Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,789
edits
Changes
→Frank Zindler Versus Dr. William Craig Debate
A leading light in the [[American Atheists]]. Isn’t it amazing how so many atheists love [[Theory of evolution|evolution]] and appear to be threatened by the massive scientific evidence for [[Creation Science|creation]]? Zindler took the atheism side in an Atheism v. Christianity debate in front of 7,500 people at Willow Creek Community Church, USA. His opponent, Dr William Lane Craig, tore his ignorant arguments to shreds so effectively that many atheists in the audience realised that Zindler had lost the debate. It was presumably to this debate that John Snowden was alluding when he wrote that a representative of the American Atheists, whom he used to support, lost a public debate to a “fundamentalist” (Skeptic 18(3), 1998).<ref>http://www.trueorigin.org/noaig.asp</ref>}}
A leading light in the [[American Atheists]]. Isn’t it amazing how so many atheists love [[Theory of evolution|evolution]] and appear to be threatened by the massive scientific evidence for [[Creation Science|creation]]? Zindler took the atheism side in an Atheism v. Christianity debate in front of 7,500 people at Willow Creek Community Church, USA. His opponent, Dr William Lane Craig, tore his ignorant arguments to shreds so effectively that many atheists in the audience realised that Zindler had lost the debate. It was presumably to this debate that John Snowden was alluding when he wrote that a representative of the American Atheists, whom he used to support, lost a public debate to a “fundamentalist” (Skeptic 18(3), 1998).<ref>http://www.trueorigin.org/noaig.asp</ref>}}
==Anthony Flew and Dr. Gary Habermas Debate Regarding the Resurrection of Jesus Christ==
A Westmont
{{cquote|Another helpful resource for judging the demonstrability of the resurrection is Terry L. Miethe, ed., Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? The Resurrection Debate. It chronicles a debate between Gary Habermas and Antony Flew held at Liberty University in 1985:
All parties agreed ... to limit the debate to a single issue, that of the historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus. The debate was not to be concerned with issues such as God's existence, revelation (such as the Bible), or miracles in general. These issues could, however, be addressed in the question and answer session following the formal debate.
Because audiences are perennially interested in who the experts choose as the winner of a public debate, we organized two panels of experts in their respective areas of specialty to render a verdict on the present subject matter. One panel consisted of five philosophers, who were instructed to judge the content of the debate and render a winner. The second panel consisted of five professional debate judges, who were asked to judge the argumentation technique of the debaters. All ten participants serve on the faculties of American universities and colleges such as the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Virginia, Western Kentucky University, James Madison University, George Mason University, Randolph-Macon College (Ashland, Virginia), Sweet Briar College, and Liberty University. We attempted to choose persons of a wide spectrum of views and persuasions.
The decisions of our judges were as follows. The panel of philosophers, judging content, cast four votes for Habermas, none for Flew, and one draw. ...
The panel of professional debate judges voted three to two, also in favor of Habermas, this time regarding the method of argumentation technique.<ref>http://www.westmont.edu/~work/faq/resurrection.html</ref>}}
==See Also==
==See Also==