Monday, July 20, 2009

William Lane Craig on Christian origins


Jc_Freak: said...

It is best if one takes to the time to watch the whole debate, especially think Craig definately comes on top in the end. This is on several points:
1) In terms of ethos Craig is far above Atkins who manages to insult his audience within his first few sentences and maintains an arrogance throughout the debate.

2) Atkins primary point he never demonstrated, that being that his position was simpler than the theistic view. He states this as fact over and over again, but never does anything to demonstrate it. To his defense, Craig never attacks this either, which I think was a mistake on his part.

3) As Craig points out, Atkins never provides an argument for his position, merely arguments against Craig's.

4) Atkins displays a number of logical fallacies throughout the debate, most of which Craig points out, but also includes a plethora of circular reasoning and begging the question. His premises in regards to science, logic, and religion not only were never established, I also do not believe them to be accurate.

5) Craig's arguments still remained standing strong at the end of the debate.

To this, I must give credit where credit is due. Craig did grossly misrepresent Atkins cosmological view. Atkins said it well that causality itself is also an aspect of our universe and therefore cannot be used to disprove his view. It also is not true that he was arguing that the world doesn't exist, but rather that the world was separated out from nothing. This is a different understanding of 'nothing' than we are used to, but I do believe I get his point.

My basic rebuttal to it is that I do not see how it is simpler! It defies common sense as well as a basic concept of nothingness. Not only that, but it proposes an inaccessible extra-dimensional reality that possesses all of the attributes of God, except without the personality, attributing the successful existence of this reality to an infinite and purposeless trial and error activity. This is in no way simpler, and thus doesn't even survive his own criticism of God.

That's my two cents, or maybe two dollars worth. All in all, fascinating video.

bossmanham said...

Thanks for the comment. It's pretty fascinating stuff. I don't think I've seen Craig do poorly in a debate.

Do you happen have a link to the full video?

Jc_Freak: said...

I watched it on your site by following the recommended links after your clip. The debate starts here. After watching it, I forgot that it wasn't what you originally posted :)

Jc_Freak: said...

In case the link above didn't work