William Lane Craig's new site

[Steven Carr]

William Lane Craig has a new site about the existence of God at
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer

There is also a forum.

I guess Craig will not be posting on an open forum.

[~M~]

William Lane Craig has a new site about the existence of God at
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer

There is also a forum.

I guess Craig will not be posting on an open forum.


I noticed this a few days ago. Did anyone read his book on naturalism? i read carrier's one sentence review; carrier accused craig of strawmen. Is this the case?

[ecco]

Damn, ya gotta register to even view the forum. I don't think I really want to give my email address to a fundie.

[Deleet]

Damn, ya gotta register to even view the forum. I don't think I really want to give my email address to a fundie.

Heck, he might pass it on to god so you can get in heaven? ;)
Nothing to lose, except time.

[ecco]

Heaven? Ya mean the place with people like Rush Limbaugh and Ted Haggard? No thanks, rather go to hell and meet people like Gandhi.

[luvluv]

If you register, there are lots of free audio debates, including one between Craig and Keith Parsons, who I think is a very formidable atheist philosopher.

You can always get a fake yahoo account to register.

[IconoclasticGoat]

I've started posting there. We'll see where this goes. I plan to leave no premise unchallenged.

[Alf]

Heck, he might pass it on to god so you can get in heaven? ;)
Nothing to lose, except time.
You couldn't be more wrong. Giving away valid E-mail addresses to anyone and anything is a very bad idea. Lists of valid E-mail addresses is a very valuable commodity in these days and that ought to be a hint.

No, be careful with whom you give your E-mail address to. I would be very reulctant to give away my E-mail address to a nutcase fundie.

Yes, I know some of you - even atheists - consider WLC to be "reasonable" or "smart" but to me he just seems to be a nutcase who goes on with one bizarre claim after the other.

Alf

[IconoclasticGoat]

You don't need to provide them with your real email address when you register. There's no confirmation of the address. Just put whatever you want, choose a name, and start writing.

ETA: Oops, I just advocated violating one of the commandments. Looks like hellfire for me!

[ecco]

IC,

Thanks for the tip. Maybe I'll se ya there.

ecco

[luvluv]

The audio debate between Craig and Parsons was pretty good and pretty lively. Both guys went for the jugular but in a civil way. The kind of debate where both sides can walk away thinking their guy won, because both did such a good job.

[Cheerful Charlie]

You don't need to provide them with your real email address when you register. There's no confirmation of the address. Just put whatever you want, choose a name, and start writing.

ETA: Oops, I just advocated violating one of the commandments. Looks like hellfire for me!


Didn't work. I get invalid user name no matter what enter.
Screw 'em.

CC

[Jeez]

You couldn't be more wrong. Giving away valid E-mail addresses to anyone and anything is a very bad idea. Lists of valid E-mail addresses is a very valuable commodity in these days and that ought to be a hint.

Not quite. Only ISP or work -based emails are valuable. Yahoo, Hotmail, GMail or other free email providers are pretty much worthless in comparison. It only takes a few minutes to set-up an email account at yahoo for example. You could use that email just for registration to internet forums and remain completely anonymous with no connection to your real email address.

[Silent Dave]

I noticed this a few days ago. Did anyone read his book on naturalism? i read carrier's one sentence review; carrier accused craig of strawmen. Is this the case?

Where did this appear?

[Draygomb]

Damn, ya gotta register to even view the forum. I don't think I really want to give my email address to a fundie.Where's bugmenot.com when you need it?

[~M~]

Where did this appear?




Errr...Carrier's criticism? If so, it was on the amazon's page concerning Craig's book: http://www.amazon.com/Naturalism-Critical-Routledge-Twentieth-Centuryphilosophy/dp/0415235243/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-0915733-0134531?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179244006&sr=8-1
albeit does not seem to be on there now. It could be the case that my memory deceives me but i am quite certain that carrier had posted and referred to Criag's case as strawmen. Carrier, thereafter, referenced his own book.

[Jeez]

I registered on Craig's site (with a Yahoo email of course) and made the mistake of listening to WLC's take on the Nightline debate with the Rational Response Squad vs Comfort/Cameron (35 MB mp3 file) (http://www.reasonablefaith.org/RF_audio_video/Other_clips/craig_edwards_on_athiesm.mp3). The Christian radio interviewer slammed Comfort and Cameron for their "pathetic" performance and asked WLC what he thought about it. I have never heard WLC speak, but if he is the best (or one of them) Christian apologist, than that side is in trouble. At one point, WLC thought Pascal's wager was a reasonable tactic. Apparently, all one has to do is eliminate the other potential choices so that it becomes one of Christianity vs Atheism. He also said that most athesists are really agnostics.

I would agree with him that the Nightline debate wasn't very good. Both sides appeared amateurish, particularly Comfort and Cameron who seem to be getting complaints by the Christian media for their poor performance.

[luvluv]

I just listened to that, too Jeez.

I would say that Craig's a decent philosopher, but he's a stellar debator.