One, I was too patient with letting others in the audience ask questions, I didn’t muster the courage to ask one of mine until it was too late, and he decided to stop answering questions.

I figure he lost about 3-400 dollars, but I don’t know exactly. There were 2 stumps, and I forgot the exact questions.

One person had a question regarding the order of creation events in the first two chapters of Genesis. Apparently the Sun is created on day 3 in one account, and Light on day 1 in the other account. Though he rambled quite a bit about reference frames, he never really answered the question about “How did God create light before he created the source of said light?”. Interestingly enough, our AAR judge ruled that the rambling answer was unsatisfactory, while the UCI prof rambled without a clear ruling, and the CCC judge agreed with the AAR ruling.

Another person had specific questions about specific passages, the one I remember being: Who inspired David to do a census, God (2SA 24:1) or Satan (1CH 21:1). His general question being “If the Bible is the inerrant word of God, why all these inconsistencies?” The speaker claim, with this example, that it is possible for God and Satan to work in concert (with an atheist heckling: The Dynamic Duo!). Though he wasn’t able to answer all such questions because he lacked exact knowledge of every biblical passage. The judges ruled this a fair technicality.

I remember a different person was arguing that the Mind was an epiphenomenon of the Brain, and that a Soul was therefore an unnecessary hypothesis. Despite a great deal of largely uncoordinated rambling by the speaker, this person was paid off simply so that the discussion could move on to other questions.

My friend Alex asked “Would God approve the smoking of marijuana?” This recieved a good laugh by the audience. The speaker replied that though it’s not addressed specifically, there was one passage that effectively said “don’t take drugs” and alcohol was mentioned specifically, and recommended only in moderation. So we could imply that marijuana should be prohibited except in medicinal use.

All in all, I thought that the speaker faced a fairly hostile crowd. There were a number of people that had come prepared with questions, and nobody was there expected to be converted. There was also a good amount of heckling, especially from the very center of the room (where there were two rows of people from AAR, and their friends). Personally I attend for the entertainment of discussion, not even expecting money, but also not expecting to hear any arguments that would sway my opinions. My expectations were all met, and my only disappointments were that the speaker rambled too much, and not all of his arguments were entirely clear; none of them were succinct.

My roomate, Josh, was disappointed in me, because I wasn’t attending to learn anything about Christian Faith or Belief; I was attenting with a closed mind. He’s right, but I neither care, nor consider it a major drawback for this particular type of event.

We need a “morning before” donut.

Budd Ruff