GOD- A Debate between William Lane Craig and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong

The question of whether or not God exists has been debated vigorously
for millennia. It’s easy to see why so many people remain intensely
interested in this issue. According to traditional believers, human
existence finds its ultimate fulfillment only in relation to God.
Moreover, in the minds of many, eternal life hangs in the balance.
The effects of belief or disbelief in God can also be dramatic in this
world. Beliefs about God often influence positions on important and
controversial issues, such as sexual behavior, abortion, medical research
using stem cells, and, of course, prayer in public schools and
government support for religious schools and charities. Many decisions
in daily life—not just on Sunday—also depend on belief or disbelief
in God. Social action has often been motivated by belief in God.

Friendships, communities, and political alliances frequently form or
break down because of common or conflicting beliefs about God. We
all need to decide where we stand on the issue of God’s existence.
Despite the antiquity of this question, new aspects of this debate
have arisen recently, partly because of developments in science and
philosophy. Big Bang cosmology is the best-known example, but each
year brings new results of research into the origins of life and of our
universe. Novel philosophical theories of causation, knowledge, and
morality also bear on the arguments for and against the existence of
God. Ongoing psychological research and the quest for the historical
Jesus by biblical scholars also introduce relevant considerations.
That is why these debates must be renewed continually.
Unfortunately, many debates about God overlook such recent developments
and degenerate into simplistic rhetoric or mutual misunderstanding.
Other discussions of God’s existence become so technical
that only experts can follow them. Neither of these extremes
ix
x Preface
serves the needs of those who are sincerely concerned about whether
or not to believe in God.
Our goal in this book is to steer a middle course between these
extremes. We have formulated our positions in light of recent science
and philosophy, but we have also avoided technical details that
would be confusing or distracting to most readers. We try to focus
on the arguments that are uppermost in the minds of non-specialists.
For example, instead of investigating modal versions of the ontological
argument, which even professional philosophers find obscure,
we discuss religious experience, the Bible, evil, eternity, the origin
of the universe, design, and the connection or lack of connection between
morality and the existence of God. These considerations are
what most people want to understand when they are deciding
whether or not to believe in God.
We also try to avoid the mutual misunderstandings that plague
debates about God. Many discussions get confused because theists
defend non-traditional accounts of God that atheists do not deny or
because atheists deny outmoded views about God that theists no
longer defend. To avoid such misunderstandings, we agreed from
the start that we were going to talk about God as He is usually defined
within the Judaeo-Christian tradition. This ensures that what
one of us claims is what the other denies. Moreover, our debate is
not just about whether God can be known to exist. Agnostics deny
that we can know that God exists, but agnostics do not deny that
God exists. In contrast, Sinnott-Armstrong denies that God exists,
whereas Craig claims that God exists. Our disagreement is not about
the limits of knowledge but, instead, directly about whether God
exists.
The style of our book results from its origin in live debates. Craig
had already debated the existence of God with several philosophers
around the United States, when he was invited to participate in another
debate at Dartmouth College on November 4, 1999. Sinnott-
Armstrong had never publicly debated or written on this topic, but
he had expressed his views to students, one of whom asked him to
face Craig. In that first debate, Craig argued for the existence of
God, and then Sinnott-Armstrong criticized Craig’s arguments and
offered arguments to the contrary. The ensuing discussion was both
fun and illuminating. The return match was held at Wooddale
Preface xi
Church in Eden Prairie, Minnesota on April 1, 2000. There Sinnott-
Armstrong opened by arguing against the existence of God, and then
Craig criticized Sinnott-Armstrong’s arguments and offered arguments
to the contrary. The extremely positive reactions to both of
these debates were what made us decide to expand them into this
book.
To retain the lively character of the debates, Craig developed his
opening remarks at Dartmouth into Chapter 1 of this book, while
Sinnott-Armstrong expanded his opening remarks in Minnesota into
Chapter 4 of this book. After exchanging those chapters, Sinnott-
Armstrong polished his criticisms at Dartmouth to produce Chapter
2 of this book, and Craig elaborated his remarks in Minnesota
to create Chapter 5 of this book. Finally, after we exchanged Chapters
2 and 5, Craig wrote Chapter 3 in response to Sinnott-Armstrong’s
Chapter 2, and Sinnott-Armstrong constructed Chapter 6
as a reply to Craig’s Chapter 5. Although we did later change a little
wording and a few details in the chapters that were written earlier,
we agreed not to change anything significant that would affect
the other author’s main criticisms in the chapters that were written
later. Revisions and responses were saved for the closing chapters
of each Part, Chapters 3 and 6. This order of composition means
that, although each of us might prefer to make some changes in the
chapters that were written earlier, our book as a whole should read
more like an ongoing conversation where positions emerge and qualifications
accumulate, much as they do in a live debate.
This origin in live debate also explains our conversational style.
We do not pull our punches or go off on technical tangents. We give
concrete examples and use common language. We are both aware
that many details would need to be added if we were writing for an
audience of professional philosophers of religion, but we chose to
simplify our writing in order to increase our book’s accessibility and
liveliness.
We are also committed to fairness. That is why Craig gets to set
the terms of the debate by going first, but Sinnott-Armstrong gets
the last word. Also to ensure fairness, just as speakers are limited to
the same time in real debates, we agreed to limit ourselves to approximately
the same total number of words in each corresponding
chapter. This plan forced us to make some of our points very conxii
Preface
cisely, but our brevity should enable our book to keep the attention
of even the most impatient reader.
Or so we hope. Whether we succeed in these goals is, of course,
for you to judge.
William Lane Craig would like to thank Craig Parker, who is a
Campus Minister with the Navigators at Dartmouth College, Voces
Clamantium, which is a Dartmouth student group that explores intellectual
life from a Christian point of view, and the Cecil B. Day
Foundation for their help in organizing and sponsoring our first debate.
He also thanks Ken Geis, associate pastor at Wooddale Church
in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, and Prof. David Clark of Bethel Seminary
for arranging our second exchange. Finally, thanks are due, of
course, to Walter Sinnott-Armstrong for being such a charitable and
engaging partner, not only in each debate but also in the production
of this book.
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong would also like to thank the sponsors
of our two live debates, as well as William Lane Craig for providing
such spirited and genial opposition. In addition, Sinnott-Armstrong
is very grateful to all of his colleagues in various departments at Dartmouth
College who helped him with details in their areas of expertise.
These friends include, especially, Susan Ackerman, Rob
Caldwell, Julia Driver, Bernie Gert, Marcelo Gleiser, Jack Hanson,
Sam Levey, Laurie Snell, Christie Thomas, and James Walters, as
well as many others whom he bothered with numerous questions on
these issues over the years. He is also grateful to all of his students
who encouraged him in this project, especially those who had the
courage to stand up to him and argue against his views. In addition,
a great debt is due to his magnificent research assistant, Kier Olsen
DeVries, whose help in this project and many others has been simply
outstanding. Finally, Sinnott-Armstrong would like thank Robert
Miller at Oxford University Press for his support and encouragement,
as well as the reviewers for the press, especially Ed Curley,
for their detailed comments. Thanks to you all.

To download this book for free click here