PART 1: Using Science to Argue Against the Existence of God
- Believers might counter this argument by stating that if God is perfect, then he created us as well as could possibly be expected. They might also argue that what we see as imperfections actually have a purpose in the larger workings of God’s design. Point out the logical fallacy in this right away. We can’t live our lives hoping that one day an explanation for why our eyes or shoulders were designed so poorly will arise. Reference the philosopher Voltaire, who wrote a novel about people looking for meaning after a devastating earthquake hit Paris. We are pattern-seeking animals, so naturally we look and hope for patterns where none can be found.
- Some might point out that God originally created humans in their perfect form, but after humanity sinned against God, God’s original creation became corrupt and wrought with sin, and death and entropy entered the world as a result. Be aware of this rebuttal when using the flawed-design argument.
- For instance, you might cite the example of evolution as one area where science has revised previous God-centric explanations for the variety of species in our world.
- Argue that religion has often been used to explain the unexplainable. The Greeks used Poseidon to explain how earthquakes happen, which we now know is due to the movement of tectonic plates to relieve pressure.
- For instance, you might say, “We find rocks all the time that are dated to be millions or even billions of years old. Doesn’t this conflict with the belief that the universe was recently created by God?”
- Some might argue that the earth only appears to be old because Noah’s Flood dramatically changed the climate and geology of the earth. However, this fails to explain the millions of craters on the moon and the supernovas in outer space.