Beyond The Big Bang: William Lane Craig Templeton Foundation Lecture Q&A (HQ) 4/4

Q and A period of William Lane Craig's 2004 Templeton Foundation Lecture at the University of Colorado. Features previous critics and debate opponents of Dr. Craig who were in attendance, including Michael Tooley, Victor Stenger, and Arnold Guminski.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Big
• Bang
• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Templeton
• Foundation
• Lecture
• Theism
• Atheism
• Cosmology
• Michael
• Tooley
• Victor
• Stenger
• Arnold
• Guminski.

[CommonSenseAtheism]

Thanks for uploading this.

[Christianjr4]

You're welcome! You got a YouTube channel now I see? You're the owner of the blog by the same name correct?

[vanmartinmpg]

Cjr4, I am an agnostic who believes that Christianity is false, but I must say I believe Richard Swinburne is an absolute intellectual powerhouse and I don't understand why youtube Christians aren't lauding this guy. He recognises the problems of many theistic arguments and takes an evidentialist approach that is much more coherent.  Perhaps you should try to bring attention to him too.

[Christianjr4]

I agree that Richard Swinburne is a powerhouse in philosophy of Religion (as is Craig), but there aren't as many video materials of Swinburne as there are of Craig. Moreover, my channel is largely devoted to debates, and as far as a I know, there's like next to nothing for formal debates with Richard Swinburne. In addition, my channel is apologetics in nature and Swinburne hasn't really done so much in this area compared to Craig. For all these reasons, I can't really put up materials of his.

[regelemihai]

"Hasn't done so much.." in what area specifically?

Can you please calrify?

[Christianjr4]

In the area of apologetics. Don't get me wrong, he's done much work to bring forth arguments in defense of God's existence and the Christian God in particular. What I'm talking about, however, is work specifically on apologetics itself (such as methodology, strategy, conference participation etc et) to which he hasn't been so active compared to Craig.

[CommonSenseAtheism]

Yup, yup.

I really like the Kalam argument. Atheists think they can refute it in 5 minutes, but here is Craig defending it against the attacks of Ph.D. physicists and doing quite well. :)

[Slossius1983]

Great physicists don't necessarily make great philosophers!

[csnowutube]

William Lame. Sorry, I couldn't resist. I have been listening to him for years. Smooth talker, but,.... 

[GodTheHypothesis]

@CommonSenseAtheism

Do you not think it's at all revealing that virtually no physicists actually take the argument seriously? I doubt it's ever convinced anyone that didn't already believe it.

[sleepcity]

WLC constantly, constantly, constantly conflates personal theology and rational, evidence-based, historical analysis. Endless sophistry and confusion. No wonder the Templeton folks like him. Bet he was happy to take their money too.

[DigitalDecadence]

Thanks for posting these CJnr :)  I really find WLC's argument so convincing personally, I hope it gets more attention as time goes on. :)

[ebeatworld]

This is a good man right here. I really admire Craig. I would probably feel the same way even if I was an atheist.

[Slossius1983]

@AgeOfReasonXXI I agree.

[AgeOfReasonXXI]

@CommonSenseAtheism Craig's doing it quite well? Kalam is hopeless. Ever asked yourself why cosmologists don't take it seriously? for ex. Hawking, Greenbaum, etc has critisized it as totally unconvincing.

btw it's not hard for Craig to "defend" Kalam here since he can easily interrupt the questioner for asking too many questions (as he did with Stenger). but it's another matter discussing it in print, where his Kalam HAS proved nothing but hot air.

and no I don't need 5 min. to refute it

[LogicEnthusiast]

he says singularities are not simple, that is just so wrong. he says they are not necceceraly a single point, when that is the definition of a singularity. i thought he was smart?

[raoskaos]

This "argument" is refuted in 3 words: fallacy of equivocation.

[huntmatuk]

All of a sudden he's an expert on general relativity now. He assumed so much