What if an Atheist Denies One of Your Premises? (William Lane Craig)

http://reasonablefaith.org - If you have a good deductive argument, and an atheist denies one of your premises, what do you do? We ask guest Dr. William Lane Craig this question in today's episode.

Watch this exciting episode and grab a copy of Dr. Craig's new book "On Guard" to learn more about this and other arguments on how to defend your faith with reason and precision.

Recommended Book: http://www.amazon.com/Guard-Defending-Faith-Reason-Precision/dp/1434764885

One Minute Apologist Interview with William Lane Craig (playlist):
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4BA3DD694EE87E80

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Philosophy
• Deductive
• Argument
• Premises
• Syllogism
• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Bobby
• Conway
• Reasonable
• Faith
• One
• Minute
• Apologist
• Atheism
• Religion
• Logic
• Science
• God
• Atheist
• Apologetics

[docpaul]

The reason you have to concentrate on these intellectual arguments is because that's all you have. They prove nothing, a smokescreen of semantics.

What you really need is evidence, which is something you simply don't have.

[drcraigvideos]

@docpaul Oh, deary me! Whoever heard that it's rational to make INTELLECTUAL arguments?! Mercy me! I guess we should only have un-intelligent arguments. Anyway... Craig has evidence. Just don't plug your ears when you hear them.

[MCP2012]

@drcraigvideos W/all due respect, u seem to miss (what I take to be, anyway) Docpaul's (albeit perhaps implicit) point: Virtually ALL of the premises (&/or sub-premises) of WLC's various arguments/positions can be perfectly reasonably/coherently DENIED, so that AT MOST/BEST, WLC position(s) can perhaps claim a sort of (meta-level?!) "mexican standoff", but NOT knock-down, drag-out triumph. And this also goes for supposed evidence as well: All can be non-theistically explained/denied.

[drcraigvideos]

@MCP2012 Look, as far as I can tell his comment suggests that he doesn't understand the nature and importance of argumentation let alone an intellectual one. Sorry, but that matters a lot.

[MCP2012]

@drcraigvideos Thanks much for ur reply, but the "Look, ..." could (tho perhaps needn't/shouldn't) be taken to seem to evince impatience or even condescension on ur part. U seem to give Docpaul a bit less intellectual credit than I do. But whatever. I concur than cogent metaphysical-&-epistemological reasoning is important, certainly. WLC, however, has yet to rebut (much less refute) the discussions of, say, e.g., Mike Martin, George Smith, Rich Gale, Jordan Sobel, & Nick Everitt.

[drcraigvideos]

@MCP2012 Actually, I put you on a lower standard than Docpaul's. Honestly, dude, you're a pretentious overkill when it comes to comments. It just makes you look desperate to look smart. Craig has addressed rebuttals from said authors and then some (like Dan Barker and Quentin Smith). Just because you're not convinced by Craig's response it doesn't mean he didn't address them.

[tjobv]

@docpaul

Yeah, you´re right!

What can we do with intellectual arguments huh...!? Especially if they are logical and rational!

lol, what can we do with logic and reason? We can´t have that shit in our Atheist Church, we just leave those ´´intellectual arguments´´ to the Theists, and we´ll just keep ducking them in the debates!

That´s what we do..!!

[Justwantahover]

@CarlosMarti123 The God Existence is futile, the universe began with a cause, but u have to convince the atheist that the cause was actually God. U just assume this (and it's a likely scenario), but there's no proof what so ever of what caused the big bang.

[Misbeliefz]

@tjobv You know that something can be logical and not true right? Logic just requires that the conclusion follows from the premise. The premise doesn't have to be true from something to be logical. Every person on the earth is 12 feet tall, Eric is 6 feet tall, Eric is not a person on the earth. That is logical.

[emnity33]

@docpaul Such an easy way out of an intellectual discussion...

[Prodigalfather1]

@MCP2012 "All can be non-theistically explained/denied" Perhaps u can explain in terms of mindless matter & energy how all the abstract immutable laws and complex maths that define how matter came to be in the finite past, or do u believe in an eternal past that necessitates an infinite regression of past finite physical events? Such is the non-intellectual atheist who never addresses his worldview.

"Infinite past time exists nowhere in reality; it remains solely that of an idea". Dave Hilbert

[DeeDemonwitch]

@docpaul I think you mean *pseudo* intellectual arguments

[CarlosMarti123]

@MCP2012 Yeah, and I can "reasonably" deny the existence of the external world. When atheists deny the premises of these arguments for absolutely no reason other than they disagree with what those premises entail, they are only exposing their own ignorance and irrationality.

[Jim1905]

@docpaul

Are you making an argument against arguments?? O.o

[THEEVANTHETOON]

@docpaul

You appear to be saying "Dr. Craig has no scientific evidence. He just uses reason and logic and stuff". Not only is this completely ridiculous, but it is false; Dr. Craig has plenty of scientific evidence. The problem is Atheists like to plug their ears when he presents it.