Richard Dawkins and Ray Comfort

_{Clive Hayden

September 26, 2010

Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Religion, Science}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Richard Dawkins takes Ray Comfort out of context:

Dawkins says he doesn’t debate Creationists, yet he debates what Creationists say quite often. Should Dawkins avoid debating Creationists when they are the subject of his lectures and speaking engagements?

Comments

bevets, you are probably correct. My point is that I cannot tell whether you are correct from the information provided. I have to make an assumption. You undoubtedly agree. Otherwise you would not have used the qualifier "seems."Barry Arrington_{September 27, 2010
September
09
Sep
27
27
2010
08:59 AM
8
08
59
AM
PDT}

Scardova Dawkins: We only need to use the word ‘faith’ when there isn’t any evidence. Lennox: No, not at all. I presume you’ve got faith in your wife — is there any evidence for that? Dawkins: Yes. Yes, plenty of evidence. Lennox: Hmmm The God Delusion Debate Part I 36.20 Barry Arrington I have not seen the full context, however Comfort seems to have been making a joke, and he objects to people suggesting that he was being serious.bevets_{September 27, 2010
September
09
Sep
27
27
2010
08:40 AM
8
08
40
AM
PDT}

Clive, I am sorry, but I don't understand this post. jurassicmac makes a good point. Dawkins does not seem to be taking Comfort's banana routine out of context. In fact, he paraphrases it almost point for point. Perhaps the video assumes the routine itself is given in a greater context and that is the context that Dawkins ignores. But for someone who does not follow Comfort at all (like myself) two conclusions follow: 1. I thought Comfort was mocking the design position. Surely the banana routine is not a serious attempt to explain the design inference. 2. Dawkins quoted Comfort fairly.Barry Arrington_{September 27, 2010
September
09
Sep
27
27
2010
07:15 AM
7
07
15
AM
PDT}

How is Dawkins taking Comfort out of context? I agree with scordova. The debate between Dawkins and Lennox was stimulating. The debate between Dawkins and Comfort would be a disastrous embarrassment for the creationists.jurassicmac_{September 27, 2010
September
09
Sep
27
27
2010
06:04 AM
6
06
04
AM
PDT}

I’m afraid Ray Comfort would embarass the creationists. For once, I've to agree with Sal :-)DiEb_{September 27, 2010
September
09
Sep
27
27
2010
02:57 AM
2
02
57
AM
PDT}

Dawkins debated Lennox, and lennox was widely viewed to have prevailed (even some agnostics saluted Lennox' performance). Dawkins has a penchant for going against triple doctorates (like Lennox). The other triple doctorate/scientist was A-E Wilder-Smith, and that was a good exchange indeed. I'm afraid Ray Comfort would embarass the creationists. But that's just my opinion.scordova_{September 26, 2010
September
09
Sep
26
26
2010
09:19 PM
9
09
19
PM
PDT}

Much like this video relieves stress,, this new study shows that belief in God relieves depression: Studies: Belief in God relieves depression Excerpt: Data released last year by sociologists from the University of California at Berkeley, in fact, revealed that 93 percent of the nation believes in God, a finding that has remained unchanged since 1988. The Canadian researchers who found that belief in God lowers anxiety and stress also based their conclusions on measurements — monitoring the brain activities of believers and nonbelievers charged with some challenging tasks. "We found that religious people or even people who simply believe in the existence of God show significantly less brain activity in relation to their own errors," said Michael Inzlicht, assistant psychology professor at the University of Toronto, who led the research. "They're much less anxious and feel less stressed when they have made an error," he said. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/25/research-indicates-belief-in-god-relieves-depressi/?page=2&feat=home_headlinesbornagain77_{September 26, 2010
September
09
Sep
26
26
2010
06:06 PM
6
06
06
PM
PDT}

Dawkins has participated in a few debates -- which is why he knows enough to steer clear of Craig.bevets_{September 26, 2010
September
09
Sep
26
26
2010
03:52 PM
3
03
52
PM
PDT}

AusieID Yeah, I think Craig would be the better choice here. I'm not much of a Comfort fan. I like bananas, but geesh! His illustration in my view begs for ridicule. Craig will offer meat, while Comfort will offer, well, banana meat. Gotta admire his persistence, though.CannuckianYankee_{September 26, 2010
September
09
Sep
26
26
2010
02:37 PM
2
02
37
PM
PDT}

Dawkins fears being properly grilled over his atheistic propositions. Ray Comfort would need for than 20 minutes because Dawkins would fulminate and bluster and each comment of his needs more time to be properly answered . Having looked at this a while ago, Comfort, I believe, is up to offering Dawkins $40 000 for a half an hour's work. Still Dicky D say nay! He's fearful, not of Comfort per se, but of the fallout if things went awry. The real debate (Sorry Ray!) I would like to see is William Lane Craig having a stoush with Dawkins. I think there has been previous talk of this on this site, but anyway, go here to see Craig's take on it (36 secs in). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQlB78Hgsj4 Mr Dawkins, you say you have the answers, then really prove it. Take on one of our best! PS. Dicky's New Zealand accent: 6 out of ten, eh! NZer might like to comment on that one!AussieID_{September 26, 2010
September
09
Sep
26
26
2010
02:47 AM
2
02
47
AM
PDT}

Prev 1 2 3

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply