Most churchmen these days wisely disown the horrific genocides ordered by the God of the Old Testament. He has a dark side, and that is putting it kindly. But what are we to make of this attempt to turn my non-appearance into a self-promotion stunt? In the interests of transparency, I should point out that it isn't only Oxford that won't see me on the night Craig proposes to debate me in absentia: you can also see me not appear in Cambridge, Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh, Glasgow and, if time allows, Bristol.īut Craig is not just a figure of fun. The idea of cashing in on another's name by conniving to share a stage with him is hardly new. In an epitome of bullying presumption, Craig now proposes to place an empty chair on a stage in Oxford next week to symbolise my absence. To this I would only say I that I turn down hundreds of more worthy invitations every year, I have publicly engaged an archbishop of York, two archbishops of Canterbury, many bishops and the chief rabbi, and I'm looking forward to my imminent, doubtless civilised encounter with the present archbishop of Canterbury. I took pleasure in refusing again, which threw him and his followers into a frenzy of blogging, tweeting and YouTubed accusations of cowardice. I have consistently refused, in the spirit, if not the letter, of a famous retort by the then president of the Royal Society: "That would look great on your CV, not so good on mine".Ĭraig's latest stalking foray has taken the form of a string of increasingly hectoring challenges to confront him in Oxford this October. For some years now, Craig has been increasingly importunate in his efforts to cajole, harass or defame me into a debate with him.
He parades himself as a philosopher, but none of the professors of philosophy whom I consulted had heard his name either. D on't feel embarrassed if you've never heard of William Lane Craig.
0 kommentar(er)
