Closing Statement
Vic Stenger
Dr. Craig believes in the God of the Gaps. That's the
God who is used as a substitute explanation for something we do not understand
until the time comes that we do.
Dr. Craig cannot see how the universe came about
naturally, so it must have come about supernaturally. He cannot see how the
universe became orderly by natural processes, so order must have come about by
supernatural processes. He cannot see how objective morality came from
humanity, so it must have come from God. He cannot see how Jesus's tomb could
have been empty, so he must have risen from the dead. And, finally, Dr, Craig
cannot see how his inner experience of God could be a simple physical brain
process, so it must be a true experience of God.
In each of these cases we can give a plausible natural
explanation that violates no known principles of science and requires no divine
actions. Dr. Craig does not succeed in proving these natural explanations
wrong, and so he does not succeed in proving that God exists.
Even if the goal of the debate were not proof but simply
arguing to the better explanation, Dr. Craig fails. Secular humanism or
materialism is a better explanation than theism or supernaturalism. It is
simpler and more consitent with emprical observcations. In fact, Dr. Craig
offers no explanations at all. It's not an explanation for the origin or the
order of the universe to say "God did it." How did God do it? Dr.
Craig cannot say.
I have shown that a God with the attributes assumed for
him by traditional theism can be proved not to exist, beyond a shadow of a
doubt. These properties are incompatible with each other and inconsistent with
what we see in the world. In particular,
1) A God who is all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing
is inconsistent with the fact of unnecessary evil and suffering in the world
and so, beyond any doubt, does not exist.
2) A God who reveals knowledge about the universe that
was not previously known but could be empirically verified does not exist.
3) A God who answers prayers and performs miracles that
can be objectively verified does not exist.
I readily admit that I cannot disprove every conceivable
God. But there's no basis for believing in a God who doesn't possess
objectively verifiable attributes.
I am sure I have not convinced many of the believers in
the audience. You will testify, as does Dr, Craig, that you can feel the
presence of God in your hearts. I'm sure you do. I understand your conviction.
I was raised in a devout Catholic family and heard this conviction expressed by
almost everyone around me. But as I grew up, I found that I could not share
this faith. Despite the importance of religion to my family and friends, I
could not believe in God because I saw no evidence that he existed.
No one told me about humanism. I read no humanist books.
I just found that the arguments and evidence that everyone cited to me were
unconvincing. Not knowing "how all this came about" didn't mean it
came from God. It just meant that we didn't know how all this came about. And,
sincere, personal testimonies of deeply held faith were not the sort of
objective evidence that we rely on in modern life. Indeed, I saw so many
conflicting religious points of view, all based on primitive, superstitious
ideas, that I knew they couldn't all be right. I decided that, most likely,
they were all wrong.
Most scientists share my view. Are we being too
skeptical? Are we being dogmatically unwilling to entertain the possibility of
a personal creator God? I don't think so. There are many examples in the
history of science that demonstrate its willingness to accept ideas that
challenge conventional wisdom--when the data require it. In the early twentieth
century, the theories of relativity and quantum mechanics revolutionized some
of our most basic concepts about the nature of reality.
Most scientists would be thrilled if evidence were found
for previously undetected, immaterial substances and forces. Think of all the
funding opportunities that would open up! I would come out of retirement. But
even if that were to happen, I doubt that the new world being uncovered would
bear any resemblance to the fantasies from the childhood of humanity that
constitute traditional religious belief.
People like what they see when
they look in the mirror illuminated by the light of faith. It reflects an image
of themselves as fallen angels, set on this planet with the divine purpose of
rehabilitating themselves so they may rejoin their fellow angels in paradise.
Unfortunately, the universe exposed by the light of science does not reveal a
special place for humanity in the cosmos or any prospect for life after death.
I would not be honest if I tried to sugarcoat these facts, just because they
conflict so dramatically with common yearnings.
St. Paul said,
When I was a child, I thought as
a child, I understood as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish
things. For now we see through a glass darkly. (1 Corinthians 13, 11-12, King
James Version).
Humanity has moved beyond
childhood. We no longer need to depend on imaginary friends for company or a
mythical sky-father to provide for our needs. We can take care of ourselves. We
can find ways to live our lives that are consistent with the universe revealed
to us by reason and science.
While believers must struggle under a constant burden of guilt--because they
can never live up to their cosmic status as fallen angels--nonbelievers can
take pride in their achievements and those of the rest of our species. The
great works of art, literature, and science are the result of our own efforts,
not something inspired from another realm. Ideas such as democracy and liberty
are human ideas, not God's. The are found no place in scriptures. Our
individual fates and the future of humankind are not already written, in either
the laws of nature or the mind of God. These fates are in our hands. These
hands, along with the mighty potential that has evolved within our purely
material brains, provide all the power we need to continue the upward advance
of the human race.
The universe is not populated by
mysterious forces, beyond our comprehension, that control our lives and
destinies for some unseen purpose. Rather, humanity is in control and defines
its own purpose.
Finally, if an all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing
God existed, he would have the power to comfort a child dying an excruciating
death from leukemia. He chooses not to do so. Is there a person in this room
who would not ease that child's suffering, given the power? I would do it!
Jesus Christ could appear before me to tell me not to, but still, I would do it!
Even if I faced eternal damnation, I would do it!