Saturday, December 11, 2010

More William Lane Craig Awesomeness on the Incarnation


Most of these great videos are posted by the person who goes by the tag drcraigvideos. Not enough can be said about the importance of this person's endeavor to post this information in a way that is so easily accessible. They have a blog as well.

19 comments:

The Seeking Disciple said...

Excellent. Praise God for Dr. Craig and his stand for truth!

Ryan Anderson said...

Mancrushes are adorable...

Ryan Anderson said...

As to WLC's sound byte, way to make it unfalsifiable... but that's what he does...

Marcus McElhaney said...

"unfalsifiable" does not equal untrue

Marcus McElhaney said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ryan Anderson said...

No, but an almost infinite number of things that do not equate to not true do not equate to true.

Marcus McElhaney said...

And in the case of the incarnation there is not "an infinite number of things" that equate to not true. "Unfalsifiable" does not mean not true. IT means that you don't know how to test if its true or not through measurement and observation. Big difference.

bossmanham said...

Ryan, I wonder if you realize how utterly stupid that statement was. This is Christian doctrine, not a scientific experiment. Christian doctrine is based off of God's self-revelation. You take that and extrapolate theological models. You don't perform experiments based on empirical data. Empiricism is a stupid thing to bring up when speaking of Christian doctrine. The thing that falsifies theological models is the Bible.

If you're serious, then you're also seriously dense.

Ryan Anderson said...

Doctrine would need to be abandoned if empirically shown to be false, regardless of how it relates to the bible. So it’s handy to make sure your doctrine is empirically unfalsifiable.

bossmanham said...

I'll just give you an outlet here to display your laughable (purposeful?) ignorance

Ryan Anderson said...

Meaning you have no meaningful response?

Marcus McElhaney said...

I think Brennon means that you have to give him something meaningful to respond to.

Ryan Anderson said...

Seemed "meaningful" enough to garner to responses from you.

Marcus McElhaney said...

Only a response of laughter.

bossmanham said...

Marcus, right on.

exreformed said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
cl said...

No, but an almost infinite number of things that do not equate to not true do not equate to true.

That's impossible. Truth is Boolean; there is no such thing as "kinda true." Neither does it make sense to say, "almost infinite." Nothing else needs to be said, and names certainly don't have to be called. Although, bossmanham, I can understand why you got frustrated.

I agree that you need to give our host something meaningful to respond to.

bossmanham said...

I called Ryan's idea stupid. I did say he was being dense, but that isn't something he has to be. He's choosing to be as such. I think ideas are fair game for insulting.

Plus, this isn't the first time Ryan has come along and trolled a post of mine.

Ryan Anderson said...

cl; my comment was in response to Marcus' claim that something is not necessarily "untrue" if it's "unfalsifiable". Perhaps he and I were being a little loose with definitions. Hope that helps.