Why I Won't Debate William Lane Craig - Richard Dawkins

- SPECIAL THANKS

As always, I would like to direct extra gratitude to my top-tier patrons:

John Early
Dmitry C.
Mouthy Buddha
Solaf

- CONNECT

SOCIAL LINKS:

Snapchat: cosmicskeptic

- CONTACT

Or send me something:

Alex O'Connor
Po Box 1610
OXFORD
OX4 9LL
ENGLAND

------------------------------------------

[zacharylehocki]

I admire the way Alex is so open and fair in how he interviews and he`s not afraid to push a little or challenge the interviewee, that`s what makes this such a great and fruitful conversation!

[stunns]

Richard Dawkins conveniently forgot about his debates with John Lennox.

John exposed his “rationality from irrationality” argument but he left that bit out.

[SpecCrun]

Richard Dawkins calling someone else pompous is really rich

[BrandonsCommentary]

Alex is, by far, the most fair minded, and well read atheist in the realm of genuine Christian theology.

[afritimm]

Pretty rich Dawkins accusing someone else of being pompous.
While at the same time simply declaring no one in the world has any argument against his position worth considering.
Because, you know, I'm right. End of discussion.
Quite a master debater!

[sirmrs]

As a Christian, mad props to Alex. What a stand up gentleman that displays courage respectfully. A display that I personally think makes a good and honest man.

[bangcolt]

Sounds to me that Professor Dawkins is afraid to debate William Lane Craig.

[jeremiahd]

Dawkins needs to just say that he won't debate William Lane Craig because he doesn't Like him Lol

[mammawanna]

As an atheist, I find it ironic he would criticize someone for being pompous.

[MSA-ujcp]

Dawkins lack of knowledge in the field would have been exposed by WLC. That is why he gives a really poor excuse for not debating him.... Alex's questions bring out Dawkins' inconsistencies.

[chrisfieramosca]

Nah bc Dawkins himself has said arguments from the fine tuning of the universe is what would make him believe in a discussion with Francis Collins. Basically saying people like John Lennox, Francis Collins and Sy Garte aren’t formidable how arrogant is this man Dawkins

[alexanderlyon]

The point at 4:42, "Why do children get cancer?" is an important one. But, Atheists simply won't accept the answer. 1) When Adam and Eve sinned, all of humanity and nature fell from grace. Before they sinned, the world was called "very good, " by God. At that moment of sin, death was introduced into the world in all its forms. Now, we ALL die. Some die young. Some die old. Some die in pain. Some die peacefully, but nobody escapes death. Nobody is innocent, "not one, " as the Bible says.

2) But, for the Christian, that's not the end of the story. Jesus then died in our place to pay our debt. And he died for every single one of us past, present, and future. He reconciled all who are willing to be in a right relationship with God again.

3) One day, everybody who accepts the debt Jesus paid for us and receives Jesus as his/her savior will finally live with God in a place where there is no more death, pain, or suffering.

So, the atheists/skeptics take a snapshot of out-of-context death (and blame a God they don't believe in), but the Christian listens to the rest of the story and see that death is temporary, but life is forever.

Now, atheists/skeptics don't have to believe that, but it is THE answer. Humans sinned and let evil into the world. Humans broke the world. We are the ones to blame.

[revealcreativeco]

As a Christian, I enjoyed this discussion, and I applaud you Alex for having a reasoned and positively fair and polite approach to both believers and non-believers. Keep up the good work!

[gertstronkhorst]

Richard Dawkins doesn't debate. He smooches up to people who agree with him, and oozes contempt for people who don't. He feels that people who don't agree with him are diseased. Why would he take them seriously? What he likes is a young man like Alex showering him with adulation, never asking him a difficult question. He enjoys that above anything else. He doesn't suffer fools and he decides who is and isn't a fool. And ironically, he says he doesn't want to be remembered above as an atheist. You have to admit, that's kinda funny!

[Amadeus]

Respectufully, sounded like a excuse to me.

[aaronmueller]

I appreciate how much you are willing to push against or poke at anyone. You ask pointed questions aimed at the ideas, not the people, who are the subject of discussion, and keep things respectful. You also wait patiently for answers, you clearly aren’t trying to pull gotcha’s to get a win, but instead forcing your interviewee to consider and explain their position in regards to other viewpoints or their other positions. So refreshing to see.

[sethgilbertson]

Awesome job hosting this discussion, Alex. I am familiar with you from your interactions with WLC and Douglas Murray (to name a couple), and I have always found you to be one of the most articulate and fair voices even though your personal beliefs are often different than mine. I really appreciate your intellectual integrity and respectful demeanor.

On the flip side, I was surprised that Dawkins suggests that Christians should say that unsightly OT events simply never happened. That would be disingenuous. If they hold to the veracity of the OT as a historical text, they absolutely ought to wrestle with the ramifications. I can respect anyone who says “is this true, and if so, then what?” But I can’t respect someone who says “I wish this weren’t true, so I will conveniently pretend it is not so.” Dawkins’ promotion of this kind of self-serving expediency seems to be a reflection of his own character.

[sammyking]

Because Dr Craig would mop the floor with Dawkins .

[EdMoses-jn]

Dawkins forgot of his debate with Prof. John Lennox.

[JonathanOelkers]

Seems like Dawkins is using something WLC said about the OT as a smoke screen to hide the fact that he was afraid to debate him. Perhaps this is because he knew he could not contend with him… Also interesting to see Alex interact with one of the guys who first inspired his atheism. Now that Alex is so much stronger in philosophy, he must realize that Dawkins doesn’t really have much to offer beyond a solid commitment to materialism and skepticism. I wonder if deep down it’s hard for Alex to see this kind of shallow academic commitment from one of his early heros.