A rebuttal of a New Scientist article by atheist Victor J. Stenger

In his 2012 New Scientist article, the God Hypothesis, Victor J. Stenger focusses on the Judaic-Christian-Islamic version of God, and then looks for empirical evidence for it. Here are his main points, followed by my own observations:

Stenger says that experiments on prayer showed no evidence of their effectiveness. Prayer is a highly effective, and evidential tool for relaxing and calming the mind, in much the same way as meditation is, for which there is lots of concrete evidence. I would not advocate prayer as a form of physical healing, but prayer is often used as a way of focusing one’s own faith, strengthening our mind, and for thinking about a person and sending them love. A positive spiritual mindset might also help alleviate mental health problems too. 

Stenger says similar experiments on near death experiences have shown no evidence they are real. There is recent evidence to suggest that around 20% of people experience NDE when resuscitated. Out of 53 surviving cardiac arrest patients, 28 of these (52.8%) completed interviews, and 11(39.3%) reported memories or perceptions suggestive of consciousness after death. 

Stenger says a Deist god is hard to falsify, but no one worships a god who does nothing. If a Deist God created the universe then that’s hardly nothing. A Deist would believe that everything was made for an unknown higher purpose, that there is a power greater than them. That’s a powerful thing to believe that affects how you see the world. A Deist would understand that everything around them was part of a greater design, and that science was helping unravel the mysteries of this plan. Religion is humanity’s perpetual quest to find meaning and purpose in our lives. 

Stenger says if God is the designer of life, we should find evidence for His intelligence in observations of the structure of life. We do not. It has been said that you find what you are looking for. Some are looking for evidence of a supernatural superpower, others just accept the ’miracle’ of life for what it is. Science tells us that life evolved out of inanimate matter using natural forces. Life on Earth sprung out of nothing and evolved into sentient beings who can argue about the nature of reality. That’s quite a miracle.

Stenger says we should find evidence of immaterial souls, yet we do not. There is certainly an empirically evidenced bioelectrical life force within us. This is probably the source of what many have called a spirit or soul. It is the essence of our self, our energy, consciousness or Qi. There is no evidence this can live on after we die however, but many of those who have died and come back say there is an afterlife. It is compelling and so no wonder people choose to believe in it.

Stenger says that if God were the originator of morality, then people who worship God should be better behaved than those who do not. Yet they don’t, and he says, anyway morality developed independently of religion. Religion exists as a fundamental aspect of humanity, so I do think it was symbiotic in the development of morals. However, I agree, religious people don’t have exclusive rights to goodness. But this is our free will in action. Religion is always teaching us to be better people. Some heed the lessons, many don’t. Some are on a constant journey of self improvement, others are on a quest to get more for themselves. 

Stenger says there is no evidence that revealed truths took place anywhere other than the persons head. Maybe. Maybe that’s the only place they can exist, or maybe they are invented. Either way, we must look at the effect of such truths and how important they’ve become in shaping humanity.

Stenger says that if God is the creator of the universe, then we should find evidence for that in astronomy and physics. We do not. The origin of our universe required no miracles. Furthermore, modern cosmology suggests an eternal “multiverse” in which many other universes come and go. Multiverse theory is at best speculative. It’s not much better than saying God created it. It’s just a mathematical idea. Even if it were true, that the idea that multiple universes created themselves is even more absurd. It simply pushes the question further back: who created the multiverse? And anyway, fine tuning is enough evidence for me that the universe was created.

Stenger says If humans are a special creation of God, then the universe should be congenial to human life. It is not. I don’t think humans are any more special to God than any other creature. The laws of nature are often tough, but humans have developed societies and cultures that aim to transcend them in order to live peacefully in large groups. Homo Erectus lived congenially for 2 million years in much the same way as many other creatures do. Maybe our modern notions of congeniality are too high. 

Stenger says Theists claim that the parameters of the universe are fine-tuned for human life. They are not. The universe is not fine-tuned for us. We are fine-tuned to the universe. Yes, human life is fine-tuned to the parameters of our earth. However, the universe is fine-tuned to provide those conditions to exist in the first place. Therefore, fine-tuning is both reciprocal and interdependent. 

Stenger says After evaluating all the evidence, we can conclude that the universe and life look exactly as they would be expected to look if there were no God. After evaluating all the evidence, I’ve concluded that the universe and life look exactly how God intended it to look.

Stenger describes the ‘folly of faith’. He says: ‘when faith rules over facts, magical thinking becomes deeply ingrained and warps all areas of life. It produces a frame of mind in which concepts are formulated with deep passion but without the slightest attention paid to the evidence. To reduce faith to magical ‘thinking’ is disingenuous. Just because you have none of it does not make it of any less value to those who have lots of it. Evidence is an important tool to help us make sound decisions in everyday life, but none of us use facts exclusively. We all use our own personal beliefs to act in ways we think are morally or socially correct. Faith is helps people lead more spiritually fulfilled lives. So long as religious thinking doesn’t interfere with scientific evidence, I’ve no problem with it.