Does God Exist?: The Debate Between Theists & Atheists

by J.P. Moreland, Kai Nielsen

Is there a God? What is the evidence for belief in such a being? What is God like? Or, is God a figment of human inspiration? How do we know that such a being might not exist? Should belief or disbelief in God's existence make a difference in our opinions and moral choices, in the way we see ourselves and relate to those around us? These are fundamental questions, and their answers have shaped individual lives, races, and nations throughout history.On 24 March, 1988 at the University of Mississippi, J. P. Moreland, a leading Christian philosopher and ethicist, and Kai Nielsen, one of today's best-known atheist philosophers, went head-to-head over these questions. This book records their entire lively debate and includes questions from the audience, the debaters' answers, and the responses of four recognised scholars - William Lane Craig, Antony Flew, Dallas Willard, and Keith Parsons. Noted author and philosopher, Peter Kreeft has written an introduction, concluding chapter, and appendix - all designed to help readers decide for themselves whether God is fact or fantasy.

Genres: Philosophy, Religion, Theology, Atheism, Christian, Spirituality, 20th Century

320 pages, Paperback

First published July 1, 1990

About the author

J.P. Moreland is the Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University in La Mirada, California. He has four earned degrees: a B.S. in chemistry from the University of Missouri, a Th.M. in theology from Dallas Theological Seminary, an M. A. in philosophy from the University of California-Riverside, and a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Southern California.

He has co-planted three churches, spoken and debated on over 175 college campuses around the country, and served with Campus Crusade for Christ for 10 years. For eight years, he served as a bioethicist for PersonaCare Nursing Homes, Inc. headquartered in Baltimore, Maryland.

His ideas have been covered by both popular religious and non-religious outlets, including the New Scientist and PBS’s “Closer to Truth,” Christianity Today and WORLD magazine. He has authored or co-authored 30 books, and published over 70 articles in journals, which include Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, American Philosophical Quarterly, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Metaphilosophy, Philosophia Christi, and Faith and Philosophy.

Reviews

[GD · Rating 3 out of 5]

One funny thing to say about this book is that it presents tself as an aid to help people answer the most important question in life, "Does God exist?" Calling this the most important question in life already at once betrays the leaning of the editors of this book, because the question of God's existence is important only to people who believe in God. The same as a person who believes in, say, a pantheon of gods would say that believing or not believing in the pantheon of gods would be the most important question. Better yet, at the risk of sounding judgemental, I could say that it would be a hardcore conspiracy theorist saying believing whether or not George Bush is a genetically engineered soldier of death for the NWO is the most important question in life. Again, only if you believe that side in the first place.

Most of the book concerns an overly built-up debate between two guys I'd never heard of before, one arguing for God, the other against. The guy arguing for God kind of did a better job, because the guy who doesn't believe in god wouldn't get off his single theory for not doing so, which was the incoherence theory, basically saying it is irrational to believe in god because no one can say exactly what god is. I thought this was pretty weak. But the progod guy, while he seemed to have thought this debate through a little more (because the atheist flat-out said he didn't really take the debate seriously in his later commentary), he made these absolutely ridiculous claims, "I met Jesus in college and I have been loving and fellowshipping with him everyday since," just embarassing shit to read in a book that presented itself as philosophical. The two best parts of the book were the commentaries by the Christian Dallas Willard and the atheist Parsons.

I'm a liberal-minded, never-say-never guy, but I honestly think it's more likely that I will one day learn to fly by flapping my hands really quickly than I will believe in god, especially when the arguments for it are presented in such a pseudo-academic way. I still can't get over the feeling it's like the clasic image of the theologians arguing over how many angels can fit on the head of a pen.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

AN IMPORTANT ATHEIST/CHRISTIAN DEBATE, WITH COMMENTARIES

Kai Nielsen (born 1926) is professor emeritus of philosophy at the University of Calgary; he has also written books such as 'Ethics Without God,' 'Philosophy and Atheism: In Defense of Atheism,' etc. J.P. (John Porter) Moreland (born 1948) is Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology at Biola University; he has also written books such as 'Love Your God with All Your Mind: The Role of Reason in the Life of the Soul,' 'Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview,' etc.

The first part of this book consists of a transcript of the March 24, 1988 debate between Moreland and Nielsen. Next is included the separate lectures that each man gave before the debate, including Q&A. The debate transcript is then reviewed by theists William Lane Craig and Keith Parsons, and atheists Antony Flew and Dallas Willard. Finally, Moreland and Nielsen submit closing chapters. Finally, Peter Kreeft---professor of philosophy at Boston College and The King's College, and a theist---is allowed to make the last word.

Moreland asserts, "there is no evidence whatsoever that [Jesus'] tomb was ever a site of veneration. This is explained by the fact that His tomb was empty... A fabricated account of the empty tomb would have used men, certainly not women. In fact, when Paul cites the resurrection formula in First Corinthians ... he leaves the women out, no doubt to keep unbelievers from stumbling on a peripheral detail which was culturally insensitive. The women are left in the gospel accounts, however, to preserve a record ... as it actually was, even though it was an embarrassment to them culturally." (Pg. 40)

Moreland suggests that for the atheist, "there is no moral truth to be discovered... the [ethical] decision is arbitrary, rationally speaking. And the difference between, say, Mother Teresa and Hitler is roughly the same as the difference between whether I want to be a trumpet player or a baseball player. There is no rational factor or truth of the matter at stake... I have to just decide my form of life... If a person wanted to be the best male prostitute he could be, and if that was his subjective choice of how he wanted to live his life... it doesn't seem to me that the optimistic humanist view provides a sufficiently robust framework for criticizing that type of choice... Furthermore, why should I care for future generations, or why should I give to help the poor? I happen to like mice. Why shouldn't I give my money to caring for mice instead of caring for the poor?" (Pg. 117-118)

Moreland also argues, "The atheistic account can provide no reason for expecting the arrangement that yielded life to come about, other than the mere fact that it was just the one that happened. The atheist cannot simply assert that some arrangement or other had to occur... The theist, on the other hand... makes the occurrence of life likely as a part of its overall hypothesis." (Pg. 226)

Nielsen states, "Moreland thinks there is nothing problematic in the concept of God and immortality, that a conservative version of orthodox Christianity is plainly plausible... and that recent developments in scientific cosmology and biblical studies gives us strongly confirming evidence for the existence of God and the traditional conception of Jesus. I, in turn, find these latter beliefs so patently absurd... that I can hardly bring myself to seriously consider them." (Pg. 249)

This is one of the best such debates in print, and will be of considerable value to anyone interested in Christian apologetics, or the philosophy of religion.

[Marshall A. Lewis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Being a philosophical book, it was in general, mostly understandable and I was able to follow along with most of the lines of logic. The only places I really wish I had more understanding was with references to other well-known philosophers and their positions. I was hoping to find an atheistic perspective that actually felt somewhat convincing rather than the normal responses to normal theistic debates, however the only atheist contribution I enjoyed reading was Nielsen's final comments on the debate. I found Willard's contributions to be the most convincing on the theistic side of the debate. As I wouldn't recommend the entire book, but I would recommend certain essays from it, I found it to be relatively underwhelming rather than being an overall engaging debate.

[G0thamite · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is the transcript of a 1988 debate that took place at Old Miss (Oxford, Mississippi - just 30 miles from where my mother lives). In addition, other scholars contributed their thoughts after the debate and let me say, this is one very heady book. Not an easy read if you are new to philosophy. Dr. Kai Nielsen and J.P. Moreland went head to head and their philosophical bodyguards contributed as well: William Lane Craig, Dallas Willard, Peter Kreeft, Keith Ward, and Anthony Flew.

I found it interesting that Nielsen's primary argument is a modified (less strenuous) version of logical positivism. Moreland maintained the traditional arguments for God. Nielsen was most impressed with Dallas Willard, as was I. His case was presented in a most thoughful and fresh manner.

Don't read this when you are sleepy are you'll find yourself waking up with drool on your pillow. It demands an alert and attentive mind. So, go - read and learn.

[Josh Morris · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very stimulating book, including the preface, and is a transcript of a debate between two highly qualified scholars. The supporting contributions for each side add positively to the discussion, giving several thoughtful viewpoints. Moreland argues that it is rational to believe God exists backed by his arguments from cosmology, design, experience, the existence of morality, the existence of the mind, and the historical account of Jesus and the bible. Nielsen argues that it is irrational to believe God exists and backs this view by his argument of the incoherence of the term and idea "God" as presented by theism.

Well worth the read. A more detailed review here: http://theblackpenguin.net/philosophy...

[Baff · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book presents articulate arguments for both sides. I think the juxtaposition of Nielson and Moreland was probably more equivocal 20 years ago when the book was published. I would like to see another edition with comments by today's philosophers/cosmologists. In any case, I think Moreland's description of the Cosmological Argument accessible and convincing.

[Don · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this some time ago, but I remember being very unimpressed by Kai Nielsen's logical positivist argument against God's existence. So I suppose this book would be of some interest to those interested in this argument, but I would look elsewhere if you want a more convincing argument for atheism.

[David Leemon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Even though the atheist loses, this is a good book. It goes beyond the usual talking past each other to a deeper level of talking past each other, but even so, shows what a good discussion can be like.

[Donovan Mattole · Rating 5 out of 5]

Best book I have ever read regarding the debate on God.

[Kyle Deming · Rating 3 out of 5]

http://www.skepticalchristian.com/br_...

[Jeffrey · Rating 2 out of 5]

A debate on the existence of God between a Christian (cumulative approach) and an atheist (positivist).

[Noknei]

u8iye6 uy8 y69 y5348