A Philosophical and Historical Analysis of William Lane Craig’s Resurrection of Jesus Argument - Dec 2014

Published in Cambridge University’s Think journal (Volume 14, Issue 39, pp. 59-71) in Spring 2015.

Online link here. The abstract:


William Lane Craig is a prolific Christian apologist who has written many articles and popular books on the mainly philosophical arguments for God’s existence, and is famed for his debating, and his engaging with the public. His work with philosophical arguments is significant, as there is no confirmed empirical evidence for the existence of God, nor can there be any good historical evidence; sound historical methodology necessarily being dismissive of supernatural claims. Craig has formulated a number of arguments that he presents in a clear and accessible cumulative case. These mostly philosophical arguments are riddled with problems, the most significant being that it is far from clear why the hypothetical god of the arguments must be the Judeo-Christian God that Craig personally believes in. By his own admission, the only one of these arguments that identifies his god is his Christological or Resurrection of Jesus argument, which concludes that a miracle-working Jesus of Nazareth was resurrected from the dead, by the theistic/Christian god. In other words, refuting Craig’s cumulative case for the Christian god’s existence is remarkably simple: only the Resurrection argument needs addressing, and given that it is actually a historical argument, a refutation is arrived at very swiftly.

Raphael Lataster 2021