| | |
 |
|
| 03-30-2004 | Previous edition: 03-28-2004 |
        
     |
Printer-friendly version Theological debate brings issues to forefront
Staff Writer Although there was no proclaimed victor in Monday night’s debate of God’s existence, many controversial issues were raised. Austin Dacey, director of the Center for Inquiry, presented the atheist point of view while William Lane Craig, a top philosopher of theism, presented the Christian views. Craig began the debate by stating his reasons for the belief in theism. "First of all, the origin of the universe is not eternal," said Craig. "There was an absolute beginning with the Big Bang Theory. The universe could not have started from nothing. Therefore, there must be a timeless, spaceless being of unfathomable power." Craig continued his defense of theism by recalling historical accounts of Jesus and his resurrection from the grave. He gave evidence of studies in which New Testament historians agreed that facts point to "virtual certainty of the resurrection." Dacey followed up Craig’s case by stating that there are better reasons to believe that no superior being exists. "Basically, God can’t exist because the idea just makes no sense," said Dacey. "The evidence for theism is simply insufficient, yet there is overwhelming evidence for atheism." Dacey began by saying that if we are to believe in God, we expect that he would have powers to make us believe, and there would not be reason to hold this debate. The "divine handedness" of God, however, is "precisely what we would expect if He didn’t exist," he said. Dacey also pointed out that science is extremely successful without taking God into account and that the process of evolution is extremely inefficient and imperfect. "There are many nonfunctional and dysfunctional designs in humans, such as our nose and mouth being too close and we sometimes choke," Dacey said. "We expect that God would create living things with a rational and efficient process, but this is not the case." The evidence that Dacey spent the most time discussing was the existence of pointless suffering in the world, saying that we would expect God to prevent these tragedies. "There is no comfort offered to a sick or dying child," he said. "God does not come to them with a reason for their suffering." Nicholas McKeehan, junior in the School of Science, said he didn’t feel that either side represented a better case. "I was in between viewpoints when I came here tonight and I still have not made up my mind," said McKeehan. "This has certainly given me a lot to think about, though." Printer-friendly version |
|
Front Page | Campus | City | Features | Opinions | Sports | Classifieds Advertising | Archive | Links | About us | Letter Submission Form To report any errors with or to give ideas on how we can improve the online edition of The Exponent contact Online Production |
