When is a Debate “Win” Significant?

A reader asked me if I had watched the debate between William Lane Craig and Alex Rosenberg. Here is my reply. No, I haven't seen it. I've read some of Rosenberg's book, The Atheist’s Guide to Reality, however.  My prediction is that WLC not only “won” the debate, but that Rosenberg did awful. Why would I make such a prediction? Three reasons. First, Rosenberg is not a specialist in the philosophy of religion. Here is how he summarizes his areas of focus: My interests focus on probl … [Read more...]

Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 1: The Anti-Resurrection Prior Probability Argument

As I reported earlier, Greg Cavin has graciously allowed us to publish the slides for his debate with Michael Licona on the Resurrection of Jesus. While only Cavin debated Licona, both Cavin and Carlos Colombetti  (C&C) co-authored the slides used in the debate, so I’ve mentioned both C&C in the title. What I want to do in this post is to summarize (and offer my own interpretation of) Cavin’s first main contention in his debate with Michael Licona on the Resurrection of Jesus: C … [Read more...]

Video of Licona-Cavin Debate on the Resurrection of Jesus

Here is the video of Licona-Cavin debate on the resurrection of Jesus. (HT: Wes)I hope to blog about this debate in detail in the future. … [Read more...]

MUST READ: Greg Cavin’s Case Against the Resurrection of Jesus

Greg Cavin has graciously allowed me to publish a PDF version of his slides from his debate with Michael Licona on the resurrection of Jesus. For anyone interested in arguments for or against the resurrection of Jesus, these slides are an absolute must read. In my opinion, they constitute a major contribution to the ongoing debate about the Resurrection and are the best case against the Resurrection yet presented. Cavin decisively refutes arguments for the resurrection made by all of its … [Read more...]

Marcus McElhaney on Austin Dacey’s Debate with WLC

Marcus McElhaney responds to a recent blog post at Debunking Christianity which links to a video of Austin Dacey’s debate with William Lane Craig on God’s existence. Since I believe Dacey’s debate with Craig is one of the better debate performances by an atheist, this caught my eye. Here I want to comment on McElhaney’s critique. Topic: The Argument from Divine Hiddenness Here is McElhaney: This thought amazes me! God is not hidden too well if I and so many others have found him.  Just bec … [Read more...]

Video Commentary on my debate with William Lane Craig

Someone was kind enough to take the trouble to make this video going through some of the exchanges between myself and Bill Craig in our debate.There is an error. The creator of the video says that the subject of the debate was the existence of the Christian God. In fact, the question before us was simply "Does God exist?"However, the points made in the video remain valid, as Craig, in the debate itself, actually defines God as being necessarily good. Hence, if I can show there is no good God, … [Read more...]

LINKS: Dishonesty and Possible Craig-Lowder Debate

I just posted the following on my personal blog."How to Argue that Someone Lied""Craig-Lowder Debate?" … [Read more...]

Victor Reppert on Atheist Responses to Moral Arguments

Commenting on how atheists have responded to William Lane Craig's moral argument, Victor Reppert writes this.Yet, when I hear atheists talking about moral arguments, they always assume that the advocate of the moral argument is saying that we have to believe in God to lead moral lives, (and indignantly argue that we don't have to believe in God to lead moral lives) in spite of the fact that Christian advocates of moral arguments, at least the ones I am familiar with NEVER say … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X