William Lane Craig is a theologian whom I have encountered before because of his advocacy of what is known as ‘divine command theory‘ that asserts that “things are morally good or bad, or morally obligatory, permissible, or prohibited, solely because of God’s will or commands”, and results in him justifying the most horrendous atrocities, both biblical and contemporary.
Craig’s other project is to try to logically argue for the existence of god without actually providing any evidence. These attempts to argue for the existence of any entity on purely logical grounds and without any empirical support other than the brute fact of the universe’s existence seem to me to be a futile exercise on the face of it. However theologians have a long history of trying to do so and Craig spends a lot his energy trying to provide scientific and mathematical support for the so-called Kalam cosmological argument.
This argument depends crucially on the idea that the universe had a beginning in time and essentially has the following logical structure:
(1) Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence.
(2) The universe has a beginning of its existence.
(3) The universe has a cause of its existence.
(4) If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is God.
(5) God exists.
The catch is that if you want to challenge Craig on his own terms, then you have to wade through a lot of stuff, since he will throw a lot of scientific and mathematical terminology at you.
Fortunately one of this blog’s readers CounterApologist has taken the time and trouble to do all that work for us. He has a series of four posts titled Countering the Kalam where he carefully refutes the argument, and also has created a short five-minute video below that gives a summary of his refutation.
Taken together, you should have all the information you need to deal with this argument if one of Craig’s acolytes should spring it on you.