«

»

Mar
05

David Wood vs. John W. Loftus: Does God Exist? (Part One)

Does God exist? Get the facts in this debate between former atheist David Wood (Acts 17) and former Christian minister John W. Loftus (Debunking Christianity…
Video Rating: 4 / 5

    JVZoo Product Feed

25 comments

No ping yet

  1. Knibis kniben says:

    im an atheist/agnostic, i do believe that same higher power or energy exist
    but why must it be exactly the Christian god and not another cultures god
    or just a higher power not acknowledged by any culture, the possibility for
    one cultures god being the actual god would be high, the big religions are
    mostly political if you look through history, why would more than billions
    of people believe in the same god and jesus, that my friends is politics,,

    but with this said i respect Christianity as it is today compered to the
    totalitarian hate ideology of islam, Christianity has left its barbaric
    past and respects human rights and the freedom of beliefs in other persons,
    i also support Israel all the way!

  2. Peter Metcalfe says:

    An atheist presenting his argument to a group of theists is like a
    Prosecution Council in a court of law presenting his case to a jury who
    have already decided the Defence Council is right before the trial has
    begun.

  3. Robert Sparks says:

    John shows all the signs of having a short circuit in his thinking. When we
    exclude God we are forced to use logic and reason to explain our existence
    without him.
    This means we are forced into a smaller circuit of thinking. John can’t
    come to any reasonable or logical conclusion that God exists because God is
    out of the circuit. This taking God off the table is a game and the rules
    and objective are, “how did we get here?…don’t use God.
    It’s only a game and not a serious inquiry into our existence.
    This short circuit converts reason to facts, logic to evidence and belief
    to truth.
    By excluding God, man has no other option but replace the certainty of God
    with the uncertainty of the human mind.
    If something is reasonable to them it’s a fact, if something is logical to
    them it’s evidence for that fact and if they believe something it becomes
    truth.
    In the real world, reason, logic and belief are anything but certain.
    In the real world reason is whats reasonable and are not facts, logic is
    whats logical and are not evidence and truth is what’s so and is not
    subject to whimsy.
    It gets worse for atheists as they start to search for evidence in the
    world.
    Our beliefs inform the evidence we see in the world and not the other way
    around. Evidence is recognized as evidence only when it fits our beliefs.
    There is just no way around the fact that if you see evidence for something
    you believe it to be evidence for something otherwise you don’t see it as
    evidence for anything.
    It gets even worse than that for atheists.
    If you don’t believe in God you can see no evidence for him.
    You could present God himself to an atheist and they will rationalize him
    away because God contradicts atheistic belief therefore can’t exist.

  4. Nelly Suzuki says:

    The “Big Bang Theory” was told by a Catholic Priest never from Stephen
    Hawking. Hawking just stole the idea. The only difference is that the
    Priest stated G-d was the Creator of it. Why don’t we hear (the TRUTH)
    that!? hmm….

  5. Nelly Suzuki says:

    Two Paths: Spirituality vs Materialism
    LIFE VS Death
    You cannot be the follow two masters. There those who will reject G-d until
    their deathbed….

  6. Dio Rex says:

    John W. Loftus loves porno, the guy is a perv!

  7. john phelan says:

    Same old demolished argument from Wood.

  8. Robert Broome says:

    Sahih: you have lost your mind Hitchens smashed WLC.

  9. Bruce McGee says:
  10. Jesus Saves says:
  11. Straight8S says:

    “you say we don’t have an answer therefore god.” Im saying that any
    reasonable person that examines all the evidence, honestly, will come to
    the conclusion that there is something more going on in the natural world
    then science has the capacity to explain. “many things were attributed to
    god that have been found to have a naturalistic explanation” Such as?

  12. AmunRaRocks says:

    “Ahaha, so because Romeo and Julliet was made up, that means Alexander the
    great was also a fictional person? Love how you think about things lol”
    False analogy. We know Romeo and Juliet are fictional because the writer of
    the play implied they were AND I don’t think there is solid evidence to
    imply that Shakespeare’s play were based on actual people. Alexander the
    Great accounts was penned by contemporary historians. Unfortunately history
    cannot be repeated to test its authenticity

  13. emailpobox666 says:

    “That all Christians have is Negative Evidence: False” what Positive
    evidence do you have?

  14. Matt Revell says:

    why dont we ask god how he created the universe?

  15. emailpobox666 says:

    A logical argument must follow the rules of logic . Craig strays for this
    over and over . The man actually said he would ignore evidence against his
    superstition, Hardly the rhetoric of an academic

  16. Naughtfull says:

    Common sense and education. David Wood is a Hustler. He’s making bank off
    the foolishness of people like you.

  17. rubinood says:

    By far most of the ‘ancient documents’ informing us about the life of
    Christ stem from Christian authors – the writers of the Gospels. They were
    written 30-60 years after the death of Jesus. I leave it to you to
    determine the worth of such highly biased, late testimony. Almost no other
    ancient – non-Christian – source mentions Christ. A few sentences in Pliny,
    Tacitus and Josephus come to mind, none of whom says anything about
    Christ’s resurrection (a forged passage in Josephus notwithstanding).

  18. Straight8S says:

    The way he explained it was incoherent, there are concepts that are very
    difficult to express coherently. Is Quantum mechanic analogies expressed in
    a way that are coherent? No, the concepts of QM make no sense in our
    natural view of cosmic laws but you don’t say Krauss is lying.

  19. emailpobox666 says:

    Craig admitted the argument was incoherent in 1996. Craig still uses this
    INCOHERENT argument to provide evidence for his god. Why would any academic
    use false / incorrect/ incoherent information as evidence?

  20. emailpobox666 says:

    Are you actually arguing that it’s acceptable for a christian to LIE in an
    a debate ?

  21. Straight8S says:

    This particular argument may be, But what about Krauss’ claim that because
    quantum mechanics exit that it opens the door for the multiverse…. pls.
    Even some of Krauss’ contemporaries think he’s a little out there on this,
    At least WLC is willing to admit whether a line of reasoning is incoherent.
    How many times has an atheist been that honest during a debate? Krauss
    maybe, Dawkins anyone?

  22. emailpobox666 says:

    Illogical incoherent all of them. the cosmological is the most interesting.
    Here check this out

  23. emailpobox666 says:

    Thing is Craig doesn’t defend his superstition well. His ridiculous
    arguments impress on the deluded.

  24. Straight8S says:

    This is true, but your faith that science will provide the answers is not
    proof against God. Nor is my faith in God challenged by scientific
    endeavors. Christians embrace science I simply accept the evidence from a
    different perspective.

  25. emailpobox666 says:

    The fine tuning argument . If things (constants) were different then things
    would be different therefore god. Pure Genius

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>