William Lane Craig Gives Me A Headache. His Adherents Are Even Worse.

Most of the junior apologists [or punters as I like to call them,] I’ve talked to on social media who are evolution deniers hew to Doctor Craig’s every breath and thought.

“Doctor, doctor give me the news
I’ve got a bad case of lovin’ you
No pill’s gonna cure my ill
I’ve got a bad case of lovin’ you…

Very few of them bother to delve into what he really thinks and believes beyond the lucrative speaking circuit, because if they did, they’d discover some embarrassing contradictions. And if they thought about the logical consequences of his views, they’d be less likely to promote them publicly.

From his website “Reasonable Faith”

Transcript from podcast: Creation Out of Nothing

Kevin Harris: Dr. Craig, Christianity teaches creation ex nihilo. What does that mean?

Dr. Craig: Creation out of nothing. It means that God didn’t use any material stuff in creating the world but that he created the stuff itself.

Kevin Harris: Much like the scientist who went before God and said, “God, we can do anything that you can.” And God said, “Show me.” “Well, we can make a life.” God said, “Show me.” “Well, first we get a bunch of dirt.” And God said, “Wait a minute. Get your own dirt!” It really is that kind of a thing. So there was no material for God to use to create. He created the material itself?

Dr. Craig: Yes, that is exactly right. That is the doctrine.

Got that? God created something from nothing. Incidentally, over 50% of white Evangelical religionists in the US are taught this doctrine in their churches and claim it to be the truth.

According to PEW Research:

On the other hand….Craig holds to the principle ex nihilo nihil fit, “out of nothing, nothing comes,” saying that this “is as certain as anything in philosophy and that no rational person sincerely doubts it.” Furthermore, he has also claimed that “it is impossible that nothing exists.” Citing Leibniz’s view of God as a “logically necessary being,” Craig goes on to say that “there is no possible world in which nothing exists.”

Hmmm. I’m beginning to see an un-explainable paradox here. OR both those positions can’t be true. Also, any claim that god exists immaterially free of the laws of matter, time, and space are logically inconsistent because god would then be indistinguishable from nothing which he claims can’t exist.

I guess that’s why they say “god works in mysterious ways.” Craig is equally weak in explaining the contradictory ideas that “everything that exists has a cause” and “nothing caused god to exist.” Instead we get Gish gabble.

Now, if christians would like, we can have a discussion about cause in relation to the beginning of the universe once we’ve moved god from the numinous into a definable reality that has properties that can be described and tested.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in atheism, Post weakly and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to William Lane Craig Gives Me A Headache. His Adherents Are Even Worse.

  1. Steve Ruis says:

    The problem is that Dr. Craig is an example of a person who wastes what intellectual gifts he has in trying to explain away the unexplainable. He claims that scientific theories are too complicated, it is easier for him to believe that his god did it by magic. How he obtained a PH.D. based upon a specious philosophical argument (the Kalam) is beyond me.

    Liked by 3 people

    • persedeplume says:

      It’d be one thing if he simply held a mistaken or misinformed opinion of something, I could forgive that~ but the guy’s a weasel.
      1) Craig’s dubious use of intellectual authorities, a la Ehrman and various scientists
      2) Deliberate misrepresentations of Harris quotes about moral authority
      3) Misrepresentations of Stephen Law, in 2011 debate
      etc.
      One shouldn’t have to lie to defend “the truth”.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Nan says:

        One shouldn’t have to lie to defend “the truth”. Oh, but doncha’ know? It’s not a lie. It’s just a way of convincing his followers that he knows more than anyone else about “The Faith” by discrediting others, along with manipulating the facts to appeal to his audience. He’s not unlike any other Christian apologist … he just does it with more flair.

        Liked by 2 people

  2. Arkenaten says:

    He is my absolute favorite most hateable person. I can no longer listen or watch him on Youtube. I almost feel like gagging the moment he starts his whiny diatribe.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. john zande says:

    1. It is possible that a maximally wicked being exists.
    2. If it is possible that a maximally wicked being exists, then a maximally wicked being exists in some possible world.
    3. If a maximally wicked being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
    4. If a maximally wicked being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
    5. Therefore, a maximally wicked being exists in the actual world.
    6. Therefore, a maximally wicked being exists.
    7. Therefore, the Omnimalevolent Creator exists.

    For some reason, Craig doesn’t like this version (word-for-word, mind you) of his ontological argument.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s