Faith Interface

Richard Dawkins - Cowardly Windbag?

In recent times I have been reminded in what an intelligent, well-informed and articulate Christian brother we have in internationally-acclaimed philosopher and academic Dr William Lane Craig. Dr Craig’s grasp on philosophy, cosmology, quantum physics and theology is truly remarkable, as his ability to express this vast storehouse of knowledge in an articulate and understandable manner.

I was also reminded once again what an arrogant, yet cowardly, windbag is New Atheist poster boy, Dr Richard Dawkins. Dawkins has consistently and stubbornly refused to debate Dr Craig on matters of the philosophy of religion, philosophy of science (which is meant to be an area of expertise for Dawkins) or the rationality of belief in the existence of God. Instead, Dawkins attempts to dismiss requests to debate Dr Craig with a series of pathetic, yet totally transparent excuses:

In this recent refusal, Dawkins gives the following reasons why he doesn’t think he needs to debate Dr Craig:

1. He claims he won’t debate “Creationists”.

Dawkins has debated Dr John Lennox, Oxford mathematician and theologian, who supports Intelligent Design (what Dawkins would sneeringly call a “creationist”). Ironically Bill Craig has not identified himself as clearly supporting Intelligent Design and is most definitely not a “Creationist” in the perjorative sense in which Dawkins applies it.

2. He claims he will only debate Archbishops, Cardinals, Bishops and other clergymen.

Dawkins has debated Dr Alister McGrath (an Oxford molecular biophysicist and theologian) and Dr John Lennox, neither of which are clergymen or episcopal position-holders. For Dawkins to limit his opponents to clergymen (who may not have as good a knowledge of philosophy and science) is like Mike Tyson agreeing only to fight someone with little or no boxing experience. Talk about stacking the cards in his favour!

3. He claims he won’t debate someone who is nothing but a “professional debater”.

In his usual contemptuously arrogant manner, Dawkins has seriously diminished the academic and professional credentials of Bill Craig, who is first and foremost a professional philosopher, academic research scholar and career philosophy professor. Dr Craig has multiple publications to his name, both in the academic and popular literature sphere. If anyone is in doubt that Bill Craig is much more that just a “professional debater”, take a look at his Curriculum Vitae.

No - none of these excuses remotely cut it. Dawkins is nothing but a smarmy, and cowardly, wind-bag. He knows, as we all do, that if he was silly enough to face Bill Craig publically in a toe-to-toe debate, Dr Craig would wipe the floor with Dawkins. Dawkins would be shown up for the noisy, clanging bell that he really is. And Dawkins knows it. That would be the end of his credibility and the end of his lucrative publishing career.

You’re not “busy” Dr Dawkins, you’re just a piker.

See also Dawkins Versus Craig Debate Petition.

Thanks to Peter Grice for this one: