The “lost” interview with Alister McGrath from “Root of All Evil?”

12 June 2007

I’ve been wanting to see this “missing” interview with Alister McGrath from Root of All Evil? for a good while now, and thankfully richarddawkins.net has posted the entire unedited interview.

Alister McGrath

McGrath complained that this interview, which he curiously claimed as a victory, was cut from the final edit.

Let’s see if McGrath squirms and vacillates with his effete reasoning as much as he did when he and Dawkins debated The God Delusion? in Oxford. Somehow I expect this to be simply another case of McGrath just not getting it, but I’ll reserve judgement until I’ve watched the entire interview.

No other posts are likely to be like this.

Tags: no tags

Comments

281Comments2007-06-12+23%3A30%3A14nullifidian to “The “lost” interview with Alister McGrath from “Root of All Evil?””

tobe38 on June 13th, 2007 7:27 pm

For goodness sake! This is what McGrath said about that interview:

But when I debated these points with him, Dawkins seemed uncomfortable. I was not surprised to be told that my contribution was to be cut.

The Root Of All Evil? was subsequently panned for its blatant unfairness. Where, the critics asked, was a responsible, informed Christian response to Dawkins? The answer: on the cutting-room floor.

For him to claim that is laughable. How can one man talk so much and say so little?!

By the way, good to have you back, Null. Was getting worried about you :)
nullifidian on June 13th, 2007 7:46 pm

Cheers Tobe, I just had a lot of “stuff” that needed to be done recently, sadly not all of it generating income. :-)

I do like this bit:

Where, the critics asked, was a responsible, informed Christian response to Dawkins?

What exactly compromises an “informed” christian response? One that has boned up on the bible as-is, warts and all (like the fundies) or one that has adopted so many MacGuffins to explain away the nonsense in same that it’s practically unrecognisable as christianity if they don’t keep throwing the name Jesus around like confetti (like a modern anglican), or even some melding of these two into a completely inconsistent mindfuck?

Enquiring minds need to know.

And then laugh. :-)
AV on June 14th, 2007 8:55 am

Somehow I expect this to be simply another case of McGrath just not getting it, but I’ll reserve judgement until I’ve watched the entire interview.

Good luck! For some reason it cuts out about 5 mins into the interview. I hate Google Video.
nullifidian on June 14th, 2007 9:35 am

If it’s hosted on Google Video rather than YouTube, I tend to download it for use with the GV player - the quality seems to be higher, but that might just be because it’s played at a natural resolution rather than being squashed or stretched to fit in the Flash viewer.

I still haven’t managed to watch it all the way through yet, although a quick scrub through the end of the download seemed to indicate that it was complete.
E. I. Sanchez on June 16th, 2007 4:43 am

I agree with you that McGrath fails to provide concise - clear answers. His theological vocabulary gets on the way.

I appreciate Richard taking the time to talk to him though, and providing the video.

I also appreciate McGrath’s courage to do the interview/debate and put it on video.

You can find a better video source here:
http://richarddawkins.net/video/146%20-%20Alister%20McGrath%28Oxford%29%20ALL2.mov

Edgar,
Chris Dills on July 2nd, 2007 7:34 pm

Agreed that McGrath brings forth any sort of valid rebuttle to the points presented by Dawkins. In fairness, however, it must be noted that the Dawkins himself was quite faulty in the evidence that he delivered. This was far more a battle of semantics and sentence restructuring than it was a discussion of the existence of God. Both offered reasoning that at times was circular at best and completely non-beneficial. Both desperately desired to present their own arguments and ignored the problems raised by the other.