This is a nice little segment from a TV show where one of the UK’s most famous Christians – Bear Grylls, has a conversation with one of the UK’s most famous atheists – Stephen Fry. And they are respectful. And civil. And that’s why adversarial debates are a stupid model of apologetics (well, that and they’re usually disconnected from the Gospel).
Comments
Adversarial doesn’t necessarily equal lack of civility or respect. Some of the debates I’ve seen on youtube that James White has been involved in have been intense in terms of clearly enunciating the positions held by each side, but respect and politeness was impressive given the very divergent viewpoints. The one advantage of the debate form is that it allows each side to give its best position rather than papering over fundamental differences.
How else are you going to get a bunch of people with very divergent worldviews to meet up except in the hope of seeing “their guy” mop the floor with the other guy? Hopefully, by putting the opposing case forward clearly, and the lack of logic in the non-christian viewpoint, people will at least start to reconsider their antagonism towards the gospel. At its worst, a debate is just playing for your own side rather than trying to genuinely win over the other.