Listen Here: http://www.spreaker.com/user/cellardoorskeptics/17-debate-presup
This week is a first us here at Cellar Door Skeptics, a formal debate on the topic “Is There Sufficient Evidence For The Christian God?” Chris Hanna will be taking the moderator position in an effort to quell the fire and the flames between his co-host Christopher Tanner and our guest, Aaron Furlong. Aaron will be taking the positive with a strong background in presuppositional Christian apologetics and Christopher will be representing the skeptics and atheists who believe there simply just isn’t enough evidence.
Check out the link below for both of the presenters bios along with the rules for the debate.
00:00 Debate Introductions / Rules
05:21 Aaron’s Introduction
13:06 Christopher’s Introduction
21:00 Aaron Questions and Christopher Answers
37:58 Christopher Questions and Aaron Answers
54:11 Aaron’s Monologue Rebuttal
58:57 Christopher’s Monologue Rebuttal
65:00 Back and Forth with Christopher and Aaron
83:22 Audience Questions for Christopher and Aaron
113:30 Aaron’s Closing Statement
118:40 Christopher’s Closing Statement
RSS Feed: https://www.spreaker.com/user/8326690/episodes/feed
Ockham’s Razor is a simple concept. Essentially, it says that when two explanations have equal amount of explaining power, it is best to take the simpler explanation over the more complex one. I have discussed it in passing within previous articles, but I really believe that this concept deserves a post of its own. This is because Ockham’s Razor is an extremely valuable concept in debating theists, who like to rationalize away the problems with their belief system, and really tip a debate with two seemingly viable explanations for an event in favor of the atheist. When used properly, this logical tool literally cuts through the bull that I often see Christian apologists and other theists try to peddle.
I recently had a conversation with someone over the problem of evil, and why bad things happen in our world. My explanation is simple: Bad things happen because God is not in control of the universe. There is no evidence this being exists, and the state of the universe seems incompatible with this being’s core characteristics. An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being cannot exist because such a deity could have made the universe without evil; it would know that this universe would lead to evil, and an omnibenevolent being would seek to minimize evil. Since evil exists, this model of God cannot exist.
Continue reading “The Power of Ockham’s Razor”
John Figdor and Dan Fincke tackle subjective verses Objective Morality. John starts us off with why he feels subjective morality is the only way we can understand morals. Dan counters John’s point of view to discuss why Objective #morality true for most situations.
Godless Offerings are condensed clips from shows done on the Atheist Analysis network meant to bring a shortened version of our shows or to highlight important points made during the show.
Please like, share, and subscribe to our channel.
Watch the Original Show Here: http://youtu.be/B519dWROpG4
Continue reading “Godless Offering 16 Free Range Brain Farming: Is Your Morality Caged or Self Defined”
- When theists run out of conventional arguments for the existence of God, sometimes they grow desperate, and take the so called “nuclear option” of attempting to cast doubt on common epistemologies many atheists rely on like empiricism, rationalism, and naturalism. This was the primary approach Sye Ten Bruggencate took in his recent debate against Matt Dillahunty in Memphis, and I am sure many atheists who read this have experienced these kinds of arguments in debating theists. Seeing how this is my first blog post on the Atheist Analysis, and considering how the Bruggencate vs Dillahunty debate is still fresh in everyone’s mind, it makes sense to both comment on presuppositionalism, as well as defend the worldview many atheists rely upon.
Continue reading “Defending Atheism, and Why Presuppositionalist Apologetics Fail”