Skip to main content

Posts by William Lane Craig



  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dear Dr. Craig, I have been arguing with a friend that is an atheist. I am also an atheist or perhaps more correctly, an agnostic about Leibniz’s cosmological argument ... If after sufficient research, Leibniz’s argument proves more plausibly true than false, than on the basis of it and the abductive argument for the historicity of Christ's resurrection, I'm prepared to take Pascal's Wager.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    ... I have read and listened to you on your reformed epistemologist view; the Christian faith being based on Holy Spirit witnessed properly basic beliefs; distinguishing between knowing and showing your Faith to be true and all. In your statements, and especially with reference to the recent 'Problem with Christian Apologetics' podcast, you state that when a believer encounters a more skilled and sophisticated rebuttal of his Faith, because he knows his Faith to be true primarily by the Witness of the God, he only has to go and research on good defeaters to the rebuttals. The unanswered rebuttals in no way should trump the witness of the Spirit to us on the Truth of Christianity. My question is, wouldn't that be argued to be having the end game in mind and only finding the reasons to shore up a presupposed conclusion? Wouldn't the incentive to beef up your case lead to interpreting the data to fit the conclusion already at hand? I believe you hold that we should move towards where the evidences lead us, how open are we to the evidences if we have a conclusion that has got to and can only be upheld? I would love to have a response from you.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    "I'm an agnostic undergraduate philosophy student, and I find the idea of divine necessity particularly interesting for whatever reason. I wonder if you might respond to the following question / argument ..."

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    "Can you be an anti-realist about some things and a realist about others? For example, do you no longer give the realist resolution to the Euthyphro Dilemma, no longer ground the Good in God's nature? Couldn't abstract objects be grounded in the Logos (divine, rather than Platonic, essentialism)?"

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    In this week's Q & A, Dr. William Lane Craig tackles some questions regarding the Leibnizian cosmological argument.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Hi Dr Craig I was wondering today after binge listening your podcast if there are any women theologians or philosophers you read/quote in your arguments/works. I've listened to a great deal of your podcast and read a small handful of your work but I don't remember ever seeing you've favourably quoted or referenced a women as a peer ...

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    This week's Q & A topic with Dr. William Lane Craig addresses the beginning of the universe and includes reflections on Dr. William Lane Craig's recent debate with Sean Carroll.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Hello Dr. Craig, I have recently become interested in your work on abstract objects. I have a quick question regarding the Fregean argument for mathematical platonism. The argument concludes that mathematical objects exist because they are referred to by singular terms. For example, "3 is prime" is a true, simple sentence in which "3" is a singular term referring to an abstract object. So, does the claim that abstract objects exist mean anything other than that they can be referred to by singular terms? I don't see how it could, since they have absolutely no impact on the world. But if that's the case, their "existence" seems to be more about the function of a word than anything to do with ontology. Thanks, Ander

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    "As far as I understand God created all things that exist. He is the ultimate entity. Thus, can he not create a free being that follows him no matter what? Sure, to my human understanding that is impossible. But with God all things are possible. Could he not have created a world where freedom of choice and ultimate happiness co-exist? ..."

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dear Dr. Craig, I am an atheist and have found you to be very sincere and reasonable in your defense of the Christian religion. You have addressed many of Dr. Bart Ehrman's positions on textual criticism of the bible, yet I haven't found you address the main claim of his book dealing with forgeries. How do we know that the gospels were written by the authors listed in our current day bibles? The titles were later additions, and upon reading through the other books of the new testament a common theme is that there are ample false teachers spreading false doctrine. In short, is there good evidence supporting the claims to the gospels authorship, and if so, what is it?

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dear Dr. Craig, You have often said that the problem of evil is the best argument for atheism, but I actually disagree. I think that the incoherence argument(s) is the best. What responses have you given to these arguments ... To me, this seems to be a serious problem for theism and I'm even thinking of giving up belief in God because of it so I would appreciate your help. If nothing else, please let me know of some books that answer these arguments. Thank you very much.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dr. William Lane Craig addresses questions regarding God's love for us and our significance as human beingings in a vast and uncomprehendable cosmos.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    In this week's Q & A, Dr. William Lane Craig finishes answering questions related to his debate with Sean Carroll, sharing his stance on fine-tuning.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    In this week's Q & A blog post, Dr. William Lane Craig continues to respond to last week's questions regarding his debate with Sean Carroll, touching on the Boltzmann Brain problem and fine-tuning.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    I wanted to ask you about the latest debate with Sean Carroll. There were some strong points made in that debate that as a layman in cosmology make me want to seek further and further what are the theoretical physicists really saying on their theories. The media is not always clear on separating the cosmologist opinion/belief vs what their theory actually says without bias ...

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    "Those who attempt to discount the majority views of New Testament (NT) scholars on certain issues on the basis of Christian bias only show how naïve they are about historical Jesus studies. While it is doubtless true that Christians will be disproportionately represented in NT scholarship in contrast to various secular disciplines, it is far too simplistic to dismiss the conclusions of NT scholarship as heavily biased and thus easily discounted ..."

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dr. Craig, In your debates on the Resurrection, you often present four facts that the majority of New Testament scholars support, namely the honorable burial, the discovery of the empty tomb by women, the post-Resurrection appearances, and the disciples' genuine belief in the Resurrection. While the majority of scholars support these facts, my question has to do with the minority who disagree. For example, John Dominic Crossan has claimed Jesus was buried in a shallow grave, where his body was eaten by wild dogs. My question is this: from what sources do scholars who disagree with the four facts stated above draw their conclusions? The way I understand it, there are very few extra-Biblical sources that discuss the Resurrection, and none that contradict the four facts stated above. And the Canonical Gospels make it very clear that the four facts are indeed what happened. So on what grounds do these dissenting scholars dispute the four facts stated above?

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dr. Craig, I appreciate the work you do a great deal and it has been personally beneficial to my faith and my ministry. I do have a question, however, concerning the 1st century Jewish expectations of resurrection. You write, and I agree that the evidence points to a Jewish belief in a general resurrection at the end of the age (John 11:24), as opposed to that of a dying and rising Messiah during their own lifetime. This would seem to work as evidence against certain theories that would deny the resurrection, such as it being a hoax, or the resurrection appearances being hallucinations, etc. ...

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dear Dr. Craig I am a Christian student from Norway. During a debate about if god exists or not (on a Facebook group called political youth), I defended his existence to the best of my ability, using the Kalam cosmological argument. I had seen on your YouTube videos, and on your articles here on RF. However, I encountered a problem. Someone else tried to undercut the argument using the problem of existence of an unembodied mind beyond time and space. I fear I cannot counter this, and I struggled to find an explanation to this on your pages.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    On your site (www.reasonablefaith.com) you say: "On most Divine Command theories God possesses His moral qualities essentially (indeed, that's just what it means to say they're part of His nature!). So there is no possible world in which God is not kind, impartial, gracious, loving, and so on. So I don't think it is possible that Allah is God, since Allah is not all-loving and impartial." Essentially you argue that Allah can't be God based on His immorality. But don't you? ...

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    In the news I notice that the BICEP2 project has released some data that measures the polarization of the cosmic background radiation due to gravitational waves in the very first instances of the universes existence. Physicists seem to be getting excited as they claim it supports the multiverse theory. I am not familiar with the mathematics that underpins cosmogony so I was wondering if you had any comments on a few of their claims.

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dr. Craig, I'm an atheist and I've long followed your debates. Though I'm not moved by your arguments I think you present and defend them well. One of these arguments, the fine tuning argument, seems to be quite presumptuous in it's attempt to explain life. It seems to me that it skips quite a few steps to land at a conclusion that life is an ultimate goal of the universe ...http://www.reasonablefaith.org/rr

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Hello Dr. Craig, I hope you are fine. I have theological objections to your proposition that an infinite regression of events into the past is impossible. I adhere to a particular Islamic denomination and my denomination doesn't accept the view that it's impossible for there to be an infinite regression of events into the past...

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dear Dr. Craig, My question is on objective morality. I lead a Christian life group of 11th and 12th graders, where I often use apologetics to show them that belief in God, specifically Christianity, is not only the true religion, but also the best explanation for the origin of the universe. I firmly believe that equipping teenagers in this particular stage of life is essential to firmly ground their beliefs and also to explain their reasons for holding such beliefs as they prepare for university and the work force. With regard to objective moral value though, I find myself wrestling with a problem. I do agree that without God there cannot be moral objectivity, but where do we get the rules for morality?

  • The Good Book Blog

    William Lane Craig — 

    Dr. Craig, I read your excellent book "Creation out of Nothing" and I agree with it! However, doesn't God need tremendous (if not infinite) energy to create something out of nothing? Is God's energy something rather than nothing? What is God's Mind made of if it is immaterial?...