John Shook v. William Lane Craig Debate: "Does God Exist?"

Part 1/2

University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Sponsored by Campus for Christ at UBC

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• debate
• god
• exist
• existence
• secular
• atheism
• william
• lane
• craig
• agnostic
• atheist
• john
• shook
• humanist
• humanism
• freethought
• deist
• religion
• skeptic
• naturalist
• science

[emailpobox666]

@smitty0521 Fine tuning begs the question when it assumes that the universe has a goal/purpose to create life.Just becasuse the human mind is pattern seekuing doesn not mean there is an actual pattern to discern. In the end it is Faith not these failed arguments

[emailpobox666]

@smitty0521 Causality was incoherent prior to the universe existing. Aristtle was commenting on causality within the framework of spasce time. Goood try though.

[smitty0521]

@emailpobox666 Regarding causality, I found that a little reading of aristotle on this subject is helpful. He describes a material causality and an efficient cause. If you ask why a light is on, the material cause would involve electricity and light bulbs while the efficient cause would be the person who flipped the switch on.

The origin of the universe would, clearly, not have a material cause, but I believe that with a supernatural world view, an efficient cause (ie God) is sufficient.

[smitty0521]

@emailpobox666 To argue for fine tuning, you must show a great degree of complexity (easy to show by looking at the list of constants in the back of a physics text book) and a compatibility with a very specific pattern, namely life. My experience through college and medical school has led me to believe that life does require a very specific pattern in all the complexity of the universe.

So, to me the evidence, while not being a mathematical proof, does point strongly to a designer.

[emailpobox666]

@smitty0521 Fine tuning begs the question and assumes the universe has a purpose Moral objective argument circular reasoning. Ontological incoherent definition of maximal greatness, cosmological causality is incapable of being discussed prior to the universe. The most interesting of them is the Cosmological Craig admitted that the argument fails but still uses it.

[smitty0521]

So much of what Shook says is based on ignorance or lack. His definition of atheism is so void that even a stick would meet the criteria. He takes totally no burden of proof. He is skeptical of Craig's arguments without offering reasons why. His defense seems more based on ignorance and his own confusion about many of the difficult concepts that Craig brings forth.

[soygoratsu]

I think Shook's opening statement was solid and true. I have difficulties with WLC, he kinda circles around the arguments against his arguments without ever confronting them and his overall arrogance seems missplaced. Would love to see WLC in a real debate without any moderator. Like the one between Lennox and Dawkins. Any links guys?

[MusicByMartin]

0:47:19 "Dose God Exist?" Seriously?

[84mwalk]

i just cant quite get behind dr shook. part of me wants to but when all is said and done the arguments for the existence of God seem to far outweigh the arguments for the opposed.

[TheEarthFirst]

@sandyandcrustybungle - An atheist says that there is not enough evidence for he, himself to believe in god go to church , pray etc... Most atheists won't say there is no god because we cannot prove there isn't any. I believe that god is highly unlikely due to the lack of good solid evidence that there is one.