Evidence for God from Science

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:What are his other arguments he uses?

Kurieuo wrote: I don't think so... Jimmy was mainly concerned with theology and focused largely on specifically discrediting Christianity and Scripture. Ipazia was familiar with physics so probably could have possibly caused a bit of doubt regarding Craig's "big bang" argument, but then I believe Dacey did this effectively enough. I sincerely doubt both would not be as equipped philosophically nor as qualified as Dacey.

I should remind you, that Craig is a veteran debater, and has much knowledge and experience. There are many well respected opponents who "the other side" (that is, non-Christian/Athiest side) choose. These discussions aren't rigged in Craig's favour by picking out someone easy for him to debate. And I think any lack of persausive arguing on Dacey's part does not come down to his lack of skills, but rather I think it is simply because Theism is so much more consistent and rationally grounded than Atheism. Now it still could be that the quality of Craig's opponents (and Dacey "may" be a poor opponent like you believe), but once one sees Craig win against well-respected opponents time after time, my feeling grows more and more that it is simply the Atheistic worldview that is lacking and not his opponents.

Kurieuo

Kurieuo wrote:

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:What are his other arguments he uses?

Just take a look at his debates that I linked to...