We've talked about counter-apologist before Dr Craig and some of his work we've interacted with the thoughtful atheist who says that countering Christian apologetics arguments with logic

evidence and reason is his main goal. But in a blog a couple of months ago, he's wondering why he should bother this whole enterprise.

He says, I'll be honest, lately I've been wondering about why I stay in the game.

I've gotten a bit sick of hashing through arguments that can never really

be answered, which is what the overwhelming majority of arguments really hit on when it comes

to philosophy of religion.

Well, that's an opening salvo right there

that you might want to address.

Well, I think that this is the nature of the discipline of philosophy.

These are open-ended questions, which are never finally and decisively

resolved, but which can be explored again and again in every generation and people who have inquiring and

restless minds are eager to explore the deep intellectual issues. That's not just true of philosophy of religion but

metaphysics as well. Theories about the nature of material composition for

example or philosophy of mind for another example.

These are open-ended questions which philosophers enjoy exploring because they think they're worth

asking.

And if you'll pardon the pun, he's fine-tuning his approach he says rather than just these vague

theism or broader theism arguments that he's always running into.

He wants to narrow that down to just the claims of the Christian faith, as we'll see as he says

here at the end of this.

But I think what got him frustrated is something that he read on capturing Christianity

or saw on their YouTube channel about divine hiddenness.

...