  
[
Dr. Craig's Reasonable Faith Site |
Debates |
Articles |
Calendar |
About Dr. Craig ]
The Craig-Pigliucci Debate:
Does God Exist?
Dr. Craig's Closing Statement
I certainly hope you've enjoyed the debate as much as I have this evening! It's been a very
stimulating exchange, I think.
Second Question
Argument from Imperfections
First, what arguments have we seen that
falsify the hypothesis that God exists? Well, in the
last speech we basically heard again the so called "imperfection argument." But, here, I think, it
became evident from Dr. Pigliucci's comments that his arguments are based on the false assumption
that according to theism the world is perfect. Frankly, I can't imagine where he got that idea. As
Christians, we believe God is perfect, but not that the
world is perfect. Look at Genesis, as God saw
that the creation was "good."{1} And I think it certainly is good! But the idea that it is a perfectly
functioning machine is no part of Christian theology or theism. And without that assumption his
whole argument evaporates.
As for the argument concerning evolution, he misquoted me. He said there is no consensus
that human beings would not have evolved by chance. My argument from Barrow and Tipler said
that there is a consensus among every evolutionary biologists that sentient life which is comparable
to homo sapiens in information-processing ability is so improbable that it's unlikely to have
evolved anywhere else in the visible
universe.{2} And, therefore, you cannot use evolution as an
argument against theism. On the contrary, evolution is actually an argument
for theism because it is so improbable that it's unlikely to have occurred in the absence of a supervising Designer.
Pragmatic Argument for Naturalism
Finally, he argued that naturalism is tested everyday, and it works. I would say that it only tests
that there are natural laws. But that's consistent with the idea that there is a Creator who has made
a universe that functions normally according to natural laws.
So none of these arguments provide good grounds for thinking that the God hypothesis is false.
In fact what has emerged from this aspect of the debate are two arguments
for the existence of God in addition to the five I gave, namely, (1) the argument from evolution and (2) the argument from
the existence of evil. So I thank Dr. Pigliucci for giving me two additional arguments on my side of
the debate for the existence of God tonight!
First Question
Now what about reasons that verify the God hypothesis?
First Argument
First, I argued that God is required by the origin of the universe. We saw that whatever begins
to exist has a cause; the universe began to exist; and, therefore, there must be a transcendent,
personal cause of the universe.
Second Argument
Secondly, I argued that complex order of the initial conditions of the universe points to God as
a Designer over the universe. And here Dr. Pigliucci now says that "This is such a waste of space!
The universe is so large!" Not at all! These stellar spaces are necessary in order for the stars to
cook up the heavy elements which are necessary for the existence of life on Earth; and in order to be
that old the universe would have expand 15 billion years. So the size of the universe is related to the
age of the stars, which is related to the furnaces necessary to make the elements requisite for
intelligent life. And, frankly, as a theist I may argue that there may be life elsewhere in the universe that
God has created. How do we know that it is wasted space? Perhaps God has created life elsewhere.
But wherever life exists, it all depends upon that fine-tuning present in the Big Bang itself, which no
one has been able to explain by chance.
Third Argument
Thirdly, objective moral values exist. Again, we saw that in the absence of God we are left
with moral nihilism: there is no right and wrong. If you do believe that there are objective moral
values, then, I think, you will agree with me that God exists.
Fourth Argument
Finally, with respect to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, I think I showed that the
resurrection is the best explanation of those three facts recognized by the majority of New Testament
scholars today.
Fifth Argument
Finally, the immediate experience of God. Let me just say this: I wasn't raised in a Christian
home or a church-going family. But when I became a teenager, I began to ask the big questions in
life--about the meaning of life and death--,and in the search for answers I began to read the New
Testament. And I discovered in the person of Jesus a figure that just arrested and captivated me.
His words had the ring truth about them. And after a period of about six months of the most
intense soul-searching--to make a long story short--, I just gave my life to God, and I experienced a sort
of inner rebirth. God became an immediate living reality in my life, a reality that has never left me.
And I would just challenge you: if you would like to know God in that sort of way yourself, begin
to do what I did. Read the New Testament. I believe it could change your life in the same way that
it changed mine.
Endnotes
{1} Genesis 1.10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31.
{2} Their exact words are: "there has developed a general consensus among evolutionists that
the evolution of intelligent life, comparable in information processing ability to that of
homo sapiens, is so improbable that it is unlikely to have occurred on any other planet in the entire visible
universe" (John Barrow and Frank Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological
Principle [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986], p. 133).
Email this to a friend
copyright
© 1995-2008
Leadership U. All rights reserved.
Updated: 13 July 2002
|