Over the years, I have collected arguments from various websites to explain why God doesn’t exist. I’m certain most of these are offered in all sincerity, so I won’t make fun of them. I do, however, offer my own thoughts about the logic of the arguments.
God has never spoken to modern man, for example by taking over all the television stations and broadcasting a rational message to everyone. The argument is that God cannot exist because He has never appeared done the Super Bowl halftime show or late-night television. If He did, what would He say? Would that make believers of everyone? Perhaps God has spoken, but we were watching the wrong channel.
There are the magical miracles of Jesus, but none of these miracles left behind any tangible evidence. The miracles of Jesus (the Resurrection excluded) are healings, feeding masses, walking on water and the like…all things one would not expect to leave tangible evidence 2,000 years later. So, God does not exist because Jesus picked the wrong types of magic tricks.
There is nothing to stop Jesus from materializing in your kitchen tonight to have a personal chat with you. I’ve never seen Australia, either. However, based on the evidence, I take it on faith that Australia exists. I not just saying that because I prefer Australia not materialize in my kitchen.
Why not hang a stained, wrinkled shirt in the closet and pray for God to clean and press it there? It’s well known that God has a plan and answers prayer, but not every prayer. He might not respond to the “clean my shirt” prayer in order to teach people to eat more carefully. Alternatively, the Romans believed in multiple gods: perhaps they have one that does laundry.
It is only by assuming that the belief in prayer is a superstition and therefore God is imaginary that science can proceed. We can see science and technology moving forward every day. By this argument, we can only conclude, therefore, that prayer must be pointless, and God must be imaginary.
The common thread of all these arguments is that the lack of evidence of God’s existence (no TV show, no miracles, not cooking or doing laundry and the progress of science) proves God does not exist. Or, does it?
In the arena of logic, such arguments are called argumentum ad ignorantiam or “argument from ignorance” (where ignorance means "without evidence"): if you can’t see evidence of God, He must not exist. If He doesn’t deliver everything you demand, He doesn’t exist. The common response to this is, “The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
When the exterminator says you have no termites (termites don’t exist), he means there was an absence of evidence of termites. Since the exterminator won’t inspect every inch of your house, the message of no termites is not the same as knowing with absolute certainty there are no termites.
With all due respect, I think God has given us abundant evidence of His existence…just look at the heavens, the Earth, nature, science and life.