Why won’t Richard Dawkins debate William Lane Craig?
I found in the UK Guardian an article that caught my eye because it mentioned my Fool’s Club friend Richard Dawkins. You know Dawkins, right? He’s one of my deluded “new atheists” who go about spewing bile and hatred in the name of reason and science. I like bile and hatred. I almost like Richard Dawkins.
The article, by Daniel Came and entitled “Richard Dawkins’s refusal to debate is cynical and anti-intellectualist,” makes some interesting points and raises some pressing questions. The article explores Dawkin’s refusal to debate noted Christian apologist and debater William Lane Craig. Essentially, Mr. Came, a self-proclaimed sceptic, believes Dawkins uses “opportunistic” excuses in refusing to debate Craig. Mr. Came believes Dawkin’s excuse on a finer point of Craig’s interpretation of an Old Testament event actually is a “smokescreen to hide the real reasons for his refusal to debate Craig.”
A couple of months ago FoxNews reported on this phenomena in an article entitled “Christian Philosopher William Lane Craig Is Ready to Debate, but Finds Few Challengers.” In the FoxNews article, Dawkins is listed as one of many world-famous atheists who have turned down invitations to debate Craig, including the president of the British Humanist Association, Polly Toynbee, who pulled out of an agreed debate at London’s Westminster Central Hall in October, saying she “hadn’t realized the nature of Mr. Lane Craig’s debating style.”
Ha ha ha ha ha.
I’ve made them all fools, my friends.
Now Dawkins is an arrogant birdbrain, for sure. I know because I was instrumental in deceiving him into what he is. But I’m curious, my friends and servants: just why do you think Dawkins and other outspoken atheists refuse to debate Craig?