Hypatia Press, a publishing company that I helped create last year, just released its second book, called Unreasonable Faith: How William Lane Craig Overstates the Case for Christianity.
Unreasonable Faith, which was already featured on Hemant Mehta’s Friendly Atheist blog, is a philosophical and logical rebuke of William Lane Craig and his main apologetics arguments. The book tackles the arguments for which Craig is most well known, including the Kalam Cosmological Argument and the argument for “fine tuning.”
Here’s a brief synopsis from the book:
William Lane Craig is arguably the world’s leading Christian apologist, having engaged in dozens of public debates concerning the existence of God and the resurrection of Jesus, and with a large online following through his Reasonable Faith ministry. Although many philosophers, scientists, and historians have responded to various aspects of Craig’s work, a single integrated in-depth response to Craig’s apologetic as a whole has hitherto been lacking. This book aims to fill this gap by providing the first book-length critical response to all of Craig’s main apologetic arguments, building upon previous responses to develop several new and innovative lines of critique. Craig’s much-discussed kalam cosmological argument is considered from both a philosophical and scientific standpoint, integrating previously disparate criticisms developed by scholars such as L. Nathan Oaklander, Quentin Smith, Graham Oppy, and Sean Carroll. It is contended that Craig’s argument suffers from a hitherto unappreciated flaw, namely that the very same reasons Craig uses to establish the tensed theory of time (necessary for the kalam to succeed), actually serve to undermine his arguments that the universe began to exist. A similarly novel approach is taken with respect to the fine-tuning argument, where Craig’s key assumption that fine-tuning of the universe for life is a well-established scientific fact is shown to be based on an equivocation concerning what type of life is being referred to. The discussion of Craig’s moral argument is considerably more comprehensive than any previously published critiques, and focuses on Craig’s failure to specify any properties that render God a superior foundation for objective moral values than any of the many non-theistic alternatives developed by philosophers. With regard to Craig’s argument for resurrection of Jesus, a new theory is developed to account for the key historical facts without needing to appeal to divine intervention. Drawing upon work by thinkers such as Gerd Lüdemann and Richard Carrier, as well as extensive research from sociology, psychology, and comparative religion, it is shown how a combination of hallucinations, memory biases, and social reinforcement could have operated to lead Jesus’ followers to report seeing the risen Jesus. Written in a clear and accessible style, this book provides a robust and comprehensive response to Craig’s arguments for Christianity, and will be of interest to believers and non-believers alike.
As someone who edited the book, I highly recommend it. You can buy the book here, and if you’ve already read it, please tell me what you think!