Now I am a Christian, but I want to approach this without preconceived notions. Im not sure its possible to approach anything with 100% non bias, but I will do my best to not be convinced either way and to go where the evidence leads like that CSI show on TV.
A couple such arguments that I found very interesting.
One was creation itself. Christians say that the universe started with the Words of God. God spoke and the universe came into existence. Science says that it all started with the Big Bang.
According to the movie Gods not Dead, it was argued that the big bang is exactly what one would expect if God spoke the words "Let there me light". Not sure where this quote came from, but if anyone knows, please let me know.
Another one that I found very interesting was when the professor brought up Stephen Hawking's book The Grand Design. On a side note, Lennox says that Stephen Hawking's book The Grand Design is one of the most unread books in history. This is because much, of what Mr Hawking had to say in the book is way over the heads of most people, so they bought it, but were unable to read it. In the book Mr Hawking says: "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."
Josh in the movie brought up, it an effort to refute this, what John Lennox said in response to Mr Hawking. Lennox said that Hawking was using circular reasoning. He went on to say that Hawking was saying that the universe created itself because it needed to.
Now I am no scientist or even that smart of a guy. Surely no where even close to as smart as Mr Hawking. But to me, what he is saying is that the Universe created itself because it needed to be created. Wouldnt this mean that we are assigning intelligence to the Universe? How would the universe know that it needed to be created unless it was an intelligence? And if we are assigning intelligence to the universe, wouldnt that we just replacing one intelligence (God) with another (The Universe?) And if we did that, maybe we Mr Hawking would then be telling us why the Universe felt that it needed to be created and even further instead of trying to prove that God does not exists, we would be having the discussion on why the Universe does not exist??
I would add to this, in my own limited intelligence that no where nears Mr Hawkings, a question. How did the universe know that it needed to create itself? Wouldn't this mean that the universe was intelligent. so it was able to think and reason that it needed to exist? Seems to be like if this were true, we would only be replacing one intelligence and designer, ie "God", with another, ie "The Universe". So instead saying that we had an intelligent creator called God that created the universe, we would be saying that we had an intelligence called the Universe that created the universe. Seems like Occams Razor should come into play here somewhere.
When doing a Google search, I also found this.
Lennox’s argument was something like this. Imagine someone saying, “Henry Ford or mechanical engineering caused the Model T car. Pick one.” Of course, the Model T was caused by both Henry Ford and mechanical engineering; it makes no sense to demand that only one can be a cause. Similarly, only a faulty understanding of God makes the “pick one” dichotomy make sense. For example, Isaac Newton happily accepted both gravity and God.
Another very odd thing that Hawking says in his book is that "Philosophy is dead". What an odd thing to say. This is very poor logical argument. In fact, there is no logic in it at all. Hawking stating that Philosophy is Dead is a Philosophical testament in of itself. So how Hawking came up with this baffles even me and I am no where near even close as smart as Hawking.
Now I am not a physicist and not near smart enough to grasp all the they are talking about. In fact, lots of what they are saying is over my head. It would be nice is someone that is not a physicist or genius would translate all this.
But I do find these arguments interesting and Id love to hear from anyone out there that can state more evidence on either side.
