William Lane Craig's take on the Cameron/Comfort/Squad Debate

cslewisster
Theist
cslewisster's picture
Posts: 64
Joined: 2006-11-06
User is offlineOffline
William Lane Craig's take on the Cameron/Comfort/Squad Debate

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/

William Lane Craig's take on the Cameron/Comfort/Squad Debate is located at the top of the bar scrolling across. You can download it and listen to it.

ttdm.blogspot.com


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
cslewisster

cslewisster wrote:

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/

William Lane Craig's take on the Cameron/Comfort/Squad Debate is located at the top of the bar scrolling across. You can download it and listen to it.

Ironically I'd say that Craig ranks along with Comfort on the seriousness scale. 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


cslewisster
Theist
cslewisster's picture
Posts: 64
Joined: 2006-11-06
User is offlineOffline
todangst

todangst wrote:
cslewisster wrote:

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/

William Lane Craig's take on the Cameron/Comfort/Squad Debate is located at the top of the bar scrolling across. You can download it and listen to it.

Ironically I'd say that Craig ranks along with Comfort on the seriousness scale.


Come off it Craig actually has a degree. I don't agree with everything that the man does but he is a respectable Philosopher. He's even cited in the SEP's article on Philosophy of Religion (though Dempski is also). I think that many of the Theists that you guys discount at one time or another did have something good to say and honestly it's always bugged me that you are so quick to write them off. Perhaps if they had received their Ph.D's from Patriot University or if they were outside of their realm of expertise I'd understand why you could write them off, but to do it just because they say something that you disagree with is nothing less than bigotry.

ttdm.blogspot.com


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
I agree more with

I agree more with cslewisster here. I rarely took Craig seriously, especially after his "debate" with Tabash, but comparing him to a man like Ray Comfort is just unfair. At very least Craig has credentials and the ability to speak plain English with the vocabulary of a fully grown adult. Which is more than I can say for Ray Comfort.

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
cslewisster

cslewisster wrote:
todangst wrote:
cslewisster wrote:

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/

William Lane Craig's take on the Cameron/Comfort/Squad Debate is located at the top of the bar scrolling across. You can download it and listen to it.

Ironically I'd say that Craig ranks along with Comfort on the seriousness scale.


Come off it Craig actually has a degree.

So?

As James Randi says, "having a degree doesn't make you smart, it only means you should be..."

 One of Craig's 'debate points' is his personal testimony of his conversation with Christ than began back in 68... that's Comfort level apologetics.

Quote:
 

 I don't agree with everything that the man does but he is a respectable Philosopher. He's even cited in the SEP's article on Philosophy of Religion (though Dempski is also).

So?

Quote:
 

I think that many of the Theists that you guys discount at one time or another did have something good to say and honestly it's always bugged me that you are so quick to write them off.

Please stop misrepresenting a person you know nothing about. You haven't a clue as to how much I know about Craig.

Quote:
 

Perhaps if they had received their Ph.D's from Patriot University or if they were outside of their realm of expertise I'd understand why you could write them off

I write him off because I've read him, and seen his arguments. He's stunningly bad. 

Seriously.

I mean, I spent my money on the books. I really had hopes for more. 

I'd say that there are theists on IIDB that argue as well or better than he does.  You're impressed with him because he has a name and a degree. I'm not impressed with him because I've read his arguments.

See a difference? 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
deludedgod wrote: I agree

deludedgod wrote:
I agree more with cslewisster here. I rarely took Craig seriously, especially after his "debate" with Tabash, but comparing him to a man like Ray Comfort is just unfair. At very least Craig has credentials and the ability to speak plain English with the vocabulary of a fully grown adult. Which is more than I can say for Ray Comfort.

The difference between Craig and Comfort is that Craig has a doctorate.  If that impresses you, well then, I do hope everyone who glorifies the holy PhD will continue to stand in awe of the title when I earn my doctorate.... 

You mentioned the Tabash debate. That's representative of Craig. You yourself can see why Craig cannot be taken seriously.  I fail to see why placing "PhD" behind his name somehow makes up for his bad arguments.  What matters is the persons' arguments, and Craig has more than his share of BAD ones.

 Oh, and if you want to hear a positive word for a Phd Theologian, I found Dallas Willard's style of argumentation in one debate I've read to be .... almost 'ok'. Although in the end he was given to the same sort of wildly unsupported assertions that plague his field.

 C. S. Lewisser should know who that is...

 Oh, and Peter Kreeft has moments of rationality. Although his 20 arguments for the existence of god are ridiculous, he at least presents them in a fair minded fashion, and he seems to be open to actual, legitimate questioning of his arguments.  

 

 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


cslewisster
Theist
cslewisster's picture
Posts: 64
Joined: 2006-11-06
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote:

todangst wrote:

So?

As James Randi says, "having a degree doesn't make you smart, it only means you should be..."

But it does give you more clout.

Quote:

One of Craig's 'debate points' is his personal testimony of his conversation with Christ than began back in 68... that's Comfort level apologetics.

I'm not going to defend all of his debate points (but I don't believe a testimony is the same as the WOTM), but I'd still say that he has actually contributed to his field in an academic way which is more than you could say for Comfort.

Quote:

So?

A) It's more recognition than Comfort has in the area of Philosophy of Religion.

B) It's a scolarly article, the indication is that he has participated in his field of study and has done so in a way that makes him a bit of an expert in certain studies.

Quote:

Please stop misrepresenting a person you know nothing about. You haven't a clue as to how much I know about Craig.

I know enough about him to know that he is not anything like Ray Comfort.

Quote:

You're impressed with him because he has a name and a degree. I'm not impressed with him because I've read his arguments.

I never said I was impressed with him, I simply said that he is not anything like Ray Comfort and I would not discount everything the man has to say.

ttdm.blogspot.com


cslewisster
Theist
cslewisster's picture
Posts: 64
Joined: 2006-11-06
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote:  I do

todangst wrote:

 I do hope everyone who glorifies the holy PhD will continue to stand in awe of the title when I earn my doctorate...

Well if you're talking about Psychology I'm sure that they will be in awe Smiling

ttdm.blogspot.com


cslewisster
Theist
cslewisster's picture
Posts: 64
Joined: 2006-11-06
User is offlineOffline
Also I'd like to say my main

Also I'd like to say my main point here is that Ray Comfort has knowledge comparible to a teenager, Craig does not. It's unfair to group them together, Craig (if you'd like to admite it or not) has done academic research and he has contributed to the field of Philosophy of Religion.

ttdm.blogspot.com


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
cslewisster

cslewisster wrote:
todangst wrote:

So?

As James Randi says, "having a degree doesn't make you smart, it only means you should be..."

But it does give you more clout.

That's unfortunate. One's abilities ought to be what gives them clout.

Quote:

Please stop misrepresenting a person you know nothing about. You haven't a clue as to how much I know about Craig.

Quote:

I know enough about him to know that he is not anything like Ray Comfort.

Their arguments aren't all that different.

I don't automatically discount everything Craig says. I don't know why you have to misrepresent what I say. What I am telling you is that Craig impresses me about as much as Comfort does... The ability to write scholarly papers doesn't impress me as long as what is in the paper is not really all that different than banana theology...

 

 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


cslewisster
Theist
cslewisster's picture
Posts: 64
Joined: 2006-11-06
User is offlineOffline
Well I'm sorry Todangst I

Well I'm sorry Todangst I didn't mean to misrepresent you. I had thought you were discounting him in general and I was just reacting to what I felt was an unfair statement. To me, the most important thing that separates Craig from Comfort is that Craig can get himself published in Blackwell (a few times at that), the drivel that Comfort spits out isn't even worth using as toilet paper.

ttdm.blogspot.com


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
cslewisster wrote: Well I'm

cslewisster wrote:
Well I'm sorry Todangst I didn't mean to misrepresent you.

I do not think it was intentional. Please don't think there is any enmity between us, we are voicing a difference of opinion, and it is natural that the first step in such a situation involves working out just where the difference lies.

Quote:
 

 I had thought you were discounting him in general and I was just reacting to what I felt was an unfair statement. To me, the most important thing that separates Craig from Comfort is that Craig can get himself published in Blackwell (a few times at that), the drivel that Comfort spits out isn't even worth using as toilet paper.

Comfort is an embarrassment to more serious thinkers, whereas Craig is not. I will certainly concede to that.

 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
I wouldn't put the guy very

I wouldn't put the guy very far above Comfort based on that interview clip. Here's some basic errors:

1. Big Bang theory describes what happened picoseconds AFTER the raw energy that became the universe came into being. It is not an account of the origin of the matter and energy in the universe, as Craig claims. This huge error destroys his entire attempt to refute Brian's static universe theory.

2 . He supported the 1st Law of Thermodynamics (matter/energy cannot be created/destroyed) then turned right around and contradicted himself by also supporting the Christian doctrine of causation, in which Christians claim that things which "come into being" must have a creator. Take another look at the 1st Law, Craig. Nothing in this universe has "come into being" since the Beginning. It has only changed state.

3. He said that noting that Christian morality comes from previous moral codes misses the point of the origin of morality. I guess he's OK with the idea that the Bible is just warmed-over stuff from previous cultures and that the Sumerians knew as much about God's moral laws as the writers of the Gospel.

4. His entire morality argument amounted to an arguement from ignorance. "I don't understand why people all have similar moral instincts, therefore God."

 

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


D-cubed
Rational VIP!
D-cubed's picture
Posts: 715
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Craig does have a degree but

Craig does have a degree but he uses the same debunked argument for the existence of god over and over again.  The only other difference between him and Ray is that Craig manages to sound more intelligent when he debates (hint, he uses bigger words and less dorky pictures).


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Precisely, gentlemen.

Precisely, gentlemen.