Er... HELLO? If Dawkins really IS afraid of debating WCL how come he's already HAS?! The PROOF he wasn't afraid is here: /watch?v=dRmKA5zUYBI (Add full 'youtube' URL in front of it)
What I find wrong with theist arguements for God lately is the fact that they feel the need to make everything so complex that no one without a Ph.D could understand it. Shouldn't evidence for the existance of a God who created the universe be more readily available to the public? If God did exist, he would have realized that hiding his existance would cause the scuffling between Atheists and Theists we see today, and so any rational diety would get it over with and show themself/selves.
Descendants of Apes and Chimps, when do we devolve back to the forest? I earnestly look forward to the days of hopping from one tree to another and walking around naked.
Oh Christians, thou art morons. Believing in an imaginary, socially constructed being who permits the rape and murder of children on a daily basis and watches indifferently, despite having the power to stop it. The god who needs your worship to feed his ego. I take it you people don't believe in Zeus, Apollo, Mars, Venus, Dionysus, Thor, Osiris, Tawaret, Hades, Aphrodite, Quetzalcoatl, Ganesh, Aries and the hundreds of other gods people worshipped? You're a disgrace to the species.
dawkins aint scared of that twat craig, not one bit, we all know dawkins would destroy that deluded twat, just like hitchens did. Dawkins does not want to lower himself to debate with idiots like him, it would be like somebody who studys geography and the earth, debating with someone who thinks the earth is flat, theres no point because we have already won the argument.
Dawkins should respond by making another poster on a bus that reads....."There's probably no god and there's probably no Dawkins, but there is evidence for one of these."
And then the poster should have a picture of two boxes. One box has a picture of Dawkins and the other box is BLANK. Ha ha ha!!!
@aswar87 The reason that there is probably no Dawkins though is that it looks like he will be absent from the debate he was asked to attend against William Lane Craig at the Sheldonian Theatre on 25th Oct.
@Shazoolo See....... you say asked, but in reality it is more like a cocky little runt with his fists up and saying to Dawkins "Come on, debate me fool, come on."
fine, u are a monkey and we are children of Almighty God feel better now by the way u really need to read up some History God did not came out with the atomic bomb the Holocause or human experiments
well sorry when u have some sicko who believes in aliens! making the atheist world look like some superstitious back water overriding science and parroting a badly thought out ,medieval , philosophical word dance that proves nothing .that bothers me. not only that but u have this superstitious followers of Mr. Dawkins who spend their time parroting about other peoples belief! trying to convince themselves they are not obsessed with Mr.Dawkins LOL!!!Not to worry JESUS can save u
@katelling1 Dawkins denies God yet holds to the possibility that Aliens made us! lol! Anything other than God will do for Dawkins and the Dawkinate masses! Just about anything as long as it means they can deny their conscience and wallow in sin.
Unsurprisingly, this video omits any mention of the reasons Dawkins has given for why he refuses to debate Craig. The makers of the video would have us believe that there can only be one reason: that Dawkins cannot defend what he's said. Does anyone here really think this is the ONLY possible reason?
Richard Dawkins is showing himself to be an utterly spineless coward. How any atheist can look to him as their 'guru' is beyond me. What a joke this guy is becoming. He's had his day now.
@MultiStanDaMan Wow, you guys are so desperate to win at something that you grab at anything. Very sad. Has it been that long? You did win the battle against Galileo... at least temporarily. That was only 400 years ago. Don't try so hard, I realize how hard it is for you now that you can clearly see that religion is dying, and that inside you yourself know its all bullshit, it can be scary, I understand. But life will go on without your invisible wizard friend, it always has.
@domcurrie But Dawkins is the one the average person associates with the former atheist campaign, not necessarily Sherine. High profile unbelievers such as Dawkins (and others from the British Humanist Accociation) were asked to lend their support to this to raise publicity and that's exactly what they got. From that the average joe associates the atheist bus campaign with Dawkins and co now.
@Shazoolo Your reply speaks volumes about religious faith. Being 'average' and part of a mob is more important to you than telling the truth.
The whole point of Sherine's campaign was to counter the violent and threatening advertising of the 'jesussaid' group that threatened non Christian men, women and children with agonising pain, burning in the fires of hell for eternity.
The Atheist Bus Campaign was smart, funny and morally right. The Christian Bus is ignorance on wheels.
@domcurrie Smart funny and morally right?!!! lol! An atheist talking about "morals". That's hilarious! Tell me, how do you define this atheist "morality" of yours?
@19nisey69 About as stupid as Dawkinite drones who buy so many of the pope of atheism's books that they make weak philosophical clap trap like 'The (soon to be picked totally apart by William Lane Ctaig at The Sheldonian Theatre on the 25th of Oct, less Dawkins finally finds the guts to defent it) God Delusion' best sellers.
@ARudeAwakening4U Gee, you think Dawkins might have just got tired of trying to have intelligent discussions with people to stupid to understand science? How many idiots like Kirk Cameron, Christine Odonnel, and Baldwin who think monkeys shouldn't exist because they would all be people already should someone have to deal with? they don't understand evolution because they are either too stupid, or willfully remaining ignorant to believe the lies of the bible and it's murderous god.
Did Mr. Dawkins pay u to defend him? u treat Dawkins like a God some people are so sensitive the first bad thing someone says about him forget freedom of speech u have some extreme atheist calling u an ignorant savage where is ur intellect and peaceful reason now?
@katelling1 My goodness. Another theist bringing up Dawkins. lol This is hilarious. None of my comments were related to Dawkins apart from asking why YOU people keep bringing him up. As i have already said in another comment. This infatuation with Dawkins is not healthy. I would suggest counseling and get this sorted.
Outside this tiny community who knows who Craig is? Is Dawkins a big name and who will gain the most from this when they don't get anywhere and Craig just muddles up the debate? Will it be the same laughable arguement that god exists because the universe exists, fine tuning, universe has a cause and morals. I wouldn't go if I was Dawkins :) Dawkins is in Oxford the friday after though and I am going to that to say hello to him!
Now here's the problem with this video. People are now going to think that everyone in England/UK is as dumb as you. Thanks for making the UK look like some middle eastern, superstitious back water. Great job. Oh and btw, William Lame repeating the Kalam argument over and over is not actually a debate. It can only be described as, Lame parroting a badly thought out, medieval, philosophical word dance that proves nothing. I bet the big words impress you though.
Dawkins proves nothing either. At least WLC doesn't make crapy arguments like Dawkins. WLC repeats Kalam because it works. And because something works doesn't mean it becomes invalid as one repeats it.
@Jacob011 rofl @ kalam works The issue is not whether Dawkins makes any argument. The issue is people like you who make the UK look like a backward thinking, third world, under developed nation where people still believe that some magic, invisible daddy, who came from nothing & made everything out of nothing using his magic fairy dust. And then, you try to justify the magic, invisible, sky daddy by parroting a flawed and refuted argument over and over. Stop trying to drag us into your delusion.
You're little overreacting, don't you think ? (England certainly won't look like 3rd world, or whatever nonsense. On the contrary, it will appear as a free country.)
@Jacob011 watch?v=GiRjRc0Tuos&feature=related another example of Craig losing badly. This was in his early years, he won't debate this topic again. He sticks to the Kalam argument because he doesn't have to be judgemental and ruin his good boy reputation ;)
@Jacob011 kalam doesn't work and you can watch Craig lose arguments on stage and yet just keep saying the same point but in a different manner, in the end he appears to win because his opponent gives up talking to a brick wall that doesn't understand it has lost. Dawkins is a great biologist but he is a poor philosopher and poorer debater. When placed vs Craig a full time super prepared debater he will lose even though Dawkins is right. (the best debater will win, see school debates)
@Jacob011 watch?v=_l69QN7ixmM&list=PL5C6AC262F765A152&index=1 I presume you mean the Kagan vs Craig debate? Craig loses badly, however it is a debate setup that definitely suits Kagan more as it will be how he has argued philosophy for all his life. Then again Craig is meant to have a degree in philosophy so he should be used to these type of debates :P
@Lucky7Wolfin Typical emotional reaction from a typical new atheist. I do wonder whether you guys have some variant of Tourette Syndrome as many of you can barely string one sentence together without assailing people with personal insults. If (as you assert) Craig's argument is so weak then Dawkins should have no bother stepping up and refuting it. As it is, he is currently embarrassing himself as the wider public are getting the impression that he is running from Craig.
@Shazoolo Another invisible sky buddy believer desperately trying to cling on to your ancient myths of magic beings who came from nothing and then magically created the universe out of nothing. Just what we need is backward thinking clowns who are desperate to drag the rest of us down into their level of bronze age, goat herder thinking. Thanks for making the UK look like the third world. Arguing the Kalam is like arguing that the sun goes round the earth. Pointless and not for grown ups.
I am wondering, do you have to send Dawkins and Co. a royalty cheque every time you open your mouth or type a sentence? Honestly, do you enjoy being a living stereotype?
@Jim1905 Only people who have brought up Dawkins, are people who support this video. As I have already said in my comments, the comments you seem unable to read, this is nothing to do with Dawkins. I'm sorry that you can not address the point i brought up and seem only able to obsess about Dawkins. Now why don't you back to reading the words of ignorant savages, who thought the world was flat and the rest of the universe rotated round the earth. Seems that's all you are capable of comprehending
Yes, I'm clearly obsessed. Hahaha, good Lord, you really can't stop, can you? I mean, you're practically the poster child for the new atheists. Have you ever had an original thought?
@Jim1905 Yes, clearly you are. Now you have failed to address the point raised again. But what can be expected from an invisible sky buddy believer who thinks that the universe can be explained by reading the ramblings of bronze age, barbaric, terrorist, desert nomads. Fortunately for the rest of us, your belief in fairy tales about magic, creator beings who poof things into existence from nothing and make you live forever, is in terminal decline. Good riddance to the thorn in humanity's side.
@ARudeAwakening4U LOL Another christian obsessing about Dawkins. You guys just can't stop. Seems like he is making a big impression. Only time i mentioned Dawkins is to ask why you guys keep bringing him up. Really, you people need to stop this. It's not healthy to be this infatuated with someone.
lmao, what "point"?! The ignorant rants of someone who desperately wants there not to be a God? I mean, bad enough as it is that you clearly haven't a clue what you're talking (or should I say typing) about; but it's even worse (and more hilarious) that they're not even your own thoughts!
@Jim1905 This just gets better. At least you have stopped obsessing about Dawkins. Well not here anyway. Now can you give me any reason why I should continue to take seriously, anything that is said by a believer in the most horrendous fairytale yet known to man? A believer in a magic creator, who came from no where and used his magic sky buddy wand to make the universe from nothing. A creator so barbaric that he uses genocide as his answer to a problem he created. You sir, are a joke at best.
Well you can continue to sling mud if you like; green is lovely colour on you. However, being an ignorant douche doesn't mean God does not exist, despite your obviously best efforts.
"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell."
@Jim1905 You really don't have anything do you. Calling names and quoting other invisible sky buddy believers. Lets just translate your Lewis quote shall we. "A man can no more diminish the glory of my mythical, completely unproven, completely unjustified, invisible sky buddy by refusing to worship him etc" As you like quotes so much. "Humanity has the stars in its future, and that future is too important to be lost under the burden of juvenile folly and ignorant superstition" Isaac Asimov :)
Isaac Asimov? Hahaha, who are you going to quote next, Carl Sagan? There are atheist whom I admire and think are/were very intelligent people, though not always right but come on, you can do better. None the less:
"The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you"
@Jim1905 Again we can translate your quote from yet another invisible sky buddy believer. "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass my invisible scary magic sky buddy that I can not prove or demonstrate in anyway is waiting for you" ROFL This is great. Keep bringing them on. Appeals to authority mean nothing I'm afraid. Especially when the authority's assertion of a sky buddy is unfounded and meaningless. Pitiful at best.
What? No Sagan quote, but come on he's the best! Did you just laugh at your own joke? Are you eight years old? I am still wondering though if you're ever going to say (or type) something that's actually from your own thoughts; I mean, don't you ever get tired of parroting others? Do you like being a living piece of propaganda or are you simply that dense? I hadn't realized quoting someone btw is an appeal to authority, you ought to take your own advice :)
@Jim1905 ROFL Now this really is scraping the bottom of the barrel. No response but to point out a spelling error. The last grasp of the straw, by a beaten man. I'm sure that your invisible sky buddy inspired you to this new height of sky buddy apologetics. Did you pray to jeebus? What is you next response going to be? I know, you can call me a douche bag again. Now that does sound like a response inspired by the love of jeebus. How about another quote from a sky buddy believer to spice it up.
Yeah, you see this is why you're an ignorant moron because I did respond to you; I responded twice, once to each seperate comments. Of course you're too lazy to bother (or stupid, I suspect both however) to scroll down and check; you simply assume I didn't and proceed to rant on. Well if you use for your philosophy then I guess I shouldn't be surprised you use it for your more mundane tasks, such as reading comments.
@Jim1905 rofl. I love it!! You sir, are a shining example of a good christian. Give you theists enough rope and you hang yourself every time. I bet jeebus is really proud of you. Lets do a quick recap. First you obsess about Dawkins. Something I did not mention. Then you assert your invisible sky buddy by quoting the author of childrens fairytales. All mixed through with various insults of course. Then you resort to a spelling error and more insults. Great job of supporting my original comment.
Yeah, you're just mad because I caught you being ignorant. Let's recap: First you rant on and on using language and thoughts which aren't your own, you then accuse me of obsessing about Dawkins (I brought him up once, If that's obessing then you're clearly dangerously obsessed with God), and then laugh at your own jokes. Finally you completely ignore another response of mine. You, sir (who talks like that?) are a shining example of a psuedo-intellectual.
@Jim1905 You mention Dawkins in your first two posts. Plainly there for everyone to see. You brought him up when he was not the subject of my original comment. And would have kept going had I not pointed out the post was nothing to do with Dawkins. Also, you have made no responses apart from insults, blind assertions and quotes from children's authors. I love the way you christians resort to plain old lies when you have nothing to rely on apart from pointing out a spelling error. Failed.
@Lucky7Wolfin You use words such as "skydaddy" and sentences such as "the ramblings of bronze age, barbaric, terrorist, desert nomads." This is all virtually verbatim verbiage from the likes of crazed rabid atheistic bigoted athestic loonies as Christopher Hitchens. Can't you people think for yourselves? You sound like a brianwashed drone spouting the buzz words of your cult.
@MultiStanDaMan LOL You appear to be very hostile to having facts repeated to you. Shame your only defence is to complain that someone has said it before and then to call names. Truth hurts :) I am very sorry that you are so ashamed of just what it is you actually believe in. But you know what, I would be ashamed if i believed in the ignorant attempts of primitive barbarians who tried to explain the world around them by using "god did it" whenever they could not understand something.
@MultiStanDaMan Oh btw, I love that you were so angry when you replied to me, that you used atheistic twice in your description of Hitchens. As I said. Truth hurts. Best calm yourself down and read through before you post in future. Maybe you should do some thin air talking and ask jeebus to help you.
No, it's physically impossible for him to have an original thought; I've tried to wriggle one out but alas to no avail. I would go so far as to say he's not even brainwashed, he's just an idiot.
You talk about embarrassment,but please don't forget that you believe in an ancient myth that just happened to be the ancient myth that was believed by the strongest armies.
Suckers like you would get sucked into believing what ever prevailing myth that exists,where the myth only changes due to global location.
William Lane Craig,for all his impressively slick American speeches,still finds himself defending,for instance, the idea that non-believers will suffer agony for eternity.
@Shazoolo there not mate, not one bit, we all know dawkins would destroy that deluded twat, just like hitchens did. Dawkins does not want to lower himself to debate with idiots like him, it would be like somebody who studys geography and the earth and debating with someone who thinks the earth is flat, theres no point because we have already won the argument.
@fabuladeum1 Wait a minute...seriously? You honestly thought Hitchens won his debate against Craig? That was the most one sided beating I have ever seen in a debate. It was so bad that Hitchens even forfeited his final rebuttal. Pathetic.
@logotheist hitchens kicked his ass, maybe you were clearly wathcing a different debate, one you dreamt! hitchens was unbeatable and that idiot craig was left looking like a total retard, as would anyone when they talk about something they have no fucking evidence for, ill post a link to your page, please watch it, then fuck off deluded god believing dumb ass
@fabuladeum1 Hitchens most definately lost that one. Other atheists don't think Hitchens won either. The atheist web site: Common Sense Atheism' said: "Craig was flawless and unstoppable. Hitchens was rambling and incoherent, with the occasional rhetorical jab. Frankly, Craig spanked Hitchens like a foolish child. Perhaps Hitchens realized how bad things were for him after Craig’s opening speech, as even Hitchens’ rhetorical flourishes were not as confident as usual."
@Shazoolo no, he didnt loose, craigs arguements are all based on assertaions without evidence, so basically, he is an idiot. I have watched the full debate, 2 hours and 12 mins and totally disagree with you, craig was made to look like the utter deluded retard he is, just like all people who belive in god without evidence. But like all debates, both sides come away thinking they won. Even though i do think that craig gave nothing that made anyone think god exists who didnt already belive that.
@Shazoolo and the vast majority of the comments on the page for the full debate, all are in agrement that craig lost and was made to look like the deluded ignorant twat he is.
@fabuladeum1 Do you have Tourette's Syndrome? So many atheists can barely string a coherent sentence together these days without blathering out a whole load of swear words. I made a polite and reasonable request for you to cease spouting foul language on this page and you were unable to. The question is with regards to the ARTICLE and the 'atheist' authors opinion of the debate (who stated Craig won). Of course the mindless trollish minions would bleat a contrary opinion!
@fabuladeum1 By the way, seeing you cannot respect a simple and reasonable request to stop swearing count yourself blocked. I don't have the time to babysit foul mouthed individuals here.
@logotheist you really think someone like hitchens would forfeit his final rebuttal because he knew he was beaten? You have heard of Hitchens right? I'm not saying he won or lost, but I can assure you that this is not the reason he forfeit his rebuttal.
@AtheistsOfGP I don't know why he forfeited. Maybe he was too drunk, maybe he knew he was having an off night and wanted to cut his losses, maybe he wasn't equipped to answer the rebuttals that Craig offered. The bottom line is that there are no good causes for a person to forfeit his closing round in a debate, and whether or not his forfeiture was caused by his thorough drubbing, it was at least reflective of it.
@logotheist I disagree, he just wouldn't for those reasons, he'd fake passing out first. I don't know what his reasoning was, but for christians to try and turn that last forfeit into some claim of victory, really just shows how desperate they have become. They can no longer try to claim victory on actual 'points of discussion' as their position has been repeatedly destroyed, so they jump and yell cause Hitchens forfeits his final argument... thats all they have left.
I doubt he will turn up. Too much like hard work for him. He's happy to try and insult Christian beliefs but as soon as he gets a fair responce from us, he hides away. This is the way of things.
@BrightStaroftheDawn He seems perfectly happy to attack Christianity...but as far as I know hasn't defended his beliefs to someone who actually disagreed. I have seen him discuss the issue...however it was with people who agreed with him. I don't think this falls under the realm of "debate".
@BrightStaroftheDawn Same old thing over and over...? Like I've said...Dawkins hasn't dealt with it. He's stated his opinion on God or the lack of...and seems to think it is up to Christians to then defend God. Debates do not work like that. One person makes their opinion known and it is then up to them to defend THEIR opinions. Dawkins has not done that. Instead...he runs away.
To put it plain and simple.....you people wore out any respect you had left ....by more than just non believing groups. You also embarrass a good portion of Christians.
It's time to ignore you......like the ancient followers of Zeus.
@BrightStaroftheDawn You can ignore me all you want...but at the end of the day, it was you who found this video and commented on it. I don't have much respect for Dawkin and many of his followers simply because they choose to insult Christians and not back up their beliefs with debate. They state their beliefs as fact...which is okay if you are willing to stand up for your beliefs. You talk as if we Christians owe athiests respect when we get none.
@markieman64 U shouldnt get any. Maybe when you stop persecuting everyone that doesnt believe in your invisible wizard friend. The peaceful christians of the world have tried to outlaw, ridicule, & destroy anything that threatened their fragile faith. Scholars have tried being polite & get squashed by the christian majority. All atheists have left, and in truth its much easier and more effective, is to show anyone who will listen just how absolutely absurd the christian faiths are
@AtheistsOfGP You talk of persecution of athiests when your comment is riddled with Christian persecution. You athiests really don't like tasting your own medicine do you?
@markieman64 wow 'you christians' have an apparent inability to see flawed logic and reasoning. lets compare the persecution that you speak of: you feel persecuted when us big bad mean atheists call you names. How horrible for you, why don't you tell the teacher & she will give us a time-out. Christians persecute by killing, burning people, separating children from parents, denying equal rights, stalling mankind's technological advancement. hmm, I see what you mean, equally guilty.
@markieman64 He debates all types of religious supporters, from Bishops to Christian theologians. This is the whole reason christians are jumping up and down trying to claim this as some kind of defeat of atheism, To them it seems Dawkins will debate anyone except Craig, so they say he's afraid. In truth they are just desperate to finally win something, their position has been kicked around so relentlessly in the last few decades they're starting to feel bad for themselves.
@markieman64 "A fair response from us"... ya... I can virtually assure everyone in youtube land that you don't even understand Craigs position. So don't latch on to him like he's your big brother standing up to a bully "ya, that's right! what he said, I told you we were right!" The reason Dawkins won't debate Craig, as he has said, Craig is a professional debater, he wins on semantics and irrelevant 'gotcha' points. He is not debating to find truth, he debates to win more points.
To be fair, your bus advert did make me laugh out loud, and it's a shame that Prof Dawkins won't be at the Sheldonian as (a) you'd pack the place to the rafters and maybe warm it up a bit!, and (b) it'd be fun to watch him demolish Prof Lane Craig. As it is, the latter will simply be--if you'll forgive the apt metaphor--preaching to the converted. Oh well; I suppose it's good for the economy.
The really funny thing is how hysterical you theists become about atheism. Keeps me in stitches! You'll stoop to anything, no matter how absurd, to prop up your fairy tale. LOL!
@ChristiansofAsia Great point, very observant, thanks for joining the conversation. Now see if you can say that and walk at the same time... it's very important for people like you to challenge yourself. Don't be upset if you fail, try, try, try again. Maybe say a prayer before you give it a go... I mean that always helps right.
Dawkins is just running scared. It's amazing how he is quite willing to weigh into philosophical issues but refuses to publicly defend his statements. lol
@hdregmore do you have any idea who dawkins is? He is one of the most outspoken atheists in the world. He publicly defends his position more or less for a living. That's why the 'Craig Camp' is so upset... he debates everyone but won't debate Craig. Please, next time, have at least the smallest clue of what your trying to get across before typing onto a public forum. Read it aloud a couple of times, share it with friends first. You'll avoid looking silly next time.
@AtheistsOfGP What a load of crap. You can worship as a demigod if you like however if he wishes to weigh into philosophical issues like the existence of God then he should have the balls to publicly defend his position.
Please next time try and deal with the facts of the issue before embarrassing yourself on a public forum. Take it to your primary school teacher for review if you like.
@hdregmore I'm not sure how to respond, seeing as your comment made no sense. I'll copy and paste what I wrote last time seeing as you need repetition in order to gain comprehension.
"He is one of the most outspoken atheists in the world. He publicly defends his position for a living - more or less."
I don't know why you don't understand this. I used small words so I thought even your kind would understand it. But, just in case, this means he argues his position all the time.
@AtheistsOfGP Perhaps you should read it again. Sometimes it takes an atheist a few reads before complex sentences sink in. If that fails perhaps you should take a copy of it to your primary school teacher along with a shiny green apple.
That way she may just give you some remedial attention.
@hdregmore Are you refusing to read what I wrote or just can't understand it? I do however appreciate the laugh as you struggle to come up with something witty to throw back at me and the best you can do is a bad copy of what I said. It's like watching a dumb kid play with glue. Maybe you're intellectually fatigued, it must have been difficult for you to think of let alone spell the word 'remedial'. In the future, come up with original material or you just end up sounding stupid.
Why should an accomplished biologist debate a person whose only skill is semantic wordplay, and whose claim to fame is ignoring rebuttals, responses and refutations of his tripe? He's intellectually dishonest in his constant repeating of previously debunked tripe.
And while you may think the bus ad is witty, it shows the weakness of your position. The fact that Dawkins exists can be demonstrated and repeated [thats science], while your god's existence is anything but demonstrable.
Why does he have to debate him though? Dawkins arguements against God are clearly set out in his book for anyone to read and he has done many debates already on this matter. Who is Craig really? Dawkins could debate him win, then 1 month down the line there will be another "Craig" just like there is still "Comfort." He has to draw a line somewhere as he cannot debate everyone.
Dr. Craig is considered to be one of the leading Christian apologists, worldwide. Dawkins considers him to be a bit of an idiot, so this would have been a golden opportunity for Dawkins to be able to say that he had wiped the floor with the leading expert in this field. If Dawkins really is so passionately concerned about our emancipation and freedom from religion, you would have thought he would have taken this one on.
'Didn't buy his book. I picked it up, opened a page, read a bit, and realized pretty quickly it was worthless drivel. It was written *as if* it were an intellectual piece, but of course, it is not. So, I put it down.
@The1hope4all Yes, most definitely. Dawkins plays to people's basic fallen nature and resistance to God. As the Bible says,' people will gather about themselves a great number of teachers who will say what their itching ears want them to hear.'
@Sophiethefembot I was out of the country for 17 years, and I was vaguely aware that there was supposed to be some terrible new threat to Christianity, in the form of Dawkins. I came back to the UK in 2006, and heard Dawkins on the radio, and afterwards I was thinking "Oh, is that it?"
@OWC2000 He claims religion is always dangerous. I know he never says "always" in so many words but that seems to be what he is implying, that for the most part religion causes war and ALL the evil done in the world is because of religion. The other problem with this is he seems to use the word 'religion' rather loosely. If you are going to use such a broad word you need to explain exactly what you mean by 'religion'. People call me religious because I'm christian. Religion is about....
@OWC2000 following rules. This is christianity is really more of a relationship than a religion as it is about the grace of God rather than being under the rigidity of the law like the Jews. Jesus set us free from that. However if you want to say religion causes violence, yes that is legitimate but not on such large scale as Dawkins puts it on. Religion *can* cause violence (but depends on which religion, the nature of it). great evil has been done in the name of christianity, but this is rare.
@OWC2000 Islam on the other hand....is much more likely to cause violence since some of their prime teachings instruct it. You will not find anything inspiring anything other than peace in the words of Christ. Dawkins has used this argument to attack primarily christianity (he doesn't say so but I know his agenda). He might have a point with many other religions but with christianity, the argument falls far too short. I hope that helps illustrate what I'm saying. No disrespect to Dawkins though.
@Sophiethefembot Thanks for replying. It is not religion that is dangerous but dogma. Any teaching that restricts free thought is dangerous, including Christianity.
The Christian message is as every bit as dogmatic as Muslim teachings, the difference being that Christianity has be tempered by secular values to the point where most Christian groups are tolerant of others: Notable exceptions, Westboro Baptists, the Muslim death/rape camps in Bosnia & the extreme US Christian Right.
@OWC2000 I agree, fixed, unchalleneged dogma IS dangerous. The difference between Islam and christianity is in christianity you are encouraged to question every doctrine. In Islam, you are discouraged. There will be some cases where people have made negative impacts on society in the name of Christ, but these are because of man's failings, not God's or Christ's. Sincere, regenerate followers of Christ are more concerned with *relationship* that adhering to dogma, that's why many christians...
@Sophiethefembot This has not always been so. Galileo was persecuted by church leaders for his views. For centuries only priest were allowed to read and interpret the bible and in may ways it is still so, with groups like the Westboto Baptist, Branch Davidians and events like the Salem witch trials.
.
We also see this in the election with attacks on Romney and religious wackos like Bachmann wanting to turn this into a religious theocracy
@OWC2000 disagree with one another on minor issues and why we have so many different denominations of christianity. Let me ask you though, have you ever read any of the four gospels, and the actual words of Jesus? If dogma is setting in place boundaries and structure then you could call anything dogma. If that is true, then politics could be dogmatic. But Christ calls us to find what he says true for ourselves, not to just accept it arbitrarily.
@YhwhKhai Why? Because he refuses to debate someone despite saying why a long time ago? Instead of asking for a debate, maybe he should deal with the fallacies and dishonesty other people he debated pointed out in his debates.
@DarkEmergence I hear what you're saying but he's willing to debate a pope, a bishop but not Craig? It should be easy to defend a book you wrote. Correct? His explanation for not wanting to debate Craig wreaks of cowardice. Even some from his own camp called him a coward. I guess being a man of his stature he can't admit it but I don't know how you don't think his reasons aren't lame! "I'm busy!" WTH???? Really dude!
@YhwhKhai I'd love to see a debate between Dawkins and Craig, but a written one, annotated, with sources and no time constraints. The rigid timed format of debates favors Craig, who has his script down pat.
I doubt Craig would go for that though. Barring that I'd like to see Craig debate John Loftus, if only because he seems to be avoiding him
@YhwhKhai Popes and Bishops (who I'm sure you wouldn't cowards for not debating Dawkins) are authorities in their fields, Craig is a professor of religious studies and philosophy. His claim to fame is debating where he repeats the same well-worded arguments despite having them debunked in earlier debates and books. And despite having his arguments debunked, Christians will swear he has never lost a debate. Debating Craig IS a waste of time. It will only elevate Craig.
@DarkEmergence Oh and Dawkins never spews the same rhetoric? Really, ok then let the coward step up and debunk Craig's arguments. But alas he's too "busy" for that. I for one would not say Craig never lost a debate - I haven't seen all of them.
@YhwhKhai Craig will state the same argument, word for word, right after someone has pointed out the flaws in it in a previous debate. He even uses decades old scientific quotes after they have become irrelevant (as scientific consensuses changes with new information). It doesn't matter if Dawkins points out Craig's dishonesty, Christians will still declare him the winner. Hell, they do that with Ray Comfort.
@DarkEmergence Oh and how do you explain many of the atheists referring to Dawkins as a coward? Apparently they don't think debating Craig would be a waste of time.
@DarkEmergence Perhaps I'll do a count for you and come back to post links. But the comments from atheists are all over YT and other secular blogs. Well you know maybe Dawkins will turn up and not be a freakin' coward!
@YhwhKhai You keep asserting he's a coward, but without any reasons besides the fact that he won't debate who you want him to debate who you will probably say won no matter what Dawkin's arguments are.
Er... HELLO? If Dawkins really IS afraid of debating WCL how come he's already HAS?! The PROOF he wasn't afraid is here: /watch?v=dRmKA5zUYBI (Add full 'youtube' URL in front of it)
sitemountain 1 day ago
40% of the UK has no religion. So the probability of Dawkins existing is 1%
saguhh00 1 month ago
What I find wrong with theist arguements for God lately is the fact that they feel the need to make everything so complex that no one without a Ph.D could understand it. Shouldn't evidence for the existance of a God who created the universe be more readily available to the public? If God did exist, he would have realized that hiding his existance would cause the scuffling between Atheists and Theists we see today, and so any rational diety would get it over with and show themself/selves.
xGimpyx 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Descendants of Apes and Chimps, when do we devolve back to the forest? I earnestly look forward to the days of hopping from one tree to another and walking around naked.
eltopus4747 1 month ago
Oh Christians, thou art morons. Believing in an imaginary, socially constructed being who permits the rape and murder of children on a daily basis and watches indifferently, despite having the power to stop it. The god who needs your worship to feed his ego. I take it you people don't believe in Zeus, Apollo, Mars, Venus, Dionysus, Thor, Osiris, Tawaret, Hades, Aphrodite, Quetzalcoatl, Ganesh, Aries and the hundreds of other gods people worshipped? You're a disgrace to the species.
BarryDong 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
dawkins aint scared of that twat craig, not one bit, we all know dawkins would destroy that deluded twat, just like hitchens did. Dawkins does not want to lower himself to debate with idiots like him, it would be like somebody who studys geography and the earth, debating with someone who thinks the earth is flat, theres no point because we have already won the argument.
fabuladeum1 2 months ago
William Lane Craig is a God-of-the-gaps merchant.
He has not a single other argument in favour of god. (yes, including morality, in which he regularly gets his backside handed to him).
He forgets that Richard Dawkins is now an old aged pensioner - it's like a young goalkeeper asking to be tested against a 68 year-old Pele.
Try Sam Harris instead ... oh you did?, and got trounced!
jazzx251 4 months ago
Dawkins should respond by making another poster on a bus that reads....."There's probably no god and there's probably no Dawkins, but there is evidence for one of these."
And then the poster should have a picture of two boxes. One box has a picture of Dawkins and the other box is BLANK. Ha ha ha!!!
aswar87 4 months ago
@aswar87 The reason that there is probably no Dawkins though is that it looks like he will be absent from the debate he was asked to attend against William Lane Craig at the Sheldonian Theatre on 25th Oct.
Shazoolo 4 months ago 2
@Shazoolo See....... you say asked, but in reality it is more like a cocky little runt with his fists up and saying to Dawkins "Come on, debate me fool, come on."
You know it's true. Ha ha!
You don't debate someone who has nothing to say.
aswar87 4 months ago
I wished I could attend that debate.
Wot no Dawkins
FeignofCordor 4 months ago
@19nisey69
fine, u are a monkey and we are children of Almighty God feel better now by the way u really need to read up some History God did not came out with the atomic bomb the Holocause or human experiments
katelling1 4 months ago
@ARudeAwakening4U
I know !! how dumb is he!
katelling1 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
well sorry when u have some sicko who believes in aliens! making the atheist world look like some superstitious back water overriding science and parroting a badly thought out ,medieval , philosophical word dance that proves nothing .that bothers me. not only that but u have this superstitious followers of Mr. Dawkins who spend their time parroting about other peoples belief! trying to convince themselves they are not obsessed with Mr.Dawkins LOL!!!Not to worry JESUS can save u
katelling1 4 months ago
@katelling1 Dawkins denies God yet holds to the possibility that Aliens made us! lol! Anything other than God will do for Dawkins and the Dawkinate masses! Just about anything as long as it means they can deny their conscience and wallow in sin.
ARudeAwakening4U 4 months ago
Unsurprisingly, this video omits any mention of the reasons Dawkins has given for why he refuses to debate Craig. The makers of the video would have us believe that there can only be one reason: that Dawkins cannot defend what he's said. Does anyone here really think this is the ONLY possible reason?
cavalrycome 4 months ago
Richard Dawkins is showing himself to be an utterly spineless coward. How any atheist can look to him as their 'guru' is beyond me. What a joke this guy is becoming. He's had his day now.
MultiStanDaMan 4 months ago 2
@MultiStanDaMan Wow, you guys are so desperate to win at something that you grab at anything. Very sad. Has it been that long? You did win the battle against Galileo... at least temporarily. That was only 400 years ago. Don't try so hard, I realize how hard it is for you now that you can clearly see that religion is dying, and that inside you yourself know its all bullshit, it can be scary, I understand. But life will go on without your invisible wizard friend, it always has.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
What?
JesusLives11keila 4 months ago
So it turns out you're wrong on two counts. Great campaign!
Actually 3 counts... Ariane Sherine was the person behind The Atheist Bus campaign. Dawkins had little to do with it - he just gave them some money.
Whoever came up with this idea should be crucified.
domcurrie 4 months ago
@domcurrie But Dawkins is the one the average person associates with the former atheist campaign, not necessarily Sherine. High profile unbelievers such as Dawkins (and others from the British Humanist Accociation) were asked to lend their support to this to raise publicity and that's exactly what they got. From that the average joe associates the atheist bus campaign with Dawkins and co now.
Shazoolo 4 months ago 7
@Shazoolo Your reply speaks volumes about religious faith. Being 'average' and part of a mob is more important to you than telling the truth.
The whole point of Sherine's campaign was to counter the violent and threatening advertising of the 'jesussaid' group that threatened non Christian men, women and children with agonising pain, burning in the fires of hell for eternity.
The Atheist Bus Campaign was smart, funny and morally right. The Christian Bus is ignorance on wheels.
domcurrie 4 months ago
@domcurrie Smart funny and morally right?!!! lol! An atheist talking about "morals". That's hilarious! Tell me, how do you define this atheist "morality" of yours?
ARudeAwakening4U 4 months ago 4
@ARudeAwakening4U Well using a dictionary is a good start. I think it's Latin. If God told you to kill a child, would you do it? If not, why not?
domcurrie 4 months ago
@ARudeAwakening4U Tell me, why do christians require a book to tell them how to be morally responsible? Too stupid to think for themselves? YES!
19nisey69 4 months ago
@19nisey69 About as stupid as Dawkinite drones who buy so many of the pope of atheism's books that they make weak philosophical clap trap like 'The (soon to be picked totally apart by William Lane Ctaig at The Sheldonian Theatre on the 25th of Oct, less Dawkins finally finds the guts to defent it) God Delusion' best sellers.
ARudeAwakening4U 4 months ago
@ARudeAwakening4U Gee, you think Dawkins might have just got tired of trying to have intelligent discussions with people to stupid to understand science? How many idiots like Kirk Cameron, Christine Odonnel, and Baldwin who think monkeys shouldn't exist because they would all be people already should someone have to deal with? they don't understand evolution because they are either too stupid, or willfully remaining ignorant to believe the lies of the bible and it's murderous god.
19nisey69 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
Did Mr. Dawkins pay u to defend him? u treat Dawkins like a God some people are so sensitive the first bad thing someone says about him forget freedom of speech u have some extreme atheist calling u an ignorant savage where is ur intellect and peaceful reason now?
katelling1 4 months ago 4
@katelling1 My goodness. Another theist bringing up Dawkins. lol This is hilarious. None of my comments were related to Dawkins apart from asking why YOU people keep bringing him up. As i have already said in another comment. This infatuation with Dawkins is not healthy. I would suggest counseling and get this sorted.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
Is there any particular reason you had the Union Jack upside down, cos it's gets my goat?
KnockoffNigeI 4 months ago
This is frivolous. You're embarrassing my country on an international scale.
finchy633 4 months ago
Hopefully this will create some free advertising for Dawkins :)
MythicalManMoth 4 months ago
Craig is a grade A douchenugget but this is hilarious XD
AndySiner 4 months ago
Outside this tiny community who knows who Craig is? Is Dawkins a big name and who will gain the most from this when they don't get anywhere and Craig just muddles up the debate? Will it be the same laughable arguement that god exists because the universe exists, fine tuning, universe has a cause and morals. I wouldn't go if I was Dawkins :) Dawkins is in Oxford the friday after though and I am going to that to say hello to him!
benjami66 4 months ago
LOL.....
I am sure Mr. Dawkins is "so offended". that he'll be making videos end on end to prove that he's real, with his book....
Now if only a god to appear and prove he's real by doing the same thing.
LOL!!
BrightStaroftheDawn 4 months ago
Now here's the problem with this video. People are now going to think that everyone in England/UK is as dumb as you. Thanks for making the UK look like some middle eastern, superstitious back water. Great job. Oh and btw, William Lame repeating the Kalam argument over and over is not actually a debate. It can only be described as, Lame parroting a badly thought out, medieval, philosophical word dance that proves nothing. I bet the big words impress you though.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
Dawkins proves nothing either. At least WLC doesn't make crapy arguments like Dawkins. WLC repeats Kalam because it works. And because something works doesn't mean it becomes invalid as one repeats it.
Jacob011 4 months ago
@Jacob011 rofl @ kalam works The issue is not whether Dawkins makes any argument. The issue is people like you who make the UK look like a backward thinking, third world, under developed nation where people still believe that some magic, invisible daddy, who came from nothing & made everything out of nothing using his magic fairy dust. And then, you try to justify the magic, invisible, sky daddy by parroting a flawed and refuted argument over and over. Stop trying to drag us into your delusion.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
You're little overreacting, don't you think ? (England certainly won't look like 3rd world, or whatever nonsense. On the contrary, it will appear as a free country.)
Jacob011 4 months ago
"Stop trying to drag us into your delusion. "
I didn't write "The Magic of Reality" :D
Jacob011 4 months ago
@Jacob011 watch?v=GiRjRc0Tuos&feature=related another example of Craig losing badly. This was in his early years, he won't debate this topic again. He sticks to the Kalam argument because he doesn't have to be judgemental and ruin his good boy reputation ;)
benjami66 4 months ago
@Jacob011 kalam doesn't work and you can watch Craig lose arguments on stage and yet just keep saying the same point but in a different manner, in the end he appears to win because his opponent gives up talking to a brick wall that doesn't understand it has lost. Dawkins is a great biologist but he is a poor philosopher and poorer debater. When placed vs Craig a full time super prepared debater he will lose even though Dawkins is right. (the best debater will win, see school debates)
benjami66 4 months ago
@benjami66 Point me to that video. I think you're in denial about that.
Jacob011 4 months ago
@Jacob011 watch?v=_l69QN7ixmM&list=PL5C6AC262F765A152&index=1 I presume you mean the Kagan vs Craig debate? Craig loses badly, however it is a debate setup that definitely suits Kagan more as it will be how he has argued philosophy for all his life. Then again Craig is meant to have a degree in philosophy so he should be used to these type of debates :P
benjami66 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin Typical emotional reaction from a typical new atheist. I do wonder whether you guys have some variant of Tourette Syndrome as many of you can barely string one sentence together without assailing people with personal insults. If (as you assert) Craig's argument is so weak then Dawkins should have no bother stepping up and refuting it. As it is, he is currently embarrassing himself as the wider public are getting the impression that he is running from Craig.
Shazoolo 4 months ago 8
@Shazoolo Another invisible sky buddy believer desperately trying to cling on to your ancient myths of magic beings who came from nothing and then magically created the universe out of nothing. Just what we need is backward thinking clowns who are desperate to drag the rest of us down into their level of bronze age, goat herder thinking. Thanks for making the UK look like the third world. Arguing the Kalam is like arguing that the sun goes round the earth. Pointless and not for grown ups.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago 2
@Lucky7Wolfin
I am wondering, do you have to send Dawkins and Co. a royalty cheque every time you open your mouth or type a sentence? Honestly, do you enjoy being a living stereotype?
Jim1905 4 months ago
@Jim1905 Only people who have brought up Dawkins, are people who support this video. As I have already said in my comments, the comments you seem unable to read, this is nothing to do with Dawkins. I'm sorry that you can not address the point i brought up and seem only able to obsess about Dawkins. Now why don't you back to reading the words of ignorant savages, who thought the world was flat and the rest of the universe rotated round the earth. Seems that's all you are capable of comprehending
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
Yes, I'm clearly obsessed. Hahaha, good Lord, you really can't stop, can you? I mean, you're practically the poster child for the new atheists. Have you ever had an original thought?
Jim1905 4 months ago
@Jim1905 Yes, clearly you are. Now you have failed to address the point raised again. But what can be expected from an invisible sky buddy believer who thinks that the universe can be explained by reading the ramblings of bronze age, barbaric, terrorist, desert nomads. Fortunately for the rest of us, your belief in fairy tales about magic, creator beings who poof things into existence from nothing and make you live forever, is in terminal decline. Good riddance to the thorn in humanity's side.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin I can just feel the atheistic fundamentalist hate oozing out of this message. One of the many brianwashed Dawkinites on YouTube.
ARudeAwakening4U 4 months ago 4
@ARudeAwakening4U These atheists are most definately brainwashed wacko's.
MultiStanDaMan 4 months ago 2
@ARudeAwakening4U LOL Another christian obsessing about Dawkins. You guys just can't stop. Seems like he is making a big impression. Only time i mentioned Dawkins is to ask why you guys keep bringing him up. Really, you people need to stop this. It's not healthy to be this infatuated with someone.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
lmao, what "point"?! The ignorant rants of someone who desperately wants there not to be a God? I mean, bad enough as it is that you clearly haven't a clue what you're talking (or should I say typing) about; but it's even worse (and more hilarious) that they're not even your own thoughts!
Jim1905 4 months ago 4
@Jim1905 This just gets better. At least you have stopped obsessing about Dawkins. Well not here anyway. Now can you give me any reason why I should continue to take seriously, anything that is said by a believer in the most horrendous fairytale yet known to man? A believer in a magic creator, who came from no where and used his magic sky buddy wand to make the universe from nothing. A creator so barbaric that he uses genocide as his answer to a problem he created. You sir, are a joke at best.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
Well you can continue to sling mud if you like; green is lovely colour on you. However, being an ignorant douche doesn't mean God does not exist, despite your obviously best efforts.
"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell."
- CS Lewis
Jim1905 4 months ago
@Jim1905 You really don't have anything do you. Calling names and quoting other invisible sky buddy believers. Lets just translate your Lewis quote shall we. "A man can no more diminish the glory of my mythical, completely unproven, completely unjustified, invisible sky buddy by refusing to worship him etc" As you like quotes so much. "Humanity has the stars in its future, and that future is too important to be lost under the burden of juvenile folly and ignorant superstition" Isaac Asimov :)
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
Isaac Asimov? Hahaha, who are you going to quote next, Carl Sagan? There are atheist whom I admire and think are/were very intelligent people, though not always right but come on, you can do better. None the less:
"The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you"
- Werner Heisenberg
Jim1905 4 months ago
@Jim1905 Again we can translate your quote from yet another invisible sky buddy believer. "The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass my invisible scary magic sky buddy that I can not prove or demonstrate in anyway is waiting for you" ROFL This is great. Keep bringing them on. Appeals to authority mean nothing I'm afraid. Especially when the authority's assertion of a sky buddy is unfounded and meaningless. Pitiful at best.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
What? No Sagan quote, but come on he's the best! Did you just laugh at your own joke? Are you eight years old? I am still wondering though if you're ever going to say (or type) something that's actually from your own thoughts; I mean, don't you ever get tired of parroting others? Do you like being a living piece of propaganda or are you simply that dense? I hadn't realized quoting someone btw is an appeal to authority, you ought to take your own advice :)
Jim1905 4 months ago
@Jim1905 CS Lewis. Who are you going to quote next? J K Rowling? She is another writer of children's fairytales about magic and hocupocus.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
Magic and hocupocus? I believe it's hocus pocus; if you're going to be an bigoted douche bag you ought to at least learn to spell your slander.
Jim1905 4 months ago
@Jim1905 ROFL Now this really is scraping the bottom of the barrel. No response but to point out a spelling error. The last grasp of the straw, by a beaten man. I'm sure that your invisible sky buddy inspired you to this new height of sky buddy apologetics. Did you pray to jeebus? What is you next response going to be? I know, you can call me a douche bag again. Now that does sound like a response inspired by the love of jeebus. How about another quote from a sky buddy believer to spice it up.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
Yeah, you see this is why you're an ignorant moron because I did respond to you; I responded twice, once to each seperate comments. Of course you're too lazy to bother (or stupid, I suspect both however) to scroll down and check; you simply assume I didn't and proceed to rant on. Well if you use for your philosophy then I guess I shouldn't be surprised you use it for your more mundane tasks, such as reading comments.
Jim1905 4 months ago
@Jim1905 rofl. I love it!! You sir, are a shining example of a good christian. Give you theists enough rope and you hang yourself every time. I bet jeebus is really proud of you. Lets do a quick recap. First you obsess about Dawkins. Something I did not mention. Then you assert your invisible sky buddy by quoting the author of childrens fairytales. All mixed through with various insults of course. Then you resort to a spelling error and more insults. Great job of supporting my original comment.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin
Yeah, you're just mad because I caught you being ignorant. Let's recap: First you rant on and on using language and thoughts which aren't your own, you then accuse me of obsessing about Dawkins (I brought him up once, If that's obessing then you're clearly dangerously obsessed with God), and then laugh at your own jokes. Finally you completely ignore another response of mine. You, sir (who talks like that?) are a shining example of a psuedo-intellectual.
Jim1905 4 months ago
@Jim1905 You mention Dawkins in your first two posts. Plainly there for everyone to see. You brought him up when he was not the subject of my original comment. And would have kept going had I not pointed out the post was nothing to do with Dawkins. Also, you have made no responses apart from insults, blind assertions and quotes from children's authors. I love the way you christians resort to plain old lies when you have nothing to rely on apart from pointing out a spelling error. Failed.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@Lucky7Wolfin You use words such as "skydaddy" and sentences such as "the ramblings of bronze age, barbaric, terrorist, desert nomads." This is all virtually verbatim verbiage from the likes of crazed rabid atheistic bigoted athestic loonies as Christopher Hitchens. Can't you people think for yourselves? You sound like a brianwashed drone spouting the buzz words of your cult.
MultiStanDaMan 4 months ago 2
@MultiStanDaMan LOL You appear to be very hostile to having facts repeated to you. Shame your only defence is to complain that someone has said it before and then to call names. Truth hurts :) I am very sorry that you are so ashamed of just what it is you actually believe in. But you know what, I would be ashamed if i believed in the ignorant attempts of primitive barbarians who tried to explain the world around them by using "god did it" whenever they could not understand something.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@MultiStanDaMan Oh btw, I love that you were so angry when you replied to me, that you used atheistic twice in your description of Hitchens. As I said. Truth hurts. Best calm yourself down and read through before you post in future. Maybe you should do some thin air talking and ask jeebus to help you.
Lucky7Wolfin 4 months ago
@MultiStanDaMan
No, it's physically impossible for him to have an original thought; I've tried to wriggle one out but alas to no avail. I would go so far as to say he's not even brainwashed, he's just an idiot.
Jim1905 4 months ago
@Shazoolo You are joking right?
Annamissyk4 4 months ago
@Shazoolo
You talk about embarrassment,but please don't forget that you believe in an ancient myth that just happened to be the ancient myth that was believed by the strongest armies.
Suckers like you would get sucked into believing what ever prevailing myth that exists,where the myth only changes due to global location.
William Lane Craig,for all his impressively slick American speeches,still finds himself defending,for instance, the idea that non-believers will suffer agony for eternity.
yington 3 months ago
@yington What makes you think that my belief is an ancient myth? Please clarify.
Shazoolo 3 months ago
@Shazoolo
The same reasons you would think Zeus is an ancient myth.
yington 3 months ago
@Shazoolo there not mate, not one bit, we all know dawkins would destroy that deluded twat, just like hitchens did. Dawkins does not want to lower himself to debate with idiots like him, it would be like somebody who studys geography and the earth and debating with someone who thinks the earth is flat, theres no point because we have already won the argument.
fabuladeum1 2 months ago
@fabuladeum1 Wait a minute...seriously? You honestly thought Hitchens won his debate against Craig? That was the most one sided beating I have ever seen in a debate. It was so bad that Hitchens even forfeited his final rebuttal. Pathetic.
logotheist 2 months ago
@logotheist hitchens kicked his ass, maybe you were clearly wathcing a different debate, one you dreamt! hitchens was unbeatable and that idiot craig was left looking like a total retard, as would anyone when they talk about something they have no fucking evidence for, ill post a link to your page, please watch it, then fuck off deluded god believing dumb ass
fabuladeum1 2 months ago
@fabuladeum1 Hitchens most definately lost that one. Other atheists don't think Hitchens won either. The atheist web site: Common Sense Atheism' said: "Craig was flawless and unstoppable. Hitchens was rambling and incoherent, with the occasional rhetorical jab. Frankly, Craig spanked Hitchens like a foolish child. Perhaps Hitchens realized how bad things were for him after Craig’s opening speech, as even Hitchens’ rhetorical flourishes were not as confident as usual."
Shazoolo 2 months ago
@Shazoolo no, he didnt loose, craigs arguements are all based on assertaions without evidence, so basically, he is an idiot. I have watched the full debate, 2 hours and 12 mins and totally disagree with you, craig was made to look like the utter deluded retard he is, just like all people who belive in god without evidence. But like all debates, both sides come away thinking they won. Even though i do think that craig gave nothing that made anyone think god exists who didnt already belive that.
fabuladeum1 2 months ago
@Shazoolo and the vast majority of the comments on the page for the full debate, all are in agrement that craig lost and was made to look like the deluded ignorant twat he is.
fabuladeum1 2 months ago
@fabuladeum1 Do you have Tourette's Syndrome? So many atheists can barely string a coherent sentence together these days without blathering out a whole load of swear words. I made a polite and reasonable request for you to cease spouting foul language on this page and you were unable to. The question is with regards to the ARTICLE and the 'atheist' authors opinion of the debate (who stated Craig won). Of course the mindless trollish minions would bleat a contrary opinion!
Shazoolo 2 months ago
@fabuladeum1 By the way, seeing you cannot respect a simple and reasonable request to stop swearing count yourself blocked. I don't have the time to babysit foul mouthed individuals here.
Shazoolo 2 months ago
@fabuladeum1 Please try and articulate yourself without swearing or go elsewhere. Thanks.
Shazoolo 2 months ago
@logotheist you really think someone like hitchens would forfeit his final rebuttal because he knew he was beaten? You have heard of Hitchens right? I'm not saying he won or lost, but I can assure you that this is not the reason he forfeit his rebuttal.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
@AtheistsOfGP I don't know why he forfeited. Maybe he was too drunk, maybe he knew he was having an off night and wanted to cut his losses, maybe he wasn't equipped to answer the rebuttals that Craig offered. The bottom line is that there are no good causes for a person to forfeit his closing round in a debate, and whether or not his forfeiture was caused by his thorough drubbing, it was at least reflective of it.
logotheist 1 month ago
@logotheist I disagree, he just wouldn't for those reasons, he'd fake passing out first. I don't know what his reasoning was, but for christians to try and turn that last forfeit into some claim of victory, really just shows how desperate they have become. They can no longer try to claim victory on actual 'points of discussion' as their position has been repeatedly destroyed, so they jump and yell cause Hitchens forfeits his final argument... thats all they have left.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
I doubt he will turn up. Too much like hard work for him. He's happy to try and insult Christian beliefs but as soon as he gets a fair responce from us, he hides away. This is the way of things.
markieman64 4 months ago
@markieman64 I doubt he will turn up, too.
I mean, who wouldn't want to debate the same subject over and over and over again??
BrightStaroftheDawn 4 months ago
@BrightStaroftheDawn He seems perfectly happy to attack Christianity...but as far as I know hasn't defended his beliefs to someone who actually disagreed. I have seen him discuss the issue...however it was with people who agreed with him. I don't think this falls under the realm of "debate".
markieman64 4 months ago
@markieman64
No one wants to bother with the same old thing over and over again.
It best be ignored.
I say , he's doing the right thing.
BrightStaroftheDawn 4 months ago
@BrightStaroftheDawn Same old thing over and over...? Like I've said...Dawkins hasn't dealt with it. He's stated his opinion on God or the lack of...and seems to think it is up to Christians to then defend God. Debates do not work like that. One person makes their opinion known and it is then up to them to defend THEIR opinions. Dawkins has not done that. Instead...he runs away.
markieman64 4 months ago
@markieman64
To put it plain and simple.....you people wore out any respect you had left ....by more than just non believing groups. You also embarrass a good portion of Christians.
It's time to ignore you......like the ancient followers of Zeus.
BrightStaroftheDawn 4 months ago
@BrightStaroftheDawn You can ignore me all you want...but at the end of the day, it was you who found this video and commented on it. I don't have much respect for Dawkin and many of his followers simply because they choose to insult Christians and not back up their beliefs with debate. They state their beliefs as fact...which is okay if you are willing to stand up for your beliefs. You talk as if we Christians owe athiests respect when we get none.
markieman64 4 months ago
@markieman64 U shouldnt get any. Maybe when you stop persecuting everyone that doesnt believe in your invisible wizard friend. The peaceful christians of the world have tried to outlaw, ridicule, & destroy anything that threatened their fragile faith. Scholars have tried being polite & get squashed by the christian majority. All atheists have left, and in truth its much easier and more effective, is to show anyone who will listen just how absolutely absurd the christian faiths are
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
@AtheistsOfGP You talk of persecution of athiests when your comment is riddled with Christian persecution. You athiests really don't like tasting your own medicine do you?
markieman64 1 month ago
@markieman64 wow 'you christians' have an apparent inability to see flawed logic and reasoning. lets compare the persecution that you speak of: you feel persecuted when us big bad mean atheists call you names. How horrible for you, why don't you tell the teacher & she will give us a time-out. Christians persecute by killing, burning people, separating children from parents, denying equal rights, stalling mankind's technological advancement. hmm, I see what you mean, equally guilty.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
@BrightStaroftheDawn And good luck finding a born again, bible believing Christian who has read Dawkin's work who would disagree with me.
markieman64 4 months ago
@markieman64 He debates all types of religious supporters, from Bishops to Christian theologians. This is the whole reason christians are jumping up and down trying to claim this as some kind of defeat of atheism, To them it seems Dawkins will debate anyone except Craig, so they say he's afraid. In truth they are just desperate to finally win something, their position has been kicked around so relentlessly in the last few decades they're starting to feel bad for themselves.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
@markieman64 "A fair response from us"... ya... I can virtually assure everyone in youtube land that you don't even understand Craigs position. So don't latch on to him like he's your big brother standing up to a bully "ya, that's right! what he said, I told you we were right!" The reason Dawkins won't debate Craig, as he has said, Craig is a professional debater, he wins on semantics and irrelevant 'gotcha' points. He is not debating to find truth, he debates to win more points.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
To be fair, your bus advert did make me laugh out loud, and it's a shame that Prof Dawkins won't be at the Sheldonian as (a) you'd pack the place to the rafters and maybe warm it up a bit!, and (b) it'd be fun to watch him demolish Prof Lane Craig. As it is, the latter will simply be--if you'll forgive the apt metaphor--preaching to the converted. Oh well; I suppose it's good for the economy.
ianchard 4 months ago
@ianchard Demolish Craig ? haha... what funny stuff have you been drinking.
Jacob011 4 months ago
The really funny thing is how hysterical you theists become about atheism. Keeps me in stitches! You'll stoop to anything, no matter how absurd, to prop up your fairy tale. LOL!
Christheatheist1 4 months ago
@Christheatheist1 Funny thing I hear this stuff from an atheist.
You could make an encyclopedia of obnoxious, hysterical and most irational comments just by writing down what likes of you have written.
Like you got something to prop up that sweet oblivion of yours you called atheism.
Jacob011 4 months ago
@Jacob011 - Yes. It's called evidence. Reality...so scary theists deny its existence LOL!
Christheatheist1 4 months ago
I love it this is so funny take that Mr.Dawkins!!!
katelling1 4 months ago
Atheism is laughable!
ChristiansofAsia 4 months ago
@ChristiansofAsia Great point, very observant, thanks for joining the conversation. Now see if you can say that and walk at the same time... it's very important for people like you to challenge yourself. Don't be upset if you fail, try, try, try again. Maybe say a prayer before you give it a go... I mean that always helps right.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
HAHAHAHA! There's probably no Dawkins! I love it.
NephilimFree 4 months ago
Ah, professor Wiliam Lane Craig.....putting the ASS in assertion for more than 3 decades.
TryTheRedPill 4 months ago
Why would you debate someone that believes in fairytales? What can you possibly get out of that?
syeed666 4 months ago
William Lane Craig isn't worth debating. He's a buffoon.
endthedisease 4 months ago
Isn't this precious? You seem to think that ABSURDITY is a worthy opponent of RATIONALITY. Bzzzzt! Fail!
indignant99 4 months ago
WHARHARHARHARHARHARHARHARHARHARHARHARHARHARHARHAR
ThickShades0 4 months ago
Dawkins is just running scared. It's amazing how he is quite willing to weigh into philosophical issues but refuses to publicly defend his statements. lol
hdregmore 4 months ago
@hdregmore do you have any idea who dawkins is? He is one of the most outspoken atheists in the world. He publicly defends his position more or less for a living. That's why the 'Craig Camp' is so upset... he debates everyone but won't debate Craig. Please, next time, have at least the smallest clue of what your trying to get across before typing onto a public forum. Read it aloud a couple of times, share it with friends first. You'll avoid looking silly next time.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
@AtheistsOfGP What a load of crap. You can worship as a demigod if you like however if he wishes to weigh into philosophical issues like the existence of God then he should have the balls to publicly defend his position.
Please next time try and deal with the facts of the issue before embarrassing yourself on a public forum. Take it to your primary school teacher for review if you like.
What colour is a beetroot? lol
hdregmore 1 month ago
@hdregmore I'm not sure how to respond, seeing as your comment made no sense. I'll copy and paste what I wrote last time seeing as you need repetition in order to gain comprehension.
"He is one of the most outspoken atheists in the world. He publicly defends his position for a living - more or less."
I don't know why you don't understand this. I used small words so I thought even your kind would understand it. But, just in case, this means he argues his position all the time.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
@AtheistsOfGP Perhaps you should read it again. Sometimes it takes an atheist a few reads before complex sentences sink in. If that fails perhaps you should take a copy of it to your primary school teacher along with a shiny green apple.
That way she may just give you some remedial attention.
hdregmore 1 month ago
@hdregmore Are you refusing to read what I wrote or just can't understand it? I do however appreciate the laugh as you struggle to come up with something witty to throw back at me and the best you can do is a bad copy of what I said. It's like watching a dumb kid play with glue. Maybe you're intellectually fatigued, it must have been difficult for you to think of let alone spell the word 'remedial'. In the future, come up with original material or you just end up sounding stupid.
AtheistsOfGP 1 month ago
Well, this is actually true, even from an athiest perspective, because sooner or later there will be no Dawkins ...
voyagersystem 4 months ago
Why should an accomplished biologist debate a person whose only skill is semantic wordplay, and whose claim to fame is ignoring rebuttals, responses and refutations of his tripe? He's intellectually dishonest in his constant repeating of previously debunked tripe.
And while you may think the bus ad is witty, it shows the weakness of your position. The fact that Dawkins exists can be demonstrated and repeated [thats science], while your god's existence is anything but demonstrable.
sakar181 4 months ago 2
Thanks man.
matrixlone 4 months ago
Why does he have to debate him though? Dawkins arguements against God are clearly set out in his book for anyone to read and he has done many debates already on this matter. Who is Craig really? Dawkins could debate him win, then 1 month down the line there will be another "Craig" just like there is still "Comfort." He has to draw a line somewhere as he cannot debate everyone.
benjami66 4 months ago
Why not go the whole hog next time with: There's Probably No Bus, So Walk Straight Onto The Road Without Looking ...
xntubes 4 months ago
The one guy who dislikes this video must be Harris, because doggins almost certainly doesn't exist, and Hitchens is dead.
1GodOnlyOne 4 months ago
@1GodOnlyOne
You really are a vile, sad little waste of organs.
sakar181 4 months ago
@sakar181 Ah, more Christian love. You folks could have the moral-high ground, but toss it off every chance you get. It is self-defeating.
matthewtaylorbrown 4 months ago
Awesome job man!!!!!!!!
Birdieupon 4 months ago
Great stuff!
drcraigvideos 4 months ago
there probably is no dawkins according to his critique of the univer .. everything being material in materialist in nature
followerofjesus1984 4 months ago
Dr. Craig is considered to be one of the leading Christian apologists, worldwide. Dawkins considers him to be a bit of an idiot, so this would have been a golden opportunity for Dawkins to be able to say that he had wiped the floor with the leading expert in this field. If Dawkins really is so passionately concerned about our emancipation and freedom from religion, you would have thought he would have taken this one on.
The1hope4all 4 months ago
'Didn't buy his book. I picked it up, opened a page, read a bit, and realized pretty quickly it was worthless drivel. It was written *as if* it were an intellectual piece, but of course, it is not. So, I put it down.
LemonSaucy 4 months ago
@LemonSaucy He only gets away with it because he says what so many people desperately want to hear.
The1hope4all 4 months ago
@The1hope4all Yes, most definitely. Dawkins plays to people's basic fallen nature and resistance to God. As the Bible says,' people will gather about themselves a great number of teachers who will say what their itching ears want them to hear.'
Shazoolo 4 months ago
when it comes to science, yes he is an intellectual. In terms of philosophy and theology however, he is merely a 'pop psuedo' intellectual.
Sophiethefembot 4 months ago 2
@Sophiethefembot Now if only we can get philosophers and theologists from speaking on science.
DarkEmergence 4 months ago
@Sophiethefembot 'Must be, because his book is drivel.
LemonSaucy 4 months ago
@Sophiethefembot I was out of the country for 17 years, and I was vaguely aware that there was supposed to be some terrible new threat to Christianity, in the form of Dawkins. I came back to the UK in 2006, and heard Dawkins on the radio, and afterwards I was thinking "Oh, is that it?"
The1hope4all 4 months ago
@The1hope4all hahaha yeah same!! I couldn't believe how illegitimate most (if not all) of the claims Dawkins makes in TGD are!! :P
Sophiethefembot 4 months ago
@Sophiethefembot Could you give an example/
OWC2000 4 months ago
@OWC2000 He claims religion is always dangerous. I know he never says "always" in so many words but that seems to be what he is implying, that for the most part religion causes war and ALL the evil done in the world is because of religion. The other problem with this is he seems to use the word 'religion' rather loosely. If you are going to use such a broad word you need to explain exactly what you mean by 'religion'. People call me religious because I'm christian. Religion is about....
Sophiethefembot 4 months ago
@OWC2000 following rules. This is christianity is really more of a relationship than a religion as it is about the grace of God rather than being under the rigidity of the law like the Jews. Jesus set us free from that. However if you want to say religion causes violence, yes that is legitimate but not on such large scale as Dawkins puts it on. Religion *can* cause violence (but depends on which religion, the nature of it). great evil has been done in the name of christianity, but this is rare.
Sophiethefembot 4 months ago
@OWC2000 Islam on the other hand....is much more likely to cause violence since some of their prime teachings instruct it. You will not find anything inspiring anything other than peace in the words of Christ. Dawkins has used this argument to attack primarily christianity (he doesn't say so but I know his agenda). He might have a point with many other religions but with christianity, the argument falls far too short. I hope that helps illustrate what I'm saying. No disrespect to Dawkins though.
Sophiethefembot 4 months ago
@Sophiethefembot Thanks for replying. It is not religion that is dangerous but dogma. Any teaching that restricts free thought is dangerous, including Christianity.
The Christian message is as every bit as dogmatic as Muslim teachings, the difference being that Christianity has be tempered by secular values to the point where most Christian groups are tolerant of others: Notable exceptions, Westboro Baptists, the Muslim death/rape camps in Bosnia & the extreme US Christian Right.
OWC2000 4 months ago
@OWC2000 I agree, fixed, unchalleneged dogma IS dangerous. The difference between Islam and christianity is in christianity you are encouraged to question every doctrine. In Islam, you are discouraged. There will be some cases where people have made negative impacts on society in the name of Christ, but these are because of man's failings, not God's or Christ's. Sincere, regenerate followers of Christ are more concerned with *relationship* that adhering to dogma, that's why many christians...
Sophiethefembot 4 months ago
@Sophiethefembot This has not always been so. Galileo was persecuted by church leaders for his views. For centuries only priest were allowed to read and interpret the bible and in may ways it is still so, with groups like the Westboto Baptist, Branch Davidians and events like the Salem witch trials.
.
We also see this in the election with attacks on Romney and religious wackos like Bachmann wanting to turn this into a religious theocracy
OWC2000 4 months ago
@OWC2000 disagree with one another on minor issues and why we have so many different denominations of christianity. Let me ask you though, have you ever read any of the four gospels, and the actual words of Jesus? If dogma is setting in place boundaries and structure then you could call anything dogma. If that is true, then politics could be dogmatic. But Christ calls us to find what he says true for ourselves, not to just accept it arbitrarily.
Sophiethefembot 4 months ago
But the flying spaghetti monster told me there is a Dawkins and that he's his prison bitch.
KnightOwl2006 4 months ago
who cares about Dawkins anyway?
777cata 4 months ago
@777cata Christians, obviously.
DarkEmergence 4 months ago
@DarkEmergence Atheists too until he turned into a coward!
YhwhKhai 4 months ago
@YhwhKhai Why? Because he refuses to debate someone despite saying why a long time ago? Instead of asking for a debate, maybe he should deal with the fallacies and dishonesty other people he debated pointed out in his debates.
DarkEmergence 4 months ago
@DarkEmergence I hear what you're saying but he's willing to debate a pope, a bishop but not Craig? It should be easy to defend a book you wrote. Correct? His explanation for not wanting to debate Craig wreaks of cowardice. Even some from his own camp called him a coward. I guess being a man of his stature he can't admit it but I don't know how you don't think his reasons aren't lame! "I'm busy!" WTH???? Really dude!
YhwhKhai 4 months ago
@YhwhKhai I'd love to see a debate between Dawkins and Craig, but a written one, annotated, with sources and no time constraints. The rigid timed format of debates favors Craig, who has his script down pat.
I doubt Craig would go for that though. Barring that I'd like to see Craig debate John Loftus, if only because he seems to be avoiding him
Cafeeine 4 months ago
@YhwhKhai Popes and Bishops (who I'm sure you wouldn't cowards for not debating Dawkins) are authorities in their fields, Craig is a professor of religious studies and philosophy. His claim to fame is debating where he repeats the same well-worded arguments despite having them debunked in earlier debates and books. And despite having his arguments debunked, Christians will swear he has never lost a debate. Debating Craig IS a waste of time. It will only elevate Craig.
DarkEmergence 4 months ago
@DarkEmergence Oh and Dawkins never spews the same rhetoric? Really, ok then let the coward step up and debunk Craig's arguments. But alas he's too "busy" for that. I for one would not say Craig never lost a debate - I haven't seen all of them.
YhwhKhai 4 months ago
@YhwhKhai Craig will state the same argument, word for word, right after someone has pointed out the flaws in it in a previous debate. He even uses decades old scientific quotes after they have become irrelevant (as scientific consensuses changes with new information). It doesn't matter if Dawkins points out Craig's dishonesty, Christians will still declare him the winner. Hell, they do that with Ray Comfort.
DarkEmergence 4 months ago
@DarkEmergence Oh and how do you explain many of the atheists referring to Dawkins as a coward? Apparently they don't think debating Craig would be a waste of time.
YhwhKhai 4 months ago
@YhwhKhai "The many?" How much is that?
And no, I can't explain them anymore than I can explain Atheist truthers.
DarkEmergence 4 months ago
@DarkEmergence Perhaps I'll do a count for you and come back to post links. But the comments from atheists are all over YT and other secular blogs. Well you know maybe Dawkins will turn up and not be a freakin' coward!
YhwhKhai 4 months ago
@YhwhKhai You keep asserting he's a coward, but without any reasons besides the fact that he won't debate who you want him to debate who you will probably say won no matter what Dawkin's arguments are.
DarkEmergence 4 months ago