Theism vs Atheism - Shandon Guthrie vs Douglas Krueger

May, 2005 - Shandon L. Guthrie (theist) debates Doug E. Krueger (atheist) on the topic: "Theism VS ATheism: Which View is More Rational." Watch as Guthrie takes on and counters every hard-hitting case Krueger (and the biased radio host) has against theism.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Shandon
• Guthrie
• Doug
• Krueger
• Debate
• Atheist
• Theist
• Cosmological
• Teleological
• Fine-Tuning
• Design
• God
• Religion
• Science
• Presumption
• of
• Atheism
• Theism
• Christianity
• Universe
• Multiverse
• Big
• Bang
• Singularity
• Cyclical
• Model
• Oscillating
• Ekpyrotic
• Vilenkin
• Guth
• Borde
• Apologetics
• Philosophy
• Suffering
• Pain
• Morality
• Evil

[chuckwagon1645]

@Mogley52 What difference does it make if SOME evolutionists disagree with the consensus? Most however DO agree. We will never know things with any ABSOLUTE certainty. It is about probability. Evolution most likely did occur. The majority of the scientific community accepts that as fact. HOW evolution occurred is the subject of debate. Not whether it DID happen at all. 

[chuckwagon1645]

@Mogley52 You present a flawed analogy here.You contrast the design of the sand castle to something NOT designed such as the sand around it. For you to prove that the universe was designed you would have to demonstrate that this universe would not look the same way had it been formed by natural means. Calling natural forces random is a misrepresentation of such phenomenon. Such forces are well understood by science. We can predict them to some degree. They have verifiable patterns.

[MrWagman11]

God can not be proved to exist and can not be prove to not exist.

[Mogley52]

THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real an eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith ~ Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology).

[grizzlednutz]

the next step of debates is this: a winner should be declared at the end of every debate. the mediator should have a weighted vote and the crowd should be polled as to whom they think wins the debate, there is then declared a winner of the debate. similar to boxing.

[grizzlednutz]

wow, guthrie got destroyed this was hilarious.

[Mogley52]

INTELLIGENT DESIGN DEBATE: If you discovered a sand castle on a lonely beach, you can't prove it was made by either chance or design. No one observed its origins. Either it was designed or the random forces of wind and waves made the castle. You didn't find fingerprints. Did the wind wipe the fingerprints away? How do we know that there were fingerprints in the first place? By chance or by design? Both sides should present their case. Read the article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

[Mogley52]

NOT ALL EVOLUTIONISTS even agree on the fossils used to support and reconstruct human evolution. The bones are incomplete. There's no certainty of the bones belonging to the same creature. They can reconstruct whatever they want from these bones, and they have. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from a four-legged dog-like creature. Read my article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE

[1empathy]

If theists ever agree which god they worship and how, i might take them seriously.

[deshaebeasley]

atheism and theism hold opposite views on the multiverse level. Atheism with the belief that things get more and more simple (evolution of universes). Maybe outside this universe their are less laws like gravity here is universal law and numbers. Theist believe that things get more and complex.. until we reach a complexity so great that we cant even comprehend its beginning.