Richard Dawkins lacks fortitude

[Dexter]

Dawkins has debated theologians before and has destroyed them. He's not obligated to debate every one that wants a shot at the limelight.

It's not like these are respected academics outside of their field, theology is not a real subject. It's a subject where an ancient book tells you what you need to know. Why do you even need a professor?

[Interbane]

Dawkins response:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... lane-craig

``When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, The Truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.''
Dresden James

Are you saying, Mr. Erickson, that the well packaged web of lies is Christianity, and your view of Dawkins as raving means that he's actually speaking the truth?

[johnson1010]

In the interests of transparency, I should point out that it isn't only Oxford that won't see me on the night Craig proposes to debate me in absentia: you can also see me not appear in Cambridge, Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh, Glasgow and, if time allows, Bristol.

HAHA! Classic!

[Dexter]

Its known that Lane Craig would have taken him to the cleaners which is the real reason and only reason he refused to appear.

What's Craig going to do, quote the Bible at him, as he did in defending genocide?

It's true, you can win any debate by quoting the Bible if you believe it answers all questions. Pretty easy, what does he need Dawkins there for?

[Dexter]

Craig dealt with Dawkins spurious and specious charge about genocide.

Yes, he said God is allowed to slaughter children if he wants to, and it's OK because they're going to heaven. Wonderful.

http://au.christiantoday.com/article/wi ... /12308.htm

[Dexter]

You don't need to post biased secondary articles up Dexter you can listen to what he said by clicking on the link which I placed in the opening thread.

That's fine, but I don't know the timestamp. Was he misquoted?

[geo]

Of course Dawkins made himself look like a clown he challenged publicly any Theist to a debate and then bottled it. Inventing excuses afterwards is pathetic but I did and still do find it risible.
Its known that Lane Craig would have taken him to the cleaners which is the real reason and only reason he refused to appear. Remember it was his fellow Oxford dons who charged him publicly with cowardice and I acquiesce with that observation.

When did Dawkins challenge "any Theist" to a debate? In fact, Lane Craig challenged Dawkins to a debate.

[geo]

When did Dawkins challenge "any Theist" to a debate? In fact, Lane Craig challenged Dawkins to a debate.

Not true use a search engine and you should see the classic moment for yourself. Lane Craig was approached by Oxford remember its Dicke's Oxford colleagues that charged him with cowardice, dereliction in face of the enemy.PMSL That should really tell you everything and no amount of spinning by you or others is going to change the true facts.

Mr. Erickson, I don't believe BookTalk charges extra for punctuation. You should try periods. Marvelous, useful things.

You said Dawkins challenged "any Theist" to a debate. I don't think this is actually true. This is one of those canards being circulated by the creationist community. I don't think Dawkins is obligated to debate every Tom, Dick, and Harry that comes along. And I could be wrong, but I don't think he issued any kind of open challenge to "any Theist." Prove me wrong.

[geo]

Geo I don't care what you think I saw Dawkins challenge any Theist to a debate. He bottled it against Lane Craig and no amount of apologising for his lack of bottle is going to change that.

I forgot to add this link you need to have a peep at it and heed the message:

http://anongallery.org/5502/if-you-cant ... ar-instead

My comment about punctuation was an aside believe me I'm not trying to win an argument against you you have proven yourself to be far beyond rational debate.

[geo]

Yeah whatever.