close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Richard Dawkins Again Refuses to Debate William Lane Craig

Discussion in 'Religious Issues' started by Paul7, Oct 10, 2011.


  1. Paul7

    Paul7
    Expand Collapse
    New Guy

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    14,236
    946
    Location:
    East of Eden
    #1 Paul7, Oct 10, 2011
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2011
  2. Animal Mother

    Animal Mother
    Expand Collapse
    Not Enough Gun

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    13,021
    169
    If only there were some indication of why. Perhaps in the article itself:
    And from richarddawkins.net, a report from someone who did engage Craig in debate and found the experience pointless.
     

  3. Schabesbert

    Schabesbert
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    5,038
    0
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY, USA
    Sounds like an excuse to me.

    So, which pope does he claim to have debated? :popcorn:

    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.
     
  4. Kingarthurhk

    Kingarthurhk
    Expand Collapse
    Isaiah 53:4-9

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2010
    7,926
    90
    Location:
    Texas
  5. Smacktard

    Smacktard
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    1,361
    3
  6. Animal Mother

    Animal Mother
    Expand Collapse
    Not Enough Gun

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    13,021
    169
    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.
    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.
     
  7. Schabesbert

    Schabesbert
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    5,038
    0
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY, USA
    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.
     
  8. Kingarthurhk

    Kingarthurhk
    Expand Collapse
    Isaiah 53:4-9

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2010
    7,926
    90
    Location:
    Texas
  9. Animal Mother

    Animal Mother
    Expand Collapse
    Not Enough Gun

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    13,021
    169
    It's exactly what I've seen, and I don't put much stock in second and third hand reports.
    Outstanding, then perhaps you'd care to lend some assistance to Dr. Craig.
    Please explain his errors.
     
  10. packsaddle

    packsaddle
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    1,185
    37
    Translation: I'm scared I will be exposed for the charlatan I am.
     
  11. nmk

    nmk
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    6,468
    243
    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.
     
  12. steveksux

    steveksux
    Expand Collapse
    Massive Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    18,411
    1,216
    You've overlooked one fact: Only one side needs logic to think they've won.

    Randy
     
    #12 steveksux, Oct 10, 2011
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2011
  13. chilic82

    chilic82
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    579
    0
    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-
     
  14. juggy4711

    juggy4711
    Expand Collapse
    Nimrod Son

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    3,060
    0
    Location:
    Galveston County, TX
    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?
     
  15. Animal Mother

    Animal Mother
    Expand Collapse
    Not Enough Gun

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    13,021
    169
    I think you're projecting.
     
  16. Schabesbert

    Schabesbert
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    5,038
    0
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY, USA
    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?
     
  17. Kingarthurhk

    Kingarthurhk
    Expand Collapse
    Isaiah 53:4-9

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2010
    7,926
    90
    Location:
    Texas
  18. Animal Mother

    Animal Mother
    Expand Collapse
    Not Enough Gun

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    13,021
    169
    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?
    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.
     
    #18 Animal Mother, Oct 11, 2011
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2011
  19. hamster

    hamster
    Expand Collapse
    NRA Life Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    3,146
    14
    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.

    [​IMG]
     
    #19 hamster, Oct 11, 2011
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2011
  20. chilic82

    chilic82
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    579
    0
    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.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
William Lane Craig Teaches a Young Punk a Lesson Religious Issues Apr 16, 2016
William Lane Craig Gets His Butt Handed To Him. Religious Issues Mar 17, 2016
Richard Dawkins: I Once Tried To Commune With God Religious Issues Oct 20, 2014
Feinstein Refuses to Debate Opponent Political Issues Nov 2, 2012
memory lane again The Lighter Side Dec 3, 2002
Duty Gear at CopsPlus