If a concise search is made to discover the reasons why people do not believe in God, it quickly becomes evident that every point of objection made by the atheist, is easily overcome with logic and reason. As I read through the following: “The Top 10 Reasons I Don’t Believe in God” by Greta Christina, it became clear that the author is simply making affirmation regarding things that she has little or no knowledge of.
It is common in life for persons to make inaccurate or incorrect statements about persons or matters to which they have very little knowledge.
These arguments are based largely on speculation and conjecture, rather than actual facts. It appears that this author is greatly misinformed about the subject that she attempts to write about as an instant expert. It is common amongst the atheists to regurgitate the statements of others before them, who were also in error regarding their statements. As an object lesson in how opaque the arguments against the existence of God are, I will give answers these to objections. In these responses I will demonstrate precisely how the atheist and skeptic consistently fail to demonstrate a compelling argument against the existence of God.
The following 10 objections to God are made by author, Greta Christina, in her book: But “Does God exist?”
God does not exist, because:
1: The consistent replacement of supernatural explanations of the world with natural ones.
“When you look at the history of what we know about the world, you see a noticeable pattern. Natural explanations of things have been replacing supernatural explanations of them.
This argument is fundamentally flawed in its basic argument. The author would have the reader believe that everything which occurs by a natural process, is lacking supernatural origin. In fact, the text of the Bible demonstrated repeatedly that God often uses naturally occurring phenomena, to accomplish His will.”
If the author sincerely believes that all events which occur in the universe can be explained by naturalistic causes, she is severely lacking in knowledge.
Science can tell us how the universe operates by physics and mathematics, but no scientist has ever been able to tell us why the universe exists in the first place. The beginning of the universe is the greatest mystery that science has ever endeavored to understand. The universe came into existence at a specific moment, when nothing had formerly existed.
Prior to the beginning of the cosmos, there was no time, space, or matter. Scientists describe a tiny particle, so densely compacted that it contained all the material that would make up the present universe. At the beginning, this particle suddenly exploded during the singularity described by cosmologists as the “Big Bang.”
When we examine the specific events which took place during -430 seconds, of the universe, we discover that supernatural phenomenon were present throughout the entire process.
The reader must understand that the facts of science—regarding the commencement of the cosmos, lead to only one conclusion: the universe exists as a model of design. There were no haphazard and chaotic conditions in the early formation of the cosmos. Specific and detailed procedures were followed to exact a specific outcome that would ensure life on earth, nearly 14 billion years later.
- The Universe as we know it, cannot be explained by natural forces.
- The finely tuned universe as empirical proof for the existence of God, has no formal logical defects.
- The only current explanation for the existence of the universe—which can be tested and verified, is the finely tuned and design evidence of the universe.
- Our universe contains the precise physical constants that have the precise values that are required to allow for complex structures, such as galaxies, stars, planets, and people.
The universe cannot be explained apart from an intelligent source. It is far to complex, exceedingly super-engineered, and masterfully balanced. Every star that exists amongst the 300 sextillion that we think exists, came into being because of several early processes in the initial expansion of the universe.
These processes demanded extreme power and control in order to spread out the material of the initial mass—evenly so that matter was disbursed in equal amounts, across the expanse of space. This process would be similar to a person blowing air into a large balloon until it reached a critical point where it exploded and began to eject material outward from the pressure that had been exerted internally upon it. As time is slowed to near cessation, a person could act independent of time itself and walk throughout the room and place the balloon’s material in even patterns, in every direction. This is very similar to the phenomenon that scientists have observed in their mathematical calculations of the first second of the universe. No one knows for certain what process caused this equal distribution of matter throughout the universe—which allowed the clumping of matter that provided the perfect environment for stars to form much later. Whether is was inflation, antimatter, or some other unknown phenomenon, it is certain that extreme intelligence caused this control to exist in the first place.
The author of these 10 objections to the existence of God would have us believe that the complex structures simply happened by accident. The physics of the initial universe have determined that this is not true.
As we examine the processes which allowed the universe to begin and expand in such a way that stars, galaxies, and planets were able to form—billions of years later, these were not naturalistic processes. As we examine what was necessary for this expansion to produce a universe that would permit life much later, we discover that extreme engineering and control was certainly a part of this process. This requires intelligence and unlimited power. Though natural processes were in motion, there was a great power of unimaginable wisdom, that guided each each process of the universe—throughout the past 14 billion years.
Theoretical Physicists, Stephen Hawking described the impossibility of a universe existing by naturalistic causes, apart from a supernatural event, as impossible.
“The odds against a universe like ours emerging out of something like the Big Bang are enormous. I think there are clearly religious implications.” 
In the first picosecond (one trillionth of a second) of the universe, the precise balance between gravitational force and the expansion of energy, was precisely calibrated, within extremely narrow limits—necessary for life to exist on earth, billion of years later. The big question is why they were calibrated at all since the models that scientists have developed for how the universe should have expanded, reveal a universe drastically different from what actually occurred.
Stephen Hawking describes the models that scientists have developed for a universe which began under the conditions that were present at the moment of the Big Bang:
“Why did the universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion that separates models that recollapse from those that go on expanding forever, that even now, 10 thousand million years later, it is still expanding at nearly the critical rate? If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 100 thousand million million, the universe would have recollapsed before it ever reached its present size.”
The fact that the universe was controlled by an immense force—to exact a finality that would allow for life—is a certainty. In every sense of the word; this was a supernatural event that is observable today by the calculations of mathematics and physics.
I discuss these many constants that were necessary in the production of the universe, which made life possible, in my book: “A Universe From God.”
2: The inconsistency of world religions.
“If God (or any other metaphysical being or beings) were real, and people were really perceiving him/ her/ it/ them, why do these perceptions differ so wildly?”
This second observation is similarly flawed with the first objection. According to the author, if people disagree over a particular subject, this subject must be invalid. In other words; since religious people cannot agree, this is evidence that God does not exist.
Most intelligent people understand that human beings find disagreement over countless subjects. The fact that a person does not agree with another person regarding a particular subject, is irrelevant in determining whether or not that subject is true or not.
In fact, in matters of religion, we find that people seldom agree. This is no different from politics, science or the raising of a family. People have a particular mind-set when it comes to their opinion and they are not often, easily swayed by the opinions of others. This is particularly true in matters where atheists posit the idea that there is no evidence for the existence of God.
When the human mind does not want to believe something—either due to an agenda that has attached itself to the will, or by a desire to continue in a certain lifestyle—unhindered by any outside influence, it is quite impossible to convince this person of truthful facts concerning God.
Evidence alone is not enough to cause any person to believe in God, the will must also be convinced and surrendered. There is no amount of empirical evidence that can change a heart which simply does not want to believe. The greatest barrier to faith is always the will.
We live on a planet where the existence of God is self-evident. For those who are looking for evidence, there is more than enough proof for God to convince any rational person. For those who have developed a heart that does not want to believe that God is the source of life, they will never see enough evidence to convince and change their mind.
What is important, regarding the existence of God and evidence which supports this assertion; is whether or not there is reasonable evidence to conclude His existence is true. It matters not what religious people believe, what matters are facts. In this regard, the existence of God and the fact that He has vividly revealed Himself through three compelling points of evidence, is unmistakable. These three points are detailed in articles on my web site and throughout the books I have published.
3: The weakness of religious arguments, explanations, and apologetics.
“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.”)
It is important when we are seeking the correct answers to important questions of life, that we go to the experts, not to those who are still learning. This author has apparently taken her information regarding arguments for the existence of God, from persons who have only a basic understanding of the available facts.
You would not go to the patient of a neurosurgeon to discover the facts that are required to understand whether or not you should undergo a craniotomy. You would talk directly the the physician who has the education and know-how to explain the specific subjects that are important.
This author has apparently spoken to persons who do not know enough about the evidence for God to make a compelling argument for Him. Although arguments for authority and personal experience are interesting, they are not compelling enough for the person who simply needs more.
It must be stated that just because a person has not received adequate information from those who claim to know God, this does not mean that information which would fully validate God’s existence cannot be obtained. I have spent over 40 years trying to understand the available evidence for the existence of God and It is clear that a majority of Christians have not been taught enough to be able to communicate this information to a person who is skeptical.
The facts are: the evidence is available, and it is compelling and sufficient that any reasonable person could honestly conclude that God must exist.
4: The increasing diminishment of God.
“This is closely related to #1 (the consistent replacement of supernatural explanations of the world with natural ones). But it’s different enough to deserve its own section.
When you look at the history of religion, you see that the perceived power of God has been diminishing. As our understanding of the physical world has increased — and as our ability to test theories and claims has improved — the domain of God’s miracles and interventions, or other supposed supernatural phenomena, has consistently shrunk.
Examples: We stopped needing God to explain floods… but we still needed him to explain sickness and health. Then we didn’t need him to explain sickness and health… but we still needed him to explain consciousness. Now we’re beginning to get a grip on consciousness, so we’ll soon need God to explain… what?”
This objection reveals the limited knowledge of the author, regarding what Christians actually believe. We have never needed God to explain natural disasters. The fact that some religious persons use God as a reason for, or to explain the occurrences of, natural disasters, does not demand that all persons who believe in God and the Bible, endorse such things.
The facts are, natural disasters occur because of certain conditions that are present on the earth. Can God use a flood, a storm, or an earthquake to exact a particular part of His will? Of course. Does He always use every natural disaster to speak to people or exact judgement? Of course not. The problem arises when certain religious people seek to speak for God and blame Him for things that He has not done.
Many years ago, my dear father was told by his insurance company that a particular item was not covered by his homeowners policy. When he asked the insurance agent “why,” he was told: “because this was caused by an act of God.” My father said to the person on the phone: “I spoke to God about this and He said that He didn’t do it.”
God get’s the blame for many things that He has not done.
Contrary to this author’s incorrect hypothesis, we do not need God to explain every natural event of life. For this reason, her assertion that “God is diminishing,” is a foolish position to take when seeking to prove that God cannot exist. Even if God were responsible for every natural disaster, this would not disprove His existence, it would only enforce the evidence in favor of His existence.
This author repeatedly makes the mistake of claiming that the faulty beliefs of those who claim to believe in God, is proof that God does not exist. Any person who has lived upon the earth for an extended period of time, knows that what people believe or say, is not necessarily an indication of whether or not something is valid or true. People choose to believe all sorts of foolish things during their life, without having a factual basis to do so.
The Christian faith is based upon facts, not faith alone. God has never asked any person to believe anything about Him that is not thoroughly supported by sufficient evidence. Many religions of the world ask their followers to take the word of their leaders as proof to believe. The God of the Bible provides proof that is compelling and sufficient to believe what He has said, is true.
5: The fact that religion runs in families.
“The single strongest factor in determining what religion a person is? It’s what religion they were brought up with. By far. Very few people carefully examine all the available religious beliefs — or even some of those beliefs — and select the one they think most accurately describes the world. Overwhelmingly, people believe whatever religion they were taught as children.”
How specifically a person’s family religion proves that God does not exist, is not clear here in this objection. The author would have the reader believe that every person who believes in God, does so simply because they grew up in a religious household.
As one who did not grow up in a home where religion was a part of life, I can attest to the fact that my families lack of religion had nothing to do with my eventual faith in the God or the Bible.
Ultimately, after many years of personal research of my own, I became convinced that God must exist, by the compelling evidence which exists for Jesus of Nazareth as a real person of history. I wrote a book which fully validates the historical Jesus, in Jerusalem during the time that the four gospels describe Him—fully validated by the records of the Roman government, and the Jewish Talmud—both quite hostile towards Jesus. The Romans and the Jews had no desire to preserve any historical data that would validate Jesus as a real person of that time period. By their adversarial comments about Him, regarding his crucifixion under Pontius Pilate, and their hatred of Him as one who brought conflict to the Palestine during that time period, the Roman archives and the writings of the Talmud—both describe Jesus in Jerusalem, arrested, crucified, and put to death.
My oldest son, who was raised in the Christian church and who had known God from an early age, does not follow Jesus today. He made this decision on his own.
Not everyone who is raised in a Christian home, remains a Christian. Not everyone who is raised in a home without God, remains a non believer.
The criteria that this author uses to try an disprove God’s existence, is fundamentally flawed in its logic. It does not work, and it is no proof that God cannot exist.
6: The physical causes of everything we think of as the soul.
“The sciences of neurology and neuropsychology are in their infancy. But they are advancing by astonishing leaps and bounds, even as we speak. And what they are finding — consistently, thoroughly, across the board — is that, whatever consciousness is, it is inextricably linked to the brain.
Everything we think of as the soul — consciousness, identity, character, free will — all of that is powerfully affected by physical changes to the brain and body. Changes in the brain result in changes in consciousness… sometimes so drastically, they make a personality unrecognizable. Changes in consciousness can be seen, with magnetic resonance imagery, as changes in the brain. Illness, injury, drugs and medicines, sleep deprivation, etc…. all of these can make changes to the supposed “soul,” both subtle and dramatic. And death, of course, is a physical change that renders a person’s personality and character, not only unrecognizable, but non-existent.”
By this point, the reader has noticed a pattern that has emerged. This author has made no compelling argument thus far for a lack of evidence for God’s existence. The fact that the human mind exists, as a part of the brain and that a person can be severely altered by physical or chemical damage—changing a person from who they have been—into a completely different person—is not proof that God does not exist.
The author has made a concluding statement regarding the finality of human existence at death, which she had no ability to prove. No one truly knows what happens after death. Studies suggest by overwhelming evidence from those who have died and returned to life, that we do continue to exist after the death of our physical bodies. There is no proof that we simply cease to exist. This is a theory that is put forth by those who claim that God does not exist and we are simply material beings with no spiritual entity that can live on past death.
7: The complete failure of any sort of supernatural phenomenon to stand up to rigorous testing.
“Not all religious and spiritual beliefs make testable claims. But some of them do. And in the face of actual testing, every one of those claims falls apart like Kleenex in a hurricane.
Whether it’s the power of prayer, or faith healing, or astrology, or life after death: the same pattern is seen. Whenever religious and supernatural beliefs have made testable claims, and those claims have been tested — not half-assedly tested, but really tested, using careful, rigorous, double-blind, placebo-controlled, replicated, etc. etc. etc. testing methods — the claims have consistently fallen apart. Occasionally a scientific study has appeared that claimed to support something supernatural… but more thorough studies have always refuted them. Every time.”
The author continues her assertion that in matters regarding God, He is disproven by those who claim to believe in Him. The fact that supernatural events do occur, but are untestable by scientific methods, does nothing to diminish the fact that inexplicable events do take place everyday on the earth, that have no natural explanation.
Many years ago, a young woman who attended a Bible study that I was teaching, came into the room and began to tell us about a debilitating condition that would soon leave her in a wheelchair. She explained that she had a degenerative spine condition that could not be altered. We saw the X-rays films of her spine and it was twisted and contorted so severely that we could all see this with our own eyes. We gathered for prayer over this young woman and asked the Lord to heal her spine. A week later, she returned to the Bible study with news that her back was healed and she was in perfect health. She brought in the original X-ray that showed the twisted spine, as well as a recent X-ray that showed a perfect spine. She never again experienced pain or any problems with this condition. Today she is a senior citizen, still in perfect health.
During my 40 years of knowing Jesus as my Savior, I have had numerous occasions when doctors and other experts had no natural explanation for how I survived certain episodes of my life. When I was seven years old, I was bitten by a baby diamond back rattlesnake in Scottsdale Arizona. I ran over a mile home, which drastically increased the effects of the venom in my body. By the time that I arrived at the hospital, the doctors told my mother that there was no chance that I would survive, it was simply too late. I survived that crisis and I am nearly 60 years old today.
Last November, I suffered a thrombosis in my heart (blood clot). I was working on a remote island of the Philippines with the poor. Because I was at such great distance from a cardiac hospital, I did not receive the proper treatment. By the time that I made it to the hospital three weeks later, the doctors gave me very little hope of survival. Today I am healthier than I have been in many years.
You may call these events coincidences, or luck. I have had too many of these coincidences, and have seen far too many of these amazing events, to conclude that they were all happenstance. Throughout my life, I have observed supernatural occurrences that have taken place in my life, and the lives of many others, that are clues to a power that is greater than human ability.
The author of these 10 objections claims that these supernatural events cannot be tested. Those of us who have lived through these events, have all the tests that we need to understand that what happened to us was not an accident.
When we examine the supernatural healing that Jesus conducted in the New Testament, and the raising of people from the dead, we discover that the men who recorded these events were just as stunned by them as we are today when we read about them.
One of the enduring attributes which sets the Bible apart from all other books who claim divine authority, is the actual confirmation of the words of the Bible by Archeology.
If we can demonstrate that the ancient people and places, which are described in the Bible, actually existed—this provides great credibility for the authenticity of Old and New Testaments.
Robert D. Wilson, Ph.D., February 4, 1856–October 11, 1930, was an American linguist and Biblical Scholar who was fluent in 45 ancient languages and dialects and had memorized the entire Old Testament in Hebrew. Dr. Wilson was able to recite, from memory, every word of the Hebrew scriptures without missing a syllable.
Dr. Wilson demonstrated that the secular accounts of 29 ancient kings from 10 different nations were inaccurate. At the same time, He also firmly established that the names of these kings, as they are recorded in the Old Testament scriptures, matched the artifacts of Archeology empirically.
Today, those who have criticized the Bible for being inaccurate have eaten their own words. The secular record has been proven inaccurate by discoveries of modern archeology, while the Biblical descriptions of archeological artifacts have been proven true.
Previous claims that certain references in the Bible, such as the depiction of King David, Pontius Pilate, and the ancient Hittites—once claimed by critics of the Old Testament as myths, have been proven by archeological discoveries to be absolutely accurate.
Professor Wilson wrote:
“I have come to the conviction that no man knows enough to attack the veracity of the Old Testament. Every time when anyone has been able to get together enough documentary ‘proofs’ to undertake an investigation, the biblical facts in the original text have victoriously met the test”
Today, no credible scholar disputes the accuracy of Biblical accounts of ancient cities, cultures, or people. They are beyond dispute and without impeachment.
Nelson Glueck is considered one of the world’s greatest Archeologists. His work in the discovery of over 1,500 ancient sites led him to the firm conclusion that every reference in the Old Testament scriptures which refers to an ancient city, civilization, or people, were entirely accurate in every regard.
In the words of Dr. Nelson Glueck:
“It may be stated categorically that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a single biblical reference. Scores of archeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible.”
The evidence presented to us by the archeological record of ancient history demands a conclusion that the Bible is perfect in all its descriptions of the historical events it reports. Dr. Wilson describes the record of Biblical precision, which accurately describes names, cities, and events of history, as a marvel unequalled by any other literature of antiquity.
“That the Hebrew writers should have transliterated these names with such accuracy and conformity to philological principles is a wonderful proof of their thorough care and scholarship and of their access to the original sources. That the names should have been transmitted to us through so many copyings and so many centuries in so complete a state of preservation is a phenomenon unequaled in the history of literature.”
Those who purport to be “experts” or scholarly authorities on the inaccuracies allegedly found in the Bible should go back to school and learn the important study of Paleography and the ancient languages in which the Bible was written.
“Before a man has the right to speak about the history, the language, and the paleography of the Old Testament, the Christian church has the right to demand that such a man should establish his ability to do so.” —R.D. Wilson
In regards to the New Testament and the facts that it reports to us in its narrative: Sir William Ramsey, world famous historian and renowned archeologist, describes the statements of the New Testament regarding the geographical and historical references it makes, as existing without a single error.
“I began with a mind unfavorable to (the accuracy of the New Testament) but more recently I found myself brought into contact with the Book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth.”
Dr. Ramsey believed, at the onset, that the accounts which are described in the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts were inaccurate. Over 100 years ago, he undertook an expedition to Asia to try and refute the New Testament, only to become so overwhelmed by the evidence that he became a follower of Jesus Christ.
“Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy…this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians.”
Archeological Accuracy Points to Literary Accuracy
Since Luke’s description of cities, names, places, and customs are perfect in their historical accuracy, it is certain that his accounts of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection are also accurate and reliable.
The fact that Luke has been confirmed as a scholarly historian of specific details regarding the history of the first century, it is certain that he also recorded for us, with the same precision, the specific events which transpired concerning the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Luke’s integrity as a historical scholar demands that we accept, with confidence, his testimony of Jesus’ resurrection, which is the foundation of the entire Christian church.
One of the criticism’s of Luke’s account of Jesus’ life is found in his description of the census that he says was ordered by Caesar Agustus.
And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. 2 This census first took place while Quirinius was governing Syria. 3 So all went to be registered, everyone to his own city. —Luke 2:1-3
Because no archeological discovery had previously verified that such a census took place, Luke was regarded in past history as having embellished this story. A later discovery regarding the taxes of the kingdom of the Roman government revealed that the tax payers were enrolled every 14 years by the use of a census. Archeology has uncovered facts which verify that Caesar Agustus did conduct the precise census described, during the period of time Luke specified—near the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem.
Further, an inscription discovered in Antioch describes Quirinius in 7 B.C., who was the governor of Syria, on two occasions—7 B.C. and 6 A.D.—a fact that is confirmed by the Jewish historian Josephus.
An archeological discovery in Egypt, uncovered a Papyrus which specifically describes the details of this census spoken of by Luke, under Caesar Agustus:
“Because of the approaching census it is necessary that all those residing for any cause away from their homes should at once prepare to return to their own governments in order that they may complete the family registration of the enrollment and that the tilled lands may retain those belonging to them.”
In his book, Archeological Confirmation of the New Testament,” Dr. F. F. Bruce describes a problem that was present in Luke’s description of the Tetrarch of Abilene in Luke 3:1.
Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene... —Luke 3:1
Previously, there was no record of anyone called “Lysanius” as the tetrarch of Abilene during the time that Luke specified that he was there. In recent history, an archeological discovery made in Damascus, Syria, describes a person called “Freedman of Lysanias the Tetrarch.” Scholars date this inscription at between 14 A.D and 29 A.D. This is the same period of time in which Luke had written of Lysanias.
This is incredible information for the person who is seeking to validate the text of the New Testament as authentic and reliable. If Luke took such care to describe a census, and Lysanius, who could only be verified recently by archeology, he is certainly a writer who records accurate and specific details. It is clear that Luke was seeking to preserve the historical record of that time for future generations. He wanted the reader to know that what he had written, was recorded with great care. This was extremely important to Luke as a historian, as he would also record events of such magnitude that readers in future generations would have a difficult time accepting. As we understand how serious Luke was about the events he has written, he does not appear to us a one who would fabricating a lie, but as a scholar who is honest and has told the truth.
Since Luke recorded events and people, who are much less important than the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus—with such stunning accuracy; it is certain that the the accounts of a world-changing, supernatural resurrection from the dead, are also a accurately documented. When we examine the diligence of Luke in the descriptions he has made regarding the background and symmetry of events that were happening at that period of history, we understand that he is not one to contrive stories. Luke simply recounts to the world what he knew was true—though these events are quite extraordinary—he documented what happened with the precision of an astute historian.
8: The slipperiness of religious and spiritual beliefs.
“Not all religious and spiritual beliefs make testable claims. Many of them have a more “saved if we do, saved if we don’t” quality. If things go the believer’s way, it’s a sign of God’s grace and intervention; if they don’t, then God moves in mysterious ways, and maybe he has a lesson to teach that we don’t understand, and it’s not up to us to question his will. No matter what happens, it can be twisted to prove that the belief is right.
That is a sure sign of a bad argument.“
As we approach the end of the author’s arguments against the existence of God, we are struck by her repeated objections to the behavior of those who claim to believe in God, as proof that He does not exist.
Here, the argument is centered on what a person believes in response to their difficulties or successes in life. If things go well, then the believer is happy and proclaims that this is a sign of God’s grace in their life. When things do not go so well, the believer proclaims that God is working, just not is a way that is clear or aparent to the believer.
Precisely how this disproves the existence of God, is a mystery to myself and I am sure many others who read through these 10 objections. It seems to be a common problem for the author that her objections for God have more to do with the people who claim to believe in Him, rather than God Himself. In all of these objections, there is no relevance between the existence of God and what is viewed as the inconsistencies of those who believe in Him.
Seeking to deny the existence of God, based solely on the behavior of people, is not only illogical, it is ineffective as a defense. We cannot diminish or void a particular premise, based on the behavior of people. This has been a common objection by this author from the first objection. It appears that the author is not able to make a legitimate defense of her position that God does not exist. Only that those who believe in God are flawed and inconsistent.
9: The failure of religion to improve or clarify over time.
“Over the years and decades and centuries, our understanding of the physical world has grown and clarified by a ridiculous amount. We understand things about the Universe that we couldn’t have imagined a thousand years ago, or a hundred, or even ten. Things that make your mouth gape with astonishment just to think about.
And the reason for this is that we came up with an incredibly good method for sorting out good ideas from bad ones. We came up with the scientific method, a self-correcting method for understanding the physical world: a method which — over time, and with the many fits and starts that accompany any human endeavor — has done an astonishingly good job of helping us perceive and understand the world, predict it and shape it, in ways we couldn’t have imagined in decades and centuries past. And the scientific method itself is self-correcting. Not only has our understanding of the natural world improved dramatically: our method for understanding it is improving as well.”
This objection is directed more at the establishment of religion than those who believe in religion. We are getting closer to the formation of an actual argument, while still a great distance from the actual point of this article: Does God exist?
The author seems to be confused regarding the establishment of religion, which finds its origin in man, and the actual person of God. For those who have studied God, the religions of man have absolutely nothing to do with God. Religion is man’s attempt at reaching God by a set of rules, whereas the true way that a person can truly know God is to respond to what He has revealed about Himself.
This author attributes advancements in science and what she views as a stagnation of religion, as proofs that God cannot exist. If God were responsible for religion, then this premise may be true. The fact that the author does not know the difference between religion and God, which are diametrically apposed to each other, allows us to understand why these 10 objections have been written in the first place.
If a person will know God, they must forget all that they know about religion. The fact that this author has become so fervent in her efforts to discredit religion, while offering no proof whatsoever that God does not exist, allows us to see that her true conflict is with religion and religious people, not those who are in a personal relationship with the true and living God. One cannot but feel a sense of compassion for the author, for it is clear that she has been hurt or disappointed by organized religion in her past. This is a common error that is made by many people. Thinking that God must be like the people who claim to believe in Him, they cast Him from their lives and take the position that He could not exist.
In reality, the misunderstanding that has ensued in the mind of this author has originated from the very poor behavior of religious people, not from God.
If a person will carefully read and examine the narrative of Jesus in the New Testament scriptures, they will see that Jesus is unlike anyone they have met before. The character and nature of Jesus is equal to what we would hope to find in God, if He does exist. Jesus is not like those who claim to be religious. He is perfect in every regard and never disappoints those who place their trust in Him.
10: The complete lack of solid evidence for God’s existence.
“This is probably the best argument I have against God’s existence: There’s no evidence for it. No good evidence, anyway. No evidence that doesn’t just amount to opinion and tradition and confirmation bias and all the other stuff I’ve been talking about. No evidence that doesn’t fall apart upon close examination.”
“It is not up to atheists to prove that God does not exist. It is up to believers to prove that he does. And in the absence of any good, solid evidence or arguments in favor of God’s existence — and in the presence of a whole lot of solid arguments against it — I will continue to be an atheist. God almost certainly does not exist, and it’s completely reasonable to act as if he doesn’t.”
This final argument is the author’s best. It is a common objection that we see often from those who claim that God does not exist. The premise of the argument is that there is “no evidence for God’s existence.”
This is always an interesting statement to me for in making this claim, the author must have examined all of the available evidence in the world before she could make a true declaration that “no evidence exists for God.” Since it is impossible that any person could examine all the evidence that exists, this particular position is not a valid argument. At best, the author could state that in all the evidence that she has seen so far, there is no evidence which would convince her that God exists. If she is truly honest, this author would tell us that there may be evidence for God somewhere, but to this point in her life, she has not examined anything that would give her a reason to believe in God.
By stating that there is no evidence for God, while at the same time, it being impossible that she could have examined all the available evidence, we should understand that this author is not really being honest with us. This further causes us to believe that perhaps she is making these objection due to a bias which will not permit her to examine evidence impartially.
People who make statements that have a conclusion attached to them: “They always… That person never… There is no evidence…” are not telling the truth. As one who reads a statement like this, It causes me to doubt the sincerity of this writer. It seems to me that Greta has an agenda, much like those religious people whom she accuses of being disingenuous. In truth, this author is quite disingenuous. The author has not given us any compelling evidence for why God cannot exist.
One thing is certain: the facts which prove whether or not God exists, cannot be proven by any of the preceding ten points written by this author.
The final decalration made here, states that the burden for proving the existence of God, is the responsibility of those who claim that He exists. Of course, this depends on who is asking the question or making the claim. When a Christian claims that God exists, they must provide evidence which supports their assertion.
When the atheist writes an article with 10 points that attempts to explain why they do not believe in God, they must provide evidence in their objections, which proves that God does not exist. This author has provided nothing that would cause any intelligent person to conclude that God does not exist.
 1. Collins, Francis S. (2006-07-17). The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (p. 75). Free Press. Kindle Edition.
2. I. G. Barbour, When Science Meets Religion (New York: HarperCollins, 2000).
 Stephen Hawking, A Brief History, Page 138.
 1.This includes all the Biblical and cognate languages, i.e., Hebrew, Aramaic, the Sumerian/Babylonian dialects, Phoenician, Assyrian, Ethiopic, the various Egyptian and Persian dialects.
2.Nelson Glueck: Biblical Archaeologist and President of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Jonathan M. Brown, Laurence Kutler, Hebrew Union College Press, 2006
 “A Scientific Investigation of the Old Testament,” by R. D. Wilson, “Is Higher Criticism Scholarly,” and “Which Bible,” by David Otis Fuller, who studied under Dr. Wilson at Princeton Theological Seminary.
 An interesting discovery in 1910 by Sir William Ramsey, debunked the secular record of Cicero of the Romans who described Iconium as being in Lycaonia. Luke describes Lystra and Derbe as being in Lycaonia. Acts 14:6 they became aware of it and fled to Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia, and to the surrounding region.
 Quoted in R. Pache, The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture
 Nelson Glueck, Rivers in the Desert, 1960, pageg 31
 “A Scientific Investigation of the Old Testament,” by R. D. Wilson
 Paleography is the study of ancient writing systems and the deciphering and dating of historical manuscripts
 William M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveler and the Roman Citizen, 1982, page 8
 William M. Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, 1915, page 222
 1.John Elder, “Prophets, Idols and Diggers.” Indianapolis, New York: Bobbs-Merrill,1960. Pages 159, 160
2.Joseph Free,. “Archaeology and Bible History.” Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, 1969, Page 285
 Elder, John. Prophets, Idols and Diggers. Indianapolis, New York: Bobbs-Merrill,1960, Page 160
 1.Elder, John. Prophets, Idols and Diggers. Indianapolis, New York: Bobbs-Merrill,1960, Pages 159, 160
2.Free, Joseph. Archaeology and Bible History. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, 1969, page 285
 F. F. Bruce, “Archaeological Confirmation of the New Testament.” Revelation and the Bible. Edited by Carl Henry. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1969. Page 321
Categories: 10 Lists, Agnostics and Skeptics, Archeological Confirmation, Atheists, Atheists uneducated observations, Atheists, Agnostics and Skeptics, Common errors of Atheists, Greta Christina, Historical Validity of the New Testament, Reliability of the Bible, Reliability of the New Testament, The Existence of God