DOES THE IDEA OF GOD VIOLATE LOGIC AND SCIENCE?

Atheists often claim that the idea of God violates Occam’s razor (simplicity). They reason that it is more logical and scientific that everything originated from one single, eternal, and unintelligent force than from a highly complex God. However, there are also other considerations:

1.    Positing one omnipotent and omniscient God is able to explain all phenomena. Meanwhile, naturalism (non-ID) cannot even begin to explain many phenomena – the fine-tuning of the universe, the origins of matter, energy, space, time, the laws of science (“natural” laws), consciousness, freewill, DNA, the cell, life… The superior paradigm is the one that can explain everything within its domain.

2.    Besides, an unintelligent non-omnipotent force can explain nothing by itself. When we examine this hypothesis, we observe that for a force to be causal, it must also be associated with time, space, matter, and energy. As such, I think that it violates the simplicity criterion more than God would. Also, it cannot explain why it remains immutable, universal, and even elegant.

3.    Occam’s razor pertains to scientific phenomena, rightly claiming that that the theory that requires fewer assumptions is preferable to one requiring more. The God-hypothesis requires only one assumption. Besides, God is pre-science. As such, there is nothing logical or scientific that would militate against the theistic paradigm.