How Modern Christianity has failed Christians

by Christ Alone 277 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Christ Alone

  Ok, did some research on this Loftus guy, and it was interesting. From what I gather, in 1985 WLC told him that it would be inappropriate for him to debate a fromer student of his. It seems that this made Loftus pretty angry. He's posted all over his site that WLC is too afraid to debate him, which seems ridiculous that WLC would be afraid to debate this guy after debating bigger heavy hitters.

  It also appears that the "reasons" Loftus gives for WLC not debating him were that Craig doesn't think it woudl be good for Loftus spiritually, that Loftus is not qualified, or that Craig doesn't want to turn Loftus into "Mr. Anti Christian Apologist." But all these reasons are given by Loftus himself based on secondhand statements.

  Sounds like Loftus is just throwing a tisy fit because he's not heavy enough for WLC to debate.
• 

  cofty

  I'm not sure why WLC would debate men like Hitchens and Harris, and then be afraid to debate an unknown...

  WLC isn't fit to clean John W. Loftus' shoes.
• 

  bohm

  Loftus has also written multiple books. Anyway, one of the reasons WLC has given was that it "would not be good for him spiritually".
• 

  PSacramento

  I think that, with John being a former student, that it might be an emotional thing for Craig.

  Who knows but I don't think that I would take any pleasure in debating a student.

  WHen I did martial arts and competed, at one pint I had to fight a student, it was not a good time for me...

  Is there any reason why anyone would think that Craig would not debate Loftus?
• 

  Christ Alone

  That wouldn't be Dawkins reason. WLC is as heavy a hitter as an apologist comes. He's debated Hitchens, Harris, Flew, Dennett, Krauss, Ehrman, etc. It's just speculation, but I can't help but wonder if Dawkins feels he would look as foolish as Hitchens did. I like Hitchens. But he clearly lost the debate.

  The only reason I can find that Dawkins gave for not debating Craig was that it "would look great on your CV, not so good on mine." He later said that he was too busy and that WLC only claim to fame was that he was a creationist and Dawkins wouldn't waste his time. Sounds like a cop out to me.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFamS4RGE_A

  Dawkins actually looks worse for not debating someone as heavy as WLC. On the date that they were supposed to debate and Dawkins backed out, Craig carried on anyway and had some interesting comments on it not looking good on Dawkins CV, and then proceded to debate Dawkins by means of his book in abstentia:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3HCthi2i_o

  It even appears that one of Dawkins' atheist friends is accusing Dawkins of being a coward for not debating WLC.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC1xgS1XGSg
• 

  bohm

  Anyway, whats the point? WLC likes debate, Dawkins like books. Which is the better medium to convey ones ideas.

  Dawkins dont want to debate WLC because he is not a scientist, WLC wont debate others because he think they are not sufficiently well known. This demonstrate what?

  Why the drama?
• 

  Christ Alone

  Cofty, you're funny. You really hate this guy! :-) Is it because he baggs on your personal hero?

  Why the drama?

  I just pause because Dawkins is THE leading atheist mind in the world. And in my opinion William Lane Craig is one of the best Christian Philosophers in the world. Dawkins has debated lesser known bishops and such. It just seems like an obvious debate. Hitchens v Craig was an obvious debate and I enjoyed it. I also enjoyed the Harris debate. Maybe Dawkins doesn't think he has any arguments to add to the debates that have already been given. I'm not sure.
• 

  bohm

  William Lane Craig trying to rebuke Einstein:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ugf9OxUC4s

  (very painfull)
• 

  PSacramento

  Dawkins is not a debater, why would he deabte WLC ?

  Debates are as much about skill in deabting as have a valid argument.
• 

  cofty

  Formal debates are entertaining and a test of the debating skills of the participants. They are a terrible way of establishing what is true.

  Debating a creationist is like allowing somebody 20 minutes to trash your house, then you get 20 minutes to repair it. When you fail they claim victory.