Doug Krueger On My Debate Strategy

Doug Krueger is a philosopher, debater, and author of the book What Is Atheism?: A Short Introduction. He responded to an email I sent him recently:

I wrote:

I don't really care whether or not some kind of god exists. I deny the Christian God. Once I can provoke doubt about that kind of God then the other gods will go by the wayside for the same reasons. Many atheists attack me for this but it's a strategy of mine based on my own anecdotal experience that I have never heard of a single Christian leaving the fold because he or she thought the arguments for the existence for God were faulty.

My goal is not to win debates but to change minds, although winning would be nice too. All some atheists are concerned with is whether or not I win debates. They don't understand what I'm doing. Do you? What do you think of this?

Doug writes:

I think your strategy is exactly right. Not a single debate opponent I've had believed in only a generic "God-of-the-Philosophers." Not a single one had a constituency interested in whether there was a God aside from the Christian one.

In fact, in at least two of my dozen or so debates, I was told by debate organizers that my opponent would be arguing for a generic god and not for Christianity in particular, and I was told in no uncertain terms that it would be a colossal waste of my time to prepare any anti-Christian arguments, such as against the empty tomb or the transformation of the apostles, etc. Well, in both cases I was told a lie, but fortunately I knew it was a lie and when the opponent argued for the Christian god in particular I was well prepared.

I agree with your approach. However, your point that it is also good to win debates is good too. Even if your opponent wins a debate about a generic god, though, the Christians will take that as a win for the Christian god.