As scientific progress and skepticism have reshaped traditional belief systems, theological conceptions of God have adapted, evolving to align with modern understanding. The existence and rise of atheism, agnosticism, and skepticism has played a significant role in indirectly defining and evolving the concept of God itself, primarily by challenging traditional frameworks and prompting religious and philosophical thought to adapt in response.
Theological Arguments and Skepticism
Throughout history, skepticism has driven theologians and philosophers to develop more sophisticated theological arguments for the existence of God, such as the teleological, ontological, cosmological, and moral arguments. As science continues to provide explanations for phenomena once attributed to divine intervention, theologians have refined arguments to align with current knowledge and discoveries.
The Teleological Argument: Design and Complexity
For instance, the teleological argument (aka the argument from design) posits that the complexity of our universe requires an intelligent designer—God. The argument goes back to ancient Greece, and has undertaken significant evolution alongside scientific advancements. This concept transformed itself by incorporating concepts like fine-tuning and the anthropic principle, focusing on the improbability of life-supporting conditions arising by chance.[1]
The Ontological Argument: Logic and Reason
The ontological argument maintains that the existence of God can be established by logic and reason alone rather than on the basis of empirical evidence. It originated with St. Anselm in the eleventh century. He believed that God, being the greatest of conceivable beings, must exist not only in the mind, but also in reality, since existence in reality is greater than existence in the mind alone. While the ontological argument is a logical argument, it doesn’t rely on observational evidence. It remains outside of the empirical sciences, focusing instead on purely abstract reasoning. Modern scientific ideas about the nature of reality, consciousness, and existence have indirectly influenced the concept.[2]
The Cosmological Argument: First Cause
The cosmological argument asserts that the existence of the universe requires a cause, or at least an explanation outside of itself. Since everything that exists must have a cause, the argument presumes, it simply postulates that God is the ‘Prime Mover’ or ‘First Cause.’ Newer versions of the argument attempt to adapt to modern physics, emphasizing the beginning of the universe (aka the Big Bang) as evidence of a transcendent cause beyond space and time. However, science has determined that what led to the creation of the universe may have happened without deterministic causes. This suggests the possibility of a broader framework, complicating the notion of a singular cause.[3]
The Moral Argument: Divine Law and Human Reason
The moral argument, that God is the divine moral lawgiver, asserts that universal moral principles require a transcendent source. However, as societies became more nonspiritual and focused on reason, the moral argument soon faced challenges from a humanistic standpoint. The possibility that morality can be grounded in human reason, independent of a deity, forced it to evolve significantly over time, adapting to philosophical developments, cultural contexts, and critiques.[4]
The Influence of Nonbelief on Religious Institutions
In societies where nonbelief is growing, religious institutions and leaders have been forced to reinterpret or modernize their teachings in order to stay relevant. On October 28, 2014, during a meeting at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope Francis declared that biological evolution and the Big Bang theory are real and compatible with the Catholic notion of creation. He maintained that God is the divine creator who initiated the processes that allow beings to evolve.[5]
Changing Concepts of God and Spirituality
Religious perspectives on medical practices have also evolved significantly over time, adapting to advancements in science and changes in societal values. Rather than emphasizing God in a literal sense, theologians have transitioned God to become more of a metaphorical or symbolic figure.[6] This has also led to a shift in how people conceptualize God, moving away from institutionalized religion to personalize spirituality. For example, God is now seen less as a traditional, anthropomorphic deity, and more as an inner force or universal energy. As our science and understanding of the universe increases, some religious thinkers have sought to harmonize God with scientific discovery, presenting God as the ultimate source of the universe’s laws, rather than a direct, interventionist force.
The Dynamic Role of Nonbelief in Cultural Dialogue
In response to intellectual challenges, cultural shifts, and advancements in science, the concept of God has been pushed from a simplistic idea to a more abstract and nuanced notion. Atheism, agnosticism, and skepticism have prompted an ongoing cultural conversation about the role of God in morality, purpose, and meaning. The dialogue itself, albeit at times antagonistic, keeps the concept of God dynamic and evolving, influencing how societies define and relate to divinity. In essence, the rise of nonbelief acts as a catalyst for theological and philosophical growth, ensuring that the concept of God remains adaptive, reflective, and even relevant in a changing intellectual and cultural landscape. The presence of nonbelief is not merely passive, but actively shapes the dialogue, metaphors, and cultural resonance of God—paradoxically keeping the concept of God alive even as theistic belief wanes.
Notes
[1] See: Del Ratzsch and Jeffrey Koperski, “Teleological Arguments for God’s Existence” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2023 edn.) ed. E. N. Zalta (Stanford, CA: Stanford University, 2023). <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2023/entries/teleological-arguments/>; and Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design (New York, NY: W. W. Norton, 1986).
[2] See: Graham Oppy, “Ontological Arguments” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2024 edn.) ed. E. N. Zalta (Stanford, CA: Stanford University, 2024). <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/ontological-arguments/>; and J. L. Mackie, The Miracle of Theism (Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 1982).
[3] Wes Morriston, “Doubts about the Kalām Cosmological Argument” in Debating Christian Theism ed. J. P. Moreland, Chad V. Meister, and Khaldoun A. Sweis (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2013): 20-32.
[4] Michael Martin, “The Gap in Theistic Arguments” (January 13, 1997). The Secular Web. <https://infidels.org/library/modern/michael-martin-gap/>.
[5] Pope Francis, “Address to the Plenary Session of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences” (October 27, 2014). Vatican—Holy See. <https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2014/october/documents/papa-francesco_20141027_plenaria-accademia-scienze.html>.
[6] See: Paul Tillich, The Courage to Be (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1952); and Karen Armstrong, The Case for God (New York, NY: Knopf, 2009).