The Reasonable Faith Tour

 

William Lane Craig is Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot Theological College, California. He is a renowned Christian Philosopher and apologist who had debated many of the world's best known atheists. He returns to the UK for the Reasonable Faith Tour during October 2011 to present lectures on the rational grounds for the truth of Christianity and to debate the existence of God with leading atheists.

LST students went to see William Lane Craig debate 'Does God Exist' with Stephen Law, lecturer in Philosophy at Heythrop College, London and Editor of the magazine of the Royal Institute of Philosophy THINK.

 

Reaction from Ben McNamara – Theology Student at LST

Anyone who enjoys competitive sport knows that when facing the opposition one is not only excited about the forthcoming battle but is in anticipation of potential humiliation. As my friends and I travelled to Westminster Central Hall there was not only excitement, as we prepared ourselves for the intellectual battle between William Lane Craig and Stephen Law, but also the anticipation that ‘our side’ would be humiliated during the exchanges.  It was Abelard who said “by doubting we come to enquire and by enquiring we reach truth” and our innocent journey in the minibus turned into a pilgrimage as doubts, inflated by Law, became inquisition. As people who had their worldview on the line, that’s what we were expecting. As LST students we were seeking that provocation, that argument that would inflate doubt, initiate a pilgrimage and lead us to the relics of truth. Instead we witnessed the scythe of Craig’s clarity cut down the straw man of Law’s presentation.

The format of the debate was as follows: each speaker introduced his argument, followed by two alternating rounds of rebuttals; closing statements came next, and then questions were taken from the floor. Craig opened with three points which he (and we) expected Law to systematically attack: the cosmological argument, the moral argument, and the resurrection of Jesus, as proofs for God’s existence. Law then followed with a single impassioned argument: the existence of moral evil proves the lack of God’s existence.

Unfortunately it was during Law’s first rebuttal that the evening started to turn sour. Sam Harris was quoted on the event’s flyers as saying that Craig is ‘the one apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into my fellow atheists’. This was certainly not true of Law, who not only showed lack of fear but an apparent lack of interest in Craig’s argument, which left Craig with little work to do in order to come out on top.

I must say at this point that I wanted a good fight! I wanted to see Craig challenged and made to defend himself! I wanted Law to do battle with Craig, to give good arguments, to pick holes, to press him and rigorously test him. But instead, Law rigidly stuck to his one point (which, although commendable, was disarmed during Craig’s first rebuttal) as he ducked any challenges by Craig to answer his other two points. This then became a debate about objective moral realities and not about the existence of God.

Jeers then arose from the crowd on both sides of the fence. On the Christian side were the giggles and sarcasm that mocked Law and his verbal pirouetting, and on the other the outcries of questions that Law failed to put to Craig. An example of this was when a round of applause came after a question was directed at Craig from the floor (by this time people had already started to leave). It was difficult to tell whether the applause originated from those supporting Law’s position, who agreed with the question, or those from Craig’s who appreciated something pertinent.

The lacklustre performance by Law was made even more apparent by Craig’s accurate, yet respectful, criticisms and encyclopaedic knowledge which included a very clear presentation of the Gospel. This created not only the intellectual buzz that I personally was looking for from the evening but a soul enriching presentation of the good news about Jesus Christ. An explosive combination for any listener who seeks to be a crucible for revelation.

Having seen the debate I am left wondering if Law had worked harder would he have come out on top? However, it is Craig who ultimately walks away with the ‘win’, and those who are going to see him in action will not be disappointed.

Bookmark and Share