Uploaded June 2026 | Updated September 2026, 1 week ago
Is it possible to have empirical evidence for God's existence? What if the stars realigned to spell out "I exist! Sincerely, God”? Wouldn't THAT count as evidence for a benevolent creator? It seems that the answer is yes. But then, various objections to theistic arguments - divine psychology, the stalking horse objection, concerns about infinity, and so on - seem to imply that even these extravagant observations would not be evidence for theism. To some philosophers, that implication implies that these objections prove too much, and must therefore fail. In this debate, eight philosophers go head-to-head over these fascinating questions.
This interview is also available as a podcast:
Apple Podcasts:
Spotify:
Substack: mileskdonahue.substack.com/publish/post/201562424?r=1pf1v9&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
Check out my Substack where you can get a paid membership because you're awesome: mileskdonahue.substack.com
To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via Buy Me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/mileskdonahue.
Follow me on X: twitter.com/PhilosopherMKD
EPISODE CHAPTERS
00:00:00 Introduction
00:02:10 Miles Donahue’s opening statement
00:07:46 Brian Cutter’s opening statement
00:13:16 Noah McKay’s opening statement
00:18:30 Travis Dumsday’s opening statement
00:23:30 Paul Draper’s opening statement
00:29:15 Alex Malpass’s opening statement
00:35:18 Nathan Bray’s opening statement
00:40:41 Kevin Scharp’s opening statement
00:47:15 Miles Donahue’s cross-examination
01:03:22 Alex Malpass’s cross-examination
01:20:15 Brian Cutter’s cross-examination
01:33:41 Nathan Bray’s cross-examination
01:49:03 Paul Draper’s cross-examination
02:01:21 Travis Dumsday’s cross-examination
02:10:54 Kevin Scharp’s cross-examination
02:24:49 Noah McKay’s cross-examination
Is it possible to have empirical evidence for God's existence? What if the stars realigned to spell out "I exist! Sincerely, God”? Wouldn't THAT count as evidence for a benevolent creator? It seems that the answer is yes. But then, various objections to theistic arguments - divine psychology, the stalking horse objection, concerns about infinity, and so on - seem to imply that even these extravagant observations would not be evidence for theism. To some philosophers, that implication implies that these objections prove too much, and must therefore fail. In this debate, eight philosophers go head-to-head over these fascinating questions.
This interview is also available as a podcast:
Apple Podcasts:
Spotify:
Substack: mileskdonahue.substack.com/publish/post/201562424?r=1pf1v9&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
Check out my Substack where you can get a paid membership because you're awesome: mileskdonahue.substack.com
To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via Buy Me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/mileskdonahue.
Follow me on X: twitter.com/PhilosopherMKD
EPISODE CHAPTERS
00:00:00 Introduction
00:02:10 Miles Donahue’s opening statement
00:07:46 Brian Cutter’s opening statement
00:13:16 Noah McKay’s opening statement
00:18:30 Travis Dumsday’s opening statement
00:23:30 Paul Draper’s opening statement
00:29:15 Alex Malpass’s opening statement
00:35:18 Nathan Bray’s opening statement
00:40:41 Kevin Scharp’s opening statement
00:47:15 Miles Donahue’s cross-examination
01:03:22 Alex Malpass’s cross-examination
01:20:15 Brian Cutter’s cross-examination
01:33:41 Nathan Bray’s cross-examination
01:49:03 Paul Draper’s cross-examination
02:01:21 Travis Dumsday’s cross-examination
02:10:54 Kevin Scharp’s cross-examination
02:24:49 Noah McKay’s cross-examination
