• New Talk – “The Case for God on Trial” went down a treat

    I gave my first talk of this name this week to Dorset Humanists, covering five different arguments (4 against God and 1 for), allowing for audience participation after each argument. Personally, I really enjoyed it – disseminating some quite intricate, at times, philosophical and theological arguments to a popular audience, though with some well-qualified members of the audience, too. I enjoyed talking after the presentation to an ex-professional philosopher (Head of Philosophy at Ontario University or some such place) and an ex-Monseigneur of the Catholic Church! Great.

    What was so fulfilling was the feedback afterwards both from the audience members I talked to and the organisers themselves. Really appreciated.

    I also enjoyed having a to-and-fro between an evangelical fundamentalist in the audience, as Christians were invited to come along too. I love that discursive battling of minds and thoughts and ideas. That floats my boat!

    Anyway, a very great thanks to Dorset Humanists who have invited me back for the third time – long may that relationship continue!

    I am presently being sent the video of the talk which I will submit to Youtube and then embed here for your intellectual edification…

    The arguments i set out were:

    •The creation of non-God objects – why would a perfect god create at all?
    •The Kalam cosmological Argument – why the argument for a prime mover ain’t all that
    •Why don’t we photosynthesise? – the problem of evil
    •Why create people with more or less likelihood to believe in him?
    •The stupidity of (believing in) the Exodus

    Category: AtheismPhilosophy of ReligionSpeaking Engagements


    Article by: Jonathan MS Pearce

    • Daydreamer1

      I look forward to seeing this. The Q&As are always one of my favourite bits.

    • Honest_John_Law

      I have a question for you, Jonathan. You pose the question re. why all animals could not photosynthesize such that predation and carnivory of other animals would not be necessary. Why not also consider why “God” would create corporeal beings in the first place? Christian tradition maintains that God created corporeal life (humans in particular) on Earth for the sake of fellowship. Well, if angelic beings (whom Christians believe are sentient) are non-corporeal, what is the point of creating something else (e.g. corporeal beings) for the sake of fellowship. One wonders why angelic beings alone wouldn’t “satisfy” God’s desire for fellowship. If Christian theologians do accept the (quite lengthy) process of evolution before humans arrived on the scene, I wonder what sort of delight God might have had in observing other corporeal beings preying and feasting upon one another in the meanwhile. Seriously, did God delight in watching some simple life forms slowly evolve into “thunder lizards”… who then roamed the Earth ripping one another’s throats out before humans arrived on the scene? That seems rather… ridiculous.

      • Hi there John – that’s a great question. The next time I do this talk I will certainly add that as an extension. Indeed, I essentially forgot to make the point as to why we should need energy at all etc – D’oh!