is man made. Nothing will change that.

@Kenny Bugh Yes. I like Dawkins. Thanks for clarifying.

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

@Drew Ferguson sad thing is that he's too blind to notice that he hasn't proved anything, just assumes what he thinks is the truth and goes from there. Fallacious reasoning

@Drew Ferguson But your god is real.

That's right. It's why the US Constitution is a demonic document. It denies God and his Anointed and makes 'We the People' God.

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

@@Lombokstrait1 a fool says in his heart there is no God

@@SMNR777 They (the men who wrote the bible) put that in there to coerce people into believing your religion.

@@Lombokstrait1 God inspired those men to write those things whether they behaved perfectly in God's eyes is up for debate

@@Lombokstrait1 I don't think that w ord means what you think it means. Also, anyone reading should be able to notice that Charlie begs the question by assuming what he needs to prove. Everything he says afterwards is arbitrary

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

@@Lombokstrait1 "progress is improving" the deadliest time period in human history is not even a century ago. Yep humanity is really making strides. Also to your point we have an objective moral standard of God. You do not. Your morality just goes with whatever the flow that society decides. You might want to read a history book if you think the collective is a good idea on where to get your morals.

@@firingallcylinders2949 People have been killing people forever. They would've killed a lot more in ancient times only if they had had the means and the volume of people to kill. So your point is hollow. My point is your god is man made fiction, thus your standard is. About morality and its flow. So does yours, does it not? Your bible says slavery was just fine. Yet you're not trying to procure, any are you? Regarding history and the common good, you're living in that reality right now. That is why we have roads, airports, farms, grocery stores, schools, a government and so on. It is why we have a civilization. Sounds like you're in denial. A underestimated psychosis.

@@Lombokstrait1 since you're reposting this to get engagement in several threads, I'll also point out here that you've committed a begging the question fallacy by assuming what you have yet to prove. Your conclusion that biblical morality is subjective doesn't follow because you haven't proved God doesn't exist

@@horrificpleasantry9474 You haven't proven a god exists either. And neither has Dug.

Proper English language, unlike the improper American English

Exactly. "Morality is determined by dinner party conversation, judges and conversations and debates in government" so its determined by rich people, powerful people and corrupt people, got it. If I had to choose one group to not determine morality or would be 100 state senators lol. What a crazy thing for people to think is a good idea

@@scottwall8419 I know and trusting atheist on what is moral when they profess morals dont exist while all the while saying things are immoral.... mental diahreah is taking place lol

@Kenny Bugh not proven to you is the only truthful statement you can honestly make in this instance. I'm thoroughly convinced

@Kenny Bugh things yet to be proven doesnt follow it isnt true. Agnosticism is But if god does exist then yes moral absolutes cab exist. If atheism is true there is no such thing simply human convention. So you can disagree with theist all day. However atheism doesnt starred being a moral system just because you dont believe in god. Humans are ultimately meaningless in atheism which means morals are not real. Only human opinion and human opinion varies and disagrees with one another. No standard of morals in atheism.

@Kenny Bugh we are intellectually consistent. Dawkins admits morals aren't real yet judges things to be immoral. INTELLECTUAL HYPOCRISY

He's done a lot for clarifying evolutionary theory but then there's dunning -kruger

He's smart and well educated. I can understand why you feel intimidated. Also; he's upper middle class, not aristocrat. His background and generation shouldn't be used against us.

So why is he also a renowned writer? He writes in a British accent?

He's obviously done a lot for biology but when it comes to history and philosophy he's woefully inadequate

@@JoshMcSwain Gonna take the craziest, wildest swing in the dark here. Are you religious?

But does this mean I can only watch this one video?

So true. A manifold truth as Doug also raised wise children. I’m edified by Nate Wilson as much as Doug. And from what I’ve seen his daughter teaches women and is also awesome, but I’m not as familiar with her.

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

Charlie commits a begging the question fallacy and everything that follows is arbitrary

@@horrificpleasantry9474 See below. The pretend god of the bible is arbitrary.

I pray you one day experience the love of God Charile. I'd be lost without Him.

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

@@Lombokstrait1 You just made a logical fallacy, Renfro. It is called 'strawman fallacy'. Christians do NOT claim that we MADE UP religion, we claim we know the truth. Jesus Christ is the foundation of truth. It's either that you find the truth or then you invent the truth either on your own or according to the collective means such as democracy. Jesus said: 'I am the way, the TRUTH, the life, no one comes unto the Father except through me'. When we talk about morality and goodness, we talk about God. God IS Good! He is the moral standard. We did NOT come up with that, we, that is born again christians, claim and believe that God Himself used humans to reveal His will to us in the Bible. We've been created into the image of God and because God is reason, logic and truth, we can also reason, use logic and find truth - Jesus. If By democratic means we would decide what's right and what is wrong then today murder could be right, tomorrow wrong. It would be just a matter of opinion. and hey, who decides if it would be the majority deciding that it would be right or wrong? why not minority? who says we must follow the scientists' views on what is right or wrong? who decides? Yet again, all about subjective morality. But absolute morality does exist and that absolute morality(goodness) is God almighty. You can know Him too by the things that have been created by Him. When you look at nature, history, read the BIble in its context, you can see this God truly exists. If God does not exist then everything goes bro. He does but, as romans 1 says, people suppress the truth(of God's Word) in unrighteousness(wickedness). They wanna live in their wickedness, like stealing all day long, than humbling themselves and trusting in Jesus Christ for their salvation and source of truth. As Jesus(who is truth) said: whosoever is of the truth hears me(Jesus). God bless

What exactly makes this guy a genius? Every time I hear him speak on things like this he sounds like a buffoon.

It's really not that complicated. It's democracy and society. What constitutes civilization. We collectively decide on what the morality will be. And then Doug says by what standard? My answer to that is: The same sort of one you are using Doug. A man made one. Religion is man made. So your supposed standard is a mirage, just like your god. Your morality was created by men. And what is progress without a contrived foundation? Easy, progress is improving and achieving whatever we set out to do. We choose with our brains what all that is. That's it. Sorry, but your god doesn't exist and doesn't need to.

@@Lombokstrait1 Your religion is just as man made as anyone else's. What makes you so godlike?

@Kenny Bugh Yes. He has a "religion". The dictionary definition of religion is a belief system, and just because he doesnt honor a "God" outside of himself, means he has declared himself the arbiter of right and wrong and all morality, and by default has become His own "God". Lol

@Kenny Bugh Lol. Atheists are their own "God's" by default. To say otherwise is a fools errand. I wouldn't be ashamed to say that if I was in that camp. Stand up for what you believe, and don't be ashamed of it.

@Kenny Bugh You are the one who's making the "straw man arguement". And obviously, we will have to agree to disagree. You will never change my worldview, and most likely, I will never change yours. That we should be able to agree upon.