Category Archives: Podcasts

Podcasts

William Lane Craig discusses his panel debate with atheist Richard Dawkins

6 Comments

Justin Brierley’s latest Unbelievable show features William Lane Craig discussing the 3-on-3 debate with Richard Dawkins that occured in Mexico.

Details:

William Lane Craig is a philosopher, author and key defender of the Christian faith in debates around the world.

Although atheist Richard Dawkins had publicly said he will not debate Craig, he found himself on the same platform as him in November 2010.  Dawkins was on an atheist team, Craig on a theist team as they debated “Does the Universe have a purpose?” at a Mexico TED-style event.

With extracts from the debate, William (Bill) Lane Craig chats to Justin about the circumstances of their encounter and why he believes Dawkins and the atheist team changed their tactics mid way, were ununified and failed to address the arguments that were presented.

To watch the full debate http://www.premiercommunity.org.uk/group/unbelievable/forum/topics/richard-dawkins-just-broke-his

The MP3 file is here.

Summary:

  • who organized the conference?
  • why was Craig invited to the event?
  • how did Dawkins get involved?
  • what happened when Craig and Dawkins met in the lobby?
  • what did Craig think of format of the debate?
  • clips of Richard Dawkins and William Lane Craig
  • how the no-purpose side changed strategies in the debate
  • what did Dawkins lecture on the day before the debate?
  • how should Christians respond to the popularity of Dawkins?
  • how did Dawkins respond to Bill Craig’s arguments?
  • what does Dawkins think about the “Why” questions of life?
  • how did Dawkins respond to the kalam and fine-tuning arguments?
  • is there anything wrong with Dawkins’ epistemology?
  • what arguments were presented by each side?
  • which side’s case is rooted in emotion and wishing?

Here’s a clip showing some of the more memorable parts:

It turns out that Michael Shermer spoke up to the conference organizers to get Craig invited to the event. I have always had a good opinion of Shermer personally, and this just cements it. Shermer is an uncommonly fair atheist. He has no problem hearing from the other side. You can read a transcript of his debate with Greg Koukl, moderated by national radio show hose Hugh Hewitt.

I would like to see Richard Dawkins debate William Lane Craig one-on-one. I think it is interesting that Dawkins avoids debating Craig even though Hitchens has debated Craig and Sam Harris WILL BE debating Craig shortly. Why do so many atheists believe in Dawkins when he will not debate.

Podcasts

Is marriage just an arrangement for people who love each other?

1 Comment

Mary sent me this article from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, which is liberal like the CBC and BBC, but Australian.

However, read this excerpt:

As proponents for gay marriage turn up the political temperature on this issue, the catchcry has become ‘equal love’ – if two persons of the same sex love each other, who are we to tell them they cannot marry? Greens MP Adam Bandt has this week reintroduced the argument in the Federal Parliament, stating, “It is the power of love that has brought us to this moment in the debate over marriage equality.” This is a persuasive argument for it evokes in us our own needs to receive and to give love, but is ‘equal love’ a valid proposition for legalising same sex marriage?

Let’s think about it. If ‘equal love’ is the only prerequisite for marriage, then why not legalise marriage between uncles and nieces, or between mums and sons, if they are so inclined? I doubt if many people would accept such sexual unions, and yet if love (and take note that love in much of this debate is left undefined) is the only requisite for marriage how can we exclude a union between any two consenting persons, regardless of their status? Let’s not stop there, what if three people love each other, should they not be permitted to marry? And if marriage is so malleable why not introduce, as one newspaper article recently suggested, fixed terms for marriage rather than being for life?

The point is simple, ‘equal love’ is an inadequate ethic for deconstructing marriage. There are some human relationships which are appropriately deemed unsuitable for marriage. Particulars such as ‘kinds’ and teleology must play a role in defining marriage: what is a man and what is a woman, and what is the purpose or goal of marriage?

This guy is a pastor, yet he makes a good rational argument that is accessible to anyone. Is marriage really about adult feelings and the needs of adults to be happy? Or is it about something else?

Jennifer Roback Morse explains the purpose of marriage

If you want to learn more about how to define and defend traditional marriage, then take a look at these videos by Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, which I found at Lex Communis.

Details:

Dr J addresses the Sacramento Department of Evangelization and Catholic Schools on the question of altering the definition of marriage to include same-sex unions.  She also examines the break-down of traditional marriage and the consequences of no-fault divorce.

Clip 1 of 4:

Clip 2 of 4:

Clip 3 of 4:

Clip 4 of 4:

Or you can download the MP3 here. If anyone is wondering who I consider to be an ideal woman, Michele Bachmann and Jennifer Roback Morse are two of my favorite women. I really like women who I can sit and listen to and learn from, especially when they are passionate about what they believe and have lots of evidence to use in debates.

Podcasts

Frank Turek asks atheists: would you follow Jesus if Christianity were true?

5 Comments

His latest radio show is awesome as usual. We need to get used to talking to atheists, and this will help you because he’s taking calls on that question – “if Christianity were true, would you become a Christian?”.

The MP3 file is here. (54 minutes, not ad-free – skip ahead 3 minutes at breaks)

Topics from opening monologue and then callers:

  • if Christianity were true, would atheists necessarily become Christians?
  • does God force people to believe in him against their will?
  • how important is evidence to persuading someone?
  • what are some reasons to believe that God exists?
  • what are some reasons to accept the resurrection of Jesus?
  • what does the Bible mean by the word “faith”?
  • what should you do with someone who needs reasons to believe?
  • what should you do with someone who wouldn’t believe even with reasons?
  • what about Christians who think the Earth is only thousands of years old?
  • was their death and suffering before the Fall?
  • what about evolution? haven’t we been able to observe evolution in action?
  • what about the origin of life – the origin of biological information?
  • what about the fossil record – especially the hominid fossil record?
  • what about theistic evolution?

This is a great podcast, especially for beginners.

Frank Turek is a former naval aviator. He flew military aircraft. If you’ve seen the movie Top Gun, he’s Maverick. And he’s talking to you about apologetics, with all the benefit of his experience debating and conducting open forums on college campuses. Fun, fun, fun! (And not the bad kind of fun that Mary likes) Sometimes I wonder why I have to sit at a keyboard all day and slave over a hot computer*, when I would much rather be doing what Frank Turek is doing. Oh well. At least I get to listen and tell you about it, too.

By the way, the right answer to his question for an atheist is “yes, but where is the evidence?”. That’s what atheists should say in response to the question, and then they should listen to the evidence. Also, they should have reasons for believing that there is no God, or they are just exercising blind faith. And if they ask you, “would believe there were no God if atheism were true?” then you have to answer yes, because if atheism is true then you are rationally obligated to believe it. But then, they have to have evidence before you actually have to believe it! Being open to being proved wrong means a lot to people who don’t agree with you. For example, I used to be a young-earther and I changed my mind.

By the way – that question he’s asking? – “if Christianity were true, would you become a follower of Jesus?” – he stole that from my 13-question quiz for atheists. But I won’t be bitter if you go to this page, print out my 13 questions, find an atheist of your very own, and ask them the questions yourself. Don’t let them know why you are asking or what the right answers are. Just ask your atheist the questions and then report back to me here.

Frank’s web site is called Cross Examined.

* I stole this from Brian Auten.