Our last apologetic's topic focused on the first chapter of William Lane Craig's book, "On Guard," where he laid out how absurd and unlivable life would be if an atheist were to be logically consistent and live out the implications of their worldview. While that doesn't disprove atheism, it should at least produce an interest in individuals to seek out and weigh the merits of believing in a god/gods/God. In the next chapter, "Why Does Anything At All Exist?," Craig is going to move into positive arguments for God. Here, Craig assesses the very origins of the universe.
1. Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence [either in necessity of it's own nature, or an external cause].
2. If the universe has an explanation, that explanation is God.
3. The universe exists.
4. Since the universe exists, it must have an explanation of its existence.
5. That explanation is God.
The argument above is unarguably logically valid. IF the premises are true, the conclusion MUST be true. Obviously, atheists will not agree with the conclusion, so they must disarm the argument by disproving at least one of the premises 1-3. Therefore, Craig spends most of his chapter defending the premises.