Keith Parsons's Blog, page 60

Summary and Assessment of the Craig-Drange Debate (1997)

(This is yet another old debate summary and assessment from my archives. I think I wrote this around 1998. I am posting it here unchanged.)


On February 26, 1997 at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, William Lane Craig debated Theodore Drange of West Virginia University. The topic was, "Does God exist?"

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING THIS DEBATE SUMMARY

Drange did not address each of

Summary of the Craig-Price Debate on Jesus' Resurrection (1999)

This is yet another old debate summary from my archives. I'm not sure when I wrote this, but I'm guessing it was between 1999 and 2002.

THE CRAIG-PRICE DEBATE: DID JESUS RISE FROM THE DEAD?


The Veritas Forum
Ohio State University, 1999



Curiously, the audiocassettes do not mention Robert Price's name, or even a debate at all. Instead, the label on the tape reads, "Intellectual Foundations

Bradley Monton's Blog

This is another one that falls into the "not new, but new for me" category.

Bradley Monton is an atheist philosopher at the University of Colorado at Boulder who specializes in philosophy of religion, philosophy of science (especially physics), probabilistic epistemology, and philosophy of time. Secular Outpost readers will be interested in Monton's interesting essay on the fine-tuning argument,

Summary and Assessment of the Craig-Draper Debate on the Existence of God (1998)

This is a another very old debate summary, which I wrote back in 1998. I have made some minor changes.

Craig's Opening Statement


Craig's presentation was his standard, cumulative case for Christian theism.

T1. The kalam cosmological argument
(1) Anything which begins to exist must have a cause
(2) The universe began to exist
(3) Therefore, the universe must have a cause
- the cause must be a

Summary of the Craig-Parsons Debate, "Why I Am/Am Not a Christian"

This is a repost of a debate summary I wrote a long time ago. (I think I wrote this in 1998.) While I tried to be accurate, I don't claim this summary is perfect. If anyone identifies any errors, omissions, or anything else that requires editing, please feedback alerting me so I can fix the summary accordingly.

One thing you will notice is that I tried use a consistent numbering scheme

In Defense of William Lane Craig

After my last post on William Lane Craig and debating, I decided to do several web searches related to William Lane Craig and debating. While I obviously disagree with his arguments, I have no problem with him as a person. I suspect the majority of atheists (who know who he is) also do not. But a few of his critics have engaged in personal attacks which I think are unfair and inaccurate. As a

Matt McCormick's Atheism Blog

His blog isn't new, but I just discovered it and wanted to mention it here.

LINK

For those of you who do not know who Matt McCormick is, he is an atheist philosopher of religion at California State University at Sacramento.

RESPONSE TO STEPHEN T. DAVIS ON RESURRECTION AND HALLUCINATION

I don't recall whether I ever posted this on SO. Prof. Stephen T. Davis did a review of The Empty Tomb edited by Jeff Lowder and Bob Price (Prometheus Books, 2005). In this review, he made some critical remarks about my contribution to the book, and the following is my response to Davis: The portion of Stephen T. Davis's review that relates to my "Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli on the

Some (Very Incomplete) Thoughts on Luke Muehlhauser's "How to Debate William Lane Craig"

After writing a post about William Lane Craig and John Loftus debating, I remembered that Luke Muehlhauser (Common Sense Atheism) posted an article in April 2009 about debating William Lane Craig. (LINK) Here are some very incomplete thoughts about Luke's article.

I agree with Luke that many of Craig's debate opponents were unqualified, in the sense that they did not have both (a) the relevant

Two Sites Related to Darwinian Ethics

While web browsing, I stumbled across two sites related to nontheistic and/or Darwinian ethics. Pretty much anyone interested in The Secular Outpost will probably be interested in both of these sites and for the same reasons.

1. The website for the late James Rachels. For those of you who do not know who James Rachels was, he was an important moral philosopher. Among his many publications were