Usually, people perceive religion and belief as aspects of personal choice that are difficult or impossible to dispute. Most often, belief is based on unjustified facts or events; however, this feature does not prevent people from holding on to their positions. On the other hand, anti-theistic arguments are most often based on scientific and philosophical arguments, logical inferences, and assumptions. However, these arguments are still widely criticized and challenged by theistic ideas and laws of various religions. In this paper, the main anti-theistic arguments will be considered to study in detail one of the positions of the world philosophy and religion.
The Problem of Evil
One of the key arguments of anti-theists against the existence of God is the fact of the existence of evil in the world. Anti-theists argue that the presence of an almighty God who loves all of his creatures or “children” should make it impossible for evil to exist. At the same time, there are two approaches to substantiate the anti-theistic position, such as logical and evidential.
Representatives of the logical approach find that the theistic argument or idea that God exists is inconsistent. This theory was most accurately formulated by Mackie in 1960, in which he presented four ideas and noted that only three of them could be right simultaneously (Penner & Arbour, 2017). These ideas are that God is omniscient; God is almighty; God is perfectly loving; evil exists (Penner & Arbour, 2017). If all the statements are true, then there is no logic. God in all religions is the embodiment of good, who fights against evil and encourages people to resist temptations that will promote the prosperity of injustice, inequality, and cruelty. Hence, ultimate God’s purpose is to eliminate evil.
Consequently, if God loves all his creatures, he would not allow evil and suffering for them. At the same time, if God has powers and knowledge and opposed evil, it would not exist. However, the fact that sufferings, diseases, hunger, violence, and war occur throughout the world suggests that God does not exist (Penner & Arbour, 2017). Thus, anti-theists argue that God does not exist by showing the illogicality of the basic principles of his essence.
Another argument against the existence of God is based on the problem of gratuitous evil. Representatives of this approach admit that God can allow evil to exist to complete higher and more challenging to achieve goals that could not be realized without the influence of evil (Penner & Arbour, 2017).
For example, a traumatic event can help a person learn the value of life and change their lifestyle. Nevertheless, the problem arises because there is much unreasonable evil in the world, including a significant one in its scale. For example, children and adults die in natural disasters or lose their homes. Therefore, the main evidentiary argument is that if God existed, then gratuitous and large-scale evil would be unacceptable (Penner & Arbour, 2017). Thus, both approaches demonstrate that the existence of God is impossible due to the evil and injustice taking place in the world towards all people, regardless of their faith and religion.
Scientific Arguments against the Existence of God
Evolutionary Arguments
The theory of evolution is one of the most famous and controversial in many religions, although it is not essentially atheistic. As Barnes (2020) points out, the theory of evolution, in general, can be considered agnostic if people’s views simultaneously include God and do not include God as an acceptance of evolution. In other words, religious views can be adapted to scientific facts while fundamental beliefs are not entirely denied. However, evolutionary arguments can also shape an anti-theistic view of the existence of God.
Darwin’s theory of evolution offers a view of the creation and development of all organisms on the planet, which denies the existence of God. According to Darwin’s theory, all species on Earth descended from one ancestor and developed through evolution from single-celled organisms (Barnes, 2020). The differences appeared due to the geographical and climatic diversity of the areas in which the organisms lived, which forced them to adapt by changing the structure and functions of the body over the millennium (Barnes, 2020).
However, according to the main world religions, for example, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, God created all living things and populated the Earth with them. In addition, one of the main ideas of monotheistic religions is that a human was built in the likeness of God. Consequently, many religious people find the fact of origin from a single-celled or animal at least offensive. Therefore, the theory of evolution contradicts the idea of creating the world in religion and denies the existence of God as the creator of a diverse world and especially people as God’s children.
Neurological Arguments
Neurology is the science that studies the brain and its connection to the body through the work of different parts of the brain and the electrical signals they send. Neurology, like other science, cannot wholly deny God, faith, and the existence of various non-material feelings and concepts, since it has not had enough proves yet. However, neurological research in many cases explains and dispels ideas about the existence of non-material components of human existence, such as consciousness or soul, demonstrating their biological and physiological nature. Consequently, these studies are used by anti-theists to prove the logical problem of the existence of God.
The first neurological argument of anti-theists is the scientific evidence that humans do not have a conscious will or soul. Consequently, this idea denies the existence of God as the creator, guide, and savior of human souls. Many scientists argue that there is no conscious will because all human actions are conditioned by reflexes, and “reception of conscious will result from random synaptic firings in the brain” (Figel, 2016, p. 1). These theories are also partly supported by practical experiments in which scientists observed the brain activity of people corresponding to their actions. Benjamin Libet is considered the most famous anti-theist in this area as he found in his experiments that the brain initiates all movements even before people are aware of them (Figel, 2016). Hence, there is no conscious will, since all actions are predetermined by brain activity.
Moreover, even if one separates movements and thoughts, that is, the free will of a person to choose right and wrong actions, neuroscience also has evidence against the existence of the soul and God. According to most world religions, God is the creator of human souls who puts in them the concept of good and evil. These concepts can be compromised, and a person can choose evil by succumbing to temptations, for example, to steal for their own good.
However, many neuroscience cases demonstrate that biological and physiological problems in the brain can trigger changes in human behavior and reasoning. For example, history knows the case of a 40-year-old schoolteacher who was convicted of pedophilia and experienced aggressive sexual desire towards some women, including minors. Nevertheless, his problem was caused by a brain tumor that pressed on the areas that trigger such aggressive sexual desire, and its removal eliminated the issue (Figel, 2016). Therefore, this example demonstrates that since people’s emotions, feelings, and judgments depend on the brain’s work, the concept of the soul as a separate non-material element of a person is false or at least ambiguous.
Furthermore, neuroscience can also explain various miracles and visions that are attributed to Divine will. For example, research demonstrates that the sensations of epiphany that people experience during near-death or coma may be due to changes in electrical activity in the brain due to stressful physiological changes (Kellenberger, 2017). One can also refer to such experiences as miracles or visions, which can be caused by pathological processes in the brain, such as a tumor, and the brain’s reaction to high psycho-emotional stress.
Hence, the neurobiological arguments against the existence of a conscious will, soul, and miracles mean that all evidence for the existence of God can be debunked. If God endows souls with an understanding of good and evil, physiological and biological changes in the brain should not affect a person’s perception. If God has given people freedom of choice so that they can find their way in faith, then their actions should not be predetermined by the electrical activity of the brain.
If God works miracles and gives people visions, they cannot be eliminated by brain surgery or reducing stressors. However, since many facts remain unexplained by science, neuroscience cannot yet completely deny the existence of supernatural forces (Sayadmansour, 2014). Hence, while neuroscience does not directly deny the existence of God, many statements and studies prove this assumption as correct.
Sociological Arguments
Sociological arguments, like most sciences, do not directly oppose the existence of God, since they just present another view on concept of God and religion. However, sociologists study and cite various theories about the formation, function, and meaning of religion, which assume that God is a social construct. Therefore, according to sociologists, God exists as a result of the formation and development of society, but not as an intangible supreme power.
Many sociologists have defined religion as a construct created by society for the implementation of various functions. This theory was first proposed by Emile Durkheim, who explained that religion was created for the domination of society over the individual (Bhukkal, 2021). Belief in a higher power, according to Durkheim, is designed to develop a sense of cohesion and unity in society, establish control and limitations, and provide meaning and purpose in life, especially in difficult life moments (Restivo, 2021).
In other words, worshiping one God and performing rituals in both primitive tribal societies and the advanced modern world creates a sense of community and unity. At the same time, the rules and restrictions of religion, such as the prohibition of theft or murder, shaped the framework of social behavior, creating order even before the advent of legal systems. In addition, people found hope or the cause of life events, such as illness, in God. Thus, in this theory, God is just an image or construct to propose to people some definite landmark to simplify fulfilling these functions.
Karl Marx also saw religion as a social construct; however, apart from the control function, Marx also added a different perspective. According to Marx, the function of religion was to assert and preserve class inequality. As long as the upper classes of the clergy have power, money, and influence, ordinary people obey their will (Restivo, 2017). A historical example is the policy of indulgence in Catholicism when people could atone for their sins by buying forgiveness with money from priests. At the same time, the church was inseparable from the state, which led to its total power in politics, economics, and cultural life.
Therefore, these theories demonstrate that religion is a social construct artificially created and maintained for millennia. Hence, God is also a social concept to shape a religion around one or several central elements that make it easier to manage. Nevertheless, these theories also may not be anti-theistic in nature if one assumes the religious origin of society and the direction of its development. For example, in monotheistic religions, God guided people through prophets.
Consequently, if one assumes that the described above principles and functions of religion were transferred to people through God’s Will, social theories can exist simultaneously with most of the rules of religion. However, since most sociologists viewed religion as an exclusively social construct and the result of increasingly complex social interactions, these theories are anti-theistic and prove that God as a higher power does not exist.
Conceptual Problem of Religious Ideas
Another anti-theistic argument against the existence of God is the inconsistency of the concept of his existence and the powers that are endowed with him. One of the manifestations of this inconsistency is the problem of evil, as discussed above; however, there are also other reasons. In other words, believing in an almighty, all-knowing, and kind God is meaningless if one observes the events in the world and uses a critical approach.
First, the concept of an omnipotent God is confronted with a logical inconsistency that indicates that God cannot be all-powerful. Planting emphasized this aspect, noting that God cannot do many things since they contradict simple logic (Beebe, n.d). For example, if God is almighty, the question arises whether he can create a stone that he cannot lift (Beebe, n.d). If the answer is yes, the fact that he cannot lift the stone suggests that he is not omnipotent. Other religious concepts face the same inconsistency. If it is argued that God cannot be wrong, not know a solution, or desire evil, these aspects show that he cannot do some things and, therefore, he is not omnipotent.
Moreover, returning to the problem of evil should also consider the inconsistency of such ideas of omniscience and absolute love of God. If one assumes that God is the absolute embodiment of good with the power to fight against evil, the existence of suffering demonstrates that he is not omniscient. At the same time, if one believes that God is all-knowing and omnipotent, he is not absolute good, since he allows suffering and evil.
At the same time, theists point out that God may have a sufficient moral reason to allow evil (Beebe, n.d). Nevertheless, in this case, the question arises whether such a reason is a manifestation of absolute goodness and love. Anti-theists use this inconsistency in the concept of God as a reason to argue that God does not exist. These details make the existence of such a higher power impossible. Nevertheless, theists insist that the omnipotence of God makes this inconsistency possible, since this divine power can go beyond the usual logic for people.
Conclusion
Therefore, this review demonstrates that anti-theists have many arguments against the existence of God. All of these arguments are based on scientific research, observation, and deductive and inductive approaches. One of the most frequently discussed arguments is the problem of evil, which means that the existence of an omnipotent, all-knowing, and loving God simultaneously with evil and suffering in the world is illogical. The very concept of God is also inconsistent because the forces that people ascribe to him and some religious ideas are self-contradictory.
At the same time, science demonstrates practical and theoretical arguments that the existence of God is only a construct created by people, while all processes of human consciousness are physiological and biological. Neurological research offers evidence that the soul and conscious will do not exist; therefore, God as their creator is also an unnecessary concept. The theory of evolution partially refutes religious ideas about the creation of all the diversity of species by God, assuming the development of all organisms from one common single-cell ancestor.
At the same time, social theories explain that religion is a consequence of the development of society and a means of creating unity and control. However, since science lacks sufficiently accurate facts and is mainly based on assumptions, anti-theistic arguments also have their weak points, which allows continue the long-term discussion about the existence of God.
References
Barnes, M. E., Dunlop, H. M., Sinatra, G. M., Hendrix, T. M., Zheng, Y., & Brownell, S. E. (2020). “Accepting evolution means you can’t believe in God”: Atheistic perceptions of evolution among college biology students. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 19(2). Web.
Beebe, J. R. (n.d). Logical problem of evil. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: A Peer-Reviewed Academic Resources. Web.
Bhukkal, S. (2021). Sacrosanct or secular: A critical approach to Durkheim’s functionalist perspective on religion. International Education & Research Journal, 7(1), 60-61.
Figel, P. (2016). Mollifying neuroscience and Christian faith: An emergent monistic claim for free will and the soul. Neuroscience and the Soul, 3, 1-10. Web.
Kellenberger, J. (2017). Religious Epiphanies Across Traditions and Cultures. Springer International Publishing.
Penner, M.A. & Arbour, B.H. (2017). Arguments from evil and evidence for pro-theism. In K.J. Kraay (Ed.), Does God matter? Essays on the axiological consequences. Routledge.
Restivo, S. (2017). Sociology, science, and the end of philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan.
Sayadmansour A. (2014). Neurotheology: The relationship between brain and religion. Iranian Journal of Neurology, 13(1), 52–55.