The existence of a higher power is something man has questioned for thousands of years.

Monday, two of these men, with contrasting views, will argue the “big question” in front of an audience of students and community members using an arsenal of education and experience.

The debate over God will be at 7 p.m. in Taylor Auditorium and will be headed by Dr. Michael Shermer, representing the skeptics side, and Dr. Doug Geivett, a proponent of God’s existence.

The education of both speakers was one factor the Campus Activity Board thought was important to look into before setting up the event.

“This is going to be a very high-end event, I mean these people have enormous reputations in their respective fields,” said Jeremy Sturgell, senior and the CAB lectures chair.

Shermer is the founder of Skeptic Magazine, the Director of the Skeptics Society, writes a monthly column for Scientific American, co-hosts the Fox Family series “Exploring the Unknown” and has written numerous books.

He received a bachelor’s degree in psychology from Pepperdine University, a master’s degree in experimental psychology from California State University, Fullerton, and a Ph.D. in the history of science from Claremont Graduate School.

Geivett is a professor of philosophy and department chair in the Talbot School of Theology at Biola University and specializes in epistemology, philosophy of religion and philosophical theology.

Geivett has published multiple books and is a member of the Committee on the Status and Future of Philosophy for the American Philosophical Association and a member of the executive committee of the Evangelical Philosophical Society.

“We were looking for an issue that we could bring in that was not necessarily controversial, but one that people had strong opinions about,” Sturgell said. “We thought this sort of takes the cake. It’s the big question.”

The idea for the debate was brought up in CAB last year, but was delayed in favor of other events. Julie Blackford, director of student activities, believes this is the kind of topic that should be addressed on a college campus and Sturgell agrees.

“My philosophy when I’ve been in CAB is to bring events to campus that challenge what people think and make them talk and have dialog,” Sturgell said. “That’s the greatest feeling, when we do an event and afterward people are outside talking about the issues, what’s going on. I think that’s what college is all about.”

The debate will consist of an opening argument from both speakers and a time for rebuttals. After the speakers finish the floor will be open for questions from the audience.

Being in the “Bible belt,” Blackford thinks that Geivett will have more supporters than Shermer, but despite the higher numbers she says some local religious organizations were skeptical about the idea at first.

“I think just bringing in the speaker suggests that maybe a God doesn’t exist may be a turnoff for them,” she said. “Some, they get defensive; but once we explained that both sides will be represented so we’re not pushing just one side it was OK.”

Sturgell thinks both sides will be represented by students, but thinks the religious organizations will more be unified due to the number of related organizations on campus. He said some of the groups have expressed interest in setting up tables outside the debate and handing out literature.

“They’re such a large presence on campus and they do such a good job when they’re involved with events, that we really felt like it was nice to sort of organize something that might be of benefit and interest to them as well,” he said.

Sturgell said believers of either side should gain something from attending the debate.

“You’re going to be exposed to arguments both for and both against your position, and I think that’s the most important thing to do in college,” he said.

“It’s to learn how to own your beliefs. I mean, if you can’t defend your own beliefs, it’s going to be very hard for you if someone challenges them. This is going to be a way for people to either reinforce what they already believe or kind of explore a question that they haven’t really made a decision on yet.”