Posted: Apr 07, 2011 7:04 pm
by hotshoe
Teuton wrote:
colubridae wrote:
The red bit is a nasty little attempt at shifting the onus.
No-one has to provide evidence for a denial of 1,2 or 3.
The onus is on the claimant to provide evidence.

The chapter on the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA) in the Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology has 100 pages. There you find all of Craig's supporting arguments that he thinks render the KCA sound.

Supporting arguments? In other words, it takes 100 pages of obfuscation and sophistry to obscure the simple fact, observed just above here, that little Willy can't provide any actual, err, evidence.

And hopes that by going on to such an extent everyone will get lost in his blather and forget that little fact. It's just another, longer, attempt to dishonestly define something into existence.