Full Debate MP3 Audio here. (2hr 34min)
Enjoy.
Be sure to subscribe to all of Dr. Craig's audio debates here.
Friday, June 11, 2010
William Lane Craig vs. Massimo Pigliucci Debate MP3
Full Debate MP3 Audio here. (2hr 34min)
Enjoy.
Be sure to subscribe to all of Dr. Craig's audio debates here.
Topics:
audio
,
debate
,
existence of God
,
mp3
,
William Lane Craig
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(393)
-
▼
June
(28)
- Apologetics Course Audio/Video via iTunes U
- Apologist Interview: Gary Habermas
- Sunday Quote: Kant on the Bible
- Biola Distance Learning Certificate in Apologetics...
- Weekly Apologetics Bonus Links (06/18 - 06/25)
- Resurrection Quiz Game
- Westminster's Apologetics Course on iTunes
- Get a Free Areopagus Journal
- Apologist Interview: Keith Kendrex of Evidence4Faith
- Sunday Quote:Charles Malik on Being Responsible In...
- A Review of the Amazon Kindle
- Weekly Apologetics Bonus Links (06/11 - 06/18)
- Peter S. Williams vs. Peter Cave Debate: Is Belief...
- The Ambassador Approach MP3 Audio by Greg Koukl
- Answering the Tough Questions About Life and God: ...
- Apologist Interview: Paul Copan
- Sunday Quote: J. Sidlow Baxter on Prayer
- The Golden Rule Apologetic by Bob Passantino
- Weekly Apologetics Bonus Links (06/04 - 06/11)
- William Lane Craig vs. Massimo Pigliucci Debate MP3
- Arguments for Theism MP3 Audio by Peter S. Williams
- Defeating Moral Relativism by Francis Beckwith MP3...
- Apologist Interview: James White
- Sunday Quote: Malcolm Muggeridge on Faith
- Michael Licona vs. Richard Carrier Debate: Did Jes...
- Weekly Apologetics Bonus Links (05/28 - 06/04)
- Apologetics in Preaching: Panel Discussion MP3 Audio
- Three Helpful Audios on Abortion
-
▼
June
(28)
9 comments :
Thanks Brian!!
Pigliucci has a great accent.
What an awful performance from Pigliucci! There simply isn't enough room to go through the unbelievable list of fallacies and contradictions (and even concessions) he made!
Most noteworthy, however, was his back-pedaling against his own claim that quantum physics demonstrates creation "uncaused, out of nothing" when confronted by an actual physicist from the audience!
Simply awful, and Craig wasted no time dismantling his arguments!
What an awful performance evaluating this debate byrom, craig brings nothing but arguments from ignorance and red herrings. His arguments are false dichotomies he attacks the position the atheist takes then says its god or nothing, ignoring many other options. Craig is an idiot.
@ Bebil
First you said craig brings nothing but arguments from ignorance and red herrings.
then you said Craig is an idiot.
Perhaps this sort of sophistry is the reason you have one follower on your blog.
I think what's great about apologists like WLC and others is that when their arguments are given an audience, the self-righteous, pseudo-intellectual atheists are exposed. Their responses evince an inability to understand/grapple with the argument, and it shows by their lack of a relevant rebuttal.
You almost never hear a WLC debate go like this:
WLC: I feel a good argument for the existence of God is X. Here is my syllogism:
i) If -P, then -Q.
ii) But we know that P.
Therefore Q.
Opponent: I disagree with my opponent's argument. Here is why:
1) It is not necessarily the case that if -P, then -Q. My counter example: X.
2) I think the second premise is only an assumption and therefore, if I am to accept it as a solid premise, I will require more of a reason to believe it is more probably true than its negation.
3) The conclusion is not warranted because the argument is logically invalid.
But no, instead we often hear, "It isn't nice to think that God doesn't exist. It isn't nice to believe that all this will pass away eventually. And these ideas are the only reason you believe in a God. It is because you are a weak-minded religious person."
A hilarious example of this is the debate between Craig and others with Dawkins and others, found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UnEkydeDVQ
Does anyone have the other Craig vs Pigliucci debate? Pigliucci claims to have debated Craig twice, the first claiming the debate came to a draw (which I assume is referring to this one, even though his assessment seems mistaken), the second he claims to have "wiped the floor with Craig".
This is actually the 2nd of the debates. Pigliucci claims this is the debate where he "wipes the floor with Craig's.....". He says so here: http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2011/06/william-lane-craig-and-logical.html
I say...listen to this debate and judge who wins for YOURSELF!!
Pigliucci could've done a much better job. He should have proven how the resurrection (assuming it happened and can be proven) doesn't prove WLC's concept of God (trinitarianism). All it would prove is that a supernatural agent exists that rose Jesus from the dead. It wouldn't prove that this supernatural agent is a Trinune God (which is how WLC defines: 'Christian theism').
Post a Comment
Thanks for taking the time to comment. By posting your comment you are agreeing to the comment policy.