From this page:

Alister McGrath Swept off the Cutting Room Floor
William Dembski

Last year I described how Richard Dawkins interviewed Alister McGrath for the BBC production THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL and then decided to leave him on the cutting room. Go here:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/scien…isive-critics/

That interview, I’ve learned, is now available at Google Video here:

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?doc…78760369344626.

In watching it, ask yourself if it would have made for a less biased program if Dawkins had dropped Ted Haggard and substituted Alister McGrath.

Note that: Dawkins interviewed Alister McGrath for his video. McGrath is eminently qualified in both theology and the natural sciences, and is the most widely published and competent critic of Dawkins out there. And what a surprise, McGrath gets cut from the video, but Ted Haggard’s comment is sooo important that it just has to stay.

Just a wild guess, but I think someone’s covering himself very well. I guess when you’re the moderator of your own debate you get to choose only the best (read: worst) arguments against your position to interact with. I guess the key is here: Christians who don’t share Dawkins views on science are irrational and generally unintelligent people, often with questionable character (obviously). So pick Haggard, and ignore anyone who might seriously challenge that presentation.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Every now and then I tip my hat in the direction of Cornelius Van Til – But he was wrong in a few ways, and I’d hate for anyone to think that I’m one of those dyed-in-the-wool Van Til fans who think he could do no wrong. He did much wrong (and much good), philosophically speaking. So here’s one way in which he was wrong: Van Til’s position committed to epistemic internalism, which is an indefensible view of epistemology.
Anyone familiar with Van Til’s apologetic, whether expressed by Van Til or his followers, like Greg L. Bahnsen, will recognise the Van Tillian quality of the argument:

1. Laws of logic, science and morality require the existence of God.
2. So called Atheists employ laws of logic, science and morality.
3. Therefore so called atheists show that they really do know that God exists.

Just now I’m not denying either premise, and I’m not denying the conclusion either. But the above argument can only appear valid if one is an epistemic internalist.
Read the rest of the entry »

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

In a previous blog entry here, I reproduced a vent from me, expressing frustrations that I was repeatedly having in discussions with people of an Eastern Orthodox church background.

I had meant to add something, which I’ve just now found. So here goes. See if you can figure out what, in this discussion could lead a man to tear out every hair on his body:

Orthodox person: “Since we are the Apostolic Church, we can tell you what the Apostles said on any matter, and you cannot tell us.”

Me: “But please sir, may we have some Apostolic evidence that this is what they taught?

“Well, we are the Apostolic Church. What more evidence would you want than that?”

“Just some evidence that this is the Apostolic view.”

“But we’re the Apostolic Church. How much more Apostolic could this evidence be?”

“Well, can you show me where the Apostles said this. I’m holding in my hand an Apostolic writing which says-”

“You don’t know what it says, because you’re not part of the Apostolic Church.”

“Are you the Apostolic Church because the Apostles passed thes doctrines down the line to you?”

“Among other things, yes.”

“So couldn’t you just settle this by showing that the Apostles did pass these things on?”

“I have proven it! We believe these things, and we’re the Apostolic Church! So the things we teach must have been passed on by the Apostles.”

“Well, even this church Father, and this one, and this one – they don’t think the doctrine is Apostolic.”

“Oh, so now YOU are making yourself the infallible never-wrong arbiter of all truth and the pillar of the faith, are you?”

“No, I never said that. I’m just saying that the eviden-”

“Oh pish! You aren’t able to listen to the evidence because you’re so proud that you think you don’t need Christ and His Church. Bless you.”

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...