Debate Teacher Reacts: William Lane Craig vs. Christopher Hitchens

Hi friends :) We've started a new thing!

Join Nate Sala as he reacts to an apologetics debate between William Lane Craig and Christopher Hitchens.

[medleysa]

Hitchens did this exact same thing in his debate against Frank Turek. He stayed from the topic “does God exist” into discussing “Is religion harmful?”
And the reason is that’s Hitchens’ wheelhouse. He was a very erudite rhetorician, but he couldn’t really defend his belief (what he always called his “lack of belief”), so he would stay the topic.
I’ve also heard he would show up drunk to these debates and didn’t take them seriously, which if true is very sad and a great disservice to both the audience and the participants.

[joashtunison]

Hitch doesn't do formal debate, he's only interested in winning the crowd.

[doesnotexist]

I remember that even when I was an atheist (and I still have a poster of Mr. Hitchens in my bedroom from that period) that I came away from this debate feeling like Dr. Craig got the better of him

[jonathanmcentire]

Comments: "You're a Christian, therefore you're biased!" I doubt they'd have the same opinion if the commentator was an atheist.

[MaverickChristian]

The ratio (as of this recording; 94 likes to 146 dislikes) is ludicrous. 😯

[juliogomez]

I came across your channel yesterday and since started binge watching your videos. So far I've watched at least 6 back to back. I'm so glad i found your channel, feels like i found a hidden gem.

[michelleanderson]

I homeschool and one of my children just started high school level curriculum. We are doing a curriculum about logic and reasoning and just came across your channel! I think I'll be using some of your videos to help my child learn terms and such when we learn about the art of arguments! I know this video is a few years old, but excited to dig into your other debate videos! You approach all of your topics with a biblical mind and take it back to scripture which I appreciate!

[CynHicks]

When Hitchens couldn't win he always seemed to appeal to the agnostics in the audience by pointing out "the ridiculousness" of what Christians believe. That's what he did here imo.

[bjorneriksson]

The christians favorite part of the debate is cross examination, that was funny.

[neohleza]

Is it just me or was Hitchens just not in his A game here.. I'm a Christian who's seen some of his debates and he just doesn't come off as vicious here.

Is it maybe because WLC is that much of a beast.. I've seen him humble some of the biggest atheist apologists out there 😂

[othername]

In training to do cross examination in court, we called "going down the garden path", "closing the gates". You need to unobtrusively ask questions that closes any avenue of escape for that witness when you finally ask the important questions. Not to trick them, but to hold them to their word so they have no option but the truth. Obviously you don't want your opponent to do the same to your client. Lol

[FantasticalProductions]

Has to be one of my favorite debates I've watched, and this has to be my favorite Debate Teacher Reacts video. It was a big inspiration for me as I'm getting back into debate. Love the insight, in this video. Thanks!

[richp]

Your analysis shows a jarring disconnect from a coherent view of the debate. A few points that stick out to me:

7:15 The Hitchens quotes, "atheism is the statement that a certain proposition isn't true" and "atheism is not in itself a belief", are not the contradictory statements you claim. You wrongly implied the aforementioned proposition to be "God exists". In actuality, he referred to the proposition as a presumption of His existence, which Hitchens stated here (6:53).

11:46 Your claim of a contradiction here is also non-sensical. Hitchens can personally believe in a proposition that God does not exist without implying this belief is equivalent to atheism generally or even that it represents a position he is arguing for in the debate. From what you edited into this video, he implied neither.

12:46 The debate addresses the question "does God exist?". The only way to examine this is the way one does with every hypothesis: assess the strength of the supporting arguments. The *precise* logical inverse of Craig's claim of 'I can show God exists' translates to 'you cannot show God exists' from the perspective of Hitchens role in this discussion. Nothing else makes sense here.

[introvertedchristian]

It would be interesting to have seen this carried out in a courtroom where they were on the witness stand during cross examination, and somebody could say, "Objection, unresponsive, " or, "Objection, relevance."

[Elijah]

The way I see it, there are really only two reasons why Hitchens might have brought a banana to the debate. One: either it’s a deep cut to ray comfort being made fun of as “banana man”, because of a kind of cringy comedy skit he did on TV a long time ago. Or two: it was simply to help with his nerves while on stage, because potassium has a calming quality to it. I’m a pianist, so eating a banana before going out on stage is a little trick that some of us use. Lol

[soloridertv]

Hitchens is more a Christian hater than an Atheist from his arguments.

[gerededasein]

The banana could have been a joking reference to the infamous banana of Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron. (I would have the double-check the dates. But it could have just been something to keep up his blood sugar.)

[isaacmahoney]

I think Hitchens took the tactic "Why refute arguments when I can just quote ridiculous parts of the Bible and try to make him look like an idiot?"

[imkluu]

This is what I have thought of Hitchen's in every debate and speech I have heard of his. He doesn't have an argument other than that he doesn't accept the opponents argument, and he gets people on his side by these kind of trick gotcha questions making the opponent appear weak in their ideas, or arguments, but he never actually defended his own side, nor diproved the other.

[robbinsnest]

"That would be sorcery right?"
Mark 3:22 Jesus was accused having a devil. But Jesus simply replied with
23 And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? 24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.

Hollywood are the only ones that portray sorcery being used as good to fight a more evil form of sorcery. You can't destroy evil with evil.