I know many intelligent, thoughtful people who are not sure one way or the other, about the existence of God. Generally, they are classified as agnostics. While I disagree with their position, usually they are very aware of the reasonable arguments for God’s existence and I, on the other hand, understand very clearly the questions that bother them. What is most striking about the modern atheistic movement, however, is the cloud of arrogance that seems to hover above its most well known proponents; much like the ubiquitous dust-cloud that followed the Peanuts character, Pig-Pen. A striking example of this arrogance is the name they chose to give to their gathering over the weekend in our nation’s capitol: “Reason Rally”

Make no mistake; these people really are convinced they have a monopoly on reason and logical thinking. Two of the leading proponents of atheism in our day, Richard Dawkins and Professor Daniel Dennet, actually proposed that atheists should be called “brights” due to their elevated status. Much to his credit, the late atheistic propagandist Christopher Hitchens, was appalled by the idea.

What fuels the hubris of writers like Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennet, Sam Harris, Jerry Coyne, P.Z. Myers, etc. is their belief that Science unequivocally supports their godless view of reality. An honest, open-minded investigation will reveal, however, that Science offers close to nothing in support of atheism. A prodigious leap of faith is required to believe such a notion; a leap that rivals any that might be demanded by a particular religion. At every critical point of contention between believers and non-believers, scientific evidence is at the very least, inconclusive, and at best, supports belief in God and the spiritual:

Origin of Life – Much to the chagrin of chemists and molecular biologists, the “dirty little secret” of origin of life research – as Dr. Eugene Koonin put it – is that Science has, until now, utterly failed in its quest to discover a plausible naturalistic explanation for the origin of the astoundingly complex molecular machinery and information systems found in the earliest life on our planet. It is these same super-sophisticated machines and genetic information systems that would allow Darwinian evolution – conceding its truth for argument’s sake – to take place. The origin of these systems is a complete mystery. Perhaps the reason is because there is no naturalistic explanation. Perhaps, Darwin forbid, there is a Creator.

Human Consciousness and our unique sense of Identity – Neuroscientists are absolutely baffled when asked to explain the phenomena of human consciousness and self-awareness. Dr. Jerry Fodor, a non-believing cognitive scientist, has put it this way: “Nobody has the slightest idea how anything material could be conscious. Nobody even knows what it would be like to have the slightest idea about how anything material could be conscious.” Nobel-Prize winning biologist George Wald has stated: “Consciousness seems wholly impervious to science.” Anyone ready to consider a non-material soul?

Man’s Relentless Search for Meaning and Abstract Moral Values – The Darwinian psychologist grasps at straws trying to understand why every other form of life on the planet does not seem to be bothered at all by the aforementioned issues and lives and thrives quite successfully without them, while human beings are obsessed with “meaning” and “moral values” and cannot live without them. The painful conundrum this raises in the atheist position is expressed by the French philosopher Jean Paul Sartre: “That God does not exist I cannot deny, that my whole being cries out for God, I cannot forget.” Is there anyone out there open-minded enough to consider that perhaps human beings are radically and qualitatively different than all other forms of life?

In short, Science has nothing to tell us about where we came from, who we are, and where we are going. Science, particularly in the area of medicine, has helped save countless lives. However, Science has no answer to the question of why a human life is worth saving in the first place; in fact, scientific knowledge is irrelevant in any attempt to seriously address the question. Despite this, I can still understand why someone might have doubts about God’s existence. What I find incomprehensible, though, is the arrogant proclamation that the only reasonable position worth rallying for is atheism. In truth, such a stance is patently irrational.

Related coverage Antisemitism’s ‘Long March Through the Institutions’ It’s commonplace nowadays to make the claim that young American Jews, especially on college campuses, are becoming steadily more alienated...

In my opinion, the most revealing moment of the “Reason Rally” was a headline performance by Australian entertainer, Tim Minchin. While the audience – many with young children in tow – clapped and bounced along with the rhythm, Mr. Minchin attempted to claim his place in the Guinness Book of Records by saying the word mother****er as many times as is humanly possible during a 3-minute “song.” The enthusiastic reaction of these “brights” to Mr. Minchin’s antics tells us much more about the true state of modern atheism than any science textbook ever will.

Rabbi Moshe Averick is an orthodox rabbi, a regular columnist for the Algemeiner Journal, and author of Nonsense of a High Order: The Confused and Illusory World of the Atheist. It is available on Amazon.com and Kindle. Rabbi Averick can be reached via his website.