William Lane Craig

What is the Conclusion of the Kalam Cosmological Argument?

In order to understand an argument, one must FIRST understand what the CONCLUSION of the argument asserts. Since Jeff Lowder and I disagree about what the conclusion of the kalam cosmological argument (hereafter: KCA) asserts, we also disagree about the specific content of KCA.  I’m going to present my reasons for believing that the conclusion What is the Conclusion of the Kalam Cosmological Argument?

William Lane Craig: 36 Years of Equivocation – Part 4

Craig’s presentation of KCA in 1979 (in The Existence of God and The Beginning of the Universe) has the following structure: I. The intermediate conclusion (the conclusion of his syllogistic argument) is stated in ambiguous language, ambiguous concerning whether there is AT LEAST ONE thing that caused the existence of the universe or EXACTLY ONE William Lane Craig: 36 Years of Equivocation – Part 4

William Lane Craig: 36 Years of Equivocation – Part 2

One reason why it should be OBVIOUS that Craig’s Kalam Cosmological Argument (hereafter: KCA) involves the fallacy of equivocation, is that Aquinas commits a very similar fallacy of equivocation in his cosmological arguments for God. Every (or almost every) introduction to philosophy of religion course includes at least a brief examination of Aquinas’s Five Ways William Lane Craig: 36 Years of Equivocation – Part 2

Gary Habermas Shows Why the ‘Minimal Facts’ of Jesus’ Death Can’t Establish the Resurrection

Editor’s Note: This is a guest post by Taylor Carr republished on The Secular Outpost with permission. The original post may be found on his blog, The Godless Skeptic. Gary Habermas is a New Testament scholar and philosopher of religion at Liberty University who has devoted much of his career to defending a historical case for the resurrection of Jesus. For Gary Habermas Shows Why the ‘Minimal Facts’ of Jesus’ Death Can’t Establish the Resurrection

Open Letter to (and Standing Debate Invitation for) William Lane Craig

Bill, It’s been almost twenty years to the day since we first exchanged letters about the transcript of your debate with Corey Washington. I enjoyed the two opportunities I had to spend time with you and your wife, Jan, once in Colorado and once in Atlanta. In September 2000, you agreed that a debate between us would Open Letter to (and Standing Debate Invitation for) William Lane Craig

Craig, Koons, and Divine Command Theory

Editor’s Note: This is a guest post by Taylor Carr republished on The Secular Outpost with permission. The original post may be found on his blog, The Godless Skeptic. In a recent episode of the Reasonable Faith podcast, William Lane Craig offers his thoughts on a 2012 paper by Jeremy Koons, Can God’s Goodness Save the Divine Command Theory from Euthyphro? Koons’ paper is another Craig, Koons, and Divine Command Theory

Christian Philosopher Richard Swinburne on One Type of Moral Argument for God’s Existence

“Now if the basic moral principles are analytic, the existence of what they describe cannot provide an argument for the existence of God.  An argument could only take off from the truth of some or all synthetic moral truths (e.g., from the fact that it is wrong to drop atomb bombs on Japan rather than Christian Philosopher Richard Swinburne on One Type of Moral Argument for God’s Existence