|
Christianity v Atheism
|
A debate between Dr. William Lane Craig (Christian) and Mr. Frank Zindler (atheist).
It has 15 parts and is quite long. It's also very interesting.
"If an injury must be done to a man, it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared" - Niccolo Macchiavelli
Fuck that is long. When I got a spare week and a half I'll give it a look.
RE: Christianity v Atheism
February 15, 2011 at 11:56 am
(This post was last modified: February 15, 2011 at 12:05 pm by Ubermensch.)
The Christian debater is clearly more charismatic and has the crowd in the palm of his hand. He however makes a number of errors. He confuses the definitions of atheism and agnosticism, among others.The atheist fellow is also a ridiculously weak debater.
"If an injury must be done to a man, it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared" - Niccolo Macchiavelli
Craing is known to be a good debater, that is one of his strong suits. His writing gets refuted more because there are no time restraints on these. Live debating is a completely different art form.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you 
 (February 15, 2011 at 11:56 am)Ubermensch Wrote: The Christian debater is clearly more charismatic and has the crowd in the palm of his hand. He however makes a number of errors. He confuses the definitions of atheism and agnosticism, among others.The atheist fellow is also a ridiculously weak debater. The story of most Christian v Atheists debates. The apologist is a slick sales person, not a scientist. Their skill set is in debate and presentation. They therefore have the home court advantage in any debate.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too." ... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept "(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question" ... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist  (February 15, 2011 at 8:47 am)Ubermensch Wrote: A debate between Dr. William Lane Craig (Christian) and Mr. Frank Zindler (atheist). The Christian debater spoke of things that contradicts his beliefs. Such as when he is talking about how the earth must have a creator in order for in to be there or else it would be nothing. So what i interpreted by him saying that was something can not be created by nothing. Well that is true so therefore how can god exist. If something can not be created from nothing then god can not be created from nothing . He also has no evidence that is worthy of being evidence to back up his beliefs. It's not hard to come up with evidence for something that is made up in the first place.  RE: Christianity v Atheism
March 11, 2011 at 9:53 am
(This post was last modified: March 11, 2011 at 9:54 am by Zenith.)
Something I don't like about such public debates: you can't know who brought them or what they're trying to do. There might be the intention of some to bring a smart christian preacher and a stupid atheist, or a smart atheist and a stupid christian, or perhaps to have the speeches set before they start debating, to prove at the end that things are X.
P.S.: I didn't watch this video : ) ) 
Craig is mostly a good debate because of a few approaches: 1. Rapid fire, 2. Appeal to emotions/intuitions, 3. Makes intentional gaffs and mis-defines the opponents position so the other person has to correct them, wasting time.
Craig is an epic academic though, so quite often he doesn't need to use dirty tricks, like when he OWNED hitchens
.
I've seen another debate which was between him and a Muslim scholar.
They talk about the concept of God in both Islam and Christianity and which is more likely to be the correct version. Craig vs. Badawi: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h51YwIMxtrQ I didn't watch the whole thing, but from what I've seen so far it seems that Badawi's arguments are more well-grounded than Craig's. I'm planning to see all of it. But to the atheists here, of course, this is going to be like watching two people debating on whose mythology is better. Still, some of you might be interested nevertheless.  (March 11, 2011 at 7:17 pm)Rayaan Wrote: I've seen another debate which was between him and a Muslim scholar. I didn't watch the whole debate, either. I got as far as Craig saying that perhaps he and Badawi were possibly both deluded. I agreed and really couldn't sit and listen to much more of what he was saying. Apologies! I tried. I doubt that Badawi's nonsense could be any less non-sensical than Craig's nonsense. There are many intelligent Christians, no doubt, but an "intellectual Christian", is surely an oxymoron. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
