Why Richard Dawkins should debate Christians

[Minimalist]

Dawkins specifically turned down an offer to debate William Lane Craig, who is a well known Christian apologist.

Dawkins is a biologist. Craig is a fucking asshole. They have no common ground to debate.

[Tonus]

I don't see why we'd want to use public debates to settle such issues. Let science and reason continue their inexorable march forward. Bread and circuses don't really work, IMO. Science does. Reason does.

[Statler Waldorf]

I'm not sure what your objection is exactly, since what I said to start with is that Dawkins will debate Christians but not Creationists.

This isn’t quite accurate, Dawkins will debate creationists, he debated Lennox and McGrath a few years ago and they are both creationists. He just won’t debate young Earth creationists. Apparently he’s okay with debating someone who believes a virgin gave birth, a man rose from the dead, a man brought another man back to life, a man walked on water, and a man turned water into whine; but if you disagree with Dawkins on the age of the Earth you’re not worth his time! The truth is he doesn’t want to debate a Biblical literalist because they hold a much more consistent view of scripture and how it relates to reality than the other creationists do.

If you’re goal is to demolish Christians in debate, I don’t think that Dawkins is the man you want debating Christians, he’s terrible at it.

“The God Delusion makes me embarrassed to be an atheist.” – Michael Ruse

[Minimalist]

Call the cesspool cleaners....Waldork just floated to the top.

[CapnAwesome]

This isn’t quite accurate, Dawkins will debate creationists, he debated Lennox and McGrath a few years ago and they are both creationists. He just won’t debate young Earth creationists. Apparently he’s okay with debating someone who believes a virgin gave birth, a man rose from the dead, a man brought another man back to life, a man walked on water, and a man turned water into whine; but if you disagree with Dawkins on the age of the Earth you’re not worth his time! The truth is he doesn’t want to debate a Biblical literalist because they hold a much more consistent view of scripture and how it relates to reality than the other creationists do.

If you’re goal is to demolish Christians in debate, I don’t think that Dawkins is the man you want debating Christians, he’s terrible at it.

“The God Delusion makes me embarrassed to be an atheist.” – Michael Ruse

I agree, although that just furthers my point that this thread is based on an inaccurate principle anyway. I don't think Dawkins is a great debater. Who cares though, debate is so overrated as a method for establishing truth. Truth is truth, not who is the best at presenting their ideas.

[Silver]

debate is so overrated as a method for establishing truth. Truth is truth, not who is the best at presenting their ideas.

I am glad that you mentioned this. Some people, mainly believers, do not understand the distinction. When judges deem that the Christian won in a debate against an atheist, it is not on the merits of truth but rather on who better presented his arguments.

[thesummerqueen]

Why the hell should he continue to argue with people who use the same arguments that have been presented over the past 2000 years? That's like continuing to argue with the fucknuts that come onto this forum always thinking they're the first ones to come up with the idea of Jesus. It doesn't matter if they're one flavor of Christian or the other - the debate isn't going to resolve anything and only serves as mental masturbation for the more militant of both sides.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

The thing about Dawkin's not debating Craig was because Dawkins mistakenly thought he was a creationist. Or so I heard.

[tokutter]

Call the cesspool cleaners....Waldork just floated to the top.

...UH OH... I THINK I SOILED MYSELF....

[Neo-Scholastic]

Besides, Dawkins is a p*ss-poor debater.