You may dismiss his methodology (but be prepared to pay the consequenses — think about it), or you may reject one of his premises, but let’s not fall into the trap of pretending that Craig isn’t doing some serious philosophy here.A response to a comment of mine of the absurdity of finding personal causation at the beginning of the universe. Projecting our own minds onto the origin of the universe as serious philosophy? Yes, yes, I know... scientism and all that.
Anyway, the discussion led to me bringing my own "serious philosophy" to the table:
- If God is a myth, then Craig’s arguments are fallacious.
- God is a myth.
- Therefore, Craig’s arguments are fallacious.
That’s fine, Kel, but can you defend that second premise as robustly as Craig defends any of his?
What will follow in subsequent posts is my defence of premise 2.
Part 1: Creation myths explain why there are gods
Part 2: Myth provides the best explanation for invoking God to explain order in the universe
Part 3: Myth provides the best explanation for objective moral values
Part 4: Myth provides the best explanation for the historical facts concerning the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus
Part 5: Myth can be immediately known and experienced
Afterword: Methodology, Craig's argument, and Craig's use of language.