Skip to comments.Christian Apologist 'Eastwooding' After Richard Dawkins Refuses Debate (On the Existence of God)
Posted on 10/09/2012 12:47:02 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
A video of a Californian Christian apologist who "Eastwooded" atheist author Richard Dawkins in response to Dawkins' refusal to debate him over the existence of God will soon be posted to YouTube.
The video features Dr. William Lane Craig, a research professor of Philosophy and the New Testament at the Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, delivering remarks at Contending with Christianity's Critics Conference held at Watermark Community Church in Dallas on Sept. 29.
During his remarks, Craig places an empty chair opposite his podium and has a dialogue with it, a la Clint Eastwood's much talked about speech at the 2012 GOP Convention.
Craig, who oversees reasonablefaith.org, has publicly challenged Dawkins to a one-on-one debate over the existence of God. Dawkins has refused on multiple occasions.
In an interview with The Christian Post, Craig stated that he felt that the major reason why Dawkins refuses to accept his challenge is his opposition to debating philosophers.
"I have been told by people in a position to know, that Dawkins refuses to debate philosophers. I think that when he speaks with philosophers he realizes that he is out of his depth," said Craig.
The video, which is slightly over 42 minutes long, shows Craig dialoguing with the empty chair representing Dawkins. Craig goes into issues surrounding the cosmological, moral, teleological, and ontological arguments for God's existence. He used various statements from Dawkins' work as a foil for his rebuttals.
"There are two kinds of people in the world my friend. Those who show up and those who get 'Eastwooded,'" says Craig to his absent opposition.
Although Dawkins has refused to debate Craig, other notable atheist public figures such as Sam Harris and the late Christopher Hitchens have done so in the past.
Last October, in response to calls by many for Dawkins to debate Craig, Dawkins wrote a piece for the British publication the Guardian that appeared on his website explaining his refusal to do so.
"I took pleasure in refusing again, which threw him and his followers into a frenzy of blogging, tweeting and YouTubed accusations of cowardice. To this I would only say that I turn down hundreds of more worthy invitations every year," wrote Dawkins.
"I have publicly engaged an archbishop of York, two archbishops of Canterbury, many bishops and the chief rabbi, and I'm looking forward to my imminent, doubtless civilised encounter with the present archbishop of Canterbury."
The posting of the video of Craig "Eastwooding" Dawkins comes as the atheist author is in the process of an American tour for his book The Magic of Reality.
"It is an opportunity for me to meet those of you who are active in a movement who are fighting to return to the traditional secular values set forth by America's founding fathers," reads a statement on the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science website.
"I am a guest in your land but, coming from a country that lacks a written constitution, I envy you yours as the first and noblest secular constitution in the world, and I would like to play my part in helping to preserve its ideals."
Although Dawkins and Craig have yet to debate each other one-on-one, both men were part of a 2010 panel debate held at the Complejo Cultural Universitario in Pueblo, Mexico. Titled "Does the Universe have a purpose?" the flashy event also featured Matt Ridley, Michael Shermer, Rabbi David Wolpe and Douglas Geivett.
I like that.
I’ll bet even Eastwood is surprrised at how his idea has taken off and even become a new word, all at Obama’s expense....lol. Poor Dawkins, he has to use his God given ability to reason to prove there is no God, what a hopeless pickle to be in. Maybe someday he will “get it.”
He spent 25 years (from age 25 to 50) as an assistant professor or lecturer before a privately wealthy friend of his endowed a new professorship and appointed him to it.
He is often described as an "evolutionary biologist", but he is actually a zoologist by qualification - and was not a particularly accomplished or well-known one after 30 years in the field.
Dawkins is a pseudointellectual who writes popular books for the purpose of reassuring fellow pseudointellectuals in their chosen worldview.
Dawkins is really not particularly bright.
I agree and he substitutes arrogance and mean sarcasm in its place. I like how he takes the time to explain the reason he turns down the debate and then lists the folks he has and will debate. I bet not one is a strong Christian or scientist.
Americans of the twenty-first century, and foreigners, often fail to realize the supreme importance which the Founding Fathers originally attached to the role of religion in the structure of the unique civilization which they hoped would emerge as the first free people in modern times. The Founding Fathers believed that an important pillar of a free society, a just government and human happiness was religion, because it was considered to be the foundation of morality and virtue. And they believed that the ability of a free people to survive under a Republican Constitution depended on them remaining virtuous and morally strong.
In 1787, the very ear the Constitution was written and approved by Congress, that same Congress passed the famous Northwest Ordinance. In it, they emphasized the essential need to teach religion and morality in the schools. Here is the way they said it:
Article 3: Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of Mankind, schools and the means of education shall be forever be encouraged.
His point with the list is that he is a famous celebrity, and he will only debate people he thinks of as being equally famous or reknowned.
copycat gimmick. Clint pulled it off.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.