Home > Apologetics > Do Atheist have Common Sense?

Do Atheist have Common Sense?

I ran across a blog over the weekend called ‘Common Sense Atheism’ that gives atheist pointers on how to debate William Lane Craig. In this post the writer argues that the reason that William Lane Craig wins his debates, isn’t because his arguments are sound, but because William Lane Craig is a skilled debater. Yet after that statement he goes into listing Craig’s credentials and tells his readers, Oh yea, by the way, Craig is also a “Ph.D. philosopher and encyclopedic historian: an expert on the two subjects he debates, the existence of God and the resurrection of Jesus.”

All I really wanted to point out was the inconsistent statement of the one who wrote this post. He first states that Craig’s arguments are not sound and he wins because he is a skilled debater, but then states that Craig is an expert on the two subjects he debates. Well it seems to me if one is an expert on the subject they are speaking on, then certainly their arguments would have to be sound or they wouldn’t be an expert on the subject of which they are debating.

Anyway to the credit of the one who wrote the post, he does go on to state that there is no one in the atheistic world that is able to debate Craig and win. This writer even names, names of those who are not capable.

 

How to Debate William Lane Craig by Luke Muehlhauser

Andrew at Evaluating Christianity has put up some excellent posts of advice on how to debate William Lane Craig (one, two, three, four, five). The reason Craig wins all his debates with atheists is not because his arguments are sound, but because he is a masterful debater. Craig has been honing his debate skills literally since high school. Not only that, but he is a Ph.D. philosopher and encyclopedic historian: an expert on the two subjects he debates, the existence of God and the resurrection of Jesus.

Let me repeat. Craig has done 20+ years of Ph.D+ level research in the two fields he debates, has published hundreds of academic books and papers on both subjects, and has been debating since high school.

Read more here.

Advertisements
  1. March 29, 2012 at 9:03 am

    Why does being an expert on a subject make your arguments sound? A person may be an expert on creationism but their arguments can never be sound. Newton was an expert on the laws of motion but his laws were not correct, Lenin was an expert on Socialism but his political reasoning was not correct. To have sound arguments you must have arguments that cannot be disproven, this only works for god because the Chritian definition makes god unprovable.

    • March 29, 2012 at 3:36 pm

      Hello and thanks for commenting on my blog. I would have to agree with you that just because someone is an expert does not mean that they of neccessity would always have sound arguments. Nevertheless you missed my point. I was answering the one who wrote the article to which I linked. He claimed that Craig only won because of his ability to debate, yet then turns around and commends Craig for his knowledge and accreditations of academic learning.

      As for your stating that the Christian definition of God makes God unprovable, I would have to disagree. The definition of God given by Antony Flew in his debate with Craig was that God would have to be sovereign and ominipotent if he existed. Jean Paul Sartre also acknowledged that if God existed, then he would have to be sovereign.

      Yet Craig is not arguing from a personal God at the beginning of his arguments, but instead argues for an Uncaused Cause of all causes. This definition most recognize as valid if the universe is finite. There must be a cause for every effect that has a beginning. Since the universe began to exist, then the atheist must give a reason why, if he is to disprove God. This argument no atheist has ever been able to develop.

      So if you think that Craig’s arguments are not sound, then maybe you might want to debate him. no one else seems to be able to win against Craig, as noted in the article I linked to above.

  2. March 30, 2012 at 8:29 am

    If the Christian definition of god is not unprovable, why has nobody been able to prove it?

    Why must the atheist give a reason for the universe to exist? I see no reason for anything to exist? The definition of god must surely involve an intentional act of creation rather than just that something caused it. However, my point is really that a debate is utterly useless if one seeks truth, losers of debates are not necessarily wrong. Debates do not find out facts, if they did we would have no need for science labs, just debating halls.

    It is also unclear that all occurences have a cause which makes the debate pointless on a scientific basis.

    • March 30, 2012 at 10:08 am

      Thanks again for your comment. I want to respond to one part of your comment here. You stated that you see no reason for anything to exist. If that’s the case, then there is no reason to continue this conversation, seeing that two nonexistent persons cannot interact with one another since they do not exist.

  3. March 30, 2012 at 11:43 am

    I never said nothing exists, I said there is no reason necessary for them to exist, no purpose.

    • March 30, 2012 at 6:32 pm

      If there is no purpose for anything to exist, then why dont you live out your beliefs and quit using my worldview to conduct your life.

      You actually conduct yourself by my worldview and not yours. My world view teaches that men are to be decent to one another because every man is created in the image of God and to attack anyone is to attack God himself.

      I see that you are a free man and not in prison for crimes against humanity. This is because you are living your life according to the Christian worldview. If you were living according to your worldview you would be breaking every law there is because your worldview has no meaning or purpose in life.

      Finally I am not afraid for anyone to challenge my beliefs. I did not grow up Christian but had a life changing experience with the risen Christ and therefore I am settled in my faith.

      • April 8, 2012 at 5:26 am

        I suppose that I was not the one that was afraid to have my beliefs questioned.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: