Alexander Hay

Jan 25, 2018

3 min read

On Atheism and Evidence for Divine or Supernatural Events

Atheists state that there is no evidence of God, a divine presence, or a supernatural presence. I disagree. There is a lot of evidence suggesting supernatural things going on, from miracles to scary things that go bump in the night. True, everything we do not understand we ascribe to the supernatural, at least until we think we understand it, and then we call it science. For instance, there is no direct evidence of the existence of black holes, and there is considerable debate about whether or not they exist. However, no one suggests that believing in black holes makes you an unscientific troglodyte.

The problem is that the very nature of the universe cannot be explained using our current concept of science. For example there is simply too much uniformity in the cosmos suggesting some kind of ordering event/energy/being/creator/template/what-have-you. So scientist have come up with bizarre theories to explain this order with zero evidence to support their suppositions; string theory, multiple universes/dimensions, etc.

Who can say we can even properly perceive reality let alone explain it all? Studies have shown that humans develop surprisingly effective neurological filters, both conscious and intellectual as well as subconscious. These filters remove incongruous sensory data from our perceptions. We simply do not register all the things we hear, see, feel, taste, smell because they do not conform to our brain imprint or beliefs. Thus the theory that animals, children, and lunatics are often able to see and experience phenomenon that the rest of us cannot because their filters are either undeveloped or impaired in some way.

Who can say?

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that there could be a divine presence in the universe along with other supernatural phenomenon. Perhaps not conclusive or even convincing, but all the same there is evidence. In the past many things have been ascribed to divine presence and have been proven to be based upon scientific actions that humans did not understand at the time.

In ancient times (and not so ancient times) people believed that lightening originated from some divine or supernatural source. This really is not so unreasonable given the fact that the wisest and most learned men could not explain lightening. These men were not fools, but they lacked the knowledge and understanding to explain lightening. They understood that the Sun was just another star, but one closer to Earth. Many also understood that the Earth orbited the Sun. But they could not explain how such powerful forces like lightening could come out of nothing. These ancient wise men came up with “scientific” explanations for lightening that were often more absurd and bizarre than the idea of anthropomorphic deities casting electrical bolts of energy upon an unhappy Earth.

Eventually the puzzle was solved, and all the mystery of lightening was eliminated if not the awe.

Now, to argue against the divine or supernatural nature of lightening is not unreasonable even when you cannot explain how and where lightening comes from. But to deny the existence of lightening because it might possibly prove or promote the existence of the divine or the supernatural is abhorrent.

Refusing to acknowledge facts is the very opposite of what science claims to be about.

That is what modern day atheists are doing in my humble opinion, and are the very opposite of open minded. The close-minded dogma against anything that might smack of the divine or the supernatural leads them to reject facts and lines of argument that might lead to truth.

Alexander Hay is a US lawyer now living in Tbilisi, Republic of Georgia. Some have accused him of being a curmudgeon, but what do they know???? Noisy kids!

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.