|
Navigation
The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us. Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help improve critical thinking. Buy a Laptop -- Apple
|
Hector Avalos Debate about the Resurrection of Jesus
Posted on: August 30, 2007 - 6:06am
   Offline
Hector Avalos Debate about the Resurrection of Jesus
http://www.stuorg.iastate.edu/isuaas/resources.shtml William Lane Craig and Hector Avalos It's at the bottom of the page. It has some great arguments. Thought you might be interested in this, I think it's awesome,
|
|
Copyright Rational Response Squad 2006-2024.
|
So it was a good debate? I haven't gotten around to listening to it. Did hector pwn?
I think hector won this hands down, I was reading a review in a Christian forum about this debate and the only thing they could say about Hector was that he was arrogant and showed signs of the typical Atheist attitude. But if they were actually paying attention you will note that William Craig attacked Proff Avalos right off the bat, so he brought it on himself.
Co-Founder of the Atheist/Freethought website Pathofreason.com
www.pathofreason.com
Check it out
Also, i'd like to say anyone who knows there shit and knows they know it sounds arrogant to many people. I do not see this as arrogance just mearly knowing your shit.
Hector calls for elimination of religion from the public and private life.
How the Hell he plans to do that, only a Troskyite thug could say.
I would imagine it would involve teaching people that there is a better alternative to religion and letting them choose it freely but then again everybody knows that when you wish something wasn't around anymore you're obviously secretly advocating using lethal armed force to remove it so I don't know.
Götter sind für Arten, die sich selbst verraten -- in den Glauben flüchten um sich hinzurichten. Menschen brauchen Götter um sich zu verletzen, um sich zu vernichten -- das sind wir.
Well Europe is becoming more and more secular and they aren't using lethal force. I think America is the one who is having the hardest time adjusting to reality. I mean we are almost last in the world in acceptance of Evolution. Only in America are we fighting it tooth and nail.
Co-Founder of the Atheist/Freethought website Pathofreason.com
www.pathofreason.com
Check it out
Yeah... and that's depressing.... :'(
I listened to the debate and thought it was pretty good. I don't think Craig got owned too terribly bad (not as bad as RRS owned Kirk and Ray anyway), but I think part of the reason for that was because Avalos promised to stick to scriptural evidence pertaining to the resurrection and to not argue directly about the supernatural.
I thought that was a really interesting position for him to take. I mean, to an atheist like me, that almost sounded like "I'm going to fight you with both arms tied behind my back!"
I also laughed during the Q&A when one of the students went postal on Craig for committing logical fallacies, haha. Why was he so pissed?! I mean, even if Craig DID commit logical fallacies, the kid sounded like he was about to rush the stage and take him down! Someone needs to give that dude a massage. (Not it).
The student said he counted at least 25 logical fallacies, and I'd be interested in knowing them all, but I didn't notice quite that many. I did notice that Craig kept stressing that "there are 2 burdends of proof here tonight", but the burden of proof he gave to Avalos was that Avalos had to prove a negative (that Jesus was not resurrected).
I also noticed that Craig started by taking the typical apologetic route and assumed from the get-go that everything in the bible is a fact. At least he made some kind of attempt to show that the bible is a legitimate historical document, but he did seem to fail pretty miserably at that.
Avalos probably could have destroyed him much more severely if he wouldn't have restricted his arguments to certain criteria. I did think that was a pretty bad ass move on his part though.
A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.
Mandatory comparative religion classes in high school would probably go a long way towards marginalizing religion.
I agree but deciding who would teach them would be a hard task. I mean I can imagine some fundemamentalist Christian teaching a comparison between Buddhism and Christianity, they would be so bias they wouldn't give the other religions a fair chance.
Co-Founder of the Atheist/Freethought website Pathofreason.com
www.pathofreason.com
Check it out
The point wouldn't be to instruct the students in how to practice the religions, though. It wouldn't be about arguing which religion makes the most sense either. It would just be a course where you learn facts about religions.
You could call it something like "Religious Mythology".
I don't doubt that there would be a Christian teacher somewhere who would try and paint Christianity in the brightest colors, but at least getting that sort of a program started would be a great first step. I'm sure we could figure out a way to control that sort of thing.
A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.