I was unable to attend this event myself. However, judging from this article, Mr. Durston's arguments are some the worst I've heard from the Theist camp.The debate over the existence of God has been considered one of the most important questions in our modern world, and on Monday night, two scholars presented their views for providing a definitive answer to the long contested dispute.
An event co-sponsored by the University of Alberta’s Campus for Christ and Atheists and Agnostics student groups, the “Does God Exist?” debate garnered a notable show of interest by the student population.
Speaking to over 200 people in an ETLC lecture hall, with two other packed rooms serving as satellite locations, self-proclaimed atheist Dr PZ Myers and theist Kirk Durston were given a venue to argue their respective sides.
For the purpose of the debate, it was agreed upon by both debaters that God would be defined as "a personal, supernatural being; one that created the universe and actively intervenes in it."
Durston, the national director of the New Scholars Society—an affiliation of Canadian, Christian university professors—and a PhD candidate at the University of Guelph, opened his argument with an explanation of why a belief in God is so integral to society and the individual.
From there, he noted that his evidence would not be what some would deem traditional.
“My arguments will not be proof in the logical or strictly mathematical sense; rather they’ll be rational justification for the belief in the existence of God,” Durston said.
He launched into a discussion of the questions surrounding the origin of nature and time, concluding how both elements are the products of some greater entity.
“The cause of nature is supernatural and not caused. [...] Time is a supernatural, eternal, and uncaused creator of nature,” he stated.
Durston also touched on the idea of history as a record that proves the existence of God, pointing to select documentation of Jesus of Nazareth, who proclaimed himself to be the son of God.
“There is highly unusual worth in believing that he was telling the truth, and therefore there is worth for the belief that God exists and is active in history,” he concluded.
Dr PZ Myers, an associate professor at the University of Minnesota, wasted no time in dispelling the points raised by Durston.
“There is no evidence of intervention of any supernatural force in the history of life on Earth. God-based explanations are inconsistent and incoherent. They make absolutely no sense. I’ve read the Bible, trust me, it’s crap,” he began.
Though Myers was hesitant to claim that God absolutely does not exist, he did put greater stock in scientific evidence to the contrary.
“Every biological thing that we’ve examined in sufficient detail has been found to be explainable by purely natural causes,” he said.
“This is not to say that we’ve figured everything out. There’s huge areas of mystery, things we don’t know about yet, but you can’t use those gaps in our knowledge to argue one way or the other. The track record is very, very good for science.”
Myers then jumped into a discussion of evolutionary developmental biology and hox genes.
“They’re very nifty genes that are involved in all kinds of processes that specify pattern,” he explained.
Although Myers ran out of time before he could complete his opening statement and initial argument, he did finish by exclaiming that religion is unable to explain processes like the ones carried out by the hox genes.
“No design theory that can account for this. Nothing in the Bible is going to account for this. There is an evolutionary theory that explains these processes in detail,” he stated.
The pair of scholars were then given twelve minutes for response, followed by five minute conclusions, which provided both with the opportunity to address their opponent's evidence.
Durston was quick to attack Myers’ initial claims that the Bible was ridiculous and filled with imaginary stories.
“This is a serious question and certainly by laughing at it or calling it crap does not logically follow that God does not exist,” he said.
He also questioned Myers’ ability to explain the origins of the systems that produce the background for proteins like the ones that operate within the hox gene.
“DNA is not a computer program. It is not software—there is no simple encoding of instructions in the genome,” Myers responded.
The biologist proceeded to point out that Durston failed to address issues of biology—Myers’ area of expertise—in his argument, opting to focus on primal cause and physics.
As can be expected with a debate topic of this nature, the discussion became heated at times, including Myers’ pointed statement to Durston regarding God’s ability to provide meaning in life.
“Mr Durston accused me of having no meaning to my life—like being like toxic waste. I happen to think that my life has a lot of meaning. My life has meaning in itself, not in some belief in some imaginary, superstitious being,” he retorted.
While no actual conclusion or final decision was arrived upon, Myers was able to succinctly summarize the reason behind the decided deadlock.
“My conclusion therefore, is simply this: probably not,” he said of the existence of God.
“I don’t say absolutely not, we can’t say absolutely anything.”
WTF?! I could just as easily say that there is "highly unusual worth" in believing that Beowulf is real, and that he really did battle Grendel's mother at the bottom of a lake with a magical sword...and select documentation "proves" his existence!Durston also touched on the idea of history as a record that proves the existence of God, pointing to select documentation of Jesus of Nazareth, who proclaimed himself to be the son of God. “There is highly unusual worth in believing that he was telling the truth, and therefore there is worth for the belief that God exists and is active in history,” he concluded.
.
.
