Why must Christian apologists tell lies?

[greneknight]

I'm still in school so I'm not exactly familiar with all the arguments in favour of religion. But I've seen almost every debate on youtube between Christians and atheists and I always go away feeling very uneasy about Christian apologists. The truth is they tell lies.

Currently the most formidable Christian apologist must be William Lane Craig. I must have seen every debate that he has ever fought and there are a lot. Why am I not delighted every time I see him take his opponent apart? I'm not just a Christian but I'm an altar boy in my church so naturally, I should be pleased with Craig.

Craig is a liar and a very good one too. I can sit down and analyse all his debates and in every one of them, I (yes, even I) have spotted huge flaws and worse, deliberate lies but he does it so well that his opponent is none the wiser.

The most recent debate that I saw between Craig and a Muslim chap called Ally was good. Ally was much better and I thought he took the wind out of Craig's sail.

What I have seen of such debates led me to the conclusion that there is no rational argument for God and the Christian faith. Those who want to remain in the faith should be honest about it and admit that faith is totally blind and irrational.

greneknight

[frankiej]

Currently the most formidable Christian apologist must be William Lane Craig. I must have seen every debate that he has ever fought and there are a lot. Why am I not delighted every time I see him take his opponent apart?

Where have you seen that???

[greneknight]

Currently the most formidable Christian apologist must be William Lane Craig. I must have seen every debate that he has ever fought and there are a lot. Why am I not delighted every time I see him take his opponent apart?

Where have you seen that???

Hi,

I have seen a debate between Craig and Christopher Hitchens and I was quite disappointed with Hitchens. He seemed unprepared and he didn't address the points raised by Craig. In the end, I felt certain that Craig won the debate but Hitchens could have countered a lot of the flawed arguments of Craig's but he did not. I'm not sure if Hitchens was already ill at that time but I wish Dawkins had been the one debating. I think Dawkins would have done a much better job but he doesn't like to debate.

Another debate I've seen is the one Craig had with Bart Ehrman. Craig was very rude and he insulted Ehrman many times. Craig's arguments were stupid but Craig is very good at inundating his opponent with stupid arguments but they are many so it's hard to counter all of them.

[pocaracas]

Try this one video on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfrARBRhwDs

[frankiej]

William Lane Craig is a slime ball anyway. I find it difficult to look at his face without retching.

I have a friend who studies theology, he likes Craig. I don't know why though.

[greneknight]

Try this one video on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfrARBRhwDs

OK, thanks. I'll see it later. It's 2 hours long. I like any video that has Craig thumped.

[LastPoet]

Its because of the absolute standpoint of the apologists. They are not there to entertain a conversation, they are there to defend their belief at any cost. Their motto is pretty much telling:



I guess lying is ok as long as you do it for Jesus™.

[greneknight]

William Lane Craig is a slime ball anyway. I find it difficult to look at his face without retching.

I have a friend who studies theology, he likes Craig. I don't know why though.

I feel the same way about Craig. He's so obviously someone you can't trust. He looks like a salesman whose wares won't work after you've bought them.

[Mister Agenda]

As long as you care about whether the people on your side are telling the truth, you'll do well here. Welcome!

[EscapingDelusion]

Where have you seen that???

"I have seen a debate between Craig and Christopher Hitchens and I was quite disappointed with Hitchens. He seemed unprepared and he didn't address the points raised by Craig. In the end, I felt certain that Craig won the debate but Hitchens could have countered a lot of the flawed arguments of Craig's but he did not. I'm not sure if Hitchens was already ill at that time but I wish Dawkins had been the one debating. I think Dawkins would have done a much better job but he doesn't like to debate.

Another debate I've seen is the one Craig had with Bart Ehrman. Craig was very rude and he insulted Ehrman many times. Craig's arguments were stupid but Craig is very good at inundating his opponent with stupid arguments but they are many so it's hard to counter all of them.

I have seen several Hitchens debates where he appeared to get flustered, sweat, and stumble. I have also seen debates where he ripped his opponents apart. My best guess is that everyone has good and bad days.

...I would also like to see his debate with Ehrman. I've read much of Ehrman's work, and he is one of the most intelligent biblical researchers I have read. I find it odd that anyone could win a debate against him, as he most certainly knows his stuff inside and out...