RE: [asa] William Lane Craig in Auckland

I've been listening to William Lane Craig's podcasts for quite a while.
In general, he never mentions evolution, and he goes as far as to
pre-empt the question that so that evolution is mute, when debating
atheists (I can't remember the details on how he does that- I think he
argues that there must be a beginning so there must be a creator- since
he dispenses with atheism at this early stage he feels he doesn't have
to debate evolution). A very good question for him would be to ask his
opinion if Adam was a real person or not, and if it matters. I think it
is a hot button topic he usually tries to avoid. Ravi Zacharius
(www.rzim.org) is another leading Christian apologetics minister who
also avoids theistic evolution, I think (I've also listened to him for
quite some time).

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Don Nield
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 4:37 PM
To: j burg; AmericanScientificAffiliation
Subject: [asa] William Lane Craig in Auckland

Last night I attended a lecture by William Lane Craig at the Bible
College of New Zealand in Auckland. His title was "A critical response
to Richard Dawkins". He spent 15 minutes or so discussing Dawkin's
central argument as presented on pages 157-158 of "The God Delusion" and

then spent about 90 minutes taking questions from the audience. He
pointed out that Dawkins' main conclusion, that God almost certainly
does not exist, does not logically follow in any way from the list of
six statements ( "premises"?) listed immediately above in his book, and
that items 3, 4, 5, and 6 can all be challenged.
The questions from the audience were mainly about apologetics. Craig
said that he saw as a positive sign that a secular philosophy department

(at the Victoria University of Wellington) had organized a seminar on
Divine Sovereignty and Human Freedom and had invited people like himself

to attend. Ken Mickleson (like myself an ASA member) asked a question
about the interpretation of Genesis. Craig replied that Christians
should not insist on a particular interpretation of Genesis that
required an age of 6000 years for the earth. He gave a plug at one stage

for Hugh Ross and Reasons to Believe. I asked him whether he held the
view that methodological naturalism inevitably led to metaphysical
naturalism, and as backgound I mentioned that he was listed as a Fellow
of the Discovery Institute and that some of his fellow Fellows did hold
that view. His answer was that he did not hold that view. He said that
even Phillip Johnson, in his book Darwin on Trial, conceded that
evolution was a satisfactory explanation at the methodological level.
This was news to me -- I need to check.
I got the impression that Craig disengages himself from the political
activities of the US Intelligent Design movement and that he has an
irenic attitude towards theistic evolutionists -- in distinct contrast
to William Dembski ! I found myself in agreement with much of what he
had to say.
Don

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jun 16 20:56:36 2008