William Lane Craig
William Lane Craig (born August 23, 1949) is a Christian apologist, evangelist, and author and editor of over 30 books.
- In order to receive forgiveness, we need to place our trust in Christ as our Savior and the Lord of our lives. But if we reject Christ, then we reject God's mercy and fall back on His justice. And you know where you stand there. If we reject Jesus’ offer of forgiveness, then there is simply is no one else to pay the penalty for your sin – except yourself.
- I truly wish with all my heart that universal salvation were true. But to pretend that people are not sinful and in need of salvation would be as cruel and deceptive as pretending that somebody was healthy even though you knew that he had a fatal disease for which you knew the cure.
- Heaven may not be a possible world when you take it in isolation by itself. It may be that the only way in which God could actualize a heaven of free creatures all worshiping Him and not falling into sin would be by having, so to speak, this run-up to it, this advance life during which there is a veil of decision-making in which some people choose for God and some people against God. Otherwise you don't know that heaven is an actualizable world. You have no way of knowing that possibility.
- . The Craig-Bradley Debate: Can a Loving God Send People to Hell? (1994)., quoted in Muehlhauser, Luke (2011-04-27). "William Lane Craig vs. Ray Bradley (debate review)". Common Sense Atheism. Retrieved on 2011-10-21.
- Okay, look at it this way: if the evening news has a very high probability of being accurate, then it's highly improbable that they would inaccurately report the numbers chosen in the lottery. That counterbalances any improbability in the choosing of those numbers, so you're quite rational to believe in this highly improbable event.
- Strobel, Lee (2000). The Case for Faith: A Journalist Investigates the Toughest Objections to Christianity. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. ISBN 9780310565703.
- In general, Western culture is deeply post-Christian. It is the product of the Enlightenment, which introduced into European culture the leaven of secularism that has by now permeated Western society. While most of the original Enlightenment thinkers were themselves theists, the majority of Western intellectuals today no longer considers theological knowledge to be possible. The person who follows the pursuit of reason unflinchingly toward its end will be atheistic or, at best, agnostic.
- Richard [Carrier] takes the extremist position that Jesus of Nazareth never even existed, that there was no such person in history. This is a position that is so extreme that to call it marginal would be an understatement; it doesn't even appear on the map of contemporary New Testament scholarship.
- "Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?" debate with Richard Carrier, 2009.
- Very often atheists themselves admit that they have no evidence of God's absence, but they try to put a different spin on it. They'll tell you, “No one can prove a universal negative” (like “There is no God”). They think this somehow excuses them from needing evidence against God's existence. But not only is it false that you can't prove a universal negative (all you have to do is show something is self-contradictory), but more importantly, this claim is really an admission that it's impossible to prove atheism! Atheism involves a universal negative, you can't prove a universal negative, therefore, atheism is unprovable. It turns out that it is the atheist who is believing a view for which there is and can be no evidence.
- On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision (2010), p. 149
- And therefore, even though animals are in pain, they aren't aware of it. They don't have this third order pain awareness. They are not aware of pain, and therefore they do not suffer as human beings do. Now, this is a tremendous comfort to those of us who are animal lovers, like myself, or to pet owners. Even though your dog or your cat may be in pain, it isn't really aware of being in pain, and therefore it doesn't suffer as you would when you are in pain.
- "Does God Exist?" debate vs Stephen Law, Westminster Central Hall, London, 2011-10-17, quoted in Coyne, Jerry (4 October 2012), "William Lane Craig argues that animals can’t feel pain", Why Evolution Is True, retrieved on 2013-03-07
- Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God's grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven's incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.
So whom does God wrong in commanding the destruction of the Canaanites? Not the Canaanite adults, for they were corrupt and deserving of judgment. Not the children, for they inherit eternal life. So who is wronged? Ironically, I think the most difficult part of this whole debate is the apparent wrong done to the Israeli soldiers themselves. Can you imagine what it would be like to have to break into some house and kill a terrified woman and her children? The brutalising effect on these Israeli soldiers is disturbing.
- Canaan was being given over to Israel, whom God had now brought out of Egypt. If the Canaanite tribes, seeing the armies of Israel, had simply chosen to flee, no one would have been killed at all. There was no command to pursue and hunt down the Canaanite peoples.
It is therefore completely misleading to characterise God's command to Israel as a command to commit genocide. Rather it was first and foremost a command to drive the tribes out of the land and to occupy it. Only those who remained behind were to be utterly exterminated. No one had to die in this whole affair.
- . Subject: The “Slaughter” of the Canaanites Re-visited. Reasonable Faith. Retrieved on 2011-10-20., quoted in Dawkins, Richard (2011-10-20). "Why I refuse to debate with William Lane Craig". Guardian. Retrieved on 2011-10-20.
- Well, there are two kinds of people in the world, my friend. Those who show up and those who get Eastwooded. You get Eastwooded.
- to an empty chair representing Richard Dawkins, Contending with Christianity's Critics Conference, Watermark Community Church, Dallas, 2012-09-29
- viewable at ReasonableFaithOrg (2012-10-09). Eastwooding Richard Dawkins. YouTube. Retrieved on 2012-10-10. Also quoted in Gryboski, Michael (2012-10-09). "Christian Apologist ‘Eastwooding’ After Richard Dawkins Refuses Debate". The Christian Post. Retrieved on 2012-10-10.
- What good does it do to pray about anything if the outcome is not affected? I would say when God chooses which world to actualize, he takes into account the prayers that would be offered in that world. We shouldn't think prayer is about changing the mind of God. He's omniscient; he already knows the future, but prayer makes a difference in that it can affect what world God has chosen to create.
- Kate Shellnutt (31 January 2014), "William Lane Craig: God Hears Your Super Bowl Prayers", Christianity Today, ISSN 0009-5753
- Posed question: "What’s the value in praying for God's will to be done for the outcome of a game if God's will will be done whether we pray or not?"
Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics (1994)
- Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics (Revised ed.). Wheaton, IL: Crossway. 1994. ISBN 0-89107-764-2.
- Therefore, when a person refuses to come to Christ it is never just because of lack of evidence or because of intellectual difficulties: at root, he refuses to come because he willingly ignores and rejects the drawing of God's Spirit on his heart. No one in the final analysis really fails to become a Christian because of lack of arguments; he fails to become a Christian because he loves darkness rather than light and wants nothing to do with God.
- pp. 35-36.
- We've already said that it's the Holy Spirit who gives us the ultimate assurance of Christianity's truth. Therefore, the only role left for argument and evidence to play is a subsidiary role. I think Martin Luther correctly distinguished between what he called the magisterial and ministerial uses of reason. The magisterial use of reason occurs when reason stands over and above the gospel like a magistrate and judges it on the basis of argument and evidence. The ministerial use of reason occurs when reason submits to and serves the gospel... Should a conflict arise between the witness of the Holy Spirit to the fundamental truth of the Christian faith and beliefs based on argument and evidence, then it is the former which must take precedence over the latter, not vice versa.
- p. 36.
- The Bible says all men are without excuse. Even those who are given no good reason to believe and many persuasive reasons to disbelieve have no excuse, because the ultimate reason they do not believe is that they have deliberately rejected God's Holy Spirit.
- p. 37.
- If there is no God, then man and the universe are doomed. Like prisoners condemned to death, we await our unavoidable execution. There is no God, and there is no immortality. And what is the consequence of this? It means that life itself is absurd. It means that the life we have is without ultimate significance, value, or purpose.
- p. 58.
- More often than not, it is what you are rather than what you say that will bring an unbeliever to Christ.
This, then, is the ultimate apologetic. For the ultimate apologetic is: your life.
- p. 302.
Quotes about Craig
- [William Lane Craig] said that as long as God gives the thumbs-up, it's okay to kill pretty much anybody. It's okay to kill bad people, because they're bad and they deserve it... and it's okay to kill good people, because they wind up in Heaven. As long as God gives the thumbs-up, it's okay to systematically wipe out entire races. As long as God gives the thumbs-up, it's okay to slaughter babies and children. Craig said — not essentially, not as a paraphrase, but literally, in quotable words — "the death of these children was actually their salvation."
- Greta Christina, "One More Reason Religion Is So Messed Up: Respected Theologian Defends Genocide and Infanticide". Alternet. 2011-04-25.
- quoting "Subject: Slaughter of the Canaanites", Reasonable Faith (see above).
- I have no intention of assisting Craig in his relentless drive for self-promotion.
- Richard Dawkins, quoted in Tim Ross (2011-05-14). "Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God". The Telegraph.
- In an epitome of bullying presumption, Craig now proposes to place an empty chair on a stage in Oxford next week to symbolise my absence. The idea of cashing in on another's name by conniving to share a stage with him is hardly new. But what are we to make of this attempt to turn my non-appearance into a self-promotion stunt? In the interests of transparency, I should point out that it isn't only Oxford that won't see me on the night Craig proposes to debate me in absentia: you can also see me not appear in Cambridge, Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh, Glasgow and, if time allows, Bristol.
- I just want to say, it's an honor to be here at Notre Dame, and I'm very happy to be debating Dr. Craig, the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists. I've actually gotten more than a few e-mails this week that more or less read, "Brother, please don't blow this."
- But I can tell you that my, um, my brothers and sisters and co-thinkers in the unbelieving community take him very seriously. He's thought of as a, uh, tough guy; very rigorous, very scholarly, very formidable. And I say that without reserve. I don't say it because I'm here. Normally I don't get people saying "good luck tonight" and "don't let us down" but with him I do.