/lit/ - Literature

>>15056710
Can he prove that god exists? If he can’t, then I don’t need to prove him wrong, either.

>>15056721
He already has proven that God exist, fedoratard.

>>15056751
>Craig invented the cosmological argument
Lmao yeah if the best contemporary philosophy has is regurgitating arguments that have been around for yonks, then you’re probably right.

>>15056862
Craig created the most cited form of the argument, you brainlet.

>>15056751
Whatever begins to exist within our universe has a cause. Doesn't mean the universe itself needs a cause. Other laws of Physics break down when we go real small so we can't predict much about the pre-big bang singularity.
I'm a complete agnostic btw so i'm not here to le dunk on Christcucks. I just really think these sorts of arguments ignore how little we can apply things in our experience to something like the beginning of the universe.

>>15056710
He’s not even taken seriously in his own field.
t. student at a t10 divinity school

>>15056887
So? Doesn’t change the fact that “a cause” is not by necessity theological. And also, >>15056904 is right, there is simply no standard from within time by which we can accurately understand outside time. There is no solution that is not pure speculation.

>>15056914
Based Christcuck dabbing on pop-philosophers

>>15056931
It is necessarily theological, because the creator of the universe must transcend time and space.

>>15056710
I remember when the "The Killers" guy was giving an interview to promote his album. Suddenly, Dawkins appears in the show and starts to debate about religion with the guy (who is a Mormon and was unprepared to discuss religion, he was there to sing).

He always refused to debate William Lane Craig
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/20/richard-dawkins-william-lane-craig

>>15056914
He's one of the most cited authors in the philosophy of religion.

He has his moments but I think it's mostly because of the lack of quality in his opposition. The "new atheists" are extraordinarily ignorant and prideful and anybody could knock them down, but not everyone does so Craig has a place.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vnjNbe5lyE

If he were talking to a Graham Oppy instead I don't think it would be very interesting.

>>15056949
>creator
Presupposes the intentionality of an impersonal force without justification

>must transcend time and space
One cannot intuit from these concepts that the first mover must be theological in nature. It does not follow.

>>15056710
>William Lane Craig
refute by Guenonacharya (pbuh)

>>15056710
A scientific and philosophical defense of God will do more to harm Christianity then just pure materialism. The guy is destroying Christianity, because its no longer the default faith for a large minority.

>>15056751
>the universe has a cause
And that cause may or may not be God.
>the universe began to exist
There is still ongoing debate whether or not the universe is eternal.
>whatever begins to exist has a cause
This does not entail however that everything that exists has to begin. For example if the physical universe is eternal. And presumably, if it exists, God.

>>15056710
I like him desu, despite his snake-oil-salesman vibe. He's a very clear writer, and I like the way he puts his arguments in standard form.

>>15056977
Based...

>>15056710
reminder that he was raped by Sean Carroll https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=M1c_GlAjvy4 (ignore the fedora tard who pops up just use it for a highlight reel)
Reminder that Carroll remains undefeated in all his refutations of christianity.
Reminder Carroll is an actual physicist so the usual handwaving mutterings about quantum physics proving freewill and fine tuning that conmen like Craig pull on an unenlightened audience don't work on Carroll.
Roger Penrose is also good on cutting through Craig's bullshit wannabe science as well https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9wLtCqm72-Y (towards the end when they start talking about time is where Craig starts to get seriously bodied)

>>15058141
The snake-oil-salesman vibe is precisely why I don't like him. Sounds silly but I simply can't like authors I don't believe are sincere, it's why I can't take therapists seriously either.

>>15056710
He's literally irrelevant outside philosophy of time, and even there he holds a minority, largely debunked view (presentism)

>>15056751
>whatever begins to exist has a cause

>>15056710
He's cool but he got owned by Tovia Singer

>>15056914
who is taken seriously in his field?

>>15058410
He's totally irrelevant about the philosophy of time. His main area is the kalam cosmological argument, which he has been influential in advancing. However, he's proven himself to be an ignoramous on scientific cosmology, he simply doesn't understand it as shown by his debate with Sean Carroll.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R97IHcuyWI0

>>15058604
>ignoramous
I chuckled.

>>15058310
Haven't watched it yet but how does he get past unfalsifiablity? It's all based on faith and religion isn't the only area where we hang our hat on it. Even science can't escape 100% without some form of it.

>>15056710
His Modality got btfo'd by Lewis.

Never heard of him. Is he on a stamp? Will he ever be on a stamp?
You're not officially "great" unless you're on a stamp.

>>15056751
>using neoplatonic arguments that are contingent on an impersonal God to pretend the beliefs of your irrational cult are real
I wish we could've had neoplatonism and not christianity become dominant, there would be far fewer atheists for a start

>>15056710
>believing William Lane Craig is the greatest contemporary philosopher
>asking for proof implying you would change you mind based on logic or reason

>>15056964
that dudes face when he's going through the list lol

>>15056710
>t. Cerebral Faith

>>15056751
>>15056988
I have enormous man-boobs. My man-boobs exist.

Their cause is my being a fat lazy fuck who eats three jars of peanutbutter every day.

THEREFORE GOD IS REAL!!!

>>15056751
Nothing in physics supports the notion that "everything that begins to exist has a cause", dumbfuck. In fact, just the opposite.

He offers nothing but shitty language games. That’s not good enough to validate your ideas. It’s not good enough for your idea to be consistent with itself. It must also be consistent with reality. That’s why your idea must also be corroborated with empirical evidence, which William Lane Craig very sneakily tries to avoid. Luckily, not everyone is as retarded as his mindless followers

>>15062123
Nah the evidenceis very much in favor of the universe having a beginning that was caused. There are however a bunch of cope speculative theories about how, current evidence to the contrary, this may not actually be true, just give me another ten billion dollars to build another piece of machinery and THIS time...

>>15056710
why are Christian logicists even a thing? Doesn't that destroy the whole point of faith?

>>15062668
Faith is the trust in the information given, not trust despite lack of information.

>>15062675
Faith is belief without reason

>>15062694
this

imagine having such a lack of faith in God that you have to resort to atheistic tendencies in order to justify Him

>>15062694
Faith is trust, regardless of reason.

Daily Reminder that every single pop philosopher, scientist and theologian posted in this shitty thread have been debunked by the illustrious Immanuel Kant (pbuh) and all of your silly arguments about space and time amount to nothing more than an arrogant predication of human structures onto the Noumenal realm

>>15062720
no, trust is trust. Faith has its own meaning.

Christian equivocation at work, folks

>>15062654
Reading comprehension much?

>>15062735
Ah yes, the time honored tradition of non-Christians telling Christians what their own words mean. Tell me again about why your edifice of strawmen & redefinitions should be taken as more authoritative than the teachings of the people that invented the system & adhere to it?

>"Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for. The evident demonstration of realities, though not beheld."—Hebrews 11:1

Oh look! The foundational religious text itself provided the definition! And it's not "belief without reason at all". Get REKT Fedorafag. Go fap to more Dawkins or Sam Harris HAHAHAHAHAHAH

>>15062916
>semantics
>bible verse
>childish antics
yep, Christians in a nutshell

I agree friend.
I'm always posting on /his/ trying to spread this good mans work but they're all blind.
Reminder this man has done the following
>refuted islam because their conception of God is fundamentally flawed in terms of love
>disproved Buddhism and atheism with his kalam cosmological argument
>DESTROYED polytheistic faiths with his ontological argument
>humiliated catholicism and it's incorrect view of justification
>ended judaism by proving that the resurrection of Jesus is a historical fact and that Jesus is God and Messiah
He's also an excellent teacher, I'm glad that I found him at my lowest point while I was an atheist.