Oh dear.
Not believing in God can only be explained by faith in there not being a God?
The idea of a God(s) is an idea about the fundamental nature of the universe. It is a very important idea indeed. Gosh, if I’m wrong, then I’m gonna be in a lot of trouble in a few years when I die.
An idea about the fundamental nature of the universe, something that describes the universe and helps us to see how it works. That’s a theory… but a theory is no good if:
(1) It cannot possibly be verified. (Proven to be true.)
(2) It cannot possibly be falsified. (Proven to be false.)
(3) It cannot be used to make better than random predicitions.
The God theory in its standard form cannot be verified or falsified, and even its keenest proponents don’t suggest they can use it to make better than random predicitions. Will the child die? Will God save it or take it to his bosom? God works in mysterious ways, etc.
So the God theory is less useful than the orbiting unicorn theory, because at least in prnciple, it would be possible to verify that. You’d only need to stumble across one star with an orbiting unicorn and you’d be home and dry.
It is possible that the first man to use a flint tool was called Gregory. There is nothing inherently implausible about this, but it is not susceptible to proof or disproof, and can’t help us to make better than random predictions about future events in palaoarchaeology. Therefore, no one investigates it further.
As for Darwin. Darwin was another fallible human being, a scientist. He had a great insight, and proposed a theory of evolution. Like all scientific hypotheses, it was susceptible to testing. Over the years, the basic idea has held good, but it has been refined as we’ve learned more.
Lamarck had another theory - the theory that acquired characteristics could be transmitted down the generations. Right or wrong, his theory was susceptible to proof, disproof, or refinement.
Of course, God(s) could have designed a world in which a mechanism like evolution played its part, and most people who call themselves Christian accept the idea of evolution. Only a minority of people profess to believe in literal 6 day creationism, and a fair number of people subscribe to some version of intelligent design.
As a purely logical challenge, it is harder to dismiss the idea of numerous gods with limited powers (as per the Greeks, Romans, Vikings, etc.) than it is to dismiss the idea of an omnipresent omnipotent etc. single God.
Those who choose to believe often derive solace, or strength from their faith. I know some very good Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and at least one pagan. Other people I have known have had their lives ruined by a religious upbringing, sinking into depression, guilt, and feelings of worthlessness.
Those who choose not to believe are sometimes stronger and happier for their independence; others sink into depression at the futility of it all.
The debate is unwinnable, because a person who strives to live by faith will only concede when they lose their faith, and a person who strives to live by the dictates of reason will only concede when they lose the will to do so.
Let’s not fall out about it.
Anyone else out there ride a unicycle? It’s great fun.
