Gave Lane Craig a listen , just one little older debate with John Stenger physicist in Hawaii, with a good crowd & had to like the Hawaiian shirts, for they were the most exciting thing of all.
youtube.com
Will assume that Craig's intro logics regarding God/Creator , the origins of the Universe arising out of nothing & science of fine tuning of the forces of the phyisical are typical of his platform ? Being well rehersed for yrs developing this self made revision of the older The Kalam Cosmological Argument. If Lane is going to be your champion of late , then might as well get familiar with the structure of what he most oft repeats & frames his debates in speech after speech.
en.wikipedia.org
You'll note that the first set of premises & subset of these logic arguments he admits later are "proven" most strongly by intuition & back by his experience ? This is exactly back to square one , imo , for Craig is saying that the Universe was Created, and every created thing has a cause therefore it his his beliefe that all of what is stated in the Bible is true . This not exactly brilliant debate nor has he proven anything at all , he's just stating his belief & admiting later that it is his "strong intuition" that is the proof . Assuming everyone should inuit as he does & believe in X,Y & Z in simplest of terms as he presents them .
Interesting that he does draw back to & founds a great deal of his logic from Islamic and Aristotelian sciences/philosophy for the base of his argument paying homage . Alot of underlying assuming & intuiting going on here , to call this "proof" ?
(Seriously)
Craig argues that the first premise is supported most strongly by intuition , but also by experience. He asserts that it is "intuitively obvious," based on the "metaphysical intuition that something cannot come into being from nothing," [20] and doubts that anyone could sincerely deny it. [19] Additionally, he claims it is affirmed by interaction with the physical world. If it were false, he states, it would be impossible to explain why things do not pop into existence uncaused. [20]
* In the debate above with physicist Stenger , after a nice flourishing intro dealing with the physics & absolute finess of tolerances needed to arise out of the Big Bang ....that so many things had to behave as they did within unimaginable tolerances to lead to a "Life Generating Universe''' was a decent enough . But just as he started out well he declines into sermonizing disguised as debate around 21:27 into this , with extremely tenuous that Jesus was God and "Four Proofs" that the Resurrection is verifiable .
** This powerful debater (? ) cites only historians & theologians of his choosing and really only offers the weakest proofs imaginable, that of belief & 2100yr old heresay . He states that we know where the Tomb was, that it was a sunday ...that it was empty for the women saw that it was empty...that Jesus appeared in the flesh afterwards to so many, therefore Jesus existed & was the Son of God in Heaven etc. At that point my listening to the talk was at an end and found Craig a well rehersed preacher with debate in his background sounding profound for using a blend of Islamic/Aristotelian thought .
( did listen to the physics professor & he was even less entertaining , lol) |
