Richard Carrier vs William Lane Craig (1 of 10)

Atheist historian Richard Carrier and Christian philosopher William Lane Craig debate the historical case for the resurrection of Jesus.

For Richard Carrier's review of this debate: http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2009/03/craig-debate-wrap.html

For William Lane Craig's review of the debate:
http://www.rfmedia.org/RF_audio_video/RF_podcast/Debate_with_Richard_Carrier_...

My review of the debate:
http://war-on-error.xanga.com/696331128/debate-review-william-lane-craig-vs-r...

For Landon Hedrick's review of the debate (he organized the debate itself):
http://landonhedrick.blogspot.com/2009/03/did-jesus-rise-from-dead-craig-and....

The best pro-Christian review of the debate that I've found so far can be found here:
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2009/03/review-of-carriercraig-debate-on.html

And it's nice to see that some Christians at least were familiar with what this debate could have been if Carrier had made better choices:

http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2009/03/20/william-lane-craig-vs-richard-c...

For the example where Craig seems to argue from the historical case for the resurrection of Jesus (rather than use it as a necessary presupposition to establish it), see here:

http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/craig-tooley1.html

For the critical examination of WLC's claims to scholarly consensus on his four facts:

http://evaluatingchristianity.wordpress.com/2009/03/05/why-the-minimal-facts-...

RC's article, "Craig's Empty Tomb & Habermas on Visions" explaining how apologists can't get "multiple" sources from just two:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/indef/4e.html

Ben

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Richard Carrier
• William Lane Craig
• debate
• Jesus
• resurrection

[Scarletpooky]

@BlueTusk1 "Craig has become one of the most respected debaters by atheists and theists alike"

Who have you been listening to?

Majority of atheist I've seen and heard comment about craig think his arguements are a joke, many make a plethora of negative comments about him and some think so little of him they don't even think he deserves the attention of a serious debate

I can't take the rubbish he spews seriously but I do take seriously that fact that people follow him and believe his tripe

[treadlightlynow]

This idea of "early independent" sources must first start with the fact that their were in the vicinty of 500 persons crucified by the Romans then . The name "Yshua" was as common as the name John is today and was the name of Moses' brother Joshua . One of those killed named Jesus was leading a pacifist movement in Galilea, another was a priest in the Temple & many more etc. Piously Craig offers up these "historical" evidences which are as flimsy as they come & the forgeries that followed.

[lachezar43]

Unfortunately Dr. Craig misleads the public with his eloquent speaking but I fail to accept his spurious arguments. Clearly it is much more probable that the early Christians were delusional people rather than believing they had revelation of the Creator of the Universe (for whom there is no evidence he/she even exist...)

[XenOfOrrinoco]

Whats with the retarded text bubbles... trying to watch a debate here...

[rapesauceCF]

@Scarletpooky Yes, but most atheists discredit anyone who doesn't agree with them based on the fact that you all are super geniuses and are the only human beings who have brains apparently. I have met very few atheists who will concede any sort of infallibility on their own part. Most of you, not all, pretend you are fighting a moral war against religion instead of just admitting that you secretly envy people with the capacity to believe in something superior to themselves.

[rapesauceCF]

@mcmanustony I find it highly unlikely that you are the world class professor/genius you claim to be because if you were you probably wouldn't troll youtube looking for arguments.

[ReverendWyrm]

I have to disagree with WLC here. He says that the best explanation of Yeshua's resurrection is that god raised Yeshua from the dead. I contend however that there's a much simpler explanation as unintentionally proposed by Sirs Lee, Kirby, and Ditko in the early 60's. Their proposal was much more sound and required no metaphysical sky genie master manipulator. Boiling down their decades long study to it's essence it would go something akin to this: Jesus was the first X-Man!