Famous Atheist [Sam Harris] FINALLY Admits Theism is Back

 

Famous Atheist FINALLY Admits Theism is Back
https://youtu.be/S5RN3kzU3u0

 

 

 

Answers To An Atheist's Mocking Questions About Heaven

 

The following [in blue] is a list of questions an atheist asked in a Facebook group. My answers [with minor additions] are below.

**copied from another group***

SOME FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT HEAVEN:

The following are questions I posted on a Christian forum. Instead of answers, I was blocked. I thought they'd take advantage of this to "win me to Christ?" Anyways.

1. Does heaven exist? If so, where's evidence?

2. According to the bible, heaven is described as streets of gold. Why is it decorated with gold? Is gold still valuable in heaven?

3. People (or faithful Christians) will be rewarded in heaven, according to the bible. But what are they going to do with those rewards? Since obviously, there's not going to be any needs in heaven?

4. Those who diēd as infants, are they going to grow up in heaven? Or they'll remain infants?

5. Are you going to chat with Jesus, Moses, Adam, Eve, etc? What kind of things will you be talking about?

6. Is thinking going to take place in heaven? Because we normally think about how to solve problems, how to use creative techniques, etc. But since there's no problems in heaven, then what exactly are Christians going to be thinking about?

7. If you get to heaven and discover someone you loved hasn't made it, will you miss them, or you'll be emotionally numb? 

8. Can you be happy and joyful, even while other people are being tortūred simply because they didn't believe in the correct religious teachings? E.g. people who are born in India are most likely Hindu. And those in Saudi Arabia are mostly Muslim. Because religion is not discovered, it's inherited. 

9. What are you going to be spending your time on in heaven? Praising God for eternity? Day and night? Is this something God enjoys? 

10. Are people going to sleep in heaven, or their eyes will be open 24 hours for eternity? 

11. Are people going to be learning in heaven? Will ignorance exist? 

12. Satan was kicked out of heaven, according to the bible, his crime was a wrong thought. What guarantee do you have, that you'll not develop a wrong thought while in heaven, especially that you had many of them on earth?m he [[sic]]

My Answers Below:

//1. Does heaven exist? If so, where's evidence?//

Read books on Near Death Experiences like:

a.) Near-Death Experiences as Evidence for the Existence of God and Heaven: A Brief Introduction in Plain Language by Steve Miller

b.) Imagine Heaven: Near-Death Experiences, God's Promises & The Exhilarating Future that Awaits You by John Burke

//2. According to the bible, heaven is described as streets of gold. Why is it decorated with gold? Is gold still valuable in heaven?// 

 You have to understand that there's a difference between the conscious disembodied condition during the Intermediate State which may simulate physical reality, and the Eternal Kingdom of God on Earth [and heaven?] after the resurrection of the body. The description of gold streets could be figurative. Though possibly literal. Just because some streets are gold doesn't mean all are made of gold. Also, gold will have aesthetic value because of its beauty, but not the same financial value. There will be no lack in heaven, so the "economy" will be different.   

Rev. 21:5-7 LSB

[5] And He who sits on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new.” And He *said, “Write, for these words are faithful and true.” [6] Then He said to me, “They are done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. [7] He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son.

//3. People (or faithful Christians) will be rewarded in heaven, according to the bible. But what are they going to do with those rewards? Since obviously, there's not going to be any needs in heaven?//

Rewards come in different forms. From closeness in rank and nearness to God in the kingdom; to responsibilities in ruling cities, peoples and angels [Matt. 19:28; Luke 19:16-19; 22:30; 1 Cor. 6:3]; greater honor [Rom. 2:6-10]; etc. 

Read these sermons:

1. The Weight of Glory by C.S. Lewis

https://www.doxaweb.com/assets/weight_of_glory.pdf
[Last link seems to be back again]

2. Heaven by Edward D. Griffin

https://gospelmeals.blogspot.com/2020/05/heaven-by-edward-d-griffin.html

3. When I Was A Child by Edward D. Griffin

https://gospelmeals.blogspot.com/2020/05/when-i-was-child-i-thought-as-child.html

//4. Those who diēd as infants, are they going to grow up in heaven? Or they'll remain infants?//

They will either slowly grow up in the afterlife, or be fully grow instantaneously [like Adam & Eve].

//5. Are you going to chat with Jesus, Moses, Adam, Eve, etc? What kind of things will you be talking about?//

Yes, we will have relationships and conversations with Jesus and the other redeemed people. Probably with angels too. Topics? Virtually everything. But sanctified conversations. Topics will include Redemptive History in the wide [civilizations] and narrow [individual]. The wonders of creation and New Creation. Old and New heavenly Music. Maybe even old and New novels.

//6. Is thinking going to take place in heaven? Because we normally think about how to solve problems, how to use creative techniques, etc. But since there's no problems in heaven, then what exactly are Christians going to be thinking about?//

There may be more scientific discoveries to be found in the New Creation. In physics, mathematics, philosophy. Read Griffin's sermon on "When I Was A Child" linked above.

//7. If you get to heaven and discover someone you loved hasn't made it, will you miss them, or you'll be emotionally numb? //

Your thinking will be so sanctified that in one sense you will be sad that any human made in God's image is in hell, but at the same time be fully convinced and satisfied that it's perfect justice. You'll be able to see that then, even if in this life it might not seem so.

//8. Can you be happy and joyful, even while other people are being tortūred simply because they didn't believe in the correct religious teachings? E.g. people who are born in India are most likely Hindu. And those in Saudi Arabia are mostly Muslim. Because religion is not discovered, it's inherited. //

That's a misrepresentation. They are in hell for their sins against God, themselves and others, not merely because they didn't believe the right things. God didn't have to provide salvation to anyone or send them the Gospel message to believe. God would have been within His just rights to withhold both atonement and the Gospel from them. And God does withhold the message from some. 

//9. What are you going to be spending your time on in heaven? Praising God for eternity? Day and night? Is this something God enjoys? //

Read the sermons I linked to above.

//10. Are people going to sleep in heaven, or their eyes will be open 24 hours for eternity? //

They probably won't need to, but will likely be able to. Eating will probably not be necessary, but it will be part of the pleasures and rewards of heaven [Matt. 8:11; Luke 13:29; 22:18]. So why not also with sleep?

//11. Are people going to be learning in heaven? Will ignorance exist? //

Yes. See Griffin's sermons above.

Eph. 2:7 ESV

so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

1 Peter 1:12 ESV

[12] It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.

//12. Satan was kicked out of heaven, according to the bible, his crime was a wrong thought. What guarantee do you have, that you'll not develop a wrong thought while in heaven, especially that you had many of them on earth?m he//

Not merely wrong thoughts, but evil and rebellious thoughts and actions. The person of Satan [who wasn't named "Satan" at the time] attempted to overthrow God and usurp His position/throne. See Isa.

 14 and Ezek. 28 which are chapters about human kings at the surface level of the text, but probably have a secondary meaning regarding Satan's rebellion and fall from his former high status among God's angels. 

Divine Hiddenness: Gavin Ortlund's Response to Alex O'Connor

 

 

 

 Divine Hiddenness: My Response to Alex O'Connor
https://youtu.be/_d-6UhOS0FE

 

 My own blogposts on the topic:

Detecting and Finding God
https://gospelcrumbs.blogspot.com/2013/07/detecting-and-finding-god.html

"Unveiling" The Hiddenness of God
https://gospelcrumbs.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-hiddenness-of-god.html

 

 

 

 

 

The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God with William Lane Craig

 

 

The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God | Reasonable Faith Podcast
https://youtu.be/_3AE0DiDH1Q

 

 https://www.reasonablefaith.org/media/reasonable-faith-podcast/the-surprising-rebirth-of-belief-in-god

 

 

 

Epic Debate Matt Dillahunty VS Than Christopoulos

 

 A friendly debate on God's existence.

 

Epic Debate  Matt Dillahunty VS Than Christopoulos
https://youtu.be/OSQWIWY9gYg

Opps! Richard Dawkins CONFIRMS David Wood's Favorite Argument against Atheism!

 

Opps! Richard Dawkins CONFIRMS [David Wood's] Favorite Argument against Atheism!

https://youtu.be/Nahd3iMqTa8?si=S7HAkTv0HMHUwZmu

Big Change Among Atheist Intellectuals

 

Acclaimed podcaster and author Justin Brierley joins Jonathan Wilson to explore why so many prominent atheists are rejecting secular materialism, and re-evaluating the merits of the Christian faith. They discuss how many of these secular elites are reassessing the perceived triumph of science over religion, as well as the fallacy that Western values such as human rights stem from the Greco-Roman world. For those seeking to live a meaningful life, Christianity is once again emerging as a compelling intellectual option.

LINK:

https://ziwani.com/podcasts-page/big-change-among-atheist-intellectuals

Is Belief in God Rational, Reasonable, and Respectable in a Scientific Age?

 

Is Belief in God Rational, Reasonable, and Respectable in a Scientific Age? 

Is Theistic Belief Rational in a Scientific Age? | William Lane Craig vs. Jeff Hester
https://youtu.be/PXE5lQW5RQw

Is Faith in God Reasonable? FULL DEBATE with William Lane Craig and Alex Rosenberg
https://youtu.be/bhfkhq-CM84

Is Christianity Intellectually Respectable? | Dan Barker Vs Dr Randal Rauser | Debate Podcast
https://youtu.be/HD254JbwwRc

Debate: Atheist Tom Jump vs. Christian Presuppositionalist Joshua Pillows

 

Tom Jump Vs Joshua Pillows: Does the God of the Bible Exist? EP 208
https://youtu.be/JBBDW4bmCdE

Debate Resolution: There is Good Reason to Believe That the Christian God Exists [atheist Michael Long vs. Christian presuppositionalist Chris Bolt]

The following debate is between an atheist Michael Long and Christian Van Tillian presuppositionalist Chris Bolt.

Debate | Michael Long vs Chris Bolt Reasons To Think The Christian God Exists
https://youtu.be/We0BOqEWJao

Download mp3 HERE

William Lane Craig & Scott Clifton Discuss the Kalam Cosmological Argument

 

William Lane Craig & Scott Clifton Discuss the Kalam Cosmological Argument

https://youtu.be/TmYCwjU_5Wc

Conversation Between Atheist Steve Baughman and Christian Apologist Jonathan McLatchie

 

Here's a great conversation between an atheist and a Christian apologist.

Conversation Between Atheist Steve Baughman and Christian Apologist Jonathan McLatchie
https://youtu.be/Rkjdvhc3gpo

Where In the Old Testament Is Human Blood Taught to be Acceptable for Atonement?

 

On Facebook I encountered an atheist who said he was familiar with the disputes between non-Messianic Jews and believers in Jesus [i.e. Gentile Christians and Messianic Jews]. He thought the Jewish arguments against Christianity are better than the arguments for Christianity. At one point he asked the following.

 //can you point to one verse that God allows human blood for atonement?//

The following was my answer:

1. Jesus isn't a MERE human. Yes, Jesus was truly human, but He was (and is) also truly God. While only the human nature of Jesus died [NOT the Divine nature], the divine PERSON endured the sufferings of death and died substitutionarily for sinners on their behalf. As a Protestant I hold to penal substitutionary atonement [though, that's consistent with being coupled with other subsidiary theories of the atonement]. Being Divine, Jesus' sufferings and death are of more  value [infinite] than that of finite creatures and therefore could atone for an infinite amount of creatures if necessary.

2. This is also why it's natural to think that the animal sacrifices weren't the ultimate solution for atonement. How could inferior animals atone for superior humans who ARE moral agents? Whereas animals are not moral agents, and don't even rise to the level of human sentience. To use a poor analogy, that's like accidentally destroying a gold wedding ring and offering to make up for it with a beer can ring tab. The OT predicted the coming of the Messiah, and it makes sense for much of the Mosaic Covenant and its laws to be figurative or symbolic or emblematic of the future Messiah's work.

3a. When God was angry with the people of Israel, Moses offered himself to be punished in their place. So the concept of human substitution wasn't completely foreign to a Semitic mindset.

Exo. 32:32 Yet now, if You will forgive their sin --- BUT IF NOT, I pray, BLOT ME OUT OF YOUR BOOK WHICH YOU HAVE WRITTEN."

3b. Even Judah offered himself in the place of Benjamin when there was the threat to arrest Benjamin for allegedly stealing the silver cup. Unbeknownst to them it was their brother Joseph who was testing them. It's interesting that it's JUDAH that offers this exchange/substitution. The Davidic line is from the tribe of Judah. For us Christians, this is a foreshadowing of the sacrifice of Jesus who is the heir to the Davidic throne.

4. We Christians believe Isaiah 53 clearly teaches the death of the Messiah as an atonement for sin. I understand that Non-Messianic Jews reject this. I've heard their arguments. I think the Christian arguments are better. See Michael Brown's responses, for an example.

5. Daniel 9:24-26 is another passage Christians believe predicts the atoning death of the Messiah. Of course, Jews reject this interpretation, and atheists think that the book of Daniel is riddled with false and failed prophecies. Atheists believe that the ones that were fulfilled were postdictions and that the book itself was written much later than is claimed [e.g. cf. the recent debate at Modern-Day Debate between 2 atheists and 2 theists].

6. In Numbers 25 when the Israelites committed harlotry and idolatry, God commanded the rebellious leaders of the people [who were HUMAN like Jesus] to be executed in order to turn away the anger of the LORD as a kind of atonement. Jesus is the Federal Head of His people similar to how these leaders were representatives of the people. Similar to how they were punished to save the people under them, so Jesus was punished in the place of His people [BTW, as a Calvinist my default position is Limited Atonement, but I'm open to other views as well].

 Num. 25:

1 Now Israel remained in Acacia Grove, and the people began to commit harlotry with the women of Moab.

2 They invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods.

3 So Israel was joined to Baal of Peor, and the anger of the LORD was aroused against Israel.

4 Then the LORD said to Moses, "Take all the LEADERS of the people and HANG THE OFFENDERS before the LORD, out in the sun, THAT the FIERCE ANGER of the LORD may TURN AWAY from Israel." 

That doesn't just sound like mere expiation [removal of sin or guilt], but surprisingly even the stronger idea of propitiation [i.e. turning away wrath].

7. We Christians believe that the command by God for Abraham to sacrifice of Isaac was emblematic of God's sacrificing His Son in our place. Right before Abraham was going to carry it out the Angel of the LORD [whom many  Christians think is the pre-incarnate Jesus] told Abraham to stop and not harm Isaac. Then a ram was found nearby which was evidently provided for by God to be the substitute for Isaac. God had many reasons for commanding the sacrifice of Abraham. Some include 

1. To show that Abraham's commitment to his God was no less than other pagans' devotion to their gods. 

2. To indicate for all time afterwards that God rejects human sacrifice [we can discuss Jephthah if you like]. 

3. As a figure of Christ' sacrifice, the unique Son of God, just as Isaac was the unique son of Abraham.

Notice the prophecy in Gen. 22:14

Gen. 22:14 And Abraham called the name of the place, The-LORD-Will-Provide; as it is said to this day, "In the Mount of the LORD it shall be provided."

That's the same area in which Jesus was crucified. For the Christian, the crucifixion of Jesus was the place and time when that prophecy was fulfilled and provision of final atonement was provided.

---

Some after thoughts:

Regarding #2, I found this quote from chapter 5 of A.W. Pink's Divine Covenants:

It is true that great relief was provided by the ceremonial law, for provision was there made for obtaining forgiveness. The means for effecting this was the sacrifices— "the life—blood of an irrational creature, itself unconscious of sin, being accepted by God in His character of Redeemer for the life of the sinner. A mode of satisfaction no doubt in itself unsatisfactory, since there was no just correspondence between the merely sensuous life of an unthinking animal and the higher life of a rational and responsible being; in the strict reckoning of justice the one could form no adequate compensation for the other. But in this respect it was not singular; it was part of a scheme of things which bore throughout the marks of relative imperfection" (P. Fairbairn).

A Quick Response to An Atheist on the Problem of Evil

 

I left a comment on the YouTube video debate between atheist Alex O'Connor (Cosmic Skeptic) and Catholic Bishop Robert Barron on the topic, "Christianity or Atheism?"

Here's an excerpt of a conversation I had in the comments:

AP: Starting with evil and suffering is starting from ingratitude and lack of appreciation. Atheists like Alex need to not only see the evil and suffering in the world, but need to open their eyes more to the good and beauty in the world too. IF they start doing that, they will move in the direction of finding and trusting God without having to know all the intricacies of why God allows the evils and sufferings that He does.

black baron: You're wrong. We already know the answer to why a loving God would allow the evil and suffering we see in the world. He wouldn't. If you love someone you obviously don't want them to suffer GRATUITOUSLY. Good parents sometime let their children suffer, but only to teach them important lessons or make them better, stronger people. They have to do this though. They are not omnipent. They can't always teach the lesson while avoiding the pain. If there is no reason for our suffering it is incompatible with a loving God. Its not an issue of gratitude. It just doesnt make sense. Theists have given answers such as the instrumentality argument or claim that God gave people free will. But these answers don't add up. To start with theres no such thing as free will

AP: @black baron In the philosophical and theological literature on the Problem of Evil [PoE] the deductive forms of the PoE have pretty much been acknowledged by most philosophers as having been solved. That the deductive/logical form of the PoE against God's existence have all failed. That's why most attention nowadays is on the inductive [i.e. probabilistic] versions. 

- Agnostic Philosopher Paul Draper in his essay "Pain and Pleasure: An Evidential Problem for Theists" wrote: "I agree with most philosophers of religion that theists face no serious logical problem of evil."

Atheist Philosopher William L. Rowe in his essay "The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism" wrote:

//"Some philosophers have contended that the existence of evil is <i>logically inconsistent</i> with the existence of the theistic God. No one, I think, has succeeded in establishing such an extravagant claim. Indeed, granted incompatibilism, there is a fairly compelling argument for the view that the existence of evil is logically consistent with the existence of the theistic God."//

Deductive arguments aim for certainty. Inductive arguments don't. They can only rise to the level of probability. Such inductive arguments often appeal to gratuitous evil and the hiddenness of God [e.g. Shellenberg]. But whether there actually are gratuitous evils has yet to be proven by any anti-theistic arguments. As one online encyclopedia says, "Skeptical theism is the view that God exists but that we should be skeptical of our ability to discern God’s reasons for acting or refraining from acting in any particular instance.  In particular, says the skeptical theist, we should not grant that our inability to think of a good reason for doing or allowing something is indicative of whether or not God might have a good reason for doing or allowing something.  If there is a God, he knows much more than we do about the relevant facts, and thus it would not be surprising at all if he has reasons for doing or allowing something that we cannot fathom." 

Besides the Skeptical theism Defense and the Free Will Defense of theistic or agnostic positions, there are positive theodicies on behalf of theism. Like 1. the Soul and Character Building/Developing theodicy; 2. the Glory of God [Reformed] theodicy, 3. Heaven Theodicy, 4. Recompense/Reward Theodicy, 5. Felix Culpa Theodicy [et al.] which could explain why God would allow the evils in the world He has. Unless and until such theodicies are refuted, then the claim of gratuitous evils hasn't been proven.

Regarding omnipotence, some ask, why couldn't God just have created us in a heavenly state and bypass/skip this "vale of tears"? God's omnipotence does not enable Him to instantiate/actualize contradictions. God cannot violate the laws of logic because they are part of His nature. It's logically impossible to develop character virtues like courage, self-sacrifice, charity, perseverance (etc.) in an unfallen world where evil, sin, suffering and adversity hasn't entered. It's logically impossible for God to justly recompense moral agents with rewards and punishments if they didn't actually commit certain acts deserving them and if they only had false memories implanted within them. It's logically impossible for God to redeem, atone for, and save unfallen creatures. Et cetera regarding other theodicies.

I tend to reject the Free Will Argument myself since I'm a Calvinist who rejects libertarian free will and opt for compatibilistic free will. Though, I don't rule it out completely since maybe libertarian free will and some form of middle knowledge is true [either Arminian-like Molinism or Calvinistic-like Suarezian Congruism]. Regarding the omnibenevolence of God, I reject the idea by many that God must be as gracious to every creature equally and to the highest degree. As I understand it, God's omnibenevolence, when attenuated by the Biblical data, merely requires that 1. God is the standard and source of all goodness, and 2. God has some benevolence and love to all creatures. Not that He loves and is gracious to them all equally and to the highest degree. Couple that with various definitions of evil. For example privatio boni whereby evil is the privation/absence/negation/twisting/corruption of the good. God is also sovereign according to the Bible. He can love some more and others less in His sovereignty. Moreover, God is not obligated to be gracious to guilty sinners deserving only of condemnation. That God saves some is a matter of mercy and grace. Grace & mercy by definition are unobligated. If they were obligated, then it would be justice, not grace & mercy.

black baron: thoughtful response. It may be a day or 2 but looks well worth considering when I get a spare couple of hours to myself. thx

Atheist Epistemology is a Mess (with Braxton Hunter & Tyler Vela)

 

Atheist Epistemology is a Mess (with Braxton Hunter & Tyler Vela)

https://youtu.be/0tdWMvp4TiI

Why Should I Return to Christianity

 

An atheist asked the following question in a facebook group:

Question:

I grew up in the church and was a Jesus Freak until I was 15 or so. I was unhappy and it took me about 5 years to decide I was an atheist. Now I'm happier than I ever was.

Why should I become a Christian again if my life is better and filled with so much more happiness now that I'm an atheist?

My response [with minor modifications]:

1. Because Christianity is true. [ Irrespective of proof or  disproof ]

2. Because it's prudentially in your best interest eternally, and often temporally in this life too. 

3. Because deep in your heart you know or suspect theism is true given the sensus divinitatis [sense of the divine] implanted by God in all human beings which all humans try to suppress in their unrighteousness. Possibly you even suspect deep in your heart that Christianity itself is true, given the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit which you might also be suppressing.

 

4. God commands you to believe the Gospel for the glory of God and for your own self-interest. 

5. Because Christianity can ground ultimate meaning, purpose, dignity and value for your own life and all of humanity. Whereas atheism cannot.

6. Because the triune God of Christianity alone can give you what your heart has truly been seeking for all your life. The real goal that earthly things are only a pale ersatz/artificial shadow of.

The Weight of Glory by C.S. Lewis

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1e-ZB3sZNtL3_7IOtyPkCbimW6F0DX-FC/view?usp=sharing

7. There was no good reason for having left Christianity, because all your intellectual objections were, if you're being honest with yourself, post hoc rationalizations for excusing your betrayal and reneging on your commitment to Jesus in order to satisfy your sinful and selfish desires.

8. In all likelihood you didn't examine the positive case for Christianity as thoroughly as you should have because of confirmation bias. We tend to surround ourselves with and shield ourselves from evidence that goes contrary from our shallow desires.  

9. Life is short, death is certain and eternity is forever. 

"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose." - martyred missionary Jim Elliot

10. Softly and Tenderly [Jesus is Calling]

https://youtu.be/B_6s6lRPPBQ

Evidence for God

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2016/12/im-going-to-list-and-summarize-what-i.html

Required reading for atheists

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2019/11/required-reading-for-atheists.html

Book Reviews of Recent Atheist Authors by Christian Apologists 

https://misclane.blogspot.com/2013/09/book-reviews-of-recent-atheist-authors.html

Making a case for Christianity

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2017/12/making-case-for-christianity.html

A case for Christ

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2019/01/a-case-for-christ.html

Over 100 Arguments for the Existence of God

https://youtu.be/Qi7ANgO2ZBU

155 Peer Reviewed Arguments For God's Existence

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XaMCHefpe0d8iJ2guiSQmB_vWkM74ykh/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/15dCoOlLgFgV-GX5u2ju9joLWI8ESe6fe/view?usp=sharing

The Bodily Resurrection of Jesus by William Lane Craig

Skeptics often claim that the New Testament evidence and extra-Biblical evidence isn't clear enough to conclude that the early Christians were positively claiming Jesus' resurrection body was physical rather than spiritual. William Lane Craig addresses that charge in the following article:

The Bodily Resurrection of Jesus by William Lane Craig 

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/scholarly-writings/historical-jesus/the-bodily-resurrection-of-jesus/

DEBATE: Would God Allow Evil? CosmicSkeptic vs InspiringPhilosophy

Being a Calvinist I wouldn't use all of the arguments that Michael Jones uses in this debate. Nevertheless, in my opinion Michael Jones won the debate. Though, Alex O'Connor did a pretty good job as well. Decide for yourself.

DEBATE: Would God Allow Evil? @CosmicSkeptic vs @InspiringPhilosophy

https://youtu.be/hNF9bTESZwE

See also this debate review:

Reviewing the @InspiringPhilosophy vs @CosmicSkeptic Debate on God and Evil

https://youtu.be/fHjlaA4Qp_Q

Are Atheists Biased or Objective? What Do the Studies Reveal?

Are Atheists Biased?

https://youtu.be/_1MBI5z0MMY

Does Math Point to God? Discussion Between William Lane Craig & Graham Oppy

Christian apologist William Lane Craig has described atheist Graham Oppy as "scary smart" on multiple occasions. After many years of people waiting for the two to either debate or discuss a topic live, they finally have a live public discussion on the subject of whether mathematics in physics point the existence of God.

Does Math Point to God? William Lane Craig + Graham Oppy

https://youtu.be/8WE1y00bwCU

A Simple Breakdown of the Craig vs Oppy Debate on Math and God
https://youtu.be/re-kuNbHd4A

William Lane Craig responds to Stephen Woodford's criticisms.

Has an Atheist Debunked Wigner's Argument from Mathematics??
https://youtu.be/YK_IyUlDPhI

or here:

 Has Dr. Craig's Mathematical Argument for God Been "Debunked"?

https://youtu.be/H9KUWdnXzho

Handicapping the Craig/Oppy debate by Steve Hays