(May 17, 2012 at 9:27 am)Markos Wrote: Just looking at the quote in context (which is on the fifth page of the article you linked to) he doesn't seem to be endorsing this view, but rather describing it:
"A robust natural theology may well be necessary for the gospel to be effectively heard in Western society today. In general, Western culture is deeply post-Christian. It is the product of the Enlightenment, which introduced into European culture the leaven of secularism that has by now permeated Western society. While most of the original Enlightenment thinkers were themselves theists, the majority of Western intellectuals today no longer considers theological knowledge to be possible. The person who follows the pursuit of reason unflinchingly toward its end will be atheistic or, at best, agnostic."
William Lane Craig, quoted from here.
After all, it comes in the context of an article containing a whole host of apologetic arguments (whatever you make of them - I don't particularly rate them myself) which WLC endorses as reasonable.
The reason I linked to the first page is so that anyone who was interested could read the entire article not just on paragraph which by itself doesn't say much. For that matter, the entire article doesn't appear to say much but it is a total reversal from what WLC has said in the past. Now that you say WLC endorses those arguments as reasonable, then when he says "The person who follows the pursuit of reason unflinchingly toward its end will be atheistic or, at best, agnostic." Either he is lying or the entire article is saying do not use reason to be a Christian. Has the apologist slipped up?
