Dr. Craig contradiction.

[Godscreated]

---

Dr. Craig, in his debate with Professor Sean Caroll, a cosmologist and physicist at the prestigious California Institute of Technology, stated that,


http://www.reasonablefaith.org/god-and-cosmology-the-existence-of-god-in-light-of-contemporary-cosmology#ixzz44RSeDZ8D

However, if Dr. Craig believes that theism is falsifiable, then Craig must admit that he is not 100% convinced that god exists:

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
   
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
   
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
   
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
   
5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
   
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
   
7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."
   

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_o...robability

Because, to admit that something is falsifiable means to admit that one is not 100% certain of it being true.  If Craig is 100% certain the god exists, then that would mean that he is 100% certain that no evidence exists to the contrary, which means that Craig's belief in god is not falsifiable.

---

Making the claim that such a fantastic creature as that exists and then not providing any evidence is the cosmological problem.
In theism it seems its fine to make a definition of a god, then make an argument that matches that definition, that way they seem at ease with using a definition of how they feel a god must be to be proof of a god.

Seems back to front to me

 Craig never said that God was falsifiable, He said the way one would need to go about it is through who He is and to date no one has. We begin with faith in Christ and what He did on the cross. Then we will move on to belief as we experience God through Bible study and then in the personal relationship God will reveal to the faithful Christian that He is real and who He says He is. Before you come to Christ there will be no proof and after only you and those who live in a personal relationship with Him will understand what God has done in His revelation of himself to the believers.

GC