Does God exist? - A layman's view

There has been a lot of debate on whether there is any God and it is going to continue until either science comes up with some evidence that indicates the presence of a God or God himself decides to unveil his presence in front of humans. Till then, we are going to have to stick to our ability to reasonably deduce from arguments and studies only.

 Now, while discussing the existence of God, there are two main arguments we come across that are given for the presence of God:

1.       Nature cannot think, so there must somebody who designed all these complex structures like humans, celestial bodies etc. and that somebody is God.

2.       The Big Bang theory says that the present universe(s) originated from a big bang that occurred 13.7 million years ago and if this is true, then what made the big bang happen? There must be something that led to the big bang and that could be nothing other than star of the show, the God.

I am going to discuss these two points in brief one by one.

Taking argument no. 1.

It is true that nature cannot think. It is also true that all living things and non living things are complex structures but is it necessary for them to be designed by someone? Let us see. The Theory of Evolution says that all living things evolved (not designed) from a single cell organism that was born in water by the combination of water and light. This organism was equipped with some basic phenomenon of reproduction which was favored by nature. A believer is most likely to raise a question here that why and how that organism was equipped with such a mechanism? Well, there is a term known as mathematical probability that says happening of something is very much dependent of not-happening of something.  Believers argue that probability is nothing but a cover up for hiding the failure of science to come up with clear evidence. Fine. Science doesn't have clear-cut evidence about this entire phenomenon but the studies in DNA sequence synthesis and fossils of oldest organisms are indicating a shift of truth towards the Theory of Evolution. Science doesn't just assume and concludes that this happened because we think this happened; it works on imagination, hypothesis, theories, experiments, reasonable deductions and in most successful cases, inferences.When it comes to human evolution, biologist are presenting more and more evidences that humans belong to the genealogy of Apes. 

Evolution is not a one moment phenomenon, it actually is a gradual process that allows a change to happen over a long period of time. There is basic difference between evolution from creation. You can create a chair from the branches of a tree but you cannot create a living tree. You can create a robot that can talk like humans but you cannot create a living human. Living things evolve. What about rain? It’s a non living thing so is it a creation? Yes, rain comprises of rain drops and they are created through a cycle of evaporation, precipitation and condensation which happens on its own. It doesn't need a supernatural power to trigger a rain. What evidence do believers have to make non-believers believe that God created everything on his own will? Well, the believers say that everything is written in their book which is a word of God. Somebody tell them that these books were written by the humans, for the humans. There is no God involved in it. There is no evidence that says that God bestowed these books on humans and humans just accepted it. History tells us that all the religions had political roots and none of them would have existed if it weren't for political advantages.

Taking argument no. 2.

If Big Bang Theory really happened then what was before big bang? I don’t know. Science talks about a gravitational singularity which is point where all the quantities that are used to measure the gravitational field becomes infinite and this point contained all the energy in itself which, by quantum fluctuation, led to a big bang. There are theories like string theory that aim at explaining every phenomenon with the help of very tiny strings though there is no proof of the existence of these strings. When a believer is asked how they explain that the universe was created by God, they argue that whatever exists has to be created and it must have a creator which is God. Well, if we assume that creation is what God does, then who created God? The believer says that God doesn't need to be created because it is unborn. How do they know that God is unborn? Answer: it is written in the book. So, following this level of logic in the argument, I can safely assume that the gravitational singularity or the strings theory paved the way for the creation of a dense mass of energy and when I am asked who created this then I can comfortably say that it is written in the book (of science) (but I won’t do that). 

Regarding the beginning of life, I would like mention some ancient scriptures like Rig-Veda where the beginning of universe is explained in a way that is different from many other religious books. This ancient scripture says that before the beginning, there was nothing but a ‘conscious element without attributes’ which randomly and suddenly produced an egg-like structure which then became the reason for the beginning of the universe and in the 10^th Chapter, Nasadiya Sukta says that God came after the universe came into existence. I thought this is worth mentioning but yes, the concept of God is there too with many unbelievable stories just like other religions.

This argument would be incomplete without mentioning the ongoing studies by scientists in CERN on Higgs Field which has non-zero average value unlike other fields. This would explain the reason for mass in the smallest unit i.e. electron and quark and thus unveil some deeper secrets of the universe that might lead to understand what was before big-bang.

To sum up, the two arguments that are discussed in this post for the existence of God are totally based on the notion that something unexplained or unanswered by science is automatically a proof of God but in reality, it is a fallacy that people try to put forward in order to strengthen their state of cognitive dissonance and coping with age old mentality of agreeing to what the book says. Reasoning and questioning is what the basis philosophy of science is which shouldn't be confused as an enemy of any imagination.