Oxford Atheist Calls Richard Dawkins "Coward" for Not Debating William Lane Craig

(Alternate cut of "Empty Chair" with updated news and views). Will Richard Dawkins finally engage in a scholarly one-to-one discussion with William Lane Crai...

Views: 704

Comment by Ghost The Smoker on August 19, 2011 at 6:30pm

I Don't like the way they're trying to make Richard Dawkins look in this video. Who is this Lane Craig Guy? And is he that good at debating? I doubt if I Believe in God No matter what these guys says. He Can't get past the BS in the Bible.

Comment by Luke Scientiae on August 19, 2011 at 6:45pm

Who is Craig? He's a crank, plain and simple. He's bent on recycling long-since rejected medieval arguments for God's existence. The evangelicals herald him as an intellectual. Here's a post on my blog debunking him:


Comment by Luke Scientiae on August 19, 2011 at 7:00pm

Craig contradicts himself more times than I can count. To say, as Kris does, that he's more interested in being a salesman than a debater is to put it extremely mildly.

All of his debates see him follow the same strategy: he throws out a number of largely nonsensical arguments for God's existence and claims victory unless his opponent can refute ALL of them (instead of making their own statement). The way this works is that Craig has a well-rehearsed collection of nonsense that he throws out very quickly; far more quickly than it's possible to refute in the time the opponent has to work with.

That's about all there is to Craig. You can watch the video in the blog post (see my previous comment) if you want to know why Craig is plain wrong (and inconsistent). I would add also that he's a pseudoscientist; he says things that sound scientific and intuitive, but that have no basis in science whatsoever. He does this time and again.

Comment by Dustin on August 19, 2011 at 7:34pm

The only reason people say Craig is good ad debates is because he is good at deception and he PWNS the 'god of the gaps' argument style and the 'You can't disprove my God' argument style , which sits very well people who already believe in the fairy tales.  


His understanding of Science is an absolute joke if you know anything at all about Quantum mechanics or physics of the big bang.  I remember he once quoted Hawkings out of one of his books , while later in the same debate , the Atheist politely pointed out that Hawkings since changed his mind in one of his newer books ... then Craig used the same hawkings quote in a future debate.  So he is continuing to use an outdated quote from a man who has since changed his views because he learned new cosmology.  


Craig purposefully distorts science and uses deception to confuse the audience.  He is also the man who argued that it was so terrible that the men in the Old Testament had to slaughter babies and women and children ... oh the agony those warriors must have felt having to do Gods biddings ... oh terrible terrible ... those poor warriors ... think of how THEY MUST HAVE FELT ... and yes , he seriously is documented as making this argument.  You can search for it yourself , a few bloggers quoted him and responded already.  


He's worse than a car salesman.  He's a deceptive fraud who makes money off of lies.  It's very difficult to watch him debate after I discovered these things... 

Comment by Gabriela Menicucci on August 19, 2011 at 7:37pm
Why should Richard Dawkins debate this loser that has made a career out of debating everyone who is not evangelical christian? This dude has his own branch of churches so every time he participates in a debate is self promotion for him. Clearly he is the one interested in debating Dawkins because it will benefit him, means the ultimate publicity he could get.. Just by the stament he made about 10 commandments being the ground of all "objective moral values"... It's enough for make anyone leave his chair!
Comment by Luke Scientiae on August 19, 2011 at 7:47pm

I doubt we'll find anyone on Think Atheist to disagree with us on Craig. But there are thousands of people "out there" that are persuaded by him. Why not agitate them a bit? Why not challenge them? Why not point out his inconsistencies to them, show him the video about how he completely misrepresents science. We won't change Craig, but we have a change of persuading people that he's not worth believing.

Comment by Luke Scientiae on August 19, 2011 at 9:25pm

Eric, Craig is an evangelical apologist, not an agnostic. See comments below.

Comment by Skycomet the Fallen Angel on August 19, 2011 at 10:52pm

This is the second time that Dr. Dawkins' behavior has confused me. First, he published an extremely heated letter upon the implosion of the Dawkins Forums... now... he won't debate Mr. Craig. IDK.... granted, Craig is a dislikable character. But, what is Dr. Dawkins doing? I'm confused again.

Comment by Luke Scientiae on August 19, 2011 at 11:54pm

What's the Dawkins forum letter, Skycomet? Haven't heard about that...

Comment by Chris on August 20, 2011 at 12:45am

Public debates are beauty pageants. The superficial and the con has the edge at all times. If the debate were instead a moderated conversation with no audience, that might be worth a look. Otherwise, it's nonsense to bother. If that makes Dawkins a coward, fucking more power to the cowards.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2021   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service