Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

Christianity, Islam, Other Religions & Belief Systems.

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86, Matt8819, amok

Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#1  Postby Passer » Apr 23, 2010 11:34 am

Dawkins v Lennox debate

Prof of mathematics John Lennox (a 'believer') of Cambridge or Oxford (can't remember which) apparently wiped the floor with Dawkins concerning Evolution and other topics. A friend was telling me about its write up in Daily Mirror newspaper.

Anyone know anything about this?
I've been diagnosed with O.C.D and G.A.D. I'd better be too - I've spent enough on the therapy!
User avatar
Passer
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 547

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google



Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#3  Postby Passer » Apr 24, 2010 11:05 pm

Peter Brown wrote:http://richarddawkins.net/articles/1707

Thank you sir!
I've been diagnosed with O.C.D and G.A.D. I'd better be too - I've spent enough on the therapy!
User avatar
Passer
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 547

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#4  Postby Macdoc » Apr 24, 2010 11:16 pm

Prof of mathematics John Lennox (a 'believer') of Cambridge or Oxford (can't remember which) apparently wiped the floor with Dawkins concerning Evolution and other topics.


Not bringing in any pre-conceptions are you ?? .....noooooooooo :roll: :coffee:
We are “natural-born cyborgs, brain plasticity allows us to attach ourselves to machines such as computers The brain is a more open system than we ever imagined.
Nature has given us a brain that survives in a changing world by changing itself. N.Doige
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 6117

Country: Canada/Australia
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#5  Postby josephchoi » Apr 24, 2010 11:19 pm

Dawkins may not be the best philosopher, but evolution is his forté. Compare that to Lennonx's usual drivel and it's like pitting Tyson in his prime with some little kid with a glass jaw.

And Lennox isn't Tyson.
Donuts don't wear alligator shoes!
User avatar
josephchoi
 
Posts: 1093
Age: 23
Male

Country: Ca...na... d- Canada.
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#6  Postby LIFE » Apr 24, 2010 11:26 pm

josephchoi wrote:Dawkins may not be the best philosopher...


How about he's no philosopher? :scratch:
"If you think education is expensive, try the cost of ignorance" - Derek Bok
"Words that make questions may not be questions at all" - Neil deGrasse Tyson
User avatar
LIFE
Site Admin
 
Name: Bernhard
Posts: 7128
Age: 33
Male

Country: Germany
Germany (de)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#7  Postby josephchoi » Apr 24, 2010 11:32 pm

LIFE wrote:
josephchoi wrote:Dawkins may not be the best philosopher...


How about he's no philosopher? :scratch:


:grin: Well you know, had to give him some credit for trying...
Donuts don't wear alligator shoes!
User avatar
josephchoi
 
Posts: 1093
Age: 23
Male

Country: Ca...na... d- Canada.
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#8  Postby LIFE » Apr 24, 2010 11:47 pm

josephchoi wrote:
LIFE wrote:
josephchoi wrote:Dawkins may not be the best philosopher...


How about he's no philosopher? :scratch:


:grin: Well you know, had to give him some credit for trying...


That must mean I'm not the best god then :D
"If you think education is expensive, try the cost of ignorance" - Derek Bok
"Words that make questions may not be questions at all" - Neil deGrasse Tyson
User avatar
LIFE
Site Admin
 
Name: Bernhard
Posts: 7128
Age: 33
Male

Country: Germany
Germany (de)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#9  Postby Passer » Apr 25, 2010 6:20 am

Macdoc wrote:
Prof of mathematics John Lennox (a 'believer') of Cambridge or Oxford (can't remember which) apparently wiped the floor with Dawkins concerning Evolution and other topics.


Not bringing in any pre-conceptions are you ?? .....noooooooooo :roll: :coffee:

Actually, and truthfully? Nooooooooo.

I'm going through a sort of crisis of faith and for the last 6 months been fast losing it. I'm trying to find the truth of it all and my believing friend told me about this debate. I told him he probably heard wrong and I'd look into it.
I've been diagnosed with O.C.D and G.A.D. I'd better be too - I've spent enough on the therapy!
User avatar
Passer
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 547

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#10  Postby Peter Brown » Apr 25, 2010 11:41 am

All I can say on the matter is: if John Lennox so trashed Dawkins why do you have to buy the DVD to see it? Such a winning would get paraded as a total knockout for Jesus by the faithful, not hidden by a price tag.
User avatar
Peter Brown
 
Posts: 2618
Age: 51
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#11  Postby Animavore » Apr 25, 2010 11:46 am

:lol:

Lennox did not "wipe the floor" with Dawkins. In fact Dawkins won early on in the debate when he pointed out that Lennox actually believed that Jesus turned the molecules of water, and what ever else goes in there, into wine, literally! And Lennox had to concede that he did believe that although he didn't sound convinced.
With regard to heretics two points must be observed (heretic and Church).. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death.

- Aquinas.
User avatar
Animavore
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 28212
Age: 35
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#12  Postby josephchoi » Apr 25, 2010 3:36 pm

Animavore wrote::lol:

Lennox did not "wipe the floor" with Dawkins. In fact Dawkins won early on in the debate when he pointed out that Lennox actually believed that Jesus turned the molecules of water, and what ever else goes in there, into wine, literally! And Lennox had to concede that he did believe that although he didn't sound convinced.

To be fair, that's not gonna win you much debating points in a room filled with people who believe that too... :naughty2:
Donuts don't wear alligator shoes!
User avatar
josephchoi
 
Posts: 1093
Age: 23
Male

Country: Ca...na... d- Canada.
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#13  Postby Animavore » Apr 25, 2010 3:38 pm

josephchoi wrote:
Animavore wrote::lol:

Lennox did not "wipe the floor" with Dawkins. In fact Dawkins won early on in the debate when he pointed out that Lennox actually believed that Jesus turned the molecules of water, and what ever else goes in there, into wine, literally! And Lennox had to concede that he did believe that although he didn't sound convinced.

To be fair, that's not gonna win you much debating points in a room filled with people who believe that too... :naughty2:


Don't mind them. They don't count. Normal people thought it was funny and stopped taking Lennox seriously after that. Especially the "Logos" bit which didn't make any sense at all.

EDIT: That is to say; not in the way he used the term.
With regard to heretics two points must be observed (heretic and Church).. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death.

- Aquinas.
User avatar
Animavore
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 28212
Age: 35
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#14  Postby Rumraket » Apr 25, 2010 10:45 pm

Debates : Not deciding truth since.... the dawn of mental capacity.
"When inventing a god, the most important thing is to claim it is invisible, inaudible and imperceptible in every way. Otherwise, people will become skeptical when it appears to no one, is silent and does nothing." - Anonymous
User avatar
Rumraket
 
Posts: 9333
Age: 33
Male

Denmark (dk)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#15  Postby King David » Apr 29, 2010 2:18 am

I saw Hitchens debate Lennox live and was not at all impressed with Lennox. He regurgitated the same old tired theistic arguments that have been heard ad nauseum. A cosmological argument which makes unwarranted inferences based on a ridiculous misinterpretation of the big bang theory, the so called "fine tuning" argument, and the moral argument from consequences, none of which at all sound or convincing. I can't really tell any difference between Lennox, D'souza, and Craig. They are all the same, yet not, kind of like an unholy trinity of morons.
Nothing is so fatal to the progress of the human mind as to suppose that our views of science are ultimate; that there are no mysteries in nature; that our triumphs are complete, and that there are no new worlds to conquer. -Humphry Davy
User avatar
King David
 
Posts: 1483
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#16  Postby Lion IRC » Apr 29, 2010 3:47 am

Animavore wrote:
josephchoi wrote:
Animavore wrote::lol:

Lennox did not "wipe the floor" with Dawkins. In fact Dawkins won early on in the debate when he pointed out that Lennox actually believed that Jesus turned the molecules of water, and what ever else goes in there, into wine, literally! And Lennox had to concede that he did believe that although he didn't sound convinced.




Mr Lennox does not CONCEDE that he accepts scripture. Pahleeeese!
He accepts the water/wine event at Cana as a matter of fact and does not need to be tortured into admitting ANY of his positions. What is Mr Dawkins gonna do - keep asking him the same question until he hears the answer he wants?

Animavores claim that Mr Lennox didnt "sound convinced" is just subjective white noise.

Lion (IRC)
FORMAL DEBATE - Lion IRC (affirmative) vs Crocodile Gandhi (negative)
Topic - Gay marriage should not be legalised in society.
Moderator - Durro
Now Showing HERE.
User avatar
Lion IRC
Banned Troll
 
Posts: 4077

Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#17  Postby Lion IRC » Apr 29, 2010 3:55 am

In fact most Christian apologists are grateful for the chance to state what they hold as religious truths.
BTW - If grape juice can turn into wine and wine into vinegar without anyone even lifting a finger why is this event such a leap of faith?
Lion (IRC)
FORMAL DEBATE - Lion IRC (affirmative) vs Crocodile Gandhi (negative)
Topic - Gay marriage should not be legalised in society.
Moderator - Durro
Now Showing HERE.
User avatar
Lion IRC
Banned Troll
 
Posts: 4077

Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#18  Postby xrayzed » Apr 29, 2010 4:22 am

Rumraket wrote:Debates : Not deciding truth since.... the dawn of mental capacity.

Indeed, which is why I regard these debates as mildly entertaining theatre at best, and an opportunity to confuse people at worst.
A thinking creationist is an oxymoron. A non-thinking creationist is just a moron.
(Source: johannessiig, here)
User avatar
xrayzed
 
Posts: 1053
Age: 56
Male

Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#19  Postby xrayzed » Apr 29, 2010 4:23 am

Lion IRC wrote:In fact most Christian apologists are grateful for the chance to state what they hold as religious truths.
BTW - If grape juice can turn into wine and wine into vinegar without anyone even lifting a finger why is this event such a leap of faith?
Lion (IRC)

I guess the whole fermentation process is just another form of god magic to you, huh?
A thinking creationist is an oxymoron. A non-thinking creationist is just a moron.
(Source: johannessiig, here)
User avatar
xrayzed
 
Posts: 1053
Age: 56
Male

Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Prof Richard Dawkins v Prof John Lennox

#20  Postby King David » Apr 29, 2010 2:03 pm

Lion IRC wrote:In fact most Christian apologists are grateful for the chance to state what they hold as religious truths.
BTW - If grape juice can turn into wine and wine into vinegar without anyone even lifting a finger why is this event such a leap of faith?
Lion (IRC)

OK, you win. I believe Jesus could turn water into wine. It just took him about six weeks and the addition of grapes and yeast.
Nothing is so fatal to the progress of the human mind as to suppose that our views of science are ultimate; that there are no mysteries in nature; that our triumphs are complete, and that there are no new worlds to conquer. -Humphry Davy
User avatar
King David
 
Posts: 1483
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Next

Return to Theism

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest