UNIVARSITY.ORG | Does God Exist? William Lane Craig vs. Christopher Hitchens – Full Debate [HD]
Interesting information about Universities
information about Universities, University, complete university guide, university league tables, which university should i go to, which university course is right for me, which university gives the most scholarship, iipm affiliated to which university, which university is best for mba distance education, which university is the best in the world,
36586
single,single-post,postid-36586,single-format-standard,ajax_leftright,page_not_loaded,,qode-title-hidden,qode-theme-ver-7.6.2,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-4.6.2,vc_responsive

29 Sep Does God Exist? William Lane Craig vs. Christopher Hitchens – Full Debate [HD]



On April 4, 2009, William Lane Craig and Christopher Hitchens met at Biola University to debate the question of God’s existence. Craig is one of the world’s foremost Christian apologists. Hitchens, is a leading spokesman for the “new atheism” movement.

In front of an overflow crowd and a global internet audience, they debated the origin and design of the universe, the implications of human morality, the deity of Jesus, and the validity of Christ’s resurrection. It was a compelling clash of worldviews and an examination of the major arguments for and against Christianity and atheism.

VISIT ONE OF OUR SPONSORS. WITHOUT THEM, OUR WEBSITE WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE.
MOST RECENT COMMENTS
39 Comments
  • R. M.
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Sorry but Craig just made an argument for the flying sphagetti monster. Literally nothing he said differentiated Christianity from any other random religion

  • Leinad Trismegistus
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    1:26:43 To me, that just sounds batshit crazy (among other statements) this one in particular just seems surreal.

  • nanettemclean5
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    I love Christopher…I do believe in god! I don't need to hear a debate!. You either have faith or you don't. R.I.P. Christopher 1 of the greatest athiests of all times. Enjoy your time with god x

  • Μαύρος Θάνατος
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Great Hitchens never got his ass kicked! We miss you Chris :/

  • 導引頭真相
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    "The third principle or teaching of Bahá'u'lláh is the oneness of religion and science. Any religious belief which is not conformable with scientific proof and investigation is superstition, for true science is reason and reality, and religion is essentially reality and pure reason; therefore, the two must correspond. Religious teaching which is at variance with science and reason is human invention and imagination unworthy of acceptance, for the antithesis and opposite of knowledge is superstition born of the ignorance of man. If we say religion is opposed to science, we lack knowledge of either true science or true religion, for both are founded upon the premises and conclusions of reason, and both must bear its test."

    —‘Abdu’l-Bahá
    The Promulgation of Universal Peace (part1) (p.107)

  • Giulio Dent
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    If no one can prove how hugely compressed dusty particles ignited that big bang

    And when we die to decompose or burn back into that dust of that beginning

    I propose we are everlasting for this reason and not any religious creator put in the place of reason just to close the gaping mouths of incredulity

    “Dust to dust” that’s it,

    Just be good as you live, and we will all meet again as dust heading for our next big bang together

    Just think one day we all will travel faster than the speed of light

  • Roy mammen Joseph
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    So you will rape if your story book- the Bible, doesn't oppose it. Wondering if you have any sense of understanding.

  • Roy mammen Joseph
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    We are living in India. I think it is a wasteful effort if you talk about God. It is a story evolved into human history.

  • Sralaine 007 o-007
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    I can most definitely prove that God Exist if you Atheists CAN PROVE THAT YOU EXIST AS WELL……. 😂🤭

  • Roy mammen Joseph
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    God is a folkstory.

  • john webster wallace
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Lane hasn't a clue…he takes selected pieces from books thinking they will prove his point. The "Big-Bang" theory being his first mistake…and a "big" one it is. I would try to explain, but realize, if one can't see his mistake on the "Big-Bang" being, in his view, to be something coming from nothing, then surely only "God" will be able to explain the bullshit he's serving to his audience. PS. Individuals, like Lane, are frightening…most people have heard…"The patients have taken over the asylum." Let's hope they don't take over the Earth. What a repeat nightmare that would be.

  • Wave
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    I am absolutely astonished that this moron used the resurrection of Jesus as one of his arguments. Are you fucking kidding me lol, this is meant to be a serious debate how can you embarrass yourself like that

  • Pedro Teixeira
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    This debate was basically:
    Hitchens: a
    Craig: YoU StiLL HaVen'T PrOVen thAt ATheiSm iS RigHt

  • Crystal Thompson
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    If there is no infinite, then how exactly is there an infinite being to create a finite universe?

  • BLΛCK SΛMPLE
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    57:16 Christopher Hitchens knows where the simpletons in the audience sit now.

    I understand Craig may have been making a joke here, but it’s just to rich.

  • Dylan George
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Hitchen's opening was fucking brilliant. An orator, a literary, not a scientist, just bent fine-tuning over his knee, whipped it and placed it back in the corner.

  • Delorean Kirk
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    I have listened and listened over and over again to them ………….yaw need to really listened to what they are saying here ……both of them are unprepared

  • Neil Shaw
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Christianity is a pill to soften death.

  • Johann Swart
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Mr Hitchens missed a great opportunity with this debate. Easily winnable, he avoided the topic mostly and on numerous occasions couldn't give a straight answer. In his defense I think his brain is just too busy, being a smart man and all.

  • wolfgang penselmeister
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Craig was tolerable until the last argument when he misrepresented everything Hitchens said. Outright lies. Mighty Christian of him.

  • Andrew Spaulding
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Refreshing to see a great debate without the two participants throwing mud at each other. I agree with Hitchens more than Craig, but I think they both do a good job of advocating their positions.

  • Delorean Kirk
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Ok here we go …….so here's the thing for me …….I am a believe in God also having been shown evidence also of his existence that I can not prove to those with a argument but I know what happen to me ………so this Craig is a little off in his way and approach to try and prove the existence of God …..how can he do it unless God gives it to him and clearly it looks and appears that he's not sent by God to prove his existence…….because his evidence is weak in terms of trying to win an argument ………his big mistake is trying to prove God existence with his way of thinking and without God giving him the wisdom and answers and demonstrations……..he's trying to prove God through human study and human evidence which still fails to prove Gods existence……. the other Guy Hitchens is more on point and makes better sense and is actually right in a lot of what he's proposing ……he's not saying that there is no God …….he just needs proof

  • Bob P
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Does God Exist?…No.

  • Bob P
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Does God Exist?…No.

  • michael plaza
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    craig, you got destroyed

  • James Sweet
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    (1:06:441:07:44) I paused the video, so Dr. Craig may be responding to this already. In Christopher Hitchen's comments on terminology in defining atheism and thus laying much of the burden of proof on the Christian theists, one needs only to look at Chapter 5 in The Best Things in Life by Peter Kreeft. In this section, the subject of universal propositions come up, specifically the difference between a positive one and a negative one. Before we go into this, we should always remind ourselves that with faith (whether it is belief or unbelief), comes wisdom. And with wisdom comes a whole lot of humility in recognizing that we don't truly know the knowledge that we hold on to. That is because pure knowledge is not the end we seek, knowledge is the means to wisdom.

    In writing on propositions, we are reminded we need to be reminded of our English classes. The "subject" and the "predicate." Here are some example propositions, statements if you will. "All men are mortal." "No Dogs have hands." The subjects here are men and dogs. The predicate in the first statement is mortality, and the predicate in the second statement is having hands. However, you notice that even with our analyzing, there is a difference in polarity. The polarity makes a difference.

    With our "All men are mortal" example it is a universal positive proposition. This means we are taking all of the subject (men), and INCLUDING them in the predicate (mortality). However, look at our negative universal proposition example, "No dogs have hands." The relationship is different. Through this statement, we are EXCLUDING the subject (dogs) from the predicate (having hands). When we exclude the subject from the predicate, we show that we have knowledge about all of the predicate as well as the subject. (It is pretty easy to know about what it means to have hands and what it means to not have hands.) In including the subject into the predicate, we don't have to know about all of the predicate (we don't know much about everything that is mortal or what it really means to be mortal).

    Here is another example. Take two propositions. One is positive and the other is negative. "There is a spider in my room." "There isn't a spider in my room." The positive proposition would only require us to have been in a small section of our room before we have seen the spider (or maybe just happened upon it.) The negative proposition would require us to search the entire room before we were certain there weren't any spiders in the room. This means every nook and cranny.

    Now if we take the spider example and make it relevant, let's say that the spider is God and the room is all of reality. I am doing this because of two propositions that are made through Theism and through Atheism, "God is real" and God is not real." The subject here is God. The predicate here is all of reality. I believe it is wise to have faith. Whether it is belief or unbelief, it is good to have faith but with that comes wisdom and humility. This means a lot of "I don't know."

    In laying the burden of proof on Christian Theists, Christopher Hitchen was in error because his own beliefs also require an inordinate amount of faith. I would say, looking at what we have looked at here, it requires more faith to be an Atheist that to be a Theist. Here is why. "God is not real" is a negative universal proposition. This means this statement EXCLUDES God from all of reality. In order to believe this, you either have to have a lot more faith than a theist or you are God himself. I say this because to be certain that there is no God, you would have to know every nook and cranny of REALITY. In other words, all-knowing. In other words, omniscient. This is a quality of God. (We get a bit circular in there, but the point is unbelief requires more faith than "I don't know." )

  • Edluis Rivera
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    I wonder if God watches these videos and laughs. Weak stupid humans hahahahaa

  • preto shohmoofc guy
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Craig destroyed him in this debate.

  • B S
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Given —- from nothing, nothing comes
    Therefore — Creation is not possible
    Given — Something exists, [self evident]
    Therefore — By brute fact something has always existed
    Therefore — A creator is not necessary

  • Shema Echad
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Atheist vs. polytheist.

  • M.C. Oult
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    How often, these days, would a college crowd allow to speak guests who differ from them? And how often, these days, would speakers who differ from each other treat each other with respect and courtesy?
    How horribly things have changed over the past decade.

  • Casual Gamer
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Does god exist?

    If he did the world wouldn’t be so fucked up as it is.

  • Frans Oudt
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Who of you made contact to Jesus Christ or the Lord to you? in real awareness of seeing ,hearing ,the Lord?

  • Cryo Gyro
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    One word answer: NO

  • lionelppd138
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Talk about a bias crowd, typical sheep.

  • Kenjong Mendez
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    Two things. Humans, how smart, can't prove that there is God or there is no God. It's up to each individual either you anchor to your faith or want to believe on what you see that can be explained.

    Either way, there is no right or wrong. By the end it will be only the truth. When we die, either we just simply vanish from existence or live eternally.

    No debate can disprove or approve this.

  • Captain Morgan
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    There's actually no direct evidence of the singularity our universe came from.

  • elkeism
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    There's a land bridge under the red sea located where the biblical account describes the
    hebrews' crossing.
    had the hebrews described this feature instead of mistaking it for a shallower uniform depth, atheism would no longer exist. what's wrong with this assertion??

  • Vibe
    Posted at 20:49h, 29 September

    remember there is a difference between evidence and proof. The bible is a kind of evidence for the certain theism but it is not proof.

    The Russels teapot analogy is also something worth reading up on that describes the burden of proof.

    thanks.

YOU CAN NOW ADVERTISE WITH US. PLEASE CONTACT US FOR FURTHER INFORMATION IN REGARDS TO PRICING ETC.