Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-10-2011, 13:08   #1
Paul7
New Guy
 
Paul7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East of Eden
Posts: 13,842
Richard Dawkins Again Refuses to Debate William Lane Craig

http://www.christianpost.com/news/ri...m-craig-56780/

Why?

__________________
“I don’t believe that people should be able to own guns.” Obama to John R. Lott Jr. in a private conversation at the University of Chicago.

Last edited by Paul7; 10-10-2011 at 13:09..
Paul7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 13:44   #2
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul7 View Post
If only there were some indication of why. Perhaps in the article itself:
Quote:
But Dawkins, defending his decision, previously shared during a panel that Craig was not a worthy opponent.

“I always said when invited to do debates that I would be happy to debate a bishop, a cardinal, a pope, an archbishop, indeed I have done those, but I don’t take on creationists and I don’t take on people whose only claim to fame is that they are professional debaters; they’ve got to have something more than that. I’m busy.”
And from richarddawkins.net, a report from someone who did engage Craig in debate and found the experience pointless.
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."
Animal Mother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 14:00   #3
Schabesbert
Senior Member
 
Schabesbert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Posts: 10,616


Quote:
Originally Posted by Animal Mother View Post
If only there were some indication of why. Perhaps in the article itself:
But Dawkins, defending his decision, previously shared during a panel that Craig was not a worthy opponent.

“I always said when invited to do debates that I would be happy to debate a bishop, a cardinal, a pope, an archbishop, indeed I have done those, but I don’t take on creationists and I don’t take on people whose only claim to fame is that they are professional debaters; they’ve got to have something more than that. I’m busy.”
Sounds like an excuse to me.

So, which pope does he claim to have debated?

Really, though, he should be debating someone who is versed in science, philosophy, AND theology. Craig is pretty good. Much more knowledgeable than Dawkins, IMO.

This sounds like sour grapes from someone who's been schooled.
__________________
He is no fool who exchanges that which he cannot keep for that which he can never lose.

Ho kurios mou, kai ho theos mou
Schabesbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 14:09   #4
Kingarthurhk
Isaiah 53:4-9
 
Kingarthurhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,575
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL9oA1LFoMw
Kingarthurhk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 14:14   #5
Smacktard
Senior Member
 
Smacktard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,164


Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul7 View Post

Richard Dawkins Refuses to Debate Smacktard also! What do you think he's trying to hide?

I suspect Dawkins doesn't believe in God at all.

...
__________________
Did I mention there are at least 7 billion opinions on earth, of which yours is only one?

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
- Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany.
Smacktard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 15:42   #6
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schabesbert View Post
Really, though, he should be debating someone who is versed in science, philosophy, AND theology. Craig is pretty good. Much more knowledgeable than Dawkins, IMO.
Lane either doesn't grasp science or intentionally twists it to fit his preconceived beliefs, as the myriad available videos of his debates ably demonstrate.
Quote:
This sounds like sour grapes from someone who's been schooled.
Knowing Dr. Krauss, that seems highly unlikely. As the article makes clear, Dr. Craig's claims don't withstand the most cursory examination, unless one has already decided he's right based on pre-existing beliefs. Certainly, the evidence doesn't support them.
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."
Animal Mother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 15:56   #7
Schabesbert
Senior Member
 
Schabesbert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Posts: 10,616


Quote:
Originally Posted by Animal Mother View Post
Lane either doesn't grasp science or intentionally twists it to fit his preconceived beliefs, as the myriad available videos of his debates ably demonstrate.
Sorry, that's not what I've seen and heard.
Admittedly I'm no Cosmologist, but I am very much involved in the sciences.

Quote:
Knowing Dr. Krauss, that seems highly unlikely. As the article makes clear, Dr. Craig's claims don't withstand the most cursory examination, unless one has already decided he's right based on pre-existing beliefs. Certainly, the evidence doesn't support them.
After reading his article, I can state categorically that he doesn't understand at least many of Dr. Craig's arguments.
__________________
He is no fool who exchanges that which he cannot keep for that which he can never lose.

Ho kurios mou, kai ho theos mou
Schabesbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 16:11   #8
Kingarthurhk
Isaiah 53:4-9
 
Kingarthurhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,575
I kind of envision it went something like this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4SJ0xR2_bQ
Kingarthurhk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 17:15   #9
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schabesbert View Post
Sorry, that's not what I've seen and heard.
It's exactly what I've seen, and I don't put much stock in second and third hand reports.
Quote:
Admittedly I'm no Cosmologist, but I am very much involved in the sciences.
Outstanding, then perhaps you'd care to lend some assistance to Dr. Craig.
Quote:
After reading his article, I can state categorically that he doesn't understand at least many of Dr. Craig's arguments.
Please explain his errors.
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."
Animal Mother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 17:55   #10
packsaddle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,116
Quote:
I’m busy.
Translation: I'm scared I will be exposed for the charlatan I am.
packsaddle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 18:21   #11
nmk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,176
Let's keep throwing the same jargon at someone and as soon as he refuses to debate one of us, he's afraid!!!!! You're gonna need better logic than that.
nmk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 18:50   #12
steveksux
Massive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 15,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmk View Post
Let's keep throwing the same jargon at someone and as soon as he refuses to debate one of us, he's afraid!!!!! You're gonna need better logic than that.
You've overlooked one fact: Only one side needs logic to think they've won.

Randy

Last edited by steveksux; 10-10-2011 at 18:51..
steveksux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 20:35   #13
chilic82
Senior Member
 
chilic82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,124
So Dawkins only wants to debate those that know theology? He's already shown that he is merely a layman in this area. Why wouldn't Dawkins want to show him up on his home turf in front of all his followers?Dawkins gets kicks out of posting signs, and making comments, but when lil ole William Craig comes to town he can't be found? Dawkins even has fellow atheist calling him a coward. I'd say Dr. Craig is quite a bit more than a debater.

Curriculum Vitae




Family
Birthdate: August 23, 1949
Spouse: Jan Craig
Married: May 13, 1972
Children: 2 grown children

Educational Background
Wheaton College — B. A. Communications, high honors 1971
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School — M. A. Philosophy of Religion, summa cum laude 1975
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School — M. A. Church History, summa cum laude 1975
University of Birmingham, England — Ph.D. Philosophy 1977
Universität München, Germany — D. Theol. Theology 1984


Honors and Lectureships
Scholastic Honor Society
Wheaton College 1971
Academic Achievement Award Trinity Evangelical Divinity School 1975
Research Grant Andersen Foundation 1975-77
Research Fellowship Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung 1978-80
Best Articles of 1988 Philosopher's Annual II 1988
McManis Lectureship Wheaton College 1994
Geneva Lecture Series University of Iowa 1994
Exemplary Papers Award Templeton Foundation 1995
Paley Lectures University of Western Ontario 1995
Easterwood Lecture Southern Methodist University 1996
Carver-Barnes Lectures Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary 1996
Strauss Lectures Lincoln Christian College and Seminary 1996
Easterwood Lecture Southern Methodist University 1996
Carver-Barnes Lectures Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary 1996
Strauss Lectures Lincoln Christian College and Seminary 1996
Exemplary Papers Award Templeton Foundation 1996
Exemplary Papers Award Templeton Foundation 1997
Ryan Lectures Asbury College and Seminary 1999
Templeton Lecture Montana State University 1999
Templeton Lecture Malone College 2000
Staley Lectures Crown College 2000
Saucy Lectures Talbot School of Theology 2001
Nelson Lectures Samford University 2001
Bonchek Series Franklin and Marshall College 2001
Physics and the God of Abraham Gonzaga University 2003
Lee Lectures Louisiana State University 2003
Weyerhauser Debate Series University of Hawaii 2003
Templeton Lecture University of Colorado 2004
Templeton Lecture University of California, Santa Barbara 2004
Stobb Lectures Calvin College and Seminary 2004
D. Litt. Bethel College 2005
Joseph M. Carr Lectures Mt. Union College 2006
Templeton Lecture Methodist College 2006
UNESCO Lecture University of Tunis 2007


Professional Societies
American Philosophical Association 1977-
American Academy of Religion 1978-
Society of Biblical Literature 1978-
Society of Christian Philosophers 1979-
Executive Committee 1997-2000
Evangelical Theological Society 1983-
Evangelical Philosophical Society 1983-
Vice President 1995-96
President 1996-2005
Science and Religion Forum 1990-
Philosophy of Time Society 1992-
President 1999-2006


Career Experience
Assistant Professor of Philosophy of Religion Trinity Evangelical Divinity School 1980-1986
Associate Professor of Religious Studies Westmont College 1986-1987
Visiting Researcher Université Catholique de Louvain 1987-1994
Research Professor of Philosophy Talbot School of Theology 1996-
Visiting Professor of Philosophy Wheaton College 2003-
__________________
Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.
Gilbert K. Chesterton
chilic82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 20:41   #14
juggy4711
Nimrod Son
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Galveston County, TX
Posts: 3,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schabesbert View Post
Sorry, that's not what I've seen and heard.
Admittedly I'm no Cosmologist, but I am very much involved in the sciences.

After reading his article, I can state categorically that he doesn't understand at least many of Dr. Craig's arguments.
I think Dawkins might be a looney but do you really understand cosmology or science? If you do fantastic. If you do not that was just a statement to coddle those that disagree with you. Do you really understand the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics?
juggy4711 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 22:53   #15
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by packsaddle View Post
Translation: I'm scared I will be exposed for the charlatan I am.
I think you're projecting.
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."
Animal Mother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 16:19   #16
Schabesbert
Senior Member
 
Schabesbert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Posts: 10,616


Quote:
Originally Posted by Animal Mother View Post
Please explain his errors.
Here's one:
the remarkable, and completely trite claim that the fact the Christians were willing to die for their beliefs demonstrates the validity of these beliefs would be laughable, if it weren’t so pitiful. Especially, as I indicated during the event, in light of the fact that people were recently willing to fly planes into skyscrapers because of their beliefs in a religious framework that I know Craig has openly disavowed. Throughout history people have been willing to die for their beliefs, and it is often the beliefs one is willing to die for that are most suspect. Did Roman soldiers believe in Romulus and Remus? Did Viking warriers believe in Thor? Did Nazi soldiers believe in the superiority of the Aryan race? I found and still find Craig’s statement not only facile, and not even worthy of a high school debater, but I find the claim offensive.
In his rant, he completely ignores the fact that people like those that flew their airplanes into buildings, etc. etc., and even including Christians who were martyred after the first 60 years or so, were dying for beliefs they received 2nd hand, 3rd hand, or later.

Dr. Craig is referring to those who died for their FIRST HAND beliefs. The difference is stark, and the fact that this guy can't make the distinction is an example of a mind that is closed and/or weak.

If someone dies because of what they have been taught, it's because of the great faith they have in their teacher, or the teacher's teacher, etc., up to the one(s) who, through experiential first-hand knowledge, would have to know if an assertion is true or not. That is the difference.

St. Peter would KNOW whether or not he experienced the risen Christ. Ditto all the rest of the Apostles. Nobody (with the possible, although still far from probable, exception of the wildly insane) would die for what they KNOW, experientially, is a lie. What purpose would that serve?
__________________
He is no fool who exchanges that which he cannot keep for that which he can never lose.

Ho kurios mou, kai ho theos mou
Schabesbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 17:20   #17
Kingarthurhk
Isaiah 53:4-9
 
Kingarthurhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,575
Let the debate begin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=H4_9kDO3q0w
Kingarthurhk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 18:24   #18
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schabesbert View Post
In his rant, he completely ignores the fact that people like those that flew their airplanes into buildings, etc. etc., and even including Christians who were martyred after the first 60 years or so, were dying for beliefs they received 2nd hand, 3rd hand, or later.
If you don't like that example, focus on the others. Numerous Scandinavian accounts describe first hand encounters with Odin and Thor, do you accept this as evidence that the Aesir exist and inhabit Asgard?
Quote:
Dr. Craig is referring to those who died for their FIRST HAND beliefs. The difference is stark, and the fact that this guy can't make the distinction is an example of a mind that is closed and/or weak.

If someone dies because of what they have been taught, it's because of the great faith they have in their teacher, or the teacher's teacher, etc., up to the one(s) who, through experiential first-hand knowledge, would have to know if an assertion is true or not. That is the difference.

St. Peter would KNOW whether or not he experienced the risen Christ. Ditto all the rest of the Apostles. Nobody (with the possible, although still far from probable, exception of the wildly insane) would die for what they KNOW, experientially, is a lie. What purpose would that serve?
By this reasoning, we should accept David Koresh as a prophet. Is that the position you're adopting? We have direct evidence that those at Mount Carmel chose to stay with Koresh and believed him to be a prophet, if not the actual reincarnation of Christ. We have no such evidence for Peter, only second and third hand accounts of his actions and activities.

Beyond that there's the major issue that hasn't been addressed. It's entirely possible for someone to believe something is true, but for that thing to actually be false. Thus, the Apostles' faith, fervent and real though it may have been, could also have been entirely wrong and can't be taken as objective evidence for either the divinity of Christ or the existence of God.
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."

Last edited by Animal Mother; 10-11-2011 at 21:24..
Animal Mother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 18:46   #19
hamster
NRA Life Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,066
Blog Entries: 1
What is there to debate? If one side has an unwavering belief based on faith in something that cannot be tested, challenged or experimented with, then what is the point of a debate. A debate only has a purpose if there is some possibility of convincing the opposing side.

The fact is, if tomorrow someone comes up with concrete convincing proof that some scientific theory is invalid, it will be discarded in favor of a new hypothesis. With creationism there no way to prove or disprove the assertion that God created the earth... so again where is the debate?

I doubt Mr. Craig would entertain a debate with someone who believed that the flying spaghetti monster created the earth.

Religious Issues

Last edited by hamster; 10-11-2011 at 18:48..
hamster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 21:06   #20
chilic82
Senior Member
 
chilic82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,124
William Lane Craig is not a creationist. All Craig wanted is for Dawkins to answer and defend some claims made in his books that he has written.
__________________
Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.
Gilbert K. Chesterton
chilic82 is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:28.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 705
148 Members
557 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31