Refuting The Atheistic "God Of The Gaps" Argument

          Atheists portray belief in the existence of God as merely being an explanation for things that science has of yet not answered. A common objection to theism is that it has been assumed on a priori basis the necessity of God's existence in all matters that science itself has not as of this time been able to account for satisfactorily. On the contrary, intelligent and reasonable religious people are not appealing to God simply to fill in missing or incomplete scientific data.  Arguments for the existence of God are not based on silence or ignorance of facts. They are not made on the basis of a lack of knowledge.

           When arguments for the existence of God are made, we are making inferences from the best observations gathered by science and from principles of elementary logic to substantiate our beliefs. More specifically, all of our collected evidences point to the existence of an external, greater reality. Philosophical proofs for the existence of God point beyond the scope of the natural world. It is not all that exists. If the premises of such arguments are true, then their conclusions automatically follow. It does not matter how people feel or react to the validity of presented deductive arguments.

           The validity of each logical premise in arguments for the existence of God is based on the validity of each scientific or philosophical point used in making them. For instance, the universe does have fine-tuning. The universe has a first cause. Biological structures have a degree of complexity that appears to have been designed. These are scientific facts, which must be dealt with. Theistic arguments do not simply assume the existence of God as a means of providing an explanation, but are logical deductions that are unpacked to get an intended point across.

           

          A true scientist must be open to the possibility of many things, for they dedicate their lives to seeking answers. Scientists are to be focused on truth. Scientists are supposed to be about evidence. Those who reject the existence of God are very biased indeed. Science is about the study of the natural world, not searching for naturalistic explanations with the intent of ruling out the supernatural. The fact that science has discovered answers to a number of complicated questions does not mean that it alone is sufficient to unravel every difficult question of life.