This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← 20 Christian Academics Speaking About God

20 Christian Academics Speaking About God - Comments

huzonfurst's Avatar Comment 1 by huzonfurst

Something tells me not to waste 25 minutes of my life listening to this tripe-fest.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:43:56 UTC | #859757

justinesaracen's Avatar Comment 2 by justinesaracen

Ho hum.

Out of the 20, all but six are philosophers (i.e. paid thinkers) or in fields related to theology, that is, part of the religious 'profession'. No objectivity there. Just religiots hawking their wares.

So what we really have is a list of six scientists who have managed to compartmentalize their brains to allow for a magical deity of some sort, and I can't be bothered to listen to how.

There is still no evidence, just mental gymnastics. As I said, ho hum.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:50:02 UTC | #859759

MartinRobsonUk's Avatar Comment 3 by MartinRobsonUk

I must admit , having heard the three usual arguments over and over does put you off from hearing them again from people who really should know better...

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:51:03 UTC | #859761

The Plc's Avatar Comment 4 by The Plc

In truth, all of those theologians shouldn't be considered academics.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:55:32 UTC | #859762

nlib's Avatar Comment 5 by nlib

mmhhh

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:56:04 UTC | #859763

justinesaracen's Avatar Comment 6 by justinesaracen

Ugh. Tripefest indeed. Don't bother. I got as far as the neurosurgeon who doesn't believe in evolution.

Move along. Move along. Nothing to see here. Go read a chapter in a good book and have a glass of wine instead.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:56:22 UTC | #859764

memeweaver's Avatar Comment 7 by memeweaver

Apparently Croydon has seceded from the UK as YouTube informs me "This video contains content from Channel 4, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds."

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:02:16 UTC | #859766

memeweaver's Avatar Comment 8 by memeweaver

Comment 4 by The Plc :

In truth, all of those theologians shouldn't be considered academics.

When asked what their function was at a particular institute, they reply "it's academic..."

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:07:38 UTC | #859770

God fearing Atheist's Avatar Comment 9 by God fearing Atheist

Comment 7 by memeweaver :

Apparently Croydon has seceded from the UK as YouTube informs me "This video contains content from Channel 4, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds."

Yep, blocked in the UK. I hate that. Ok, C4 own the copyright of some of it. C4 now has viewers, so the sensible (profitable) thing to do is to put those clips up on the C4 site, and prefix it with adverts. C4 gets more money, and at least I get to see it, even if I have to put up with the f-----g adverts.

I often look at the MSNBC website for the US take on international news. I get followed over there by loud, intrusive, UK advertisers, so I know there are mechanisms by which adverts can be dynamically added depending on date/user IP. It seems I'm in a loose-loose situation - too many f-----g adverts, and too much copyright protection.

Come on, sort it out you Capitalist bastards.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:15:55 UTC | #859773

chawinwords's Avatar Comment 10 by chawinwords

I spent the few minutes listening, and one word kept coming to mind: "assumptions," and too many to count. Starting with the assumption that "God?" exists and then adding those too many further personal assumptions to count, filling a half hour of time, wasted or not. In a sense, after going from one set of assumptions to another (how I think of philosophy), I am reminded, after so many thousands of years of philosophical argumentative assumptions, why it is I say: If you are hungry, don't give the rabbit to the philosopher to skin!" Circles within infinite circles, leading no place.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:18:11 UTC | #859774

Schrodinger's Cat's Avatar Comment 11 by Schrodinger's Cat

Comment 1 by huzonfurst

Something tells me not to waste 25 minutes of my life listening to this tripe-fest.

I'm sick and tired of 'Christian theologians' and their meaningless waffle. What irritates me most is not that they spout so much bullshit......but that their 'intellectual' stance has little or no relevance to the real world and its genuinely deep and profound questions.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:32:50 UTC | #859783

Daniel Williams's Avatar Comment 12 by Daniel Williams

Comment 1 by huzonfurst :

Something tells me not to waste 25 minutes of my life listening to this tripe-fest.

I 2nd that notion.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:38:37 UTC | #859784

Saganic Rites's Avatar Comment 13 by Saganic Rites

I have no intention, unlike others, of dismissing this before watching it. However, I'll be too busy doing more important things, like measuring the length of each of my body hairs, counting the grains in the 2kg bag of sugar I've just bought, testing the sharpness of my knives using my femoral artery; then there's the car needs cleaning with a toothbrush, rinsing it with one eggcup-full of water at a time, polishing it with a single cotton yarn....oh the list is endless, will I ever get to watch this video?

Ah sod it, it'll all be bollocks anyway :->

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:49:04 UTC | #859789

Zeuglodon's Avatar Comment 14 by Zeuglodon

Comment 6 by esuther

Ugh. Tripefest indeed. Don't bother. I got as far as the neurosurgeon who doesn't believe in evolution.

Move along. Move along. Nothing to see here. Go read a chapter in a good book and have a glass of wine instead.

I tried to have a look anyway, and the link wouldn't let me. I don't want to sound bigoted, but given how they conduct their debates against atheists, when they are supposedly at their best, I feel somewhat relieved at being spared. Your comment wasn't reassuring, anyway.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:21:05 UTC | #859799

ZenDruid's Avatar Comment 15 by ZenDruid

Waffle, bafflegab and flapdoodle.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:24:25 UTC | #859800

strangebrew's Avatar Comment 16 by strangebrew

Is that all they could scrape up...20 jebus fans

At least 11... I have come across and are aware of their theological hiccups...not impressive....the weakest appears to be Rowan...and he seems a little confused as to whether he believes in god or not!

The others...what can you say...blithering idiots of the finest vintage.

But 20 cretins...they are really pushing the boat our are they not?

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:26:13 UTC | #859801

Mr DArcy's Avatar Comment 17 by Mr DArcy

When I see the names: Dinesh D'Souza, John Lennox, Alistair (I was once an atheist) McGrath, William Lane Craig, and I'm sure others, I am reminded of many previous discussions on this very forum, where their Christian views got, IMO, a bloody good pounding. Those newer here than me might like to search those names and see for themselves. If Plantinga and WLC are the best "theoreticians" that Christianity can offer, then poor old Christianity!

Now whether or not I will "waste" 25 minutes by watching will be a decision for my "freewill". (Shit, I can almost hear Dinesh screaming at me now, so why bother?)

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:28:01 UTC | #859802

Red Dog's Avatar Comment 18 by Red Dog

I managed to watch about half of this but when it got to Dinesh D'Souza I had had enough. Not sure why but something about him in particular makes me nauseous.

But I did think it was rather interesting. All these guys (btw, why were they all guys?) are obviously intelligent. Yet they managed to spout some of the most ridiculous inconsistencies. My favorite was the guy who said that if he programmed a bunch of androids and some of them went bad it wouldn't be his fault. Sorry, but as a programmer I can tell you that's definitely not true.

But the one thing they have in common IMO is that they obfuscate the ideas of truth, belief, and knowledge. For them its possible to have knowledge or to know something true outside of reason, data, and the scientific method. How this works exactly isn't clear to me and I don't think it really is to them. Its obvious to me that what they are really doing is thinking uncritically, simply accepting things as true because they were brought up to believe them rather then because they have strong rational ground for believing them. I think you could hear equal amounts of nonsense, and for the same essential reason, if you had 25 post modern academics talking about,... whatever post-modernists talk about.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:34:05 UTC | #859806

ZenDruid's Avatar Comment 19 by ZenDruid

My dictionary shows a photo of Alister McGrath accompanying the definition of 'mindwanker'.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:46:42 UTC | #859814

houseofcards's Avatar Comment 20 by houseofcards

"Christian Academics" ha.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:47:25 UTC | #859815

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 21 by Neodarwinian

Quite a grab bag of apologists.

Coyne mixed in with Dembski and Royal Royce from VW's. Quantum god. to just believe because I say so.

Do they realize how disparate, and even contradictory, their BS is?

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:56:59 UTC | #859819

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 22 by Steve Zara

Comment 11 by Schrodinger's Cat

What irritates me most is not that they spout so much bullshit......but that their 'intellectual' stance has little or no relevance to the real world and its genuinely deep and profound questions.

I wish it had no relevance, but unfortunately it does. Or at least that they have an intellectual stance does. That some of these people open their mouths and make noises about God is taken both by some believers but also by the media as support for religion being taken seriously.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:50:06 UTC | #859829

Sean_W's Avatar Comment 23 by Sean_W

This is a fantastic video, it is definitely worth watching. I enjoyed it very much.

One interesting note, have you noticed that at least some of these people literally admit to Richard that their faith has been bested by reason and science, but that they hold on to it for something like sentimental reasons? I wonder what it feels like to suddenly realize that this gargantuan theist has just thrown up his hands and said the equivalent of, "I know it's bullshit Richard, but it's what I believe" What in the world! You can see Richard's surprise in some of the interviews.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:51:00 UTC | #859830

Quine's Avatar Comment 24 by Quine

I watched it through; I have seen almost all the interviews from which these clips are taken. Yes, it is a form of cherry picking, but it does show the common mode of bogus "reasoning" that runs through all. They want there to be a deity that solves the problems of their lives, so they assume that there is one, and then backfill the narrative. Theology is what it is because it assumes its conclusion at the start. Any attempt to break out of that circularity is futile from within it.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:54:14 UTC | #859832

SRWB's Avatar Comment 25 by SRWB

The biggest problem with these "sophisticated" theologians and "Christian academics" is not that they spout this inane, puerile garbage so consistently. The real problem is that there are so many ignorant twits out there who gobble it all up by the pailfull and provide these hacks and charlatans with gainful employment and a better living than most of them could ever hope for! That's the real travesty!

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:01:26 UTC | #859836

Buerggiste's Avatar Comment 26 by Buerggiste

It reflects on their dwindling numbers ...................................

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:16:01 UTC | #859840

John Desclin's Avatar Comment 27 by John Desclin

Well, they believe because they were brought up and indoctrinated that way. That's a complete waste of time to listen to them: all old hats!

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:26:53 UTC | #859843

All About Meme's Avatar Comment 28 by All About Meme

Comment 24 by Quine

They want there to be a deity that solves the problems of their lives, so they assume that there is one, and then backfill the narrative. Theology is what it is because it assumes its conclusion at the start.

Crisply and cleanly spaketh, as usual.

In Latin, as I'm 100% certain you're already aware, it's described as a priori versus a posteriori reasoning.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:33:33 UTC | #859846

Stafford Gordon's Avatar Comment 29 by Stafford Gordon

24:Quine.

Thanks. You've saved me the trouble. I've lost patience with eight of these individuals, and I wouldn't expect to be other than bored and irritated by the rest of them.

Everything they've ever spouted is a priori; predicated on the existance of a supernatural entity.

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:48:19 UTC | #859848

GBile's Avatar Comment 30 by GBile

I found it worth watching these 'scientists' squirm to produce language that was more or less grammatically correct. The great squirmer, Alister McGrath, had the most embarrasing performance, with Plantinga a close second. McGrath produced his arguements as if he squeezed them out of a tube, like toothpaste.

Each one had his fair share of 'possibly', 'purely hypothetical', 'it could be' and so forth, but all about a different aspect of their beliefs (resurrection, adam and eve, soul, inside/outside time, evil ... ). I wonder how they appreciate the stories of the others.

I also wonder how they would respond to Quine's comment ...

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:58:01 UTC | #859851