# Hugh Hewitt v. Richard Dawkins



## Marrow Man (Oct 23, 2009)

I'm not a big Hugh Hewitt fan, but he tackles Richard Dawkins on his radio show in this transcript.

It gets kind of interesting near the end when they begin discussing historical sources for Christianity and Dawkins asks about miracles.


----------



## Jon Peters (Oct 23, 2009)

Thanks for posting. It was interesting. I haven't listened to Hugh in a few years but he does, at times, badger his guests (in a friendly way) like a trial attorney. Dawkins doesn't seem to like lawyers.

Has anyone read The Greatest Show on Earth? Is it worth reading as a defense of evolution?


----------



## AThornquist (Oct 23, 2009)

Haha, the discussion about miracles was certainly interesting  Dawkins sure has to work to suppress the truth. His attitude was very revealing when, after Hewitt said that he believed Jesus turned water into wine, Dawkins said, "I’ve realized the kind of person I’m dealing with now."


----------



## Zenas (Oct 26, 2009)

Dawkins seems to do a lot of ad hominem and belittle anyone who doesn't hold to naturalism, which, if they did, would vitiate the entire need to have a discussion or debate. I suppose he considers the glaring logical fallacies in his philosophical and scientific positions not worth discussing, to the point that anyone pointing out the fact that the emperor has no clothes needs to be executed.


----------



## George Bailey (Oct 26, 2009)

My favorite HH quote was "Well, it’s not about what appeals to us, it’s about what is."


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Oct 26, 2009)

I would give my eye to see James White debate Richard Dawkins. 

But then it might be difficult to see. :}


----------



## carlgobelman (Oct 26, 2009)

I kind of liked Dawkins reluctance to debate anybody on the topic. He would rather spend his time writing books (according to him). Translation: I would rather just spout out my ideas without any critical feedback.


----------



## Jon Peters (Oct 26, 2009)

carlgobelman said:


> I kind of liked Dawkins reluctance to debate anybody on the topic. He would rather spend his time writing books (according to him). Translation: I would rather just spout out my ideas without any critical feedback.



He did make it sound that if he had known HH believed in miracles he may not have consented to the interview. But to be fair, some people are simply not gifted debaters. I don't think he should be crticized for that, in and of itself.


----------



## Marrow Man (Oct 26, 2009)

It should also be noted that Dawkins has consented to public debates (though not formal debates) on occasion. For example, he has had discourses with the likes of Alistair McGrath: see here and here.


----------

