William Lane Craig is a moron who got smashed in many debates by Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris (and I'm sure many others). He wouldn't know a good question if he heard one because he still never asked himself the question "How can I still believe the Earth is 6,000 years old when all of the evidence shows that it is 4.5 billion years old?"
While I don't like William Lane Craig myself, he's far from a young earth creationist, he even says it's an embarrassing idea to support. He also accepts evolution as fact
Well if you believe people are being born of virgins, snakes are talking, 2 of every species is fitting on a boat made by a 900 year old man, and the dead rises from the grave the moment jesus resurrects (which is also crazy) etc, believing the earth is 6000 years old isnt the most absurd claim.
Dude, just admit that you got busted out for talking out your ass about WLC. I think Hitchens lost his debate to WLC but there are plenty of people that handled him quite well in my opinion. Shelley Kagan, Bart Ehrman, Richard Carrier, Robert M. Price, Stephen Law and Raymond Bradley all stuck it to him, with the best being Bradley, Kagan and Price.
WLC has repeatedly denied Young Earth Creationism and expressed doubt about Adam and Eve.
Well I'm not an expert on WLC but I have watched several of his debates. I've also watched a lot of other nutjobs debate so they all get lost in the mix. As I said, maybe I'm wrong about him believing the Earth is 6000 years old but if he plays religion by only choosing to select the parts that he likes/haven't been roundly debunked by science, he isn't much of a religious guy in my book. If he believes the virgin birth and the walking dead then that is just as silly as a young earth. The only difference is science can't prove those things didn't happen just that one time so he'll always have something to cling to. It happened by way of miracle and good luck disproving that.
EDIT: I was confusing him with Ken Ham. My other points still stand though. I now recall who WLC is and he is one of the more exhausting guys to listen to debate because he tries to just wear down the audience by going over the Philosophical argument and Moral argument and Ontological argument etc... And in the end it all boils down to "if you can't say I'm wrong, I'm right" as if it is 50/50.
He believes in the virgin birth I'm sure or else he isn't Christian and he also believes that a resurrection occurred and according to The Bible all of the graves opened and the dead walked the Earth. If he doesn't believe in the Virgin birth and resurrection he is no Christian. But aside from that I have more respect for people who believe the whole book (as it is said the whole book is the infallible word of god and not a syllable is to be omitted) than I do people who just pick and choose shit and leave shit behind once science rules it out or social norms change due to modernity. At that point what you have to do is drop it all because the book is all or nothing. It says so itself.
16 comments
6 snoopkhat 2015-01-19
i might listen to that cunt talk about made up stuff later.
1 DianaKurlan5 2015-01-19
tips fedora
6 shameofyou 2015-01-19
I treat myself like shit. The golden rule is my guiding principal.
4 jsmill1 2015-01-19
Fuck William Lane Craig. I hate that guy.
3 kgt5003 2015-01-19
William Lane Craig is a moron who got smashed in many debates by Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris (and I'm sure many others). He wouldn't know a good question if he heard one because he still never asked himself the question "How can I still believe the Earth is 6,000 years old when all of the evidence shows that it is 4.5 billion years old?"
3 iamfromreallife 2015-01-19
While I don't like William Lane Craig myself, he's far from a young earth creationist, he even says it's an embarrassing idea to support. He also accepts evolution as fact
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2013/02/william-lane-craig-young-earth-creationism-is-an-embarrassment/
2 kgt5003 2015-01-19
Well if you believe people are being born of virgins, snakes are talking, 2 of every species is fitting on a boat made by a 900 year old man, and the dead rises from the grave the moment jesus resurrects (which is also crazy) etc, believing the earth is 6000 years old isnt the most absurd claim.
1 [deleted] 2015-01-19
[deleted]
1 BeerCanThick 2015-01-19
Dude, just admit that you got busted out for talking out your ass about WLC. I think Hitchens lost his debate to WLC but there are plenty of people that handled him quite well in my opinion. Shelley Kagan, Bart Ehrman, Richard Carrier, Robert M. Price, Stephen Law and Raymond Bradley all stuck it to him, with the best being Bradley, Kagan and Price.
WLC has repeatedly denied Young Earth Creationism and expressed doubt about Adam and Eve.
Nice try on the hate, tho!
2 kgt5003 2015-01-19
Well I'm not an expert on WLC but I have watched several of his debates. I've also watched a lot of other nutjobs debate so they all get lost in the mix. As I said, maybe I'm wrong about him believing the Earth is 6000 years old but if he plays religion by only choosing to select the parts that he likes/haven't been roundly debunked by science, he isn't much of a religious guy in my book. If he believes the virgin birth and the walking dead then that is just as silly as a young earth. The only difference is science can't prove those things didn't happen just that one time so he'll always have something to cling to. It happened by way of miracle and good luck disproving that.
EDIT: I was confusing him with Ken Ham. My other points still stand though. I now recall who WLC is and he is one of the more exhausting guys to listen to debate because he tries to just wear down the audience by going over the Philosophical argument and Moral argument and Ontological argument etc... And in the end it all boils down to "if you can't say I'm wrong, I'm right" as if it is 50/50.
1 iamfromreallife 2015-01-19
He only believes one of those though.
0 kgt5003 2015-01-19
He believes in the virgin birth I'm sure or else he isn't Christian and he also believes that a resurrection occurred and according to The Bible all of the graves opened and the dead walked the Earth. If he doesn't believe in the Virgin birth and resurrection he is no Christian. But aside from that I have more respect for people who believe the whole book (as it is said the whole book is the infallible word of god and not a syllable is to be omitted) than I do people who just pick and choose shit and leave shit behind once science rules it out or social norms change due to modernity. At that point what you have to do is drop it all because the book is all or nothing. It says so itself.
1 DianaKurlan5 2015-01-19
tips fedora
1 kgt5003 2015-01-19
Fawk yeah! Either you believe the Earth is 6000 years old or you wear a fedora! You nailed me.
1 DianaKurlan5 2015-01-19
Yes.
2 DianaKurlan5 2015-01-19
ITT: Fedora tipping