There is no God

4. Therefore, the explanation of the universe's existence is God.

Again, it is a restatement of Aristotle's argument

Friedrich Nietzsche. (1844 – 1900) was responsible for the statement 'God is Dead'. Nietzsche used the phrase to express his idea that the Enlightenment had eliminated the possibility of the existence of God. The concept has a long history, but essentially is the emergence of human history from the dogmatic beliefs prior to the French Revolution,

Voltaire(1694 –1778), spent more time considering objections to the above proofs. He did not believe in a god who personally involved himself in people's lives, like the Christian god. This type of belief is termed Deism. Voltaire believed that that god is a First Cause responsible for the creation of the universe, but that he (it?) does not interfere directly with the world. Observation of the natural world is sufficient to determine the existence of a creator.

Robert Spitzer(b. 1952), a Jesuit priest, offers 'new' proofs for the existence of God in his book titled New Proofs for the Existence of God. The subtitle is Contributions of Contemporary Physics and Philosophy. The claim for this book is that it provides "solid grounding for reasonable and responsible belief in a super-intelligent, transcendent, creative power standing at the origins of our universe". Fr. Spitzer is president of the Magis Centre, an organisation whose five part mission is to restore (i) belief in God, (ii) the transcendent dignity of every human person, (iii) the significance of virtue, (iv) the higher levels of happiness, love, and freedom and (v) the real presence of Jesus Christ. I have no problems with any of these except the belief in God.

But I am quite ready to say that none of the above writers asserting that there is a god have had any direct contact with God, nor do they know of anybody who has. Plato, a revered thinker for over 2000 years, has no knowledge of nor contact with his many gods. They are a figment of his imagination and of his fellow Greeks.

Then come miracles. I have problems with miracles. The dictionary definition is "an extraordinary event in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural powers." In short, they are contrary to scientific fact.

Richard Dawkinsagrees, at least twice, in "When Religion Steps on Science's Turf", in Free Inquiry (1998) and in "Science Discredits Religion." He points out several areas where science and religion conflict; mostly in that science tells us that miracles are not possible

Of the books that have been critical of Darwinian evolution in recent years, Michael Denton's Evolution: Still a Theory in Crisis stands out. A review of this book is on the Discovery website. Discovery is described on Google as a "politically conservative non-profit think tank based in Seattle, Washington, that advocates the pseudoscientific concept of intelligent design."

A dictionary definition of intelligent design will tell you that it is "the theory that life, or the universe, cannot have arisen by chance and was designed and created by some intelligent entity. In other words, it is an argument for the existence of god." I am prepared to accept the Big Bang as God. Along with evolutionary theory, But I am afraid that I cannot love them, nor can I pray to them. Nor do I believe that they love me, as stated in 1 Corinthians 13:13, 1 John 3:1, 1 1 John 4:7. 7 ,1 John 4:8. 8.

Moral behaviour over the centuries gives us an insight into this question. One respondent to my article made the comment: "What a joke for the author to say the church opposes good changes in our world!". This is a bit of a conundrum, as the article clearly states: "the churches… do much good." It was not elaborated enough, but any observer has only to look around their community to locate hospitals, old peoples homes, even soup kitchens run by the various Christian churches. But do those practices suggest the existence of god? I suggest, no.

He put in an OLO article a few months back Building a more moral world. It advocated "Do no harm, help others" as an overriding moral guideline. Such an injunction is outlined in the teachings of Jesus Christ. The Parable of the Good Samaritan supports it completely, as, to a large extent, does the Sermon on the Mount.