William Lane Craig Misrepresents and Strawmans CA on His Podcast, Denying Science

William Lane Craig and his obsequious co-host recently slammed Counter-Apologist and his criticisms of Craig’s use of time and the Kalam, in his recent podcast. Craig takes chap potshots at CA and is pretty disingenuous. I have red a transcript of CA’s upcoming reply, and he is spot on.

Check this video out as it will give you some background.

A further summation can be found here:

Basically, Craig asserts the A-Theory of time, largely because it fits with his understanding of God. But then he uses this A-Theory to defend his use of the Kalam Cosmological Argument, which in turn is used to argue for God. So he assumes a theory which assumes God to argue for… God. Hence the accusations of circularity.

But it is more critical than that since Craig also cherry picks his science. When it works for him, he lauds it (certain cosmological theories) and when it doesn’t, he claims that such theories presuppose naturalism, or that metaphysics is being unfairly trumped, or some such double standard nonsense.

Much of the argument revolves around the highly spurious notion that you can have an absolute time frame and thus simultaneous causality. In other words, if causality requires time, then if time was not existent, how could you have causality? How could an a-temporal god create space-time?

What is ironic is that in his rebuttal to CA in the podcast, he shows this dodgy methodology in abundance. The problem is that not many of his followers would spot it. He makes MASSIVE claims to have debunked arguments against the A-Theory of time and attack the B-Theory in his books, as a precursor to the rebuttal to CA. This gives the impression that Craig has all of the arguments nailed and up his sleeve before the rebuttal even begins. But the fact is, he doesn’t. He holds a hugely minority view within philosophy and even more so within the philosophy of science and time and within physics itself.

But his devoted followers would be more inclined to think that Craig having AN answer equates to Craig having THE answers. I look forward to CA producing his transcript as a video and wholly endorse his claims therein.