Christian Apologetics get Demolished (William Lane Craig vs Arif Ahmed debate)

Arif Ahmed of Cambridge University quickly dismantles the main arguments of Christian apologist William Lane Craig.

The full audio of this debate has been uploaded here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-NF-LlVFHM
Or you can download the MP3 here: http://www.christianheritageuk.org.uk/Media/AllMedia.aspx?speaker=Arif%20Ahme...

Craig's main arguments:

The kalam cosmological argument: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Kalam
The moral argument: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Moral_argument
Argument from the resurrection of Jesus: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Christological_argument#False_Pr...
Argument from personal religious experience: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Argument_from_personal_experience

Review/Refutation of Craig's book "Reasonable Faith": http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/chris_hallquist/faith.html

Additional refutations for the other main arguments for God: http://IronChariots.org

Category:

Education

Tags:

• theism
• atheism
• debate
• ahmed
• craig
• dawkins
• science
• reason
• catholic
• apologetics
• education
• atheist
• religion
• christianity
• christ
• jesus
• deconversion
• god
• allah
• mohammed
• islam
• bible
• quran
• creationism
• hell
• philosophy
• evolution
• darwin
• evidence
• hitchens
• christian
• muslim
• slavery
• vatican
• dennett
• heaven
• intelligent
• design
• morality
• truth
• rationality
• logic

[marssnw]

The truth is that you can argue until you are blue in the face. Nobody can change your view but God himself. A christians job is to spread the gospel. God does the rest. You have to be drawn by God before you can believe. I would think the movie Expelled had some of the best arguments around. There will always be biased thoughts on religion.

[TheTexanCanadian]

"In a way, that's self-defeating. "

It's not self-defeating. You just pick the explanation which is not obviously wrong/disproved by some evidence while supporting other evidence. If it's disproved by some evidence, it's not true.

"You're demanding 100% absolute knowledge."

No, only honesty with what we do and don't know.

"As limited human beings, we don't possess the type of knowledge"

Then people need to stop saying they know a god exists, and also stop pretending faith = knowledge.

[macklr21]

@fizzkick Lol, very true statement! BTW, I listened to this entire debate and Mr Lane owned this debate!

[fizzkick]

@macklr21 stop being so rational, the atheist automatons won't like it and deem you brainwashed while envoking images of Christopher Hitchens smiling down on them.

[TatsujinSan]

@marssnw "Nobody can change your view but god himself"

That would be a violation of free will. It is ridiculous to desire an outcome, have the power to reach that outcome and not reach it. If god desires that everyone believe and is capable of achieving this, it makes no logical sense that he should get upset when he deliberately chooses parameters for existence which allow for deviation from this desire.

Either this desire does not exist, god is incapable of achieving it, or god doesn't exist

[rwade55]

We must have different understandings of what demolition is. How does an objection like "Are we to believe that this being hung around for 15 billion years before impregnating virgins" (not a direct quote, but close) demolish anything? Folks, that's called being smart alecky. Does this professor teach his students to think and argue this way? Pity them if he does.

[macklr21]

This is only one side to the argument! How can the listeners subjectively judge who's been demolished by hearing only one side of the argument?

[cindyisa10]

@TheTexanCanadian (cont.) You say "it's impossible to generate an explanation which best explains all the data." In a way, that's self-defeating. You're demanding 100% absolute knowledge. As limited human beings, we don't possess the type of knowledge that will provide us with absolute proof of God's existence or nonexistence. Outside of the knowledge of our own existence and tautologies, we deal in the realm of probability. This is true for scientists, physicists, historians, etc...