What is the problem with Atheism? Atheism is more than just a problem for faith. It fails to qualify as science. A good science pursues naturalistic explanations of natural phenomena. The tradition of biology begun with Charles Darwin in 1859 and running down to the present time is good science. Darwinism provides the most adequate natural explanations for the evolution of one species out of a previous species. As good science, it avoids saying anything about Gods action in the world. Because science tells us how creatures act with regard to one another, we do not expect science to say anything directly about the creator. For a scientist to conclude that there is no God - which is the conclusion of the atheist - is simply unwarranted by the science. Atheism fails to be scientific, because science deals with the world of creatures, not the realm of the creator. Charles Darwin, who gave us the concept of evolution as descent with modification, was no atheist. He belonged to the Church of England; and he entertained agnostic ideas. Darwin has drawn followers who are atheists, however. Thomas Huxley in the late 19th century used evolutionary theory to argue for naturalism without belief in God. In our own era, Richard Dawkins of Oxford writes in his book, The Blind Watchmaker (Norton 1987), Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist (p.6). We believe this is a colossal error in logic. Darwin s model of evolution is good science; but good science does not require atheism. There is no step in the scientific method that says at this point, abandon belief in God. Email link | Printer-friendly | Feedback | Contributed by: Martinez Hewlett and Ted Peters