Here’s the claim from an article on Thought Catalogue. Point 5.
Link below
“I have seen a lot of arguments for the existence of God. And they all boil down to one or more of the following: The argument from authority. (Example: ‘God exists because the Bible says God exists.’) The argument from personal experience. (Example: ‘God exists because I feel in my heart that God exists.’) The argument that religion shouldn’t have to logically defend its claims. (Example: ‘God is an entity that cannot be proven by reason or evidence.’) Or the redefining of God into an abstract principle…so abstract that it can’t be argued against, but also so abstract that it scarcely deserves the name God. (Example: ‘God is love.’)
And all these arguments are ridiculously weak.
Sacred books and authorities can be mistaken. I have yet to see a sacred book that doesn’t have any mistakes. (The Bible, to give just one example, is shot full of them.)
Response
I’m sorry to hear these are the best arguments this atheist has heard. I agree they seem pretty flimsy. But I don’t think it is true that every argument boils down to the summary offered above. Far from it. Here are a few alternative arguments
We think the universe has a deep consistency.
The universe is an amazing place and full of incredible mysteries. However, we, humanity are deeply persuaded that we can eventually understand it’s mysteries. We, believe this, because of three ideas held together.
1) The universe is rational (able to be understood.) 2) Our mind when they think are rational and logical. 3) Our minds can bridge the gap between the universe and our minds and describe it (Science). I think this describes the universe and how we approach itIf the universe arose as a massive random accident or then all 3 of these ideas could not be true. It isn’t possible that the universe would have a logical consistency - it arose out of randomness and so is, in essence, random. And since, we humanity, arose within this random universe, we have no basis for trusting that our thinking is true or real in essence. And nor, should we expect that our minds can grasp reality.
But the existence of God - a great mind behind the universe, who created beings who could search our and perceive the underlying logic and then describe it makes much more sense of the universe as we experience it. (See Thomas Nagel, Mind and Cosmos for more on this.)
The person of Jesus’ as a historical figure and his claims.
This isn’t an argument from the Bible as an authority. Historians treat the documents in the New Testament of the Bible as valid historical documents. Do they have a bias about their subject? Of course. But this doesn’t discount them as sources. And sources it is - the writings of Paul, Peter, John, Matthew, Luke, Mark and others are considered separate sources. This evidence is so great, ‘ No mainstream historian doubts the existence of Jesus.’ (Quoting historian John Dickson)
Jesus claimed to be God. He claimed to bring forgiveness. He claimed to break the power of evil. There is a lot of evidence that Jesus made these claims. There is a lot of evidence that Jesus did remarkable deeds that set him apart from ordinary men. There is excellent evidence that the copies we have of the historical documents making up the New Testament have been copied faithfully and consistently such that any errors are tiny (and can be seen and evaluated through the huge numbers of copies.)
God’s existence makes the best sense of our human experience.
We, humanity, experience truth, beauty, morals and justice. Now, there is no doubt that across the wonderful breadth of humanity our definitions of truth, beauty, right and wrong etc vary widely. However, what is not in dispute (well, pretty much not in dispute. There’s always someone disputing something) is that truth, beauty, right and wrong, exist. We, humans, have founded our whole lives on their existence and their pursuit.
Truth, beauty, the pursuit of just and morality do not make sense in a universe that arose as a great cosmic accident. If we pursue them, it’s just a failure in the firing of the synapses, for they are not fundamentally part of reality. We, humanity, have just imposed them on reality, to make life easier but they aren’t actually real. We live an illusion.
Unless, of course, truth, beauty, goodness and evil are fundamentally part of reality. The existence of a creator makes sense of a universe in which we seek these things and discover these things.
The rise of the church in history
Plenty of historians come to the resurrection of Jesus and scratch their heads. It isn’t something historians deal with. But, what historians do recognise is the radical change the early church brought to the ancient world. And this raises the question, what brought about this change? Where did Christianity arise from? How did it burst into being with such surprising speed and power? What made a handful of country hicks, rough fisherman, village workers, a tax collector and a religious zealot into a force that transformed the world?
Yes, you’re right - none of this proves the resurrection. However, the logic points toward something happening. Something unique. Something transformative. Something that has changed the world.
Now, perhaps you don’t find these very persuasive. That’s fine. Perhaps you could state them better. Also fine. But what I do hope you’ll see is that these are all quite different from the summary offered above of the arguments for God.