Richard Dawkins is challenging the idea that a Deistic God created the universe
 and set it in motion and then keeps aloof. In other words, according to
 him we believe in an absentee God who seems to be indifferent to what 
is happening in the world. But if He in fact does create individual 
souls ‘off and on’, then he should face the problem of evil that exists 
in the created universe in the form of sorrows and sufferings, 
injustice, exploitation, birth-based deformities. Why should there be 
any birth-based differences that make some more privileged than others?
Besides, aggressive atheists who deny the existence of God do so because believers have been committing horrible 
acts of commission and omission in the name of religious creeds and God.
 Despite this, it is said that the so-called all-powerful, all-good, and
 all knowing God remains silent. Therefore, God’s silence is equated 
with God’s non-existence by materialists and atheists.
Howeveer, the wonderful structure of the 
universe and of the things and beings in the universe does seem to 
suggest the existence of a Grand Design, which needs explanation. Can it
 be due to matter and motion? Though human reason is capable of 
understanding a lot, it points to the existence of Universal 
Consciousness or Cosmic Intelligence, and this, say nay-sayers, is more 
faith than fact.
The theistic world view gives cosmic 
support to the believers. After all, the question of all questions is 
whether the universe is friendly or inimical to life in general and 
human life in particular. Long before the ‘Sun’ in the solar system was 
seen as the friend of humans. So the believer bowed before the Sun and 
said, “Aum Mitrya Namah” – O Lord, I bow to you, our friend. Darwin’s 
theory of biological evolution is a grand hypothesis to explain the 
origin of species on this planet. He never claimed that he could explain
 the ‘arrival of life to evolve in favour of the fittest’ in the world. 
How did the rudimentary amoebas evolve; out of nothing? Biologists aver 
the principle ‘life begets life’. Can they reduce biology to physics? 
Can they accept biology as a branch of physics? The usual and answer to 
this is ‘no’. Moreover, physics itself is becoming a science of the 
minute following the discovery that atoms can be split! The concept of 
God is not a stupid idea. It cannot be done away with so cursorily. It 
was the agnostic H Spencer who applied the concept of evolution to the 
evolution of the cosmos. Later philosophers formulated different ideas 
of evolution, as did S Alexander in the idea of Emergent Evolution, H 
Bergson in the concept of Creative Evolution.
The tiny logic and intellect of man 
should not be elevated to the status of God or the Cosmic Intelligence; 
perhaps its role in human affairs ought not to be dismissed or 
underestimated. Such a stand has its own limitations.   German 
philosopher Kant refuted the traditional rational argument addressed in 
support of belief in God. Yet he formulated the Moral Argument. For 
belief in the existence of God – and morality are special to human 
beings. Unless we accept the moral in the universe it is very difficult 
to make the universe morally intelligible. The discussion cannot be left
 in the hands of priests and pundits. Education in humanities will help 
believers liberate religion from the clutches of the priestly class. For
 aren’t modern liberation theologians willing to learn from Karl Marx to
 solve the issue of hunger and injustice?
Courtesy: Speaking Tree
When we experience physical pain, we reach out for painkillers. But when it comes to emotional pain, there seems to be no reliable way to find relief.