Khakan Ahmad, Jamia Ahmadiyya UK
How do you prove something exists? In this day and age, “science”, apparently, is the only answer: empirical evidence, reason, or observable phenomena supporting the claim.
Many claim God exists; however, atheists say there is not enough empirical evidence to support this claim. We can’t “measure” God, so if He created us to be recognised, why not make Himself physically seen?
This is the age-old question atheists ask.
Here are some thoughts to consider.
The questioning misses the mark
We know that for something to exist, we do not necessarily have to be able to sense it with one of our five senses. You must test with the correct apparatus and the correct senses to know if something exists or not. For example, we can’t “smell” a colour, or “hear” a smell, no matter how hard someone wants to. It would help if we had the right instruments for the right perception.
Take the magnetic force for example – no matter how much someone tries, they cannot directly perceive it with their physical senses. Yet, we can’t deny its existence. When the effects of magnetism – like when two magnets pull toward each other – we are given a level of certainty from the effects it shows, just like seeing something with our own eyes. We may not see the force itself with our human eyes, but its impact is undeniable.
This is what it comes down to, there are actually many ways to perceive God. If you seek Him in the right way, you will find Him.
Design points to a God
From an Islamic viewpoint, we can stick to the scientific method of concluding or testing a hypothesis. The Quran urges believers to ponder and think about the world around us. It encourages deep reflection, urging people to search for God and that true belief takes time, merely accepting Islam does not equate to complete belief.
Allah notes in the Quran that “The Arabs of the desert say, “‘We believe.’” In response, Allah says, “Say ‘You have not believed [yet]; but rather say, ‘We have accepted Islam,’ for the [true] belief has not yet entered into your hearts.’” (Surah al-Hujurat, Ch.49: V.15) Meaning that true belief is a journey and takes time, merely accepting Islam is not the pinnacle of belief in God.
Concerning observing the universe and our world, Allah states in the Holy Quran:
إِنَّ فِي خَلْقِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلَافِ اللَّيْلِ وَالنَّهَارِ وَالْفُلْكِ الَّتِي تَجْرِي فِي الْبَحْرِ بِمَا يَنفَعُ النَّاسَ وَمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ مِن مَّاءٍ فَأَحْيَا بِهِ الْأَرْضَ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهَا وَبَثَّ فِيهَا مِن كُلِّ دَابَّةٍ وَتَصْرِيفِ الرِّيَاحِ وَالسَّحَابِ الْمُسَخِّرِ بَيْنَ السَّمَاءِ وَالْأَرْضِ لَآيَاتٍ لِّقَوْمٍ يَعْقِلُونَ
That is:
“Verily, in the creation of the heavens and the earth and in the alternation of night and day, and in the ships which sail in the sea with that which profits men, and in the water which Allah sends down from the sky and quickens therewith the earth after its death and scatters therein all kinds of beasts, and in the change of the winds, and the clouds pressed into service between the heaven and the earth — are indeed Signs for the people who understand.” (Surah al-Baqarah, Ch.2: V.165)
And:
وَمَا خَلَقْنَا السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا بَاطِلًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ ظَنُّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا
“And We have not created the heaven and the earth and all that is between them in vain. That is the view of those who disbelieve. […]” (Surah Sad, Ch.38: V.28)
About His creation, Allah declares:
“Who has created seven heavens in harmony. No incongruity canst thou see in the creation of the Gracious [God]. Then look again: Seest thou any flaw?” (Surah al-Mulk, Ch.67: V. 4)
Consider this: If religion was truly disconnected from science, and if science couldn’t point to God, why would the Quran encourage us to ponder about things that might lead some to believe science explains everything, instead of God? And so, God has told us Himself in the Quran that if you want to find evidence for Him, look into the universe and ponder about who created it.
How science point towards a God
Let’s take a look at the start of the universe. The universe started somewhere, but it hasn’t always existed. Science tells us that the universe began with the Big Bang; a moment when the universe was in an incredibly hot, dense state and then it expanded. But where did this initial “hot dense state” come from? Something must have created it, and we believe that something is a Higher Power or God.
Here’s another way to think about it: imagine shaking a box of Lego bricks. What are the chances that a perfectly built house will come out? Close to zero, no? In the same way, “dead” chemicals can’t organise themselves into living things on their own. The chances of DNA forming even one functional protein by random chance are astronomically low. So, how likely is it that millions of proteins in millions of cells work together to create complex living beings by chance mutations? It must be a result of design, and where there is design, there must be a Designer.
And what about the universe even coming into existence? The chance of the universe existing without God is incredibly slim because the universe is set up with such precision that if any of the following ratios of electrons to protons or the electromagnetic force to gravity, etc. had been even slightly different, the universe could not have existed. Scientists commonly accept this.
While these observations strongly support the existence of a Higher Power, the difficulty lies in the fact that these arguments are based solely on reason. But this challenge is not unique to the concept of God. In nature, the most powerful forces are not immediately visible through direct observation, like we said earlier, the magnetic force. Instead, it takes a deeper level of understanding to grasp their true significance.
Take, for example, the four fundamental forces of nature: gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force. These forces dictate how the universe operates. While we can observe their effects, we cannot see the forces themselves.
Following this logic, wouldn’t it make sense that the Creator of the universe – the One behind these natural forces – would be the hardest to directly perceive? God, being the most powerful existence, is naturally the hardest to perceive. The Quran acknowledges that reason can lead us to conclude that God must exist, but true conviction cannot come solely from intellectual reasoning.
This is what Allah explains in the Holy Quran:
لَا تُدۡرِکُہُ الۡاَبۡصَارُ ۫ وَہُوَ یُدۡرِکُ الۡاَبۡصَارَ ۚ وَہُوَ اللَّطِیۡفُ الۡخَبِیۡرُ
“Eyes cannot reach Him but He reaches the eyes. And He is the Incomprehensible, the All-Aware.” (Surah al-An‘am, Ch.6: V.104)
The evidence is there, we just have to take the first step to realise there should be a creator and then pray and make efforts to develop a connection with Him.
A typical double-standard by atheists
A common double standard atheist often hold is demanding “empirical” evidence of God from millions, if not billions, of believers, while accepting things they have never personally observed or tested. They believe in scientific findings or historical facts based on research papers etc. without having first-hand experience, yet they dismiss the testimonies of countless individuals who claim personal experiences of God.
Damir Rafi from Rational Religion wrote an interesting argument using an analogy from his years as a medical student. He recounts a personal experience as a medical student learning about Korsakoff’s Psychosis, a condition caused by heavy alcohol use which leads to memory problems. He had learned about this rare condition when he was a first-year medical student.
His tutor read out a case of a 70-year-old patient who had this condition. The man looked normal, but he thought that he was still living in the 1960s. He was unable to form new memories. However, Damir explained:
“[…] using the philosophy of the atheist, I decided I didn’t believe that such a condition existed. It was just too far-fetched for me. After all, I had never seen a patient with it in real life, and I definitely wasn’t just going to believe whatever was on a sheet of paper, or told to me by a so-called expert. No, I wouldn’t be brainwashed so easily.
“Five years later, as a junior doctor, whilst working on the wards, I met a patient with this ‘Korsakoff’s Psychosis’, displaying very similar symptoms to those I had read about half a decade earlier. You must think I felt quite the fool, for disbelieving all this time. Actually, no, I still disbelieved. Why? Because other explanations were still possible. Perhaps the patient in front of me was faking it. Maybe I was hallucinating. […]
“So why am I telling you this entirely serious story? It is to demonstrate that atheists use a different set of criteria when assessing the validity of a scientific hypothesis, as compared to the hypothesis of God’s existence. When we are given a lecture on a scientific concept, we do not immediately disbelieve in it because we haven’t seen or experienced it for ourselves. Rather we accept the claim that is made, simply because it given to us by an expert. We trust them, out of a type of informed faith. Why not do the same with the thousands and thousands of individuals […] who claimed that they have had some kind of divine experience?” (https://rationalreligion.co.uk/what-would-it-take-for-an-atheist-to-believe-in-god/)
It’s a peculiar double standard atheists live by indeed!
Further, when millions of believers urge atheists to use their senses to contemplate the universe – encouraging them to question its Creator – and then asking them to explore and test the claims made by believers, why do atheists fail to take that step?
Treat it as a science experiment if you will, but at least don’t hold double standards and illogical demands when demanding proof of God’s existence.
If atheists don’t want to put the effort in, that’s a different question, but to deny God based on illogical questioning about seeing him with human eyes, etc. is, in itself, unscientific.
