A Clash of Worldviews (source of picture)Two Oxford University dons or professors, mathematician John Lennox, a Christian apologist, and biologist Richard Dawkins, atheist tangled in a 6 “round” bout in Birmingham, Alabama. The debate was designed to address 6 key themes from Dawkins’ book, the God Delusion.
Apparently the two had never met before this debate. The two agreed on a few things that all persons should be raised to be skeptics and not just thoughtlessly appropriate the truth from their parents, but to investigate and seek truth for themselves.
This event was a serious clash of worldviews. One man, who is in love with and who has put his complete faith and trust in Darwin and in so-called “science” (Dawkins) and the other man, who with in love with and who has put his complete faith and trust in God.
The clear cut winner, or at least the person associated with the winning side was Professor Lennox. He had truth on his side. Whereas Professor Dawkins had arguments built on a shaky foundation – wishful thinking.
Both men did an admirable and masterful job supporting their positions. They were both passionate in what they believed. Both made some excellent points.
Dawkins talked about the beauty of a garden, which I interpreted him as saying that the garden did not need a gardener or a designer. Lennox countered that any wonderfully designed garden has someone behind its design. Likewise the complexity and diversity of life could never have “evolved” from nothing into what we see today. God is the master designer and master gardener.
I never heard Dawkins address the origin of the earth or universe. He never said whether it was eternal.
Faith is blind. Lennox contended that that was not universally true. Some people may believe blindly, but others base their faith on the evidence seen in the Judeo-Christian Bible and by experience. I like the quotation, “Without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” Also, “faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence or conviction of things not seen.” Dawkins claimed that people of faith are lazy, taking the easy way to explain the mysteries of life.
Much of the debate was at such a high and intense a level that I could not keep up with all of it. It is one debate I long to here again, to contemplate and to further investigate certain concepts for myself.
Lennox made a strong point in naming recent atheistic states if Communist Soviet Union Pol Pot’s Cambodia (and I would throw in Red China) all massacred many human beings. The value of a human being is low in these godless states where the people exist for the state rather than vice versa as our Founding Fathers established here for us.
Atheism undermines Science. Theism gave birth to science is what I get from the debate.
Lennox won the debate, he had truth on his side, and he did an excellent job of using it throughout the debate.
My only criticism of the debate is that I wish there was more time to actually debate back and forth. Instead of 6 major themes perhaps having selected fewer and to allow more time for give and take. But still the debate was effective and apparently many aspects of Dawkins’ book.
I plan to buy the DVD/CD and to listen to it as many times as it takes to more fully understand the two positions. www.fixed-point.com is the web site where these DVD and/or CD can be purchased.
Apparently the two had never met before this debate. The two agreed on a few things that all persons should be raised to be skeptics and not just thoughtlessly appropriate the truth from their parents, but to investigate and seek truth for themselves.
This event was a serious clash of worldviews. One man, who is in love with and who has put his complete faith and trust in Darwin and in so-called “science” (Dawkins) and the other man, who with in love with and who has put his complete faith and trust in God.
The clear cut winner, or at least the person associated with the winning side was Professor Lennox. He had truth on his side. Whereas Professor Dawkins had arguments built on a shaky foundation – wishful thinking.
Both men did an admirable and masterful job supporting their positions. They were both passionate in what they believed. Both made some excellent points.
Dawkins talked about the beauty of a garden, which I interpreted him as saying that the garden did not need a gardener or a designer. Lennox countered that any wonderfully designed garden has someone behind its design. Likewise the complexity and diversity of life could never have “evolved” from nothing into what we see today. God is the master designer and master gardener.
I never heard Dawkins address the origin of the earth or universe. He never said whether it was eternal.
Faith is blind. Lennox contended that that was not universally true. Some people may believe blindly, but others base their faith on the evidence seen in the Judeo-Christian Bible and by experience. I like the quotation, “Without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” Also, “faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence or conviction of things not seen.” Dawkins claimed that people of faith are lazy, taking the easy way to explain the mysteries of life.
Much of the debate was at such a high and intense a level that I could not keep up with all of it. It is one debate I long to here again, to contemplate and to further investigate certain concepts for myself.
Lennox made a strong point in naming recent atheistic states if Communist Soviet Union Pol Pot’s Cambodia (and I would throw in Red China) all massacred many human beings. The value of a human being is low in these godless states where the people exist for the state rather than vice versa as our Founding Fathers established here for us.
Atheism undermines Science. Theism gave birth to science is what I get from the debate.
Lennox won the debate, he had truth on his side, and he did an excellent job of using it throughout the debate.
My only criticism of the debate is that I wish there was more time to actually debate back and forth. Instead of 6 major themes perhaps having selected fewer and to allow more time for give and take. But still the debate was effective and apparently many aspects of Dawkins’ book.
I plan to buy the DVD/CD and to listen to it as many times as it takes to more fully understand the two positions. www.fixed-point.com is the web site where these DVD and/or CD can be purchased.
No comments:
Post a Comment