Richard Dawkins is FINISHED

I was very happy some years ago, I was very happy some years ago, Richard, to quote you in a a sermon on Richard, to quote you in a a sermon on Richard, to quote you in a a sermon on Easter day in Canterbury Cathedral, Easter day in Canterbury Cathedral, Easter day in Canterbury Cathedral, [laughter] a passage from one of your [laughter] a passage from one of your [laughter] a passage from one of your books which I thought wonderfully evoked books which I thought wonderfully evoked books which I thought wonderfully evoked the sense of awe, mystery, delight in the sense of awe, mystery, delight in the sense of awe, mystery, delight in the beauty of things. And I remember in the beauty of things. And I remember in the beauty of things. And I remember in one of our previous conversations, you one of our previous conversations, you one of our previous conversations, you were saying that to introduce an extra were saying that to introduce an extra were saying that to introduce an extra explanatory level or an extra explanatory level or an extra explanatory level or an extra explanatory agent almost spoils the the explanatory agent almost spoils the the explanatory agent almost spoils the the sense of awe in the thing itself. So if sense of awe in the thing itself. So if sense of awe in the thing itself. So if I understand you correctly, you're I understand you correctly, you're I understand you correctly, you're saying the system of explanation that saying the system of explanation that saying the system of explanation that science provides of the phenomena science provides of the phenomena science provides of the phenomena amongst which we live and of which we amongst which we live and of which we amongst which we live and of which we ourselves are a part. That system of ourselves are a part. That system of ourselves are a part. That system of explanation is elegant, explanation is elegant, explanation is elegant, coherent. It interlocks. There is both coherent. It interlocks. There is both coherent. It interlocks. There is both an aesthetic and an intellectual delight an aesthetic and an intellectual delight an aesthetic and an intellectual delight in that interlocking. that to understand in that interlocking. that to understand in that interlocking. that to understand that in its fullest sense to see the that in its fullest sense to see the that in its fullest sense to see the potential universality of that structure potential universality of that structure potential universality of that structure as a way into into truth an abiding as a way into into truth an abiding as a way into into truth an abiding truth. It doesn't just depend on how I truth. It doesn't just depend on how I truth. It doesn't just depend on how I feel or how the world goes. But that is feel or how the world goes. But that is feel or how the world goes. But that is almost an approach to what religion almost an approach to what religion almost an approach to what religion wrongly in your view thinks of as the wrongly in your view thinks of as the wrongly in your view thinks of as the deeper level, the extra level. It's deeper level, the extra level. It's deeper level, the extra level. It's introducing that extra element spoils introducing that extra element spoils introducing that extra element spoils it. It knocks it off center. It says, it. It knocks it off center. It says, it. It knocks it off center. It says, "Well, actually, all this this beauty of "Well, actually, all this this beauty of "Well, actually, all this this beauty of the poetry of reality, if you like, all the poetry of reality, if you like, all the poetry of reality, if you like, all of that is some undermined. If we have of that is some undermined. If we have of that is some undermined. If we have to bring in something else outside the to bring in something else outside the to bring in something else outside the system to make full sense of it, why not system to make full sense of it, why not system to make full sense of it, why not let it be itself?"

let it be itself?" let it be itself?" >> Absolutely. Spot on. Yes. That that is >> Absolutely. Spot on. Yes. That that is >> Absolutely. Spot on. Yes. That that is exactly what I feel. Thank you very much exactly what I feel. Thank you very much exactly what I feel. Thank you very much for putting it much better than I could for putting it much better than I could for putting it much better than I could put put it. put put it. put put it. >> Wow. How interesting that Ron Williams, >> Wow. How interesting that Ron Williams, >> Wow. How interesting that Ron Williams, the ex Archbishop of Cansbury, an the ex Archbishop of Cansbury, an the ex Archbishop of Cansbury, an extremely religious man, perfectly extremely religious man, perfectly extremely religious man, perfectly eloquently puts Dawkins positions to the eloquently puts Dawkins positions to the eloquently puts Dawkins positions to the point where he actually says, "You put point where he actually says, "You put point where he actually says, "You put it better than I can." Wow. it better than I can." Wow. it better than I can." Wow. Um, I think we both agree about the Um, I think we both agree about the Um, I think we both agree about the beauty of reality. um the poetic beauty beauty of reality. um the poetic beauty beauty of reality. um the poetic beauty of reality. And um for me part of the of reality. And um for me part of the of reality. And um for me part of the beauty is the fact that it is explicable beauty is the fact that it is explicable beauty is the fact that it is explicable in terms of in terms of in terms of absolute primordial simplicity and then absolute primordial simplicity and then absolute primordial simplicity and then we develop from that into the prodigious we develop from that into the prodigious we develop from that into the prodigious complexity um which is the world that we complexity um which is the world that we complexity um which is the world that we that we live in. And to me it is a that we live in. And to me it is a that we live in. And to me it is a betrayal of the scientific enterprise to betrayal of the scientific enterprise to betrayal of the scientific enterprise to import as you say this extra element import as you say this extra element import as you say this extra element having having having >> so so it's interesting he says import >> so so it's interesting he says import >> so so it's interesting he says import because there's a lot of people because there's a lot of people because there's a lot of people especially Christian apologists whatever especially Christian apologists whatever especially Christian apologists whatever who would say that well no like Thomas who would say that well no like Thomas who would say that well no like Thomas Aquinus speaks about with clockwork and Aquinus speaks about with clockwork and Aquinus speaks about with clockwork and you know the finetuning argument you know the finetuning argument you know the finetuning argument famously um that's how we see the world famously um that's how we see the world famously um that's how we see the world you know to see the world in all its you know to see the world in all its you know to see the world in all its complexities to really know the world we complexities to really know the world we complexities to really know the world we see God through that we understand God see God through that we understand God see God through that we understand God better. Dawkins is saying, "Well, no, we better. Dawkins is saying, "Well, no, we better. Dawkins is saying, "Well, no, we we got something here. We got how we got something here. We got how we got something here. We got how creation was was. We got the nothing to creation was was. We got the nothing to creation was was. We got the nothing to something, and that's beautiful. That's

something, and that's beautiful. That's something, and that's beautiful. That's incredible. We don't need to import this incredible. We don't need to import this incredible. We don't need to import this fantasy of feel goodness actually fantasy of feel goodness actually fantasy of feel goodness actually degrades the beauty and the poetry of degrades the beauty and the poetry of degrades the beauty and the poetry of the the miraculousness of the thing the the miraculousness of the thing the the miraculousness of the thing itself. um which which is an interesting itself. um which which is an interesting itself. um which which is an interesting argument, but I would say it's I don't argument, but I would say it's I don't argument, but I would say it's I don't think it's fair to say imports because think it's fair to say imports because think it's fair to say imports because there's just so many extremely there's just so many extremely there's just so many extremely compelling arguments for the existence compelling arguments for the existence compelling arguments for the existence of God. I mean, Alex O' Conor who used of God. I mean, Alex O' Conor who used of God. I mean, Alex O' Conor who used to obviously be like a proper new to obviously be like a proper new to obviously be like a proper new atheist person, you know, he says the atheist person, you know, he says the atheist person, you know, he says the best argument for God is how many best argument for God is how many best argument for God is how many arguments there are for God. the arguments there are for God. the arguments there are for God. the finetuning argument and so many finetuning argument and so many finetuning argument and so many philosophical arguments. Um, even simple philosophical arguments. Um, even simple philosophical arguments. Um, even simple moral ones like, you know, how do we moral ones like, you know, how do we moral ones like, you know, how do we know a line is straight? Because we know know a line is straight? Because we know know a line is straight? Because we know what a wonky line looks like. Um, Clive what a wonky line looks like. Um, Clive what a wonky line looks like. Um, Clive Staples Lewis. Well, that's more Staples Lewis. Well, that's more Staples Lewis. Well, that's more morality rather than God. But God basing morality rather than God. But God basing morality rather than God. But God basing our morality. Um, and Dawkins here our morality. Um, and Dawkins here our morality. Um, and Dawkins here saying importing Christianity saying importing Christianity saying importing Christianity I don't think does justice or I don't think does justice or I don't think does justice or like even shows Rowan's point of view like even shows Rowan's point of view like even shows Rowan's point of view because Rowan, I would say, is a deeply because Rowan, I would say, is a deeply because Rowan, I would say, is a deeply religious man. It seems like he's very religious man. It seems like he's very religious man. It seems like he's very eloquently eloquently eloquently displayed Dawkins to the point where he displayed Dawkins to the point where he displayed Dawkins to the point where he says he did it better than him. But says he did it better than him. But says he did it better than him. But let's see what Dawkins actually let's see what Dawkins actually let's see what Dawkins actually summarizes Rowan's position if he can summarizes Rowan's position if he can summarizes Rowan's position if he can kind of do it with the same gravitas, if kind of do it with the same gravitas, if kind of do it with the same gravitas, if you want to call it that. He said that I you want to call it that. He said that I you want to call it that. He said that I do think that the God hypothesis is an do think that the God hypothesis is an do think that the God hypothesis is an immensely exciting scientific hypothesis

immensely exciting scientific hypothesis immensely exciting scientific hypothesis because if it's true it it is absolutely because if it's true it it is absolutely because if it's true it it is absolutely uh changes the entire scientific uh changes the entire scientific uh changes the entire scientific enterprise if if enterprise if if enterprise if if >> I mean that is quite I would never have >> I mean that is quite I would never have >> I mean that is quite I would never have thought a few years ago that Dawkins say thought a few years ago that Dawkins say thought a few years ago that Dawkins say if it was true I mean I remember in a if it was true I mean I remember in a if it was true I mean I remember in a debate famously when someone says what debate famously when someone says what debate famously when someone says what if you're wrong and he says what if I'm if you're wrong and he says what if I'm if you're wrong and he says what if I'm wrong about leprechauns what if I'm wrong about leprechauns what if I'm wrong about leprechauns what if I'm wrong about Father Christmas what if I'm wrong about Father Christmas what if I'm wrong about Father Christmas what if I'm wrong about the spaghetti hair monster wrong about the spaghetti hair monster wrong about the spaghetti hair monster to kind of degrading every truth around to kind of degrading every truth around to kind of degrading every truth around God and Christianity to God and Christianity to God and Christianity to the most bogus ridiculous things like the most bogus ridiculous things like the most bogus ridiculous things like fairies and stuff. Um, so it's it's very fairies and stuff. Um, so it's it's very fairies and stuff. Um, so it's it's very interesting because you're seeing a interesting because you're seeing a interesting because you're seeing a shift there. Like for Dawkins to say shift there. Like for Dawkins to say shift there. Like for Dawkins to say that I think means that something is that I think means that something is that I think means that something is going on in Dawkins head. something is going on in Dawkins head. something is going on in Dawkins head. something is shifting where his vehement dismissal shifting where his vehement dismissal shifting where his vehement dismissal seems to be just tweaking a bit. Now, seems to be just tweaking a bit. Now, seems to be just tweaking a bit. Now, some people can say, well, he's always some people can say, well, he's always some people can say, well, he's always said this, he's always done that. Fair said this, he's always done that. Fair said this, he's always done that. Fair enough. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe what I'm enough. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe what I'm enough. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe what I'm saying here is inaccurate and he has had saying here is inaccurate and he has had saying here is inaccurate and he has had skepticism skepticism skepticism around being completely right and maybe around being completely right and maybe around being completely right and maybe I am wrongly displaying Dawkins. But I am wrongly displaying Dawkins. But I am wrongly displaying Dawkins. But from what I've seen and read, it doesn't from what I've seen and read, it doesn't from what I've seen and read, it doesn't seem like Dawkins has held a position seem like Dawkins has held a position seem like Dawkins has held a position like this. if it is true. The fact that like this. if it is true. The fact that like this. if it is true. The fact that he's even entertaining such a he's even entertaining such a he's even entertaining such a possibility shows a radical shift within possibility shows a radical shift within possibility shows a radical shift within Dawkins own view of God, Christianity, Dawkins own view of God, Christianity, Dawkins own view of God, Christianity, and faith. And you know, who knows, and faith. And you know, who knows, and faith. And you know, who knows, ladies and gentlemen, is Dawkins on the

ladies and gentlemen, is Dawkins on the ladies and gentlemen, is Dawkins on the way to be a Christian? way to be a Christian? way to be a Christian? If it were true, if if if I thought that If it were true, if if if I thought that If it were true, if if if I thought that at the base of the universe there was a at the base of the universe there was a at the base of the universe there was a guiding intelligence who developed who guiding intelligence who developed who guiding intelligence who developed who invented the laws of physics, um that invented the laws of physics, um that invented the laws of physics, um that would be a stunning uh revelation to me would be a stunning uh revelation to me would be a stunning uh revelation to me if if somehow that could be could be if if somehow that could be could be if if somehow that could be could be proved because it was it completely proved because it was it completely proved because it was it completely changes science. You can't you can't I changes science. You can't you can't I changes science. You can't you can't I think a number of my scientific think a number of my scientific think a number of my scientific colleagues go completely wrong when they colleagues go completely wrong when they colleagues go completely wrong when they say we do our science and we let say we do our science and we let say we do our science and we let theologians get on with their job if theologians get on with their job if theologians get on with their job if they if they like. We're not interested they if they like. We're not interested they if they like. We're not interested in that. I'm very interested in in it in that. I'm very interested in in it in that. I'm very interested in in it because if it's true, it completely because if it's true, it completely because if it's true, it completely changes the entire scientific changes the entire scientific changes the entire scientific enterprise. Um, but I haven't uh done enterprise. Um, but I haven't uh done enterprise. Um, but I haven't uh done what you wanted me to do. what you wanted me to do. what you wanted me to do. >> No. Well, we'll come to that. Now, a >> No. Well, we'll come to that. Now, a >> No. Well, we'll come to that. Now, a really helpful response and one we'll we really helpful response and one we'll we really helpful response and one we'll we will dig into. Um, well, let me ask you will dig into. Um, well, let me ask you will dig into. Um, well, let me ask you the same question first though, Richard, the same question first though, Richard, the same question first though, Richard, which is if you wouldn't mind doing your which is if you wouldn't mind doing your which is if you wouldn't mind doing your best to try and summarize what you best to try and summarize what you best to try and summarize what you anticipate Rowan's perspective on this anticipate Rowan's perspective on this anticipate Rowan's perspective on this question is why Rowan believes that God question is why Rowan believes that God question is why Rowan believes that God may be the best explanation for the may be the best explanation for the may be the best explanation for the poetry of reality. poetry of reality. poetry of reality. It's very clear that Rowan has a well It's very clear that Rowan has a well It's very clear that Rowan has a well he's a published poet which I'm not for he's a published poet which I'm not for he's a published poet which I'm not for one thing. Um he has a poetic um insight one thing. Um he has a poetic um insight one thing. Um he has a poetic um insight into the world into nature. Uh and we into the world into nature. Uh and we into the world into nature. Uh and we agree I think totally about that we have agree I think totally about that we have agree I think totally about that we have he has no problem with evolution um he has no problem with evolution um he has no problem with evolution um which isn't true of all theologians.

which isn't true of all theologians. which isn't true of all theologians. Um, Um, Um, but there is the the biblical dimension but there is the the biblical dimension but there is the the biblical dimension which I've been reading in your latest which I've been reading in your latest which I've been reading in your latest book. Um, which I find a little book. Um, which I find a little book. Um, which I find a little disturbing when you, disturbing when you, disturbing when you, for example, while you accept evolution, for example, while you accept evolution, for example, while you accept evolution, you then also talk about the sin of the you then also talk about the sin of the you then also talk about the sin of the first people. first people. first people. So here we have Dawkins kind of going So here we have Dawkins kind of going So here we have Dawkins kind of going back to his old ways and speaking from back to his old ways and speaking from back to his old ways and speaking from and it is an interesting question. I and it is an interesting question. I and it is an interesting question. I think original sin is one of the think original sin is one of the think original sin is one of the I mean it's one doctrine I don't I mean it's one doctrine I don't I mean it's one doctrine I don't properly understand in the sense that properly understand in the sense that properly understand in the sense that does it make the most sense like if does it make the most sense like if does it make the most sense like if Genesis was poetry where does sin come Genesis was poetry where does sin come Genesis was poetry where does sin come from? Why did we need atonement? um that from? Why did we need atonement? um that from? Why did we need atonement? um that you know I think they ask some really you know I think they ask some really you know I think they ask some really valid questions and I'm not educated valid questions and I'm not educated valid questions and I'm not educated enough on those subjects but what I enough on those subjects but what I enough on those subjects but what I think shows this quite starkly is Ron think shows this quite starkly is Ron think shows this quite starkly is Ron Williams who is a very very spiritual Williams who is a very very spiritual Williams who is a very very spiritual man who is you know theologian man who is you know theologian man who is you know theologian um lecturer um lecturer um lecturer exarch bishop priest like seem like an exarch bishop priest like seem like an exarch bishop priest like seem like an amazing man right when he summarizes amazing man right when he summarizes amazing man right when he summarizes Dawkins who basically says that Dawkins who basically says that Dawkins who basically says that everything he believes is complete nons everything he believes is complete nons everything he believes is complete nons nonsense. He in a most beautifully kind, nonsense. He in a most beautifully kind, nonsense. He in a most beautifully kind, considerate way perfectly lays out what considerate way perfectly lays out what considerate way perfectly lays out what he thinks Dawkins believes and how he he thinks Dawkins believes and how he he thinks Dawkins believes and how he believes it. And when Dawkins is asked

believes it. And when Dawkins is asked believes it. And when Dawkins is asked to do the same thing, to do the same thing, to do the same thing, one of the first things he goes to is a one of the first things he goes to is a one of the first things he goes to is a critique. I mean, that is quite, you critique. I mean, that is quite, you critique. I mean, that is quite, you know, like if some, it's like, you know, know, like if some, it's like, you know, know, like if some, it's like, you know, if someone says a love beautiful if someone says a love beautiful if someone says a love beautiful compliment about you, they're like, "Oh, compliment about you, they're like, "Oh, compliment about you, they're like, "Oh, you look incredible. You know, you're you look incredible. You know, you're you look incredible. You know, you're the most beautiful person I've ever the most beautiful person I've ever the most beautiful person I've ever seen." And then you go around saying, seen." And then you go around saying, seen." And then you go around saying, "Yeah, your shirt does doesn't look "Yeah, your shirt does doesn't look "Yeah, your shirt does doesn't look great, does it?" You'll be like, "Hang great, does it?" You'll be like, "Hang great, does it?" You'll be like, "Hang on a sec. I'm not asking you to on a sec. I'm not asking you to on a sec. I'm not asking you to compliment me the same, but to go and compliment me the same, but to go and compliment me the same, but to go and critique seems a bit um bongas." And I critique seems a bit um bongas." And I critique seems a bit um bongas." And I think it also shows the heart posture of think it also shows the heart posture of think it also shows the heart posture of someone because Rowan Williams really I someone because Rowan Williams really I someone because Rowan Williams really I think in his heart believes in God and think in his heart believes in God and think in his heart believes in God and really does believe that Jesus of really does believe that Jesus of really does believe that Jesus of Nazareth was divine, was the son of God Nazareth was divine, was the son of God Nazareth was divine, was the son of God who walked, who performed miracles. I who walked, who performed miracles. I who walked, who performed miracles. I think he does believe it and um his think he does believe it and um his think he does believe it and um his heart's in the right place in talking. I heart's in the right place in talking. I heart's in the right place in talking. I think this does reveal a bigger think this does reveal a bigger think this does reveal a bigger framework about um how we view each framework about um how we view each framework about um how we view each other. You know, we see God in everyone other. You know, we see God in everyone other. You know, we see God in everyone and you know, someone could disagree and you know, someone could disagree and you know, someone could disagree with me. Someone could have a different with me. Someone could have a different with me. Someone could have a different political view. Someone could have but political view. Someone could have but political view. Someone could have but you know, their intent is good. They you know, their intent is good. They you know, their intent is good. They just have a different direction of the just have a different direction of the just have a different direction of the truth and a different view of what could truth and a different view of what could truth and a different view of what could be better for society, what could be be better for society, what could be be better for society, what could be better for the country you live in. and better for the country you live in. and better for the country you live in. and you you you will the good of the other.

you you you will the good of the other. you you you will the good of the other. You know, you see the best in them. You You know, you see the best in them. You You know, you see the best in them. You see the the part of them that you might see the the part of them that you might see the the part of them that you might disagree with. Your heart might be disagree with. Your heart might be disagree with. Your heart might be screaming out they're wrong. They are screaming out they're wrong. They are screaming out they're wrong. They are completely idiots. They're blah blah. completely idiots. They're blah blah. completely idiots. They're blah blah. But you you want to find the, you know, But you you want to find the, you know, But you you want to find the, you know, you don't want to be prudish. You don't you don't want to be prudish. You don't you don't want to be prudish. You don't want to be judge judgmental. You want to want to be judge judgmental. You want to want to be judge judgmental. You want to see the good the, you know, the person see the good the, you know, the person see the good the, you know, the person that God made. You want to see that in that God made. You want to see that in that God made. You want to see that in them and you want to see their good them and you want to see their good them and you want to see their good intentions, you know. But Dawkins here intentions, you know. But Dawkins here intentions, you know. But Dawkins here after he has just said that he just after he has just said that he just after he has just said that he just comes with a negative. And I find this comes with a negative. And I find this comes with a negative. And I find this really like without any kind of really like without any kind of really like without any kind of commentary by Rowan. I think this just commentary by Rowan. I think this just commentary by Rowan. I think this just speaks volumes. And you can see Rowan's speaks volumes. And you can see Rowan's speaks volumes. And you can see Rowan's face actually here where he's kind of a face actually here where he's kind of a face actually here where he's kind of a bit hurt, I think, because he he loves bit hurt, I think, because he he loves bit hurt, I think, because he he loves Dawkins. Um, and he's really a very kind Dawkins. Um, and he's really a very kind Dawkins. Um, and he's really a very kind bloke. And Dawkins has just basically bloke. And Dawkins has just basically bloke. And Dawkins has just basically almost reaffirmed the the moral belief almost reaffirmed the the moral belief almost reaffirmed the the moral belief that if you don't believe in God, what that if you don't believe in God, what that if you don't believe in God, what is a groundwork for your morality? What is a groundwork for your morality? What is a groundwork for your morality? What is, you know, if when you close the door is, you know, if when you close the door is, you know, if when you close the door at night, what is the thing that keeps at night, what is the thing that keeps at night, what is the thing that keeps you in check? What's the thing that, you you in check? What's the thing that, you you in check? What's the thing that, you know, you do because you love, not just know, you do because you love, not just know, you do because you love, not just because people can see? And I think here because people can see? And I think here because people can see? And I think here it it seems like Dawkins's ego is it it seems like Dawkins's ego is it it seems like Dawkins's ego is getting in the way. Now I'm not going to getting in the way. Now I'm not going to getting in the way. Now I'm not going to say he doesn't have a good point about say he doesn't have a good point about say he doesn't have a good point about the fall. He does, I think, here. But the fall. He does, I think, here. But the fall. He does, I think, here. But it's just remarkable that he doesn't it's just remarkable that he doesn't it's just remarkable that he doesn't start off with a compliment. I mean, start off with a compliment. I mean, start off with a compliment. I mean, just being like, "Yeah, I think you have just being like, "Yeah, I think you have just being like, "Yeah, I think you have an incredible an incredible an incredible knowledge of the universe and world. And

knowledge of the universe and world. And knowledge of the universe and world. And I think your good nature comes to this I think your good nature comes to this I think your good nature comes to this conclusion, but I think you're too conclusion, but I think you're too conclusion, but I think you're too motivated by feelings rather than motivated by feelings rather than motivated by feelings rather than facts." I don't know, something like facts." I don't know, something like facts." I don't know, something like that, you know. Um, but instead to that, you know. Um, but instead to that, you know. Um, but instead to critique this, I just think it's very critique this, I just think it's very critique this, I just think it's very poor from Dawkins. I really do. And I poor from Dawkins. I really do. And I poor from Dawkins. I really do. And I think also people listening will pick up think also people listening will pick up think also people listening will pick up on that. I think a lot. And I'll be in on that. I think a lot. And I'll be in on that. I think a lot. And I'll be in I' I've already seen a few tweets people I' I've already seen a few tweets people I' I've already seen a few tweets people actually speaking about how this moment actually speaking about how this moment actually speaking about how this moment really was like a game changer almost in really was like a game changer almost in really was like a game changer almost in um how they viewed Dawkins a little bit um how they viewed Dawkins a little bit um how they viewed Dawkins a little bit and and just it really displayed both and and just it really displayed both and and just it really displayed both sides very well just with just the sides very well just with just the sides very well just with just the subtlety of going with a negative not a subtlety of going with a negative not a subtlety of going with a negative not a positive positive positive >> Eve which you know of course they never >> Eve which you know of course they never >> Eve which you know of course they never existed and yet at some poetic level I existed and yet at some poetic level I existed and yet at some poetic level I suppose it's a poetic level it's a suppose it's a poetic level it's a suppose it's a poetic level it's a symbolic level and allegorical level um symbolic level and allegorical level um symbolic level and allegorical level um you're quite happy to ban about um the you're quite happy to ban about um the you're quite happy to ban about um the Genesis story of Adam and Eve, the fall, Genesis story of Adam and Eve, the fall, Genesis story of Adam and Eve, the fall, original sin, um the redemption. Um and original sin, um the redemption. Um and original sin, um the redemption. Um and I find it hard to see how you on the one I find it hard to see how you on the one I find it hard to see how you on the one hand take evolution seriously and on the hand take evolution seriously and on the hand take evolution seriously and on the other hand um other hand um other hand um also also also talk about Adam and Eve as though they talk about Adam and Eve as though they talk about Adam and Eve as though they existed. You know they didn't. the existed. You know they didn't. the existed. You know they didn't. the congregation listening to your sermon congregation listening to your sermon congregation listening to your sermon might not realize that you know they might not realize that you know they might not realize that you know they didn't exist.

didn't exist. didn't exist. >> Just just before we have Rowan respond >> Just just before we have Rowan respond >> Just just before we have Rowan respond to that then what what's your best go at to that then what what's your best go at to that then what what's your best go at summarizing summarizing summarizing >> and Justin has to interrupt there to to >> and Justin has to interrupt there to to >> and Justin has to interrupt there to to reiterate to Dawkins to kind of in the reiterate to Dawkins to kind of in the reiterate to Dawkins to kind of in the most polite way possible and Justin did most polite way possible and Justin did most polite way possible and Justin did a great job interviewing it. Brilliant a great job interviewing it. Brilliant a great job interviewing it. Brilliant job interviewing him here the way Justin job interviewing him here the way Justin job interviewing him here the way Justin has to come and say well no how how do has to come and say well no how how do has to come and say well no how how do you display Ren's opinion? um he has to you display Ren's opinion? um he has to you display Ren's opinion? um he has to almost remind him to almost remind him to almost remind him to like like like like like like just put himself in the shoes of someone just put himself in the shoes of someone just put himself in the shoes of someone else. And I think it's something where else. And I think it's something where else. And I think it's something where if you can't argue your opponent's if you can't argue your opponent's if you can't argue your opponent's position, then you don't really know position, then you don't really know position, then you don't really know their position. And it's such a good their position. And it's such a good their position. And it's such a good thing to do whenever whatever political thing to do whenever whatever political thing to do whenever whatever political issue, if if you can't argue their their issue, if if you can't argue their their issue, if if you can't argue their their opinion, you don't really know what opinion, you don't really know what opinion, you don't really know what you're talking about. Um because to you're talking about. Um because to you're talking about. Um because to you got you got to really drown yourself you got you got to really drown yourself you got you got to really drown yourself I think in the other side of what people I think in the other side of what people I think in the other side of what people think to actually have an objective think to actually have an objective think to actually have an objective view. You can't just stroke your ego and view. You can't just stroke your ego and view. You can't just stroke your ego and listen to what you know. But um we'll listen to what you know. But um we'll listen to what you know. But um we'll see what else is said.

see what else is said. see what else is said. >> How you think Rowan puts this together? >> How you think Rowan puts this together? >> How you think Rowan puts this together? and and why why he would still granted and and why why he would still granted and and why why he would still granted that he believes in an evolutionary that he believes in an evolutionary that he believes in an evolutionary history to earth believe that God is history to earth believe that God is history to earth believe that God is somehow underneath that that process at somehow underneath that that process at somehow underneath that that process at some at some level. some at some level. some at some level. Well, I'm rather baffled by that. I mean Well, I'm rather baffled by that. I mean Well, I'm rather baffled by that. I mean I I I don't have a um I I've I've I've I I I don't have a um I I've I've I've I I I don't have a um I I've I've I've said that what I what I see as a as a said that what I what I see as a as a said that what I what I see as a as a disjunct between on the one hand disjunct between on the one hand disjunct between on the one hand evolution and on on the other hand um evolution and on on the other hand um evolution and on on the other hand um using Genesis using Genesis using Genesis I suppose if you actually say explicitly I suppose if you actually say explicitly I suppose if you actually say explicitly this is an allegory I would not have a this is an allegory I would not have a this is an allegory I would not have a problem with that but I feel maybe I'm problem with that but I feel maybe I'm problem with that but I feel maybe I'm not attacking I mean just theologians not attacking I mean just theologians not attacking I mean just theologians generally do this it's a very common generally do this it's a very common generally do this it's a very common thing that theologians do is to um elide thing that theologians do is to um elide thing that theologians do is to um elide the to make no no easy distinction the to make no no easy distinction the to make no no easy distinction between what is actually true and what between what is actually true and what between what is actually true and what is allegorical. is allegorical. is allegorical. Okay. Well, let let's go from there. Okay. Well, let let's go from there. Okay. Well, let let's go from there. Rowan, let's how do you feel Richard has Rowan, let's how do you feel Richard has Rowan, let's how do you feel Richard has done in sort of trying to summarize your done in sort of trying to summarize your done in sort of trying to summarize your position?

>> He's quite right, of course, in in >> He's quite right, of course, in in saying that I I don't have a problem saying that I I don't have a problem saying that I I don't have a problem with evolution or with, broadly with evolution or with, broadly with evolution or with, broadly speaking, the scientific worldview, speaking, the scientific worldview, speaking, the scientific worldview, whatever that is. Just notice the heart whatever that is. Just notice the heart whatever that is. Just notice the heart posture there. He says he's very right. posture there. He says he's very right. posture there. He says he's very right. You know, he doesn't go in from a You know, he doesn't go in from a You know, he doesn't go in from a negative. Even that horrific summary of negative. Even that horrific summary of negative. Even that horrific summary of what Rowan, how Rowan comes to what Rowan, how Rowan comes to what Rowan, how Rowan comes to conclusion of believing in a God, how conclusion of believing in a God, how conclusion of believing in a God, how believing in Jesus, he, you know, he believing in Jesus, he, you know, he believing in Jesus, he, you know, he does a atrocious way at summarizing it. does a atrocious way at summarizing it. does a atrocious way at summarizing it. And then Rowan comes in, he's like, And then Rowan comes in, he's like, And then Rowan comes in, he's like, "Yeah, you're right." just and doesn't "Yeah, you're right." just and doesn't "Yeah, you're right." just and doesn't just show the heart posture of how just show the heart posture of how just show the heart posture of how kind of the Rowan really is seeking the kind of the Rowan really is seeking the kind of the Rowan really is seeking the best in people. Um best in people. Um best in people. Um because it would it would have been so because it would it would have been so because it would it would have been so easy to be like hang on a sec mate. I I easy to be like hang on a sec mate. I I easy to be like hang on a sec mate. I I just gave this eloquent lovely thing just gave this eloquent lovely thing just gave this eloquent lovely thing here and you've just criticized me, you here and you've just criticized me, you here and you've just criticized me, you know. I think a lot of people's reaction know. I think a lot of people's reaction know. I think a lot of people's reaction would be that. But Rowan is I really do would be that. But Rowan is I really do would be that. But Rowan is I really do think he's a godly man and I think this think he's a godly man and I think this think he's a godly man and I think this shows it as well, you know. Um, no man shows it as well, you know. Um, no man shows it as well, you know. Um, no man buys fruits.

buys fruits. buys fruits. >> I think possibly you do less than >> I think possibly you do less than >> I think possibly you do less than justice to a lot of congregations who justice to a lot of congregations who justice to a lot of congregations who who who will understand. I think that who who will understand. I think that who who will understand. I think that we're talking allegorically. I we're talking allegorically. I we're talking allegorically. I repeatedly said in teaching that um in repeatedly said in teaching that um in repeatedly said in teaching that um in in and out of the pulpit that Adam and in and out of the pulpit that Adam and in and out of the pulpit that Adam and Eve is a shorthand for saying as soon as Eve is a shorthand for saying as soon as Eve is a shorthand for saying as soon as there are human beings, there are the there are human beings, there are the there are human beings, there are the sort of confusions and tangles from sort of confusions and tangles from sort of confusions and tangles from which redemption delivers us. And that's which redemption delivers us. And that's which redemption delivers us. And that's that's what this is shorthand for. And that's what this is shorthand for. And that's what this is shorthand for. And um the way I've sometimes cast it for um the way I've sometimes cast it for um the way I've sometimes cast it for students, especially students coming students, especially students coming students, especially students coming from a rather strongly um literalist from a rather strongly um literalist from a rather strongly um literalist biblical background, is to say, well, biblical background, is to say, well, biblical background, is to say, well, what do you think God might want us to what do you think God might want us to what do you think God might want us to know as we're reading Genesis? Details know as we're reading Genesis? Details know as we're reading Genesis? Details of the first five minutes of the of the first five minutes of the of the first five minutes of the universe's history. Well, probably not. universe's history. Well, probably not. universe's history. Well, probably not. But what if God wants us to know? Two But what if God wants us to know? Two But what if God wants us to know? Two things basically that the world, the things basically that the world, the things basically that the world, the universe itself depends on the free gift universe itself depends on the free gift universe itself depends on the free gift of God. And second, that as soon as of God. And second, that as soon as of God. And second, that as soon as there are humans, there are muddled there are humans, there are muddled there are humans, there are muddled sinful and self-destructive humans. Get sinful and self-destructive humans. Get sinful and self-destructive humans. Get that clear. you know, you have some way that clear. you know, you have some way that clear. you know, you have some way into into into the worldview that Jews and Christians the worldview that Jews and Christians the worldview that Jews and Christians share. share. share. >> When my first book, The Selfish Dean, >> When my first book, The Selfish Dean, >> When my first book, The Selfish Dean, came out, came out, came out, both the chaplain at New College, my both the chaplain at New College, my both the chaplain at New College, my college, came up to me independently and college, came up to me independently and college, came up to me independently and said they thought it was all about said they thought it was all about said they thought it was all about original sin. Um, and I was a bit sort original sin. Um, and I was a bit sort original sin. Um, and I was a bit sort [laughter] of [laughter] of [laughter] of >> taken back, I'm sure, >> taken back, I'm sure, >> taken back, I'm sure, >> taken back. Um and but if you're just >> taken back. Um and but if you're just >> taken back. Um and but if you're just saying that humans are fallible, humans saying that humans are fallible, humans saying that humans are fallible, humans are um in many ways wicked and and there are um in many ways wicked and and there are um in many ways wicked and and there is wickedness in in the world and and is wickedness in in the world and and is wickedness in in the world and and then that's certainly something I'm then that's certainly something I'm then that's certainly something I'm interested in and I can talk about that.

interested in and I can talk about that. interested in and I can talk about that. Um but why talk about a fall? Why why Um but why talk about a fall? Why why Um but why talk about a fall? Why why talk about something that that needs talk about something that that needs talk about something that that needs redeeming and um something that redeeming and um something that redeeming and um something that Jesus could Jesus could Jesus could um absolve us get us absolved of by by um absolve us get us absolved of by by um absolve us get us absolved of by by his death. That's the idea that all his death. That's the idea that all his death. That's the idea that all humans from the day they're born are humans from the day they're born are humans from the day they're born are born in sin. It's it's a it's rather born in sin. It's it's a it's rather born in sin. It's it's a it's rather disagreeable. And I think what Dawkins disagreeable. And I think what Dawkins disagreeable. And I think what Dawkins says there is very fair and I definitely says there is very fair and I definitely says there is very fair and I definitely will do I think another video on that will do I think another video on that will do I think another video on that because I think that is one because I think that is one because I think that is one part of the reason of downfall and why part of the reason of downfall and why part of the reason of downfall and why there's so much suffering in the world there's so much suffering in the world there's so much suffering in the world why there's so much agony why there why there's so much agony why there why there's so much agony why there people whose whole lives are suffering people whose whole lives are suffering people whose whole lives are suffering why why is that the case and what why why is that the case and what why why is that the case and what because some bloke at an apple you know because some bloke at an apple you know because some bloke at an apple you know obviously that's poetry and I'm a obviously that's poetry and I'm a obviously that's poetry and I'm a Christian but that to kind of do the Christian but that to kind of do the Christian but that to kind of do the straw man of Christianity that's what straw man of Christianity that's what straw man of Christianity that's what they'll think. Some bloke at an apple they'll think. Some bloke at an apple they'll think. Some bloke at an apple and for that reason we got all this and for that reason we got all this and for that reason we got all this suffering. Um, and it's a fair point and suffering. Um, and it's a fair point and suffering. Um, and it's a fair point and I do need to look into it more and I'm I do need to look into it more and I'm I do need to look into it more and I'm going to introduce some people on it.

going to introduce some people on it. going to introduce some people on it. But I think the the point I want to get But I think the the point I want to get But I think the the point I want to get here is just the radical difference in here is just the radical difference in here is just the radical difference in people's heart posture because Dawkins people's heart posture because Dawkins people's heart posture because Dawkins is an extremely smart bloke, you know, is an extremely smart bloke, you know, is an extremely smart bloke, you know, one of the world's best biologists on one of the world's best biologists on one of the world's best biologists on the whole planet. So for him to come out the whole planet. So for him to come out the whole planet. So for him to come out and not be able to understand Rowan's and not be able to understand Rowan's and not be able to understand Rowan's position on how we came to conclude that position on how we came to conclude that position on how we came to conclude that God is the best explanation for the God is the best explanation for the God is the best explanation for the world, the universe, and everything we world, the universe, and everything we world, the universe, and everything we know know know and not even be able to understand that. and not even be able to understand that. and not even be able to understand that. I mean, that's bong. This Richard I mean, that's bong. This Richard I mean, that's bong. This Richard Dawkins is an incredibly smart man and Dawkins is an incredibly smart man and Dawkins is an incredibly smart man and the fact that he cannot see or the fact that he cannot see or the fact that he cannot see or understand the other's position is understand the other's position is understand the other's position is incredible. It ju it simply shows his incredible. It ju it simply shows his incredible. It ju it simply shows his lack of of understanding and lack of of understanding and lack of of understanding and it's it's almost like he cannot for the it's it's almost like he cannot for the it's it's almost like he cannot for the life of him drop himself because he life of him drop himself because he life of him drop himself because he views it as below himself almost he views it as below himself almost he views it as below himself almost he cannot drop himself to the point where cannot drop himself to the point where cannot drop himself to the point where he could ever even entertain he could ever even entertain he could ever even entertain that God is real that that God is real that that God is real that there is there could be some sort of there is there could be some sort of there is there could be some sort of argument from someone he respects like argument from someone he respects like argument from someone he respects like Rowan that God is real. He cannot even Rowan that God is real. He cannot even Rowan that God is real. He cannot even entertain that. And I think that does entertain that. And I think that does entertain that. And I think that does really show a big flaw in Dawkins really show a big flaw in Dawkins really show a big flaw in Dawkins thinking about God and also just his thinking about God and also just his thinking about God and also just his argument style because again like if you argument style because again like if you argument style because again like if you really know a subject, if you really really know a subject, if you really really know a subject, if you really know an argument, you know the argument

know an argument, you know the argument know an argument, you know the argument you could use to get to the other you could use to get to the other you could use to get to the other person's conclusion. You really could person's conclusion. You really could person's conclusion. You really could like there's so many issues from I mean like there's so many issues from I mean like there's so many issues from I mean if you look at like tax the rich for if you look at like tax the rich for if you look at like tax the rich for instance in the UK whatever you think of instance in the UK whatever you think of instance in the UK whatever you think of that if you agree with it disagree with that if you agree with it disagree with that if you agree with it disagree with it if you agree with it you could say we it if you agree with it you could say we it if you agree with it you could say we shouldn't be controlled of billionaires shouldn't be controlled of billionaires shouldn't be controlled of billionaires um and if if they flee so what and then um and if if they flee so what and then um and if if they flee so what and then you could say on the other side well if you could say on the other side well if you could say on the other side well if billionaires flee we're going to have billionaires flee we're going to have billionaires flee we're going to have lower tax revenues HMRC and then poorer lower tax revenues HMRC and then poorer lower tax revenues HMRC and then poorer people are going to have to pay for it people are going to have to pay for it people are going to have to pay for it meaning that you're actually hurting meaning that you're actually hurting meaning that you're actually hurting poorer people more see both sides poorer people more see both sides poorer people more see both sides you there's arguments there and I'm I you there's arguments there and I'm I you there's arguments there and I'm I don't even need to say my opinion on don't even need to say my opinion on don't even need to say my opinion on that matter but you you can see there's that matter but you you can see there's that matter but you you can see there's clearly arguments right um and the clearly arguments right um and the clearly arguments right um and the argument also be there well they won't argument also be there well they won't argument also be there well they won't flee so the question is well are they flee so the question is well are they flee so the question is well are they going to flee or aren't they and then going to flee or aren't they and then going to flee or aren't they and then obviously you can do a whole deep dive obviously you can do a whole deep dive obviously you can do a whole deep dive into that but the point is here is just into that but the point is here is just into that but the point is here is just how revealing heart posture is and um I how revealing heart posture is and um I how revealing heart posture is and um I think Ran does a fantastic job here and think Ran does a fantastic job here and think Ran does a fantastic job here and do check out the full thing on Justin do check out the full thing on Justin do check out the full thing on Justin Brierly think faith it's a brick Brierly think faith it's a brick Brierly think faith it's a brick Brilliant episode. I really enjoyed it.

Brilliant episode. I really enjoyed it. Brilliant episode. I really enjoyed it. But wow, Dawkins really showed himself But wow, Dawkins really showed himself But wow, Dawkins really showed himself up here. And Rowan Williams, what a up here. And Rowan Williams, what a up here. And Rowan Williams, what a legend. [laughter] legend. [laughter] legend. [laughter] I'm a bit biased there, massively biased I'm a bit biased there, massively biased I'm a bit biased there, massively biased as I am a Christian, but I love Ran as I am a Christian, but I love Ran as I am a Christian, but I love Ran Williams. He is an incredible man. Um, Williams. He is an incredible man. Um, Williams. He is an incredible man. Um, but yeah, hope you enjoyed, ladies and but yeah, hope you enjoyed, ladies and but yeah, hope you enjoyed, ladies and gentlemen. Like, subscribe, follow my gentlemen. Like, subscribe, follow my gentlemen. Like, subscribe, follow my Substack link below, and I'll see you Substack link below, and I'll see you Substack link below, and I'll see you all in the next one very soon.