Richard Dawkins Debates (Or Lack Thereof)

Recently, an article came out stating that Richard Dawkins is a coward for refusing to debate Dr. William Lane Craig. According to the article, Dawkins received four requests from Dr. Craig via "The British Humanist Association, The Cambridge Debating Union, the Oxford Christian Union and Premier Radio," but he refused them all stating "that Prof Craig is not a figure worthy of his attention and has reportedly said that such a contest would 'look good' on his opponent’s CV but not on his own." One of Dawkin's colleagues is taking issue with this saying that 

“The absence of a debate with the foremost apologist for Christian theism is a glaring omission on your CV and is of course apt to be interpreted as cowardice on your part.
“I notice that, by contrast, you are happy to discuss theological matters with television and radio presenters and other intellectual heavyweights like Pastor Ted Haggard of the National Association of Evangelicals and Pastor Keenan Roberts of the Colorado Hell House.”
In the past, Dawkins has debated such noteworthy figures as "Daniel Dennett, A.C.Grayling, Christopher Hitchens, Lewis Wolpert and Sam Harris." 

Meanwhile, Dr. Craig's invitation remains open to Professor Dawkins should he change his mind. 
Prof Craig, however, remains willing to debate with Prof Dawkins. “I am keeping the opportunity open for him to change his mind and debate with me in the Sheldonian Theatre in Oxford” in October, he said. 
Speaking of Richard Dawkins, yesterday I came across a debate between Dawkins and former colleague and Christian John Lennox. Lennox made some great points in response to Dawkins. I have posted Lennox's responses below, but you can watch the full debate here. [And just so you all know, I am not responsible for the title of these video clips! :)] You can also view a discussion guide to the debate via the Fixed Point Foundation's website.


Part 1:


Part 2:


Part 3:



Could this be the reason Richard Dawkins doesn't want to debate Dr. William Lane Craig?

Comments

Post a Comment

All comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Please keep in mind that the topics are not open to debate; however, I do allow (and encourage) friendly discussion and dialogue. Check out the comment policy for details before commenting. Thank you for visiting!

Popular Posts

Did Pontius Pilate actually exist?

Image
Antonio Ciseri's painting of Pontius Pilate presenting Christ to the crowd. For years, skeptics have claimed that Pontius Pilate, the one responsible for Jesus' execution, was nothing more than a mythical figure. Is this true? And whether or not it is true, what is the significance of this? The implications of this are simple: if Pontius Pilate, did not exist, then the critics are right in stating that the Bible is in error. However, if he did exist, then it proves once again that the Bible is accurate in its details. Let's begin by examining Matthew 27:2. It reads, "And when they had bound Him, they led Him away, and delivered Him to Pontius Pilate the governor." Was Pilate really a governor? Luke 3:1 seems to agree: "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea , and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias t...
Read more

April Fools

Image
Today is April Fool's Day. While I am not too enthralled with the idea of playing tricks on people, I wanted to share a little story with you all (no offense meant to those to whom it refers): An atheist complained to a Christian friend, "You Christians have your sacred holidays, such as Christmas and Easter. Jews celebrate their national holidays, such as Passover and Yom Kippur. But we atheists have no recognized national holidays. It's unfair discrimination." His friend replied, "Why don't you celebrate April first?" On a more serious note, I would like to remind you all that we are called to be "fools for Christ" (1 Corinthians 4:10). This does not mean that we are to act stupid in the name of Christ; rather, it means that we are to go about God's business -- even if it makes us look like fools in the process. Today is as good a day as any to go out and spread the Gospel, to be a fool for Christ!  P.S. Don't forget : The Online ...
Read more

Quote of the Week: Ravi Zacharias On The Problem of Evil

Image
"When you say there's too much evil in this world you assume there's good. When you assume there's good, you assume there's such a thing as a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. But if you assume a moral law, you must posit a moral Law Giver, but that's Who you're trying to disprove and not prove. Because if there's no moral Law Giver, there's no moral law. If there's no moral law, there's no good. If there's no good, there's no evil. What is your question?" ~ Ravi Zacharias, in response to the objection, "There cannot be a God, because there is too much evil in this world"
Read more