William Lane Craig & The Five Ways

I wanted to make a video discussing all of Craig's claims about cosmogony (i.e. the origin of the universe), but his logic is full of so twists and contradictions (and dubious quotes) that I've had a lot of difficulty organizing everything. Maybe in the near future I'll make a few more videos on this subject.

Link to ask Dr. Craig a question (hopefully this link will work!):
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/Survey?ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_USER_RE...

---SOURCES---

My "Sorry Apologetics" video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuYoU_IFQz8

Craig quotes Kenny (1993):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zigL_UmgAl4

Craig quotes Kenny (2009):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvj0TVt9Ukc

The Five Ways (amazon link):
http://www.amazon.com/Five-Ways-St-Thomas-Aquinas/dp/0415489067
Note: definitely not worth the price it's being sold for

Craig's article on contemporary cosmology and Kalam:
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6115

---OTHER LINKS---

Big thanks to Dhorpatan for pointing me to the 'contemporary cosmology' article by Craig. Here is Dhorpatan's channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Dhorpatan

A couple other videos I did concerning Craig and Kalam:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JIEOQ6rbkM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_676IeyJNQ

My Twitter thing:
http://twitter.com/antybu86

My BlogTV thing:
http://www.blogtv.com/people/antybu86

Category:

Education

Tags:

• William Lane Craig
• wl craig
• kalam cosmological argument
• anthony kenny
• the five ways
• universe from nothing
• something from nothing
• debate
• dishonest
• apologetics
• christian
• kalam
• cosmology
• cosmogony
• physics
• antybu86

[samuellis]

Wait wait wait, you say that we shouldn't take his word for it (Anthony Kenny) but then you say it doesn't represent opinion due to Hawking, Vilenkin, Greene contribution which would make it a fact, how can we still not take his claim? The argument for what Craig says and Kenny says is basically the same thing, matter came from nothing and by nothing that is the key.

[antybu86]

@samuellis You lost me at the end of the first sentence. You must be missing a word or two in there because I've read it about a dozen times and can't make any sense of it.

None of those people, save Craig and Kenny, claim that the universe came from "nothing" in the way that is necessary for Kalam.

[699backstab]

I thought a Human dirt napped this subhuman degenerate. Why is it still alive. Put craig down before it hurts a Human

[ginganz13]

Nice to see my Craig Cooke video put to good use :-)

[ahhninjadragon]

Does WLC still think Richard Nixon is Presidents of the United States?maybe he could read a few current books on cosmology and he would find out that the universe did not come out of nothing "membranes colliding" is the current idea how would he work that into Kalam?may be he would look at a 1973 book for that.

[PlutoPowered]

Don't hold your breath for a response.

[TheTrueConservative]

This video is stupid. No matter who said it, or when it was said, it does not matter one bit. Truth is truth no matter who believes it, and a lie is a lie if everyone believes it.

[Mathenaut]

That WLC is rather dishonest in his approach isn't exactly news.

Though, it is good that you've dug this out and exposed it. I doubt you will get a response.

[imermiguel]

@pillsareyummy now getting back to KCA; unfortunately the 2nd premise that the universe began to exist is scientifically based and you can ask Hawking, Alan Guth, Alexander Vilenkin and philosophically base on the absurdness of infinite regression . Any pre-bang era is in the realm of metaphysics it is literally beyond physics. to deny such a fact is going against evidence and reason as it is far more true than its negation.

[imermiguel]

@pillsareyummy i haven't made any arguments yet you're trying to treat this as a debate.

"science and philosophy are the same thing, which you appeared to be alluding to (at least that's how I took it)"

really? Can you show me empirical data for such conclusion? The irony and hypocrisy is that this is text book definition of a straw man. I'm well aware that you're not a philosopher since you are unaware when you are speaking metaphysics.

[pillsareyummy]

@imermiguel Again, the 'pre Big Bang universe may have existed as a Brane (M-theory), or may have been created by some other means, such as the creation of a Black hole in another universe (as proposed by lee Smolin), or by other mechanisms found in modern cosmology. Non require God. My point was, and still is, we have no knowledge about the state of the pre-Big Bang universe outside of mathematical models, thus they can't be used when discussing God in any meaningful way. OK, I'm done.