Who is the Catholic William Lane Craig?

  • Thread starter Thread starter snarflemike
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is Oderberg Catholic (I know he’s a Thomist)? While his work seems somewhat more specialized, I hear his work on philosophy of mind and ethics is some of the best out there in our circle. Perhaps one could also mention guys like Trent Dougherty.
 
I am pretty sure Oderberg is Catholic. I’m working my way through Real Essentialism right now… quite heavy. He has the most thorough approach to metaphysics and philosophy of science that I have seen. Wouldn’t call him “the Catholic William Lane Craig” just because his work is not exactly accessible.
 
**Strawberry

**In my case, there are no arguments for atheism needed.**The dogma of a literal Adam and Eve seem to make a clear case to reject the Catholic Church right from go. **

I’d like to offer a sentiment parallel to yours. 😉

In my case, there are no arguments against atheism needed. The worship of Nogod rather than the God of Adam and Eve is enough to reject atheism right from the get-go.
 
mytruepower2 said:
Of course you need arguments for atheism, and so this objection would need to be formulated as one.

P1. If the Catholic Church is the One True Faith, then Adam and Eve were literal people.
P2. Adam and Eve were not literal people.
C. Therefore, the Catholic Church is not the One True Faith.

The problem is that the second premise is unprovable, to the best of my knowledge, and the first one is questionable at best, so this is hardly a strong argument against Catholicism.

More importantly, however, even if Catholicism were -false,- that still wouldn’t prove that atheism was -true.-

Also, I hesitate to compare Professor Peter Kreeft to Dr. William Lane Craig, since Craig formulates his arguments much more thoroughly and has a far better understanding of the nature and problems of Islam in the modern world. On the others, I have no objections yet.
Click to expand...
There is no problem, the second premise is provable. Your lack of knowledge is not a strong agrument for your faith.
 
Charlemagne_II said:
**Strawberry

**In my case, there are no arguments for atheism needed.****The dogma of a literal Adam and Eve seem to make a clear case to reject the Catholic Church right from go.

I’d like to offer a sentiment parallel to yours. 😉

In my case, there are no arguments against atheism needed. The worship of Nogod rather than the God of Adam and Eve is enough to reject atheism right from the get-go.
Click to expand...
You are a mocker of science, but you are a very nice person.
How can you stand behind a positon that is clearly not true by any means?
 
**Strawberry

How can you stand behind a positon that is clearly not true by any means? **

And you know this how? :confused:
 
**Strawberry

You are a mocker of science, but you are a very nice person.**

I like science. I just don’t worship it. I wish you could see how many science books I own! 🙂
 
Charlemagne_II said:
**Strawberry

How can you stand behind a positon that is clearly not true by any means? **

And you know this how? :confused:
Click to expand...
Show me how it is possible.

I am not asking much.

You must make it clear that you are making ground breaking news to those of us that are unaware of your vast knowledge
 
Charlemagne_II said:
**Strawberry

You are a mocker of science, but you are a very nice person.**

I like science. I just don’t worship it. I wish you could see how many science books I own! 🙂
Click to expand...
Keep reading them and don’t limit yourself to the ones you have decided to read.
 
Charlemagne_II said:
**Strawberry

How can you stand behind a positon that is clearly not true by any means? **

And you know this how? :confused:
Click to expand...
Why are you confused about how we know that there is not, and never has been a literal Adam and Eve?
Please explain. You claim to know or love to know science.

It will not be hard to find an answer.
If you are looking for an answer,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top