William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins (HQ) 2/11

This is the 1998 debate between Dr. William Lane Craig and Dr. Peter W. Atkins in high quality.

.....................................THE DEBATE.................................. .
WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR/AGAINST THE EXISTENCE OF GOD?

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Peter
• Atkins
• F.
• Buckley
• Atheism
• Theism

[giorgiv18]

Craig looks better with a beard.

[rooney0423]

@MannyXj1 Zeus is not claimed to be the origin of moral values as Zeus was not a perfect representation of moral values; Zeus very often engaged in immoral acts (i.e. rape), but got away with it because he was the "king" of the gods and no one could challenge his authority without being smitten. The monotheistic/Judeo-Christian God is indeed claimed to be the origin of moral values since God is portrayed to be perfect and to be a perfect representation of each and every moral value.

[KoBred1]

Lol im learning so much thank you

[CVLFMG]

1:57 Atkins is wondering what the fuck he got himself into

[OSTube1]

Atkins did better than most people give him credit for. At least he managed to cut to the core of WLC's fallacy: all his arguments require a metaphysical leap while simpler explanations cannot be ruled out. 1. The universe appears to be designed so there must be a supernatural designer 2. There are reports of a supernatural event so it must be supernatural 3. I feel God from within so there must be... etc. Atkins 'science can explain everything'-argument is shaky at best though

[ralph489]

I love how Craig brings up rape as his example of an objective moral wrong that isn't objectively wrong on atheism. It's hilarious that he does this, because it may be that there is objective morality on atheism, and that it makes rape objectively wrong. However, on Christianity, rape is not objectively wrong, at least not by a divine commandment. The Bible is oddly silent on this (as well as on slavery and child abuse, for that matter).

[ralph489]

@rooney0423 This God you refer to who is portrayed to be perfect is the Yahweh of the BIble, correct? This is the one who supposedly ordered the ethnic cleansing of the Amalekites? Who by tradition ordered the rape of women captured by his tribe? The description in the Bible is closer to Saddam Hussein on his worst day than to a "perfect representation of moral values".

[trom2004]

Its easy to write paragraphs upon paragraphs (as shown below) but the point never sticks. I believe (with a logical string that goes through all my points) that people learn from the very beginning (however it happened) that its better to live with friendly people, than cut throat people. Civilization eventually advanced and put up tribal rules for each village to help keep the people feeling happy and safe. Religions of the past, even some now, make rape acceptable.

[Mani3e]

@Mani3e i meant not extant

[Mani3e]

@trom2004 the Christian, or believer of any other God, might not be able to prove that his book is "right". However he has reasons to believe that certain things are inherently wrong, because he believe the law is written on his heart. To the naturalist, however, right and wrong is nothing more than illusion created by electric signals in our brain, because if nature is all there is, such thing as an objective, or "higher", moral standard is extant.