William Lane Craig is a popular Christian philosopher and apologist who regularly debates atheists. Despite saying many ugly and stupid things, I think Craig almost always wins his debates with atheists.
Often, this is because his atheist opponents just aren’t very good debaters. Craig has been debating since high school, and many of his opponents don’t have any experience debating. That makes a big difference. To beat Craig in a debate, you’ve got to have some serious debate skills.
But you’ve also got to know the arguments.
Luckily, Craig gives the exact same arguments and makes the exact same points in every debate. So it’s really easy to prepare responses for everything he’s going to say. Atheists are just too lazy to do it.
Eventually, I’ll cover all of Craig’s arguments and assertions in depth (as I’m currently doing with his Kalam argument), but for now I’ll just recommend some research.
- There are currently over 55 William Lane Craig debates linked on my debates page. Read/hear/watch those, and familiarize yourself with his arguments, and with his responses to common atheist objections.
- Craig’s arguments are all arguments to the best explanation. But “Goddidit” is a terrible explanation for pretty much anything. Some good material on this includes Dawes’ Theism and Explanation.
- To get familiar with Craig’s Kalam cosmological argument, see my Kalam bibliography.
- To get familiar with the teleological argument, start with the SEoP, Craig’s article, and Sober’s article.
- For work on the moral argument, see the SEoP, Craig’s article, Loftin’s article, Linville’s article, and my response to Linville.
- For Craig’s arguments on the resurrection of Jesus, there are mountains of data to pour over, but Doubting Jesus’ Resurrection is a good place to start.
- As for Craig’s ‘Holy Spirit epistemology,’ you’ll have to read Plantinga and his detractors (Parsons, Grigg, Zeis, etc.).
- To respond to Craig’s criticisms of verificationism and evidentialism, you’ll have to learn some basic epistemology.
My links cover these topics much better than they have been covered by any atheist in a debate with Craig. Even just parroting the responses made by these articles would improve on all past atheist debate performances.