Why posner does not believe in God. Vladimir posner about religion and faith in God

Frankly, I did not expect at all that my interview, or rather, that part of it, which refers to my view of religion and the church, given to a little-known magazine from Kurgan, would cause such a boom. In fact, I said nothing that I had not said before and more than once. I have never hidden the fact that I am an atheist, that I have a negative attitude towards religion, and I do not accept the church at all. But, insofar as the interview provoked such a stormy reaction, I decided to reiterate MY position with the greatest possible clarity. Please keep in mind that I am not trying to convince or convince anyone of anything. This is just MY point of view, these are answers to the questions asked of me - if they had not asked, they would not have spoken on this topic. In the end, every person has an inalienable right to their own point of view and to express it - of course, if it does not contain a call for persecution, suppression, destruction, etc. those who hold a different point of view.

So religion is we are talking about the Christian religion, although, of course, I could talk about other religions, in particular, about Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, etc. I would like to note that I was engaged in these things, that is, I read quite a lot, but especially a lot about Christianity - and therefore I am limited only to it.

The main thing with which I cannot agree, and which is the basis of religion, is the ban on doubts, this is the elevation to the absolute of faith. They tell you: God created the Earth and all living things in six days. You can't, more than that, you have no right to doubt it, you can't ask, "How? Is it possible?" No, you just have to believe. They say to you: Mary gave birth immaculately. You can't object, \"Yes, how is it, no one has ever given birth like this, all people have given birth and are born only\"viciously\", so all mammals give birth, in fact, all living beings are sexual \". It does not matter. You must believe. What has always moved, and still moves, man and mankind? Thirst for knowledge. What is the main word of any child? The word\"why? \". Why is water wet, why is fire burning, why is the sun going down, why, why, why? We, people, are constantly looking for answers to all sorts of\"why\", that is why humanity is progressing, only because we have become what we are. Animals do not ask this question - and they live the way they have always lived. What does religion tell us in response to\"Why?\". Religion answers: \"Because!\". In this sense, it directly opposes science, which requires an answer, a proof. Volumes can be written about this, yes they are written, but I will very briefly outline the very essence of MY attitude to this issue. At the same time, I do not demand at all - and I do not expect - that they agree with me. Do you have a different point of view? To health! Your other point of view does not bother me. Are you happy with her? Wonderful. Would you like to talk about it publicly? The flag is in your hands. But let me use the same right.

Now about the church. In my interview, I compared the church with the Central Committee of the CPSU - which caused a storm of indignation. I will try to explain the reason for this comparison. There are three main branches in the Christian religion: Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Protestantism. The comparison I have made does not apply to the latter, since Protestants do not have a centralized church. As for Catholicism and Orthodoxy (in particular, Russian Orthodoxy), their church is built on the principle of a pyramid: at the very top stands the pope / patriarch, then come the cardinals / metropolitans, then the bishops, and so on in descending order. At the same time, discipline is observed, one might say, the strictest. How did the CPSU differ in terms of its structure? At the very top, the general secretary, then the members of the Politburo, then the members of the Central Committee, then the secretaries of the regional committees, and so on. In my opinion, the comparison is quite legitimate.

As I said, I have a negative attitude towards religion, but I do not reject it as a possible worldview. Another thing is the church, whose ministers take upon themselves the right to interpret religion, manage it, speak on behalf of God (I write with a lowercase letter, because - I remind you, I do not believe in God). In the same way, Marxism is a kind of worldview that can be accepted or not accepted, and the Communist Party takes on the role of an interpreter of Marxism, an executor of Marxist ideas, the only force that understands and has the right to speak\"on behalf of\" Marxism. For me, this is unacceptable. Throughout its history Christian church burned at the stake, persecuted, executed people for allowing themselves to ask questions - nothing more. For doubting that the sun revolves around the earth; for doubting that the earth is flat; for allowing the idea that man is the result of evolution. Over the millennia, religious wars have led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people - just because someone believed that his god is the only true god. I consider the church as an aggressive, dark force, always striving and striving for power and wealth. This is MY point of view and it is based on concrete facts.

And finally, about the ROC. I am convinced that the choice of Orthodoxy, which was made by the prince Kiev Vladimir, was a mistake, moreover, a tragic one. Just in case, let me remind you that I am not the only one who thinks so. If in doubt, I recommend that you familiarize yourself with the "Philosophical Letters" of Pyotr Chaadaev, one of the most brilliant minds in the history of Russia, about whom Pushkin wrote:

\"He is by the highest will of heaven
Born in the fetters of the royal service;
He would be Brug in Rome, Pericles in Athens,

And here he is a hussar officer \". And again: it was HIS, Chaadaev's point of view; and this is MY point of view, nothing more. If anyone is interested in why Chaadaev thought so, then, I repeat, this is set out in detail in his work; if if someone is interested in why I think so, then I’m ready to state the reasons - not here, because, firstly, this is a very long conversation and, secondly, not everyone will be interested in it . But in any case, what I said did not and does not pursue the goal of arguing with anyone. Moreover, I consider such a dispute to be completely useless, a waste of time, not to mention the fact that I absolutely share the view of Voltaire:\"I do not share your convictions, but I am ready to give my life for your right to express them \".

Posner replied:“I would have asked him: “Aren’t you ashamed? Well, how can there be a Holocaust? After all, Saint Mark says that not a single hair will fall from your head without His knowledge. It means that you are responsible for everything and everything is known to you. How could you let this happen? How can it be that tsunamis take the lives of 200 thousand people, just born children? How? It's you? Did you do this? How are you not ashamed?” I probably wouldn't have been so lucky after that."

Archpriest Andrei Kordochkin, rector of the Church of St. Mary Magdalene Equal-to-the-Apostles in Madrid, answers the well-known TV presenter.

I cannot answer for the One to whom this question was intended. “He is busy, he is in negotiations, but I will answer for him” - this is not the case.

For my part, I would approach the issue differently. Why can mass deaths of people - the Gulag, the Holocaust - be considered a tragedy at all? After all, neither a religious nor a non-religious person sees a tragedy, for example, in the destruction of insects - even if they are harmful. In addition, few other than sentimental vegans have compassion for slaughtered livestock or caught fish.

What I have never been able to understand, from an atheist's perspective, what makes human suffering or death tragic at all if there is no fundamental difference between a person and an animal/fish/insect?

Organic chemistry has passed into inorganic, and what's next? And if there is a difference, what is it? Why is a person of any value at all?

Why does God allow all this horror? This is the same as asking: why did the father wait for the return prodigal son, and did not return him home with the help of a police squad? Because man was created for love, and a non-free being is incapable of loving either God or man.

And why did God allow not only people to kill each other, but also his own murder? Why didn’t he answer the call: “If you are the Son of God, come down from the Cross!” (Matthew 27:40)?

After all, in Christianity, God's attitude to suffering and death is not exhausted by the words “not even a hair from your head will be lost” (Luke 21:18). God does not abolish pain and death, but by His crucifixion makes them place Your stay in the world. This is their only one - temporary! - meaning.

This applies not only to the evil that people inflict on each other, but also to natural disasters. Who should be ashamed? God or man? Who breathes life into matter, and who pulls the world down? In the fairy tale "The Scarlet Flower", the Garden of Eden withers with the death of its owner. And the world withered along with man.

Of course, we have read about the time when “God will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and there will be no more death; there will be no more weeping, no outcry, no sickness, for the former is past” (Ap. 21:4), and we remember the words of the Savior: “I will see you again, and your heart will rejoice, and no one will take your joy from you; and in that day you will ask me nothing” (John 16:22-23).

In the meantime, we are falling, pulling each other and the whole world along with us, and the world at this time is being destroyed. And since we, like Alice, fall for a very long time, in the process of falling we ask questions. Why did God allow us to fall? Will it hurt when we fall? And is there life after the fall?

12 months ago

Journalist and atheist Vladimir Pozner and representative of the Russian Orthodox Church, head Synodal department on relations with society and the media, Vladimir Legoyda, argued about the place of the church on television and in the media, whether its representatives can speak out on any public issues and whether they should limit themselves to their own ways of disseminating information. Full version of the Debate in the Rain: https://tvrain.ru/s/qQp/

3 years ago

Vladimir Pozner's questions are answered by the chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Volokolamsky Hilarion. And the conversation in the studio of the program is about the relationship between the Church and the state, about the position of the Russian Orthodox Church in relation to the West, about the need in Russia for the law to counteract insulting believers to come into force, and about how to read the Bible and observe Lent.

3 months ago

Have you ever wondered how, in fact, the world's most famous religions were born? Who is God? Who are the Pope and Patriarch of All Russia? It's time to learn even more incredible facts... Full lecture (50% New Year's discount with the NEW promo code): https://pupi.one/shop/ INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/i.pupi/ TELEGRAM: https ://t.me/onepupi VKONTAKTE: https://vk.com/goawareness FIRST CHANNEL: https://goo.gl/7K9tWP Support us: DONAT https://goo.gl/7ZJ56N QIWI wallet: +79205414613 VISA card 4276 4000 5805 6962 - Sberbank (RF) #secret knowledge #evgenypupyrin #closedarchives

6 years ago

On the Origin of Species On June 10, 1834, one of the greatest geniuses of mankind, an Englishman named Charles Darwin, sailed on the sailing ship "Beagle" towards one of the most important of all scientific discoveries which he outlined in his book On the Origin of Species. Darwin is the author of the theory of evolution. Here, of course, I must exercise extreme caution, otherwise, no matter how I inadvertently offend anyone religious feelings. Although, I’ll immediately make a reservation and say that I don’t have such a goal and never had it. Having said that, I now dare to say that Darwin brilliantly showed how we came to be. Of course, he was terribly offended. “Yes, how is it? Did man evolve from apes? Understandably, it's embarrassing. How can it be that we humans are such crowns of nature, so spiritual, how can it be that we are descended from an ape? In March of this year (I think in March, if my memory serves me right), Orthodox textbook biology for grades 10 and 11. Did not see? I highly recommend. Darwin would have enjoyed it enormously if he could have read it, of course. Although, who knows? Maybe he would die of laughter? Have you ever seen how a human embryo develops from the moment an egg is fertilized by a sperm? Amazingly interesting. As the embryo develops, it repeats the steps from the lowest species to the highest. You can see directly how his tail appears, then the gills. In a word, it clearly illustrates evolution. I'm a biologist by training, so it's no surprise that I'm a Darwin fan. But trust me. If you want to read a really exciting book, I suggest you read On the Origin of Species. You will not regret. You will learn a lot of useful and interesting things. Good luck and pleasant dreams. From an interview with Yuri Lyubimov. 06/10/2013

7 years ago

Nevzorov. Two questions to believers Series "LESSONS OF ATHEISM". The need for the appearance of commercials devoted to issues of atheism is associated with the presence of shameless and ferocious Orthodox censorship on state and not very state TV channels: the place for a serious, free-thinking, sensible conversation about religion is left only on the Internet. instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nevzorovoff... Website - http://nevzorov.tv/ Twitter - https://twitter.com/NevzorovAG Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/nevzorovanev ... Unofficial Vkontakte group - https://vk.com/nevzorov_aleksandr Alexander Glebovich Nevzorov - Soviet and Russian reporter, TV presenter, deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation of four convocations. Publicist, master and mentor of the Nevzorov Haute Ecole High School of Horse Education, stage director, hippologist, anatomist, author of books and articles, expert on ancient mouthpieces, specialist on ancient horse hardware and old hippological and anatomical publications. The main fighter against obscurantism and insanity in Russia.

3 weeks ago

Learn more about kindergartens and PIK infrastructure: https://s.pik.ru/egtp4 Edition books: King Lear. W. Shakespeare http://bit.ly/2EkrjRa Dead Souls. N. Gogol http://bit.ly/2U1B8sw "House on the Embankment". Y. Trifonov http://bit.ly/2En1BeH "Part of speech". I. Brodsky http://bit.ly/2Eky4SO "Uncombed Thoughts". S. E. Lets http://bit.ly/2ty583q We are in touch: VK https://vk.com/eshenepozner FB https://facebook.com/eshenepozner Instagram https://www.instagram.com/solodnikovnn Telegram https://t.me/eshenepozner

7 years ago

A survey published in 1998 in the journal Nature showed that in the United States the percentage of believers is minimal among the MOST OUTSTANDING SCIENTISTS (members of the National Academy of Sciences) - only 7% (!) Of those surveyed. At the same time, among PRIVATE scientists, the number of believers remained at the same level as in the previous similar survey conducted in 1914, and amounted to about 40%. http://www.skeptik.net/ism/sci_god.htm (Russian version) http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html (original) In 1998, Frank Sulloway and Michael Shermer spent survey among professors and university graduates. The study showed that 64% of those surveyed believed in God (that is, an intermediate value between that for academics - 7% and the national average - 90%). A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF BELIEVERS WITH INCREASING THE LEVEL OF EDUCATION was noticed. Shermer Michael How We Believe: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God. - New York: William H Freeman. - P. pp76--79. According to a study by Mensa Magazine, the same inverse relationship between religiosity and education was found in 39 studies (!) conducted from 1927 to 2002. Bell, Paul. "Would you believe it?" Mensa Magazine, UK Edition, Feb. 2002, pp. 12-13. These results are consistent with a statistical meta-analysis by Professor Michael Argyle. He analyzed seven research work on the relationship between attitudes towards religion and IQ. A clear inverse relationship was revealed: THE HIGHER INTELLIGENCE, THE LOWER RELIGIOUSNESS. Argyle Michael Religious Behavior. - London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. - P. 93--96. The link between RELIGIOUSNESS and LOW INTELLIGENCE has also been identified in the work of Satoshi Kanazawa. http://phys.org/news186236813.html Survey data from Russia show similar results. So, among Petersburgers with higher and incomplete higher education 52% consider themselves Orthodox, among those with secondary education - 67%, among those with incomplete secondary education - 88%. Article "Religiosity in Russia and St. Petersburg" http://ruskline.ru/monitoring_smi/2009/12/18/religioznost_v_rossii_i_peterburge http://www.word4you.ru/publications/3599/ (replacement link) Survey conducted among members of the British Academy Sciences showed that only 3.3% of academics believe in God. According to psychologist and sociologist Richard Lynn, there is a DIRECT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IQ AND THE LACK OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. http://www.atheism.ru/library/Other_105.phtml "THE MAN IS MORE educated, THE LESS PROBABILITY THAT HE BELIEVE IN GOD IS A THEIST". - Vitaly Lazarevich Ginzburg, laureate Nobel Prize in physics, article "Reason and Faith" http://www.atheism.ru/library/Ginzburg_1.phtml

6 years ago

From an interview with Sergey Kapkov "I recently returned from Germany, where we were finishing shooting a documentary, which I hope will be released in a few months. We have been working on this film for 5 months, we have come to Germany many times and, of course, we have talked to a lot of Germans And, perhaps, there was not a person to whom I did not ask one specific question, namely in connection with this. After all, 80 years ago (this is 2 days ago, on January 30), Hitler came to power in Germany together with his National - the Socialist German Workers' Party. And I asked the Germans: how did it happen that the people of Bach and Beethoven, Goethe and Schiller, Kant and Hegel, how could this people follow this mustachioed, and even unsympathetic man? And, by the way, the same question I ask about the Russian people, how could they also follow a mustachioed and, in my opinion, unsympathetic person? True, this is a different question. In Germany, many answered like this. They shrugged their shoulders and said: "I don’t know, I don’t understand how it happened ss". There were other answers. In particular, that Hitler rid the country of unemployment, that there were construction sites, huge construction sites of National Socialism, by the way, very similar to some other construction sites. There was the construction of autobahns, got rid of unemployment. All sorts of things. And, finally, there were 4-year plans for the development of the national economy - it also looks like something, right? I wanted to tell you that, already in prison, Hermann Goering (I hope you know who he is) gave an interview to a certain Mr. Gilbert. And I wanted to read part of this interview to you. Goering says the following: “Of course, the people do not want war. Of course, no one wants war either in Russia, or in England, or in America, or even in Germany. This is clear. But in the end, politics is determined by the leaders of the country. And to force the people to support the policy is a trifling matter. It's just what you need, whether it's a democracy or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship." To which Gilbert retorts: “But there is one difference in democracy - the people have the opportunity to speak out through their elected representatives. And in the US, only Congress has the power to declare war." To which Goering says: “This, of course, everything is fine, but whether they have a voice or not, the people can always be brought to obedience. It's simple: you just need to tell him that he is being attacked. And at the same time accuse the pacifists of lack of patriotism and that they endanger the country. It works in any country." Curious, right? Good luck and good dreams." 03.02.2013

6 months ago

Vladimir Pozner in an interview on the USArmenia LOS ANGELES TV channel //Exclusive interview// 09/28/2018 Rafael Mnatsakanyan's guest is the master of Russian television, the main interview of the country - Vladimir Vladimirovich Pozner!

How to explain the cruelty of the Old Testament God? Does God have anything to do with disasters? In the program “I don’t believe” on Spas, journalist and TV presenter Vladimir Pozner, who calls himself an atheist, talked with priest Maxim Kozlov. We have selected the most interesting moments of the conversation.

Vladimir Pozner: I did not receive convincing answers to questions about God

I am baptized in catholic faith, but not anywhere, but in the Cathedral Notre Dame of Paris. In principle, my parents, who were non-believers, not only active, but simply non-believers, did not influence me in any way, did not inspire me with anything. (…) May be<в формировании моего мировоззрения сыграло роль>the fact that I was inclined towards science, I became very interested in biology, I was a student at the Faculty of Biology of Moscow State University, I became quite seriously interested in who we are and how we are arranged. Gradually I came to the conclusion that the teaching that is called religion, for me personally, is not something that does not convince, but raises an infinite number of questions. And every time when I asked them, and when they couldn’t explain it to me, they said: well, you see, the ways of the Lord are inscrutable, etc.

Archpriest Maxim Kozlov: I do not agree that only life chosen people has the meaning

Prot. M.K.: How do you personally answer the question for yourself: if life ends earthly existence, what's the point of it?

VP: I'll tell you what the meaning is, as I understand it. How is it for me. I gave birth in the world - along with my wife, of course - children. Wonderful children. My daughter is a composer and pianist who brings joy to so many people. My son is a smart journalist. I believe that in my rather long life, I have helped many, done something important. And this is the meaning of life - to educate your children, to find yourself and fulfill yourself. It is very difficult to understand what you were born for. Unfortunately, education is not only with us, but in general does not really help a person to understand: where is my talent, how can I express myself? Maybe it's because you're a brilliant trolleybus driver, and that's not a bad thing either. But a lot of people just don't know what they're doing at all. They do not like this job, they dream to retire. Many people have meaningless lives.

So I understand very well the meaning of my life. I understand the meaning of the life of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, who left us what our great-grandfathers and grandfathers read, what we read, and our children will read. He became immortal in what he left us. And Shakespeare is exactly the same, and various scientists who made amazing discoveries that we use today, for example, we don’t get rabies thanks to Pasteur, etc. This is the meaning of life.

Prot. M.K.: Thank you for this answer, because I would not be able to give such an answer for myself. Probably that's why I Orthodox Christian and a believer. (...) If we go beyond our personal existence, in addition to people who are outstanding and have done a lot - in addition to Pushkin, Pasteur, Mendeleev and beyond - there are people who are completely unremarkable, ordinary people: a trolley bus driver, a simple worker. He can be a wonderful person, no doubt. After all, there are people earthly life which is unsuccessful, unhappy and, as it seems, tragic and dead end.

V.P.: There are many of them.

Prot. М.К.: There are quite a few of them, maybe most of them. And for me, only faith that Christ meets such a person, that there is no tear here that would be shed and would not be wiped away by Christ in eternity - if this is not there, then life does not acquire meaning for me.

Vladimir Pozner: Why do believers worry about me so much?

V.P.: Quite often I receive letters from people who are trying to set me on the right path so that I don’t burn in hell, etc. But they worry about me, which is very touching ...

Prot. M.K.: My deepest conviction<состоит в том>that any attempt at violence in the realm of faith or religious outlook refers only to the growth of your opponent's conviction in his worldview. No matter how many examples we give that it once brought results, at least in our time, any not only socio-political, but also ideological, psychological pressure in the field of religious worldview will lead to the opposite result. (...) if I recognize myself as a Christian, then I cannot help but recall an episode from the life of (...) St. Gregory the Theologian - this is a famous Christian philosopher, bishop, hierarch of the 4th century. He lived in the era of formation Christian doctrine, and one of the great dangers to the Church at that time was such a movement as Arianism. He was supported by the emperors of the Eastern Roman Empire, which later became known as the Byzantine Empire. And when Bishop Gregory was appointed Bishop of Constantinople and arrived in his city, the Orthodox did not have a single church and they performed services at home. Then everything changed: the emperors became Orthodox, the Arians were persecuted, Ecumenical Council, Local Councils. And Gregory the Theologian was offered: let's expel all the Arians from Constantinople, you remember how they treated us. The saint's answer was this: "We seek not victory, but the return of the brothers, separation from whom torments us."

Here I am too, Vladimir Vladimirovich, please understand. Yes, there are people, as it were, inadequate: maybe they are threatening, writing some kind of wrong letters, but there are also people whose heart really hurts about those, perhaps dear, respected by them, like you, public people who do not share Christian worldview. If an aunt or a young man sincerely writes to you: “Vladimir Vladimirovich, you know, you are an atheist, and I pray for you, because I would like you to move away from this atheism until the end of your earthly path,” then I think that this is good .

Archpriest Maxim Kozlov: The God of Christians is not “God from a machine”

VP: The Old Testament tells how Moses sent his brother Aaron to Pharaoh to demand that he free the people of Israel. And Pharaoh was inclined to say yes, but God hardens his heart to refuse, and then punishes Pharaoh for it. For the first time. Then a second time. Then on the third. And it all ends in a bloodbath, when all the first-born children are killed. Each time Pharaoh was ready to let go, but God had him change his mind. I asked the question: well, why? But no one ever told me...

Prot. M.K.: The Christian answer is fundamentally - I cannot say that this is also an easy answer for me and that I would not like some smoother answer - that there is no other way to save in that the only people, who throughout the Old Testament part of human history kept the faith that the Bible calls and we Christians consider revealed by God, there was no faith in the true God without distorting this history. Those. any other way would mean such a Deus ex machina, such an intervention, such an intervention of God in human history, when all meaning human freedom would be lost.

Let's realistically imagine what these times were and what kind of tribes, what kind of Egyptians, Assyrians, Philistines, Old Testament Jews, what level moral consciousness and relations between tribes in the human race. No matter how harshly these pages of the Old Testament history are now perceived, there was no other way to save the chosen people, so that they would not dissolve in the sea of ​​paganism.

You can say: it would be nice to give them some kind of moral law so that they were white, fluffy, so that Aaron convinced the pharaoh with some kind of moral convictions or the height of religious teaching, but, therefore, it was impossible.

Vladimir Pozner: Does God have anything to do with disasters?

V.P.: …I ask you again: there is a terrible catastrophe, an earthquake, which leads to the death of a huge number of people… And a tsunami, and such things. Does the Lord have anything to do with this, or does it happen outside of His participation, outside of His knowledge?

Prot. M.K.: God is neither the creator nor the cause of evil…

V.P.: No?

Prot. M.K.: No. God, in one way or another, which is not always clear to us, sometimes quite tragic in our earthly perception, does not stop the existing evil, having in mind the ultimate good of man.

V.P.: That is. Do you call it evil? Is an earthquake bad?

Prot. М.К.: I call evil any death and any dying. Death is generally unnatural in relation to God's plan for man.

V.P.: Then yes. Then I understand.

What if you think there is no God? How to find it? And what if you don't feel like searching? Where did human morality come from? Do science and religion contradict each other? The guests of the program talk about this: Andrey Baranov - Deputy Editor of the Politics Department " TVNZ"; Sergey Khudiev - publicist, theologian, regular author and presenter of "Radonezh", author of a number of articles in the magazines "Thomas", "Alpha and Omega", "Orthodoxy and Modernity".

What if you think there is no God? How to find it? And what if you don't feel like searching? What is the meaning of life if we are mortal? Is there any meaning in life? Why are people afraid of death? These questions will be discussed by the guests of the program: Igor Artyukhov - biophysicist (gerontologist, cryobiologist), futurologist, graduate of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, employee of the "Institute of Biology of Aging"; Sergei Khudiev is a publicist, theologian, regular contributor and presenter of "Radonezh", author of a number of articles in the journals "Foma", "Alpha and Omega", "Orthodoxy and Modernity".

Based on the well-known incompleteness theorems, which Kurd Friedrich Rudolfovich Gödel proved in 1930, one can build a chain of reasoning showing that, firstly, the existence of God is impossible, and secondly, it is unnecessary. Impossible in the sense that it is incompatible with the existence of our universe as we observe it. And it is unnecessary in the sense that any statements about nature, any statements about society, any rules of conduct, including completely misanthropic ones, can be substantiated by references to God.

Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Atheist. Arguments that will help you defeat any priest, archbishop and even Jesus himself in a dispute. In this manual, we have collected the best arguments, which are usually enough to sow at least a seed of doubt in the soul of the average believer. Of course, we mainly dealt with Christians, since we live mostly in a Christian environment, but with Muslims, Lamaists and Voodooists, let's say, these arguments can also be applied.

Conversation of Candidate of Biological Sciences Alexander Panchin with Archpriest Alexei Batanogov on the SPAS TV channel. The recording appeared on Youtube and in the community of the SPAS TV channel VKontakte on December 23, 2017. But after a few hours, the recording was deleted.

Dmitry Gusev

The eternal controversy between religious and atheistic worldview is again unfolding at the current post-secular stage of development Russian society. The confrontation between religious and atheistic values ​​is closely connected with political, social and cultural contradictions and contemporary conflicts. What position and role in this discussion can, respectively, be taken and played by science, which largely determines the appearance of modern world? Is science close in nature to atheism, and is it really opposed to religion, as it is often presented? On what grounds are scientific and atheistic visions of the world usually brought together? Can science be not only an ally of atheism, but also a harmonious continuation of religious ideas? Does it obtain knowledge that corresponds to reality or builds various interpretations of the world, man and society, which may have a rather remote relation to reality? To what extent is the practice of scientific and technological achievements a criterion of truth? How do scientistic and antiscientistic sociocultural orientations correlate with religious and atheistic world outlook? Is it possible to characterize atheism as a more rational worldview than a religious one? How can religious irrationalism turn out to be completely rational, and how can the rationalism of atheism, which at first glance makes it related to science, turn into a fundamental logical contradiction? The lecture is an attempt to find possible answers to such questions and to understand the difficult problems of the interaction of religion, atheism and science in the culture of mankind.

Steve Williams

I guarantee that you yourself are an atheist. If you are a Christian, then you do not believe in pagan gods. That is, in relation to them you are an atheist. If you are a pagan, then you probably do not believe in the concept of Brahman. However, atheism simply means the absence of faith. In a sense, we are all atheists, it's just that some people are atheists in more, than others.

Geoffrey Theiler

I offer atheists a new creed: concrete responses to creed-based insults, to religious prejudice, to what Hitchens called "clerical intimidation." Of course, believers have the right to their faith. But they do not have the original right to flaunt their faith without expecting criticism. Religion should be analyzed from the standpoint of common sense and rational assessments. It needs to be discussed openly, as we discuss politics, art and the weather. Why is it considered impolite to debate this topic, especially in an environment where believers often talk about their faith and try to impose it on others? Here are some common religious statements and how atheists might react and respond to them.

Bertrand Russell

In the preface to the first edition of the book, Russell wrote: "I have tried to say what I think of man's place in the universe and how he is able to achieve well-being ... In human affairs, as we can see, there are forces that promote happiness, and forces that unhappiness. We do not know which of them will prevail, but in order to act wisely, we must know about them. V litigation, organized by churchmen in 1940 in New York and aimed at discrediting Russell's scientific merits, the work "What I Believe" figured as the main one. Excerpts from it have been widely quoted in the press, for the most part to misrepresent Russell's philosophy as the apotheosis of immorality.

Iosif Kryvelev

In LOGIC there is a so-called law of sufficient reason. It says: everything that you think, everything that you express, you must think and express only on a sufficient basis. If a given judgment has no basis, or if there is a reason, but it is not enough, you have no logical right to consider this judgment to be true.

– You often criticize the Russian Orthodox Church and Christianity as well. But I have never heard criticism of Islam from you. I would like to hear how you feel about this religion. Don't you think this religion is the real threat of the century. Since in Russia and Europe, in the same France, by the way, great amount Muslims who do not want to assimilate establish their own rules. Many go to fight for ISIS, Varvara Karaulova is a recent example. Please tell me why they are fighting for the establishment of these orders and what is your attitude to this.

Let's not confuse church with religion. I criticize Russian Orthodox Church. And when you ask me about Islam, then Islam is not a church, it is a faith. So you can't even compare. Church, in my opinion: Catholic Church, Russian Orthodox Church (Church, which is written with a capital C). The Church has the same relation to religion as, for example, the Central Committee of the CPSU had to do with the theory of communism. Like that. These are people who think that they understand. The Pope is the vicar of God on earth, no less. He is directly with Him - he has a phone, obviously. The same patriarch. Lightest and more.

You know that in the church there is absolutely military discipline, complete submission. No freedom. I am anti-church. She is always aggressive and she always seeks power. Both Catholic and Orthodox, facing from ancient times with kings, with kings - this is part of its character. Religion is something else entirely. Religion is certain philosophical view to the world.

If we look carefully, let's say Jewish religion why you need to read Old Testament, then you can see that it is rather cruel, the Jewish God is extremely cruel, that the people he has chosen shed blood with terrible force. And at the same time, this is the first religion that defines one god and which formulates certain rules of behavior - commandments on how to behave in life. If this is not considered as from God, but simply, then for the first time what we should be is clearly stated. If you look at christian religion, to how she calls for reconciliation, for kindness; if you are struck on the cheek, turn the other; do not act in relation to others in the way that you would not like to be acted in relation to you - then a number of principles, concepts follow.

True, no one pays attention to them, does not listen, but that's another story. For two thousand years of the existence of Christianity, man has not become better. It is a fact. He killed, stole, cheated, envied - this is how it all continues.

Now Islam. Islam is very close to Judaism. Very. And Christianity. He is much younger: Judaism arose three and a half thousand years ago, and Christianity two thousand years ago, and Islam in the seventh century. This is a young religion, and it took from there and from there, and there are also messages on how to behave. I never criticize religion, mind you. Religion as such - only that it does not allow itself to doubt. Here I am against this, when they tell you: this is so, but when you ask: why? - they answer you: because. This is what I don't acknowledge. But the executors of this are churchmen, that is, priests.

As for other religions... for example, Buddhism is an absolutely wonderful religion in a number of ways. Much softer, humane, not recognizing subordination, subordination. In general, this topic is very interesting - religion as such. I think that the history of religions should be taught in schools. Not the Law of God, but the history of religions, including ancient ones - starting with polytheism, from the Greeks, from the Romans, from the Egyptians. It's incredibly interesting! This has shaped us, these are the foundations of our civilization. So I'm not at all inclined to criticize it. Another thing is that - I say it again - I criticize the bans.

When a person is born and begins to grow, his first word is “why?”. Why is the rain wet? Why does fire burn? Why. Why ... This is typical for us. We want to know, but some uncles tell us - it’s impossible.

So I ask - I'm a biologist - but how can you give birth immaculately? Explain to me, I'm ready, - and they say to me: well, this is such a Miracle. This is what happened. But if you carefully read these things (and you need to read them carefully! - people who say: I'm Orthodox - as a rule, they haven't read anything) - there is a lot that raises questions. Well, why, when God said to Moses: “Go to Pharaoh and tell him to let My people go,” Moses said: “I won’t go, because I don’t speak well” (he stuttered terribly) and said: “My brother Aron will go ". He came. God says: "He will want, he will agree, but I will harden his heart so that I can punish him later." The first time he sent some frogs, then he sent locusts, this, that, and then he killed all the firstborn sons of all the Egyptians! Everyone! And what do they have to do with it? Toughened once again the heart of the pharaoh. The question is - why? Well, I wanted to let go - and good! For what? To prove what? So I have a lot of questions for him. Alas, I'm afraid I won't be able to ask them.