The existence of God can be proven 100% absolutely, without the use of faith

This gem from actor Kirk Cameron is the first warning sign in the “debate” between Cameron and his evangelical friend Ray Comfort and the Rational Response Squad on the question “Does God Exist?”.

I’m so glad an intellectual heavyweight like Cameron is able to bring something new to this discussion which has raged for millenia.

Pardon the dripping sarcasm (and the length of this video) but there is not much to redeem here. Cameron and Comfort’s argument essentially boils down to a week form of the argument from design (aka teleological argument). This certainly puts them in the good company of philosophers like Aristotle, Aquinas, and Hume. Too bad Ray and Cameron don’t actually understand the argument or it’s limitations.

Ray points to objects from everyday experience such as coke cans, buildings, and paintings which we all assume have a creator. Since creation implies creator, Ray says the universe implies God. He then digresses into the gospel message which isn’t necessarily bad except is adds nothing to “prove 100% absolutely without faith” that God exists.

In their response, the atheists rightly dispense with the gospel digression but then fail for the most part in their rebuttal of the design argument. Their “rebuttal” consists of pointing out that while you can call up the painter and ask him/her about the painting you can’t call up God or goto his universe factory! The simplistic response to that is to point to cave paintings or Mayan temples where we can’t call up the creator. We still assume a creator because we see design regardless of our ability to communicate with the creator/designer. They failed to deal with the core of the argument: complexity seems to implie a designer.

Thankfully the moderator actually understood the issues and asked the one question the atheists should have asked: who made God? Ray mumbles something about God being outside of time which is all well and good (sort of) when taking a theological perspective but if you are trying to prove the existence of God “100% absolutely, without faith” then you have a problem.

The real tragedy of this debate is that neither side actually understands the issue. The moderator is the only one who has a clue and repeatedly raises questions that neither side knows how to deal with. Is it too much to ask that those who debate these issues are actually informed?

Here’s a shorter clip of Ray Comfort giving the famous “proof by banana”.

Browse Timeline

• « Simplified Philosophical Texts
• » Back to the future (aka moon)

Comments ( 2 )

Add a Comment