Received via email:
The President of the British Humanist Association has pulled out of debating renowned Christian apologist William Lane Craig. Polly Toynbee, Guardian columnist and prominent critic of religion, initially readily agreed to a debate on the Existence of God with Craig in April but withdrew her involvement last week saying “I hadn’t realised the nature of Mr Lane Craig’s debating style, and having now looked at his previous performances, this is not my kind of forum”.
Dawkins and Grayling (who have also refused to debate with Craig on his forthcoming UK Tour) are both Vice-Presidents of the British Humanist Association which describes one of its core values as “engaging in debate rationally, intelligently and with attention to evidence”.
William Lane Craig is Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology, California. He has debated leading atheists the world over including Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris, who described him as “the one Christian apologist who has put the fear of God into my fellow atheists.”
More information can be found at the Reasonable Faith Tour 2011.
The press release goes on to note this comment from Richard Dawkins:
Richard Dawkins, who has been publicly accused of cowardice for refusing to debate the arguments he presents in The God Delusion, recently described Craig as a “deeply unimpressive…ponderous buffoon”, who uses logic for “bamboozling his faith-head audience.” Yet he still has not responded to the actual content of the arguments presented by Craig.
Dawkins, the self proclaimed champion of reason, doesn’t want to expose himself to logic for fear of being bamboozled. What does that remind me of? Oh, I know:
“deeply unimpressive…ponderous buffoon”
This designation belongs more properly to Dawkins himself, as anyone who has read, “The God Delusion” would recognize. It is easy to see through his faulty logic and erroneous reasoning.
How can these leaders of the worldwide atheist community show their faces in public again after this tour by William Lane Craig if they fail to debate him? Why would ANY intelligent and honest person want to hear what they have to say anymore if they are not prepared to defend it in public against strong opponents?
All they are saying loud and clear to the world is that, contrary to the intellectual standards they claim to espouse, they will only debate when they feel quite sure that there is no risk to them of being defeated – and consequently exposed to ridicule; Humiliated.
Humiliated because they have heretofore boasted of the unassailability of their position which they claim to be founded on truth – which in turn they insist is sacred to them. Yet one who truly reveres truth will see no shame in being humbled by it; will in fact humble himself willingly before it. Therefore one may safely conclude that what is sacred to them is not truth at all – but merely their ridiculous self-regard founded on vanity.
I for one welcome this happy development as I had long grown intensely bored with the tiresome illogical drivel and often blatant deliberate falsehoods that have spewed from the maws of these benighted fellows – like the brackish fluid that issues from a breached sewerage pipeline. They were the scourging mankind had to endure for the corruption that was bound to result from the permissive society. But at long last after this long night of the soul dawn is breaking out again. The pestilence is being checked – the atheists are being silenced. Glory be to God! Amen!