From Wintery Knight, who summarizes the conclusions in the debate between ever-debating Bill Craig and ever-willing-to-debate James Crossley. I have found Crossley reasonable in his debates with traditionalists even when I disagree. What do you think of debates like these? What good do they do? Is this kind of apologetics the best way to “defend” the faith? If not, what is? William Lane Craig’s conclusion Supernaturalism: None of the four facts are supernatural, they are natural, and ascertained by historians... Read more