I am impressed by the gentleness and humour in dealing with a very aggressive atheism; this is for me as important as the lucid intellectual arguments for a Christian theism, which I wholeheartedly share. Thank you for both.

What a joy to watch.  I have been so encouraged and blessed as a Christian to hear such a thoughtful discussion.

There is something so “good” and “pure” about the nature of God, and His incomprehensible love for us. 

Thank you so much for speaking publicly about our Lord Jesus.

I just savor the clean, clear logic and exposition that Dr. Lennox gives to everyone who can enjoy listening to his “teaching.” I look forward to his next book for more pearls of wisdom.  Please do keep sharing your God-given discernment.

I think the focal point of mainstream religion has changed - http://www.ebook-search-queen.com/ebook/reli/religion+and+ethics.all.html .That’s part of the “see the world in black and white” that the fundamentalists find so important about their “my way or the highway to hell”. Its far easier to use religion as the label for making oneself feel better or more important than someone else. I don’t murder, so I’m better/God loves me more than someone who does.

I enjoy many of your interviews, lectures, and debates. You are very articulate.  Please, continue to send us these videos.

Hello John; I enjoyed your talk, and while I agreed with most of what you said, I think it’s an error to try and defend ‘religion.’ Religion in our day is an almost meaningless term. I think the apologist handicaps himself by agreeing to use it. A far better term (one that can actually be defined) is world view. The whole argument of ‘The God delusion’ collapses if you replace the word ‘religion’ with the term world view. (e.g. replace the sentence ‘religion is the cause of all evil’ with ‘world views are the cause of all evil.’ The first is blatantly false, while the second has a basic validity.
It’s my view that when the apologist falls for this trap of talking about religion he is nearly defeated from the start. I consider the ‘secular humanism’ of Dawkins to be a religion, but he would disagree. He cannot however, deny he has a worldview. When the apologist uses the term worldview he can avoid this science vs religion dichotomy. (Or at least has a better chance of doing so.)
Cheers.

I have enjoyed listening to John! He has a very clear understanding of the problems we face in the European societies at the present.

As one that has been brought up with the Marxist ideology and Atheism I have to agree with John that Atheism has done so much damage to generations of young people in Eastern Europe!

Marxism has been a helpless cry against poverty and injustice in its origin in the 19th century BUT without God and a true understanding of human nature (Atheist do not have it) our world cannot be fixed! Marxism and communism assume we are good by nature, but goodness without God is harsh and leads to intolerance!!!

I really enjoy hearing John Lennox speak.  He is humble in his demeanor, yet very clear and articulate in his speech.  I think the point he makes on the necessity of God as a backbone for both rationality and morality are important points. 

One thing however is I think he gives too much way to the atheist criticism of religion as a motivator for violence.  He accepts the premise that the primary motivation for the violence of terrorists is religion.  I think this point should be contested.  Much of the violence done that might invoke religion is motivated not so much by religion but by politics.  Instead of acknowledging or arguing this, Lennox asks us to instead differentiate between religions.  But let’s give Lennox the benefit of the doubt. 

Even if he didn’t want to argue against this, which might entail defending Islam against the vicious propaganda out there, it must be acknowledged that no less violence has been done in the name of freedom, liberty and democracy.  It’s easy to acknowledge the sins of communism since communism has been an external threat to Britain and America.  It’s a far more honest and also difficult acknowledgment when one realizes that a great deal of violence has also been done in the name of the values that are currently fashionable and widely accepted. 

We are currently witnessing a terrible slaughter in the Gaza Strip.  Yet the violence being done there hardly receives the condemnation of the western world and the international community.  It’s not done in the name of religion, but instead in the name of the latest political values.  Lennox should use this violence as an example of how violence often occurs, and the justifications are sought afterwards, in the name of the most prominent values of the day.  Should we now call into question the validity of democracy, secularism, liberty and freedom because of the savage violence perpetrated by Israel and often by the US?  Let’s let the atheists answer that.

John seems so real and humble.  I really enjoy listening to him.  He doesn’t try to overwhelm us with how academic he is; he speaks on a level so we all can understand.