William Lane Craig vs Jamal Badawi Debate (HQ) 11/11

This is the full debate in high quality between Dr. William Lane Craig and Dr. Jamal Badawi at the University of Illinois from 1997.

Dr. William Lane Craig:

Ph.D. Philosophy, University of Birmingham, England
D. Theol. Theology, Universität München, Germany


Dr. Jamal Badawi:

Ph.D. Economics, Indiana University, United States


.....................................THE DEBATE.................................. .
THE CONCEPT OF GOD IN ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY

OPENING STATEMENTS: 20 minutes
Part 1-3: Dr. Craig's Opening Remarks
Part 4-6: Dr. Badawi's Opening Remarks

REBUTTALS: 12 minutes
Part 7: Dr. Craig Responds
Part 8: Dr. Craig concludes/Dr. Badawi begins Response
Part 9: Dr. Badawi Concludes Response

CLOSING REMARKS: 5 minutes
Part 10: Dr. Craig's Closing Comments
Part 11: Dr. Badawi's Closing Comments

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• debates
• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Jamal
• Badawi
• Concept
• of
• God
• Islam
• Christianity

[dimic]

Dr. Badawi doesn't seem to listen when he describes how the story of Jesus striking a child to death isn't in the Qur'an. Dr. Craig was stating that if you affirm the legendary gospel of Thomas as true, stories of which are found within the Qur'an, then you must affirm that the document is inspired by God. The consequent of such a categorical statement implies that Christ striking the child to death is true.

Badawi lost this debate in such a terrible manner.

Christ is Risen!

[Brendan47051]

WLC was completely unruffelled whereas JB was losing it towards the end. I couldn't believe it when he brought up that charlatan Keith Moore. Miracles in the Koran my eye! It always astonishes me how someone as highly intelligent as Badawi could be so deluded. But such is the nature of cults I suppose.

[Hermy1138]

This is like watching a debate about wether the creator of the universe is a pink unicorn or a blue unicorn. Both are idiots

[Jen8973]

Anything that went agains what Jesus said was not accepted. It was't offical till the 3rd Cen but they only accepted what the church has always used nothing else. 2th they only accepted it if it was well known it was one of the writings of 1 of t 12 Apostles. They where divinly inspired to write it. The Koran contadicts both the Hebrew prophets, Jesus n his apostles. This makes the Koran wrong,sorry if that offends you. Go and read and see t importance of t cross and ressur there t way of God

[Jen8973]

Dr Badawi trie to say the writings of the N T have been changed. This is competley untrue. Historical evidence shows they have not been changed although they have been translated into many languages no important meanings have been changed. The Koran was not written down until the 3rd Capihs so it could easily been wrong. The N T was written 30 yrs after Christ's death. The Church only put in the N T what the early believers held what had been accepted as the real teachings of Jesus

[Jen8973]

There where good points on each side yet it is clear that Craig won the debate. Dr Badawi accepts the part of the Gospels but twists the parts he doesn't accept. His arguments where weak. The whole Gospel of John is a declaration of Jesus's divinity. Yes it says he was a man but in Jn 8 Jesus claims to have pre-existed. Dr B says the Hadith are divine intepertations in the Prophets own words yet try's to write of the very same argument when it comes to Jesus' intimate disciples.

[blackosw22]

reviewing this debate i only see this:

statement by craig-response by badaw-response to badawi's statements that he misinterpreted-badawi refuting those statements-craig repeating the process-badawi repeating the process. i find only the first part of the exchnage to be the good sum of both. the other seemed like craig saying something and badawi refuting it and craig doing it again sometimes of the same statements. i found this not to be neither useful nor informative for both faiths.

[blackosw22]

@dimic what badawi said was that you there was was a form of truth in that gospel not that it was authentic.that was earlier in the debate but it seems doctorl craig ignored that statemment.

[malikzzzzz]

Isaiah 53:1

Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the *arm of the LORD revealed*?

[NomiVoluntad]

I personally don't see the point of presenting this to the end of the debate, knowing that there will be no response. Also he didn't answer the rest, so we have a crucified Christ. and probably risen. While this serves to support the point that Jesus is human, to which all Christians believe, this can't prove Qur'anic Jesus Leaving aside that he didn't has defended the Jesus of the Koran. It doesn't help attack the biblical Jesus and not provide defense of the Quran, cuz it doesn't make it true.

[9pt9]

@dimic I kind of feel bad for badawi in this. T'was quite a beatdown.

[NomiVoluntad]

Is notable what things he says, he says Dr Craig you have the burden of proof. That's absurd, both of them have the burden of proof, to show that one conception is correct. Furthermore he claim that Jesus was human, and that is a statement, therefore, you have to give some reason to think that is correct, not presupose that the muslim view is correct at least we show that is not.