After months of preparation, "The God Delusion" Debate took place last week. The debate featured bestselling author, atheist, and scientist, Professor Richard Dawkins and his Oxford colleague, mathematician and philosopher of science, Dr. John Lennox. A tremendous amount of planning went into this event, from getting the schedules to work (a bit like trying to get the planets to align) and promotion to preparing the venue and raising the necessary capital to pull it off. No mean feat, I can assure you. I am grateful to my staff, supporters, and Richard's assistant (her modesty prevents me from mentioning her name here) for her consistent and cordial help in making it possible.

The debate was moderated by Judge Bill Pryor and it focused on issues of faith and science as well as Christianity and atheism. The debate was lively, civil, and intelligent. John gave an articulate defense of the Christian faith, while Richard countered with arguments of his own. At one point, I wandered out into the lobby to confer with my staff about post-debate logistics and I noticed that the foyer was entirely empty. So fascinated was the audience that no one was milling about.

The debate was broadcast to hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, via radio. While this was exciting that so many could hear it, it also put severe time restrictions on the debate, so things had to move along at a rapid pace. In the end, one of the six theses had to be skipped and the closing remarks abbreviated. Even so, the debate was fantastic and, I think, unique. Perhaps even historic.

The day of the debate consisted of a Latimer House luncheon that featured Dawkins and Lennox. I interviewed both men before a typical luncheon crowd of thoughtful men and women. Interestingly, Dawkins and Lennox were a bit reticient about the luncheon, wondering if it would "steal their thunder" for the evening debate. But it was a success and I came away with the impression that they both enjoyed it. More than that, there seemed to be a genuine chemistry between them.

In the aftermath of this event, we have received notes of thanks and encouragement from around the world. The event was important for a variety of reasons, but not the least of which was the fact that the debate was just that: a debate. It focused on ideas and issues, it wasn't a shouting match. It was characterized by thoughtful discourse, not ad hominem argumentation. At the end of the discussion, the audience gave these two heavyweights a standing ovation. Given the polarized nature of the audience, the passionate and deeply entrenched ideologies, and the issues at stake, such developments should not be taken for granted.

Perhaps it goes without saying that I profoundly disagree with Richard Dawkins. I think he is wrong on what he calls "the deep questions of meaning and existence." But I like him. He is engaging and his interest in science is infectious. I look forward to engaging him further in our next project Christians and Atheists: Our Best Arguments.

This film promises to be intriguing. Very intriguing.