I'll get to hear the great man himself in person when he graces our campus with his presence. I'll take notes and let y'all know if the lectures are 'compelling' (as advertised).
Originally posted by LemonJello I'll get to hear the great man himself in person when he graces our campus with his presence. I'll take notes and let y'all know if the lectures are 'compelling' (as advertised).
Originally posted by LemonJello I'll get to hear the great man himself in person when he graces our campus with his presence. I'll take notes and let y'all know if the lectures are 'compelling' (as advertised).
Originally posted by LemonJello I'll get to hear the great man himself in person when he graces our campus with his presence. I'll take notes and let y'all know if the lectures are 'compelling' (as advertised).
http://www.stanford.edu/group/absk/craig.html
Ah, I read a paper (well skimmed) by him the other day. Basically his point is that because we don't know what happened pre-big bang that leaves a place open for god. It's a shame god has had to run and hide so much from science, isn't it? Of course, his entire discourse was muddied quite a bit by his apparent lack of understanding that cause and effect are only things within our universe and are time dependant. Never mind. [sigh]
I did attend the second of Craig's lectures -- the one on the historicity of the resurrection. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the first lecture. The first lecture was the one I was much more interested in because I think Craig has some really wacky philosophical ideas.
At any rate, I found Craig to be a very polished speaker, in a mechanized 'man there's a big turd lodged up there that just won't come out, on top of which I have already given this exact same lecture 8 million times before' sort of way. He is obviously a bright guy in at least some areas -- notably, in familiarity with the claims and interpretation of the Bible. For the most part, I thought his approach was reasonably objective, but even if we resist from raising objections against his purported 'facts', his conclusions ultimately rest on philosophical suppositions with which I don't agree. That really wasn't the point of the talk though, which is why I wish I had been free to attend the first of his talks, which was oriented in a more philosophical direction.
When he's not overtly busy working on unlodging the aforementioned turd, he's a funny guy -- makes fun of the French!
12 Apr '06 23:09
At Long Last!
Back to Top