Comments on Orange County Pastor: My Atheist Friend Hosts A Debate

Hi Matt - Bruce here, the organizer for the debate...

2010-01-13T13:50:25.331-08:00

Hi Matt - Bruce here, the organizer for the debate. I'm glad you attended. I appreciate the views and comments on your blog. Do you think anyone would be interested in ordering the DVD from freethoughalliance.org? All the revenu will be going to sponsoring more debates in the future, such as our Creationist debate coming up in March 2010.

Bruce

Bruce here - the organizer of the debate, I enjoy...

2010-01-13T13:42:45.685-08:00

Bruce here - the organizer of the debate, I enjoy the different views everyone here has on the debate. I thought many points were taken and discussed. I will take into consideration all the comments, howeverm the 3v3 approah does offer a more entertaining formate. If your viewers here would like to see the entire debate, visit www.freethoughtalliance.org to order you DVD. All the revenue from the DVD will be goin to our future debates. The next one will be about Creationism and will be held in March.

Bruce

Anonymous Writes "I watched the Penn Jillett...

2009-12-17T17:57:33.265-08:00

Anonymous Writes

"I watched the Penn Jillett video and I agree with Penn's conclusion. The difference is that the person Penn encountered treated Penn with dignity and respect while expressing a sense of compassion.'

Although I trust that Dr. Jones didn't intend to come across angry or demeaning, I think I agree with you, the man who approached Penn had a more compassionate and respectful attitude.

Matt, according to the Oxford online dictionary th...

2009-12-17T07:08:15.951-08:00

Matt, according to the Oxford online dictionary the term hate means: to "feel intense dislike for or a strong aversion towards".

During the debate Clay Jones was asked to defend an article he had written in which he stated that he thought this generation was more wicked than that of the Canaanites. He affirmed that he did. He was then asked if this generation of non-Christians should be slaughtered just like the Canaanites and he agreed that we should. Finally when pressed as to wether or not he would be willing to take part in such a slaughter he agreed that if god commanded it he would.

In short, the Christian panel accused the Atheists in the crowd of actions which they were not responsible for and then declared that the Atheists deserved to die for those actions. I think that fits in with both Oxford and your definition of hatred.

I watched the Penn Jillett video and I agree with Penn's conclusion. The difference is that the person Penn encountered treated Penn with dignity and respect while expressing a sense of compassion. Clay Jones appeared angry, condescending and demeaning. Apples to Oranges as they say.

A, I am sorry to hear that you felt the Christian...

2009-12-13T12:00:56.793-08:00

A,

I am sorry to hear that you felt the Christian panelists came across so full of hate. I know that was not their intention at all.

Is is possible you are mis-defining "hate?"
Hatred is not someone having a different opinion than you?
Hatred is not someone sharing their person religious beliefs with you.

Hatred in my opinion is someone saying they could care less if you were alive or dead. Hatred is someone placing no value on your life.

In my opinion, the reason the Christian panel spoke about Hell was because they want no one to go there and believe people who don't believe in Jesus as God will go there. Ultimate Hatred for someone who believes in a real Hell, would be to not tell someone about Hell.

I refer you to Atheist "Penn" from Penn and Teller speak about this very subject on You Tube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JHS8adO3hM&feature=player_embedded

Mojoey, Great hearing from you. From the looks o...

2009-12-13T11:55:18.184-08:00

Mojoey,

Great hearing from you. From the looks of your blog, I can tell your are a deep thinker.

I am curious why you believe Dr. Ross is a "psuedo" scientist. If you get a moment, I would really be interested to hear your thoughts.

Dan, Thanks for checking out my blog, I am honore...

2009-12-13T11:53:42.431-08:00

Dan,

Thanks for checking out my blog, I am honored. Sean is a friend of mine as well and I am excited to hear about the Feb debate. I plan to be there!

As an Atheist who attended the debate I would agre...

2009-12-12T15:39:50.297-08:00

As an Atheist who attended the debate I would agree that the format was not conducive to clear arguments from either panel. Each side continually interrupted the other making it almost impossible for anyone to get a reasonable answer across. That being said, the impression I got from the Christian side of the debate was that I, as an Atheist, am a murderous adulterer who is responsible for all abortions performed and thus should spend eternity being punished. I found this all very strange since I've never killed another human being, I've never cheated on my spouse and I personally do not approve of the casual destruction of innocent life. None the less, Clay Jones pronounced his judgment on us all and Hugh Ross was right there agreeing with him. Overall the Christian panel struck me as a group of overly judgmental extremists intent on inciting fear and hatred.

Matt, thanks for post at my blog. I came over to r...

2009-12-12T10:38:53.077-08:00

Matt, thanks for post at my blog. I came over to read your thoughts. It is interesting to see how different our thoughts are on Dr. Ross. I wonder why that is?

Thanks for your comments on the ApologeticJunkie b...

2009-12-11T19:29:25.065-08:00

Thanks for your comments on the ApologeticJunkie blog, Matt. The 3v3 rapid fire question format was tough, but from what I've read so far, people could see our side did most the heavy lifting that night. I'm planning a debate between my friend Sean McDowell (Capo Valley)and Dr. James Corbett (Capo HS) on the morality issue on Feb 26th. That one will fit the typical academic 1-on-1 format. I hope to do try it some day myself. Thanks for watching and reporting it on your blog. Blessings, Matt!

Kathy, Yes, I think your suggested format would w...

2009-12-11T16:05:52.529-08:00

Kathy,

Yes, I think your suggested format would work well. Good thoughts.

Oops! I hit the "publish' button without ...

2009-12-11T12:52:10.265-08:00

Oops! I hit the "publish' button without putting my name in. This last comment is from me, Kathy.

Thanks for asking, Matt. What I envision is someth...

2009-12-11T12:50:06.613-08:00

Thanks for asking, Matt. What I envision is something like this: Two participants are seated comfortably on the platform. They have 15 minutes each to explain how they came to hold their current beliefs about the biblical God. Then they dialogue for another 20 minutes or so, till the moderator opens the floor for questions (no "preaching" or "ranting") from the audience. This takes a strong but gracious moderator and dialogue participants who can remain civil. So I suppose that narrows the field of options. But this kind of event would be much more appealing to me.

Kathy, Good summary, I agree with you. You are r...

2009-12-11T11:56:16.199-08:00

Kathy,

Good summary, I agree with you. You are right about the format lending itself more to "winning" than to thoughtful discussion.

I am wondering if there is a debate format that would lead to this in a more fruitful way?

I have noticed in some of William Lane Craig's debates with Atheists, there is this format:

Opening Argument for each side
Response #1 from each side
Response #2 from each side
Concluding Remarks

Perhaps this would be a better format than the "free for all" round that we witnessed on Wednesday.

Do you have any other ideas about how a debate could produce fruitful discussion?
Conc

I was there, too. It seemed to me the panel conced...

2009-12-11T11:11:38.190-08:00

I was there, too. It seemed to me the panel conceded the existence of God, who (as Hugh Ross pointed out) could only be the biblical God. They just don't LIKE the God of the Bible because He does not "measure up" to their personal definition of (human) goodness, justice, perfection, and love. They don't like how he treated people such as Job or the Canaanites, and they cannot imagine how hell could possibly be consistent with the character of a good, just, perfect, and loving God. The frustration for me and perhaps for others in the audience was that the debate format didn't really allow for thoughtful discussion of these issues. The Christian panelists never really had (or took) the chance to explain why they read the same Bible passages and come to entirely different conclusions about God. I came away confirmed in my dislike for debates. They tend to focus more on winning the war of words than about exploring what's true.