After his famous 1948 BBC debate with skeptic Bertrand Russell, Jesuit priest Fr. Frederick Copleston expressed some frustration. He said that he felt that Russell had come unwilling to really engage him in any of his arguments. However, during the debate the two men had this brief exchange:
“You say,” Copleston said to Russell, “I think that the universe — or my existence if you prefer, or any other existence — is unintelligible?”
“I shouldn’t say unintelligible,” Russell replied, “I think it is without explanation.”
I would say that was a major concession on Russell’s part. It’s true. Non-theists don’t really have a good explanation for the existence of the universe, theists do. For example, scientists believe that the universe had a beginning about 13 billion years ago. Theists have a good explanation for that. What do non-theists have to offer? Again, Russell concedes that they don’t have an explanation. I would say that a viable, logical and rational explanation for our existence is better than no explanation and that is what we as theists have.