Is God a Logical Necessity? Dr. William Lane Craig

Is God a Logical Necessity? Dr. William Lane Craig

Answered by
Dr. William Lane Craig
Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology
http://www.reasonablefaith.org

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• qa
• huntleyweb
• 100
• 100huntley
• Street
• Relationship
• Argument
• Belief
• in
• God
• Believe
• objective
• subjective
• Theist
• meaning
• life
• god
• between
• Faith
• Reason
• Dr.
• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Contingency
• Kalam
• Cosmological
• Design
• Moral
• Ontological
• necessary
• being
• atheism
• intelligent
• argument
• lain
• philosophy
• logical
• necessity
• have
• must
• exist
• existence
• trust
• existance

[mypolicy9]

A Craige-hater who feels the need to make a snide remark about Craig's expertise as a PhD in philosophy based on a two-minute video is trying to make up for his own failure to apply himself to the real philosophical topics at hand.

It's an Ad Hominem Absusive Fallacy.

[JesusSatanAllah]

The contingency argument fails to make god logically necessary because one could simply substitute the word "cosmos" for the word "god" and the statement works just as well.

[983215ljhlkadbspig6y]

So many dislikes... I really wish Atheism wasn't popularized by guys like Dawkins, a man of incoherent logic and philosophy, who encourages people to ridicule anyone who believes in God. Sure, there are some Theists who use only faith to believe in God, but Craig uses a lot of respectable, sound reasoning to arrive at his convictions. He should be taken seriously. Not disliked at all. You can't deny the fact that a transcendental figure is needed to secure objective meaning and morality in life.

[Naf43zitro]

The ontological argument fails because you can't define something into existence. If you can, an existent unicorn exists, along with an existent unicorn extinction.

[MrItchyElbow]

@LucCole88 The implication of your statement seems to be that if I believe in a being greater than myself, I must also believe that I am greater than some other being. I would say that is true based on this assumption. However, I would not go so far as to say that there is any more value in assuming greatness within similar beings. There may be more noteworthy individuals, but is Einstein greater than, for illustration sake, Forest Gump? I don't think so, all mankind is created equal.

[LegionarioCruel]

Craig does defend the ontological argument, which is stupid because it implies that anything we can think of MUST exist.

[servant714]

A secular humanist arguing against the existence of God isn't going to be convinced by any logical argument. There basic assumption in regards to our existence is the premise that 0+0=1

String theory= seven more dimensions we don't interact with.

Dark matter/energy= 95% of the universe we don't interact with.

How can we not accept that we know very very little about reality.

[LucCole88]

My problem with this argument is the notion of a, "greatest conceivable being." This seems to be a slippery slope into believing that certain beings are somehow greater than others; e.g. humans >antelopes, antelopes > squids, squids > volcanoes, etc. What is the criteria by which we measure the, "greatness," of any being?

The truth is, people who believe in a gradation of, "greatness," in beings can only compare it to their own subjective values as human beings.

[07Aristotle]

@AletheianAeon Philosophy gave birth to logic.

[AletheianAeon]

@07Aristotle In essence, what I meant was that at his best William Lane Craig is only a philosopher and that our understanding of the world has gone far beyond anything he can merely conjecture or poorly rationalize. Philosophy has its place, certainly, but it's nothing compared to the trails other more difficult, more applicable, more relevant disciplines are blazing today.

[AletheianAeon]

@07Aristotle I wasn't specifically using the word "rhetoric" in the same sense a student of philosophy would use it; much like the difference between the colloquial use of "theory" versus the scientific definition. Philosophy did predate all academic subjects; but arguably religion predated philosophy. It doesn't, to me, lend much credibility beyond historical consideration. My comment was meant pejoratively; that our understanding of the world has gone beyond just philosophy.