"The God Delusion" Debate (Birmingham, Alabama)


#1

“The God Delusion” Debate
7:00 pm
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
The Alys Stephens Center
Birmingham, Alabama

Remaining true to our goal of engaging secular culture on critical issues in a thoughtful, respectful manner, Fixed Point Foundation will sponsor a debate on what is arguably the most critical question of our time: the existence of God. The decision one makes regarding this question has implications that reverberate throughout eternity to be sure, but it also affects temporal existence from government policy to the individual. Historically, man’s belief in the transcendent has served as a restraint on his conduct and provided hope for his future. Now, it is argued, “God is dead”, and man can do very well without him.

The debate will feature Professor Richard Dawkins, Fellow of the Royal Society and Charles Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University and** Dr. John Lennox **(MA, MA, Ph.D., D.Phil., D.Sc.), Reader in Mathematics and Fellow in Mathematics and Philosophy of Science, Green College, University of Oxford.


#2

Ah ha right in EWTN’s backyard! Expect to see a few extra brothers, nuns, and EWTN staff. :slight_smile: Looks like it will be broadcast live: “The debate is currently sold out, but it will be broadcast live by Moody Broadcasting, Salem Radio Network, and their affiliates. For live online streaming of the debate, click here.”

Hooray WKES is broadcasting for Florida area! Don’t worry I’ll record and will have it fully edited, volume boosted and available as free MP3 on my audio page by Oct 4. :thumbsup:

Phil P


#3

Here’s an excellent new book on the subject:

ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/code=3446

Don
+T+


#4

Thanks for this great page, Phil!


#5

."

Hooray WKES is broadcasting for Florida area! Don’t worry I’ll record and will have it fully edited, volume boosted and available as free MP3 on my audio page by Oct 4. :thumbsup:

Phil P:thumbsup: Now all that reaming is for the rest of us to pray!


#6

:confused:

Typos can be so much fun! :slight_smile:


#7

Thanks Phil and Ahimsa! :slight_smile: I’ve read Dawkin’s book so am anxious to hear what he has to say in defense of it. I can’t believe he attacked Mother Theresa of Calcutta. :mad:

Phil, where have you been? Alec, me and others have been waiting for you to show-up and give us some help elsewhere!!! :smiley:

Dilly dallying around with audio equipment, eh? Typical man:rolleyes:


#8

<< Phil, where have you been? Alec, me and others have been waiting for you to show-up and give us some help elsewhere!!! Dilly dallying around with audio equipment, eh? Typical man >>

Hold on honey, just twisting a few more of these knobs and gizmos…I’ll be down for supper in a minute…pause…pause…more pause…

DONE! :thumbsup:

Dawkins vs. Lennox Debate COMPLETE AUDIO

with some commentary by Moody Christian Radio people of Florida at begin and end

Phil P


#9

BTW, this debate is archived at Dawkins own site as three .mov (Quicktime) AUDIO files. In my version that I recorded directly off Moody radio I did edit a few sentences of the beginning (Christian) commentary and the ending (Christian) commentary that I thought were extraneous (coming from Moody Christian folks). The Dawkins vs. Lennox debate itself I left untouched and complete.

The audio at Dawkins site in the .mov files is a little better quality than mine (although it has the same “blip” near the beginning where it repeats for a few seconds, something that I edited out) so if you want the complete unedited commentary as well, you can download the three .mov files here:

Dawkins vs. Lennox in three .mov Quicktime files

or my version as one MP3

Phil P


#10

Hey Phil, glad you got your Groove on:D Thanks for bringing us this debate. I’ll be sure to check it out later. Can you tell us what you thought about the debate? Ten points of interest that captured you. :slight_smile:


#11

[quote=WLB] Phil, where have you been? Alec, me and others have been waiting for you to show-up and give us some help elsewhere!!! Dilly dallying around with audio equipment, eh? Typical man
[/quote]

[quote=Phil]“Hold on honey, just twisting a few more of these knobs and gizmos…I’ll be down for supper in a minute…pause…pause…more pause…
[/quote]

:rotfl:
You all seriously crack me up :smiley:


#12

Dawkins admitted “we don’t know the origins of the universe”.
Going on to say “Although we can’t disprove there is a God it’s very, very unlikely indeed”. He’s willing to stake eternity on that? :confused: He’s definitely choosing the short end of Pascal’s wager on that one.

He concludes all of his there’s no rhyme or reason… good or evil… and maybe the world is really an awful place after all, but too terrible to admit to ourselves… with “It all comes down to the resurrection of Jesus, it’s so petty, it’s so local, it’s so trivial, it’s so earth bound, it’s so unworthy of the universe”. For a man that doesn’t believe in God he sure seems to have a lot of contempt for Him. Why would you have contempt for something that doesn’t exist? I would think that you would be totally neutral about it. Oh… I forgot… Christianity breeds terrorism, and godless fascism, and communism has done such great things for humanity.

Dawkins also said “Darwin has given to the human race a lust to be good”. Well Mr. Dawkins how did Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot… escape Darwin on that one? I thought Darwinism by definition explains adaptation and survival? He attempted to link man’s higher moral nature to survival? I can adapt and survive just fine without ever being good to anyone. The need to survive only explains the need to survive. It doesn’t know good or evil… right or wrong… justice or injustice. There are plenty of species on this planet that adapt and survive just fine without any of those traits.

Even the hosts thought Dawkins fell a little flat.

Really Dr. Dawkins that’s the very best with your Oxford professorship you can do in your argument for atheism? Does he represent the best mind for this argument?

Oh brother…:whacky:


#13

Isn’t Dawkins the one who tried to tell us that experiencing God can’t be real because we have a brain area that perceives the experience? That would mean NOTHING we EVER experience can be real for the same reason.:rolleyes: I laugh at people like that. Maybe I ought to pray for them instead.


#14

Thanks, zian. I got a chuckle out of that, which made me :extrahappy: !

Well, honestly, after 10 minutes of listening to the debate I thought to myself … I’m going to take a stroll through the park and leave those two MEN to argue. Men!


#15

Thanks for posting this. It was very good. I thought Dawkins did the best job that anyone could do of denying of the single most fundamental truth in the universe.

I have a question. Since people with English accents sound more intelligent to us Americans regardless of what they’re saying, do people with American accents sound less intelligent to Brits regardless of what we’re saying?


#16

gamera << Since people with English accents sound more intelligent to us Americans regardless of what they’re saying… >>

'Tis not necessarily so…

The Argument Sketch

Righto!

Phil P


#17

BTW, what did I (PhilVaz) think of the debate?

I think the format was not set up for a good back-and-forth. The way it was they would read some quotes from Dawkins God Delusion book, then Dawkins would elaborate a little bit, then Lennox would rebut. Which was really unfair and boring. :rolleyes:

But thankfully, both Dawkins and Lennox broke from the format and began to rebut and cross-examine each other. I think the standard format of an opening for each, 1st rebut, 2nd rebut, cross-exam with questions the debaters themselves pick, then some questions from the audience, then a closing statement would have been much better.

In other words, all the Craig and other debates on my audio page are more interesting.

I think Lennox had Dawkins “on the ropes” regarding this quote from Dawkins.

“On the contrary, if the universe were just electrons and selfish genes, meaningless tragedies like the crashing of this bus are exactly what we should expect, along with equally meaningless good fortune. Such a universe would be neither evil nor good in intention. It would manifest no intentions of any kind. In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. As that unhappy poet A.E. Housman put it: ‘For Nature, heartless, witless Nature Will neither know nor care.’ DNA neither knows nor cares. DNA just is. And we dance to its music.” (Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden, page 133)

Dawkins said he meant there is no absolute good, evil or justice. I would have to go back and listen to the debate again. But I think Lennox had him there.

Phil P


#18

There is a video for that Arguement sketch on youtube.


#19

Which, of course, explains with immense clarity why there aren’t atheistic hospitals, soup kitchens, volunteers or churches. What, me worry? :shrug:

May St. Thomas pray for them.


#20

Thanks for the links, Phil.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.