In December 2010 comic and actor Ricky Gervais, explained his un-belief in an article titled “Why I’m an Atheist”. His claim “there is no God” falls apart in at least two places. One, he ignores the scientific evidence that supports the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God. Secondly, Ricky uses moral arguments that contradict his premise, ignoring evidence that supports the Moral Argument for God’s existence.
His first statement;
“I don’t believe in God because there is absolutely no scientific evidence for his existence and from what I’ve heard the very definition is a logical impossibility in this known universe,” Ricky Gervais¹
To the contrary, the Cosmological Argument reasonably explains the possibility of a creator. Many scientist have confirmed the argument for a causal universe.
The Cosmological Argument follows as such;
Whatever begins to exist has a cause –
The universe began to exist –
Therefore the universe has a cause.
Everyday experience and scientific evidence confirm the first premise that all physical things have a cause. If something begins to exist it must have a cause. It came from somewhere.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states the universe is slowly running out of usable energy. This law points us to a universe that has a definite beginning. Albert Einsteins Theory of Relativity opened the discussion about the history of the universe. Alexander Friedman and George LeMaitre in 1927 proposed a theory of an expanding universe which later became known as the “Big Bang Theory”. This was proven in 1929 by Edwin Hubble who measured the red shift in light from distant galaxies. The evidence confirmed the universe had a single starting point in time. Recently three leading cosmologist, Arvind Borde, Alan Guth, and Alexander Vilenkin concluded that our expanding universe had a beginning.
Since the universe cannot cause itself, its cause must be space-less, timeless, immaterial, un-caused and powerful. Perhaps, Ricky has not considered “The Cosmological Argument” which gives us a reason to believe that God exist.
“The existence of God is not subjective. He either exists or he doesn’t. It’s not a matter of opinion. You can have your own opinions. But you can’t have your own facts” Ricky Gervais ²
Ricky claims there is no God – yet claims His existence is not subjective and not a matter of opinion but of fact. According to his own statement therefore, his claim “there is no God” should be based on fact and not subjective opinion.
He appeals to morality by pointing out the bad things that some people do in God’s name. He appeals to an objective morality in a selective way with no understanding of the Moral Argument.
The Moral Argument states;
If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.
But objective moral values and duties do exist.
Therefore, God exist.
God is good. God’s nature provides an objective moral reference point, a standard against which all actions and decisions are measured. We can all agree that rape, child abuse, murder and theft is wrong, affirming that objective morality does exist. There are objective moral values and duties.Therefore, God exist.
Ricky fails to provide a foundation for the objective moral reality we all experience daily. He is glad however,to appeal to an objective morality to argue against the existence of The Objective Lawgiver Himself.
Ricky should go back to contemplating Jesus as he once did as a child. Perhaps he may come to understand that Jesus is God and loves us and came to become one of us to redeem us from a world of confusion, sin and death, and is restoring us to a right relationship with Him in clarity, righteousness and life.
¹ Ricky Gervais:Why I’m an Atheist – Wall Street Journal Dec19,2010
² Ricky Gervais:Why I’m an Atheist – Wall Street Journal Dec19,2010
Momeaning 