"Arguments for God's Existence?" ~Voltaire

I have great respect for religion and the morality it can inspire, but I also do not accept things blindly. Do you have any well-reasoned arguments for the existence of God?

a. Anselm’s Ontological argument for the existence of God says that God must exist by His own definition. Anselm defines God as “that of which nothing greater can be conceived” and so would possess all the best qualities including true existence over being simply imagined.

b. Kant’s Transcendental argument says that “every fact of human experience and knowledge) are not meaningful apart from a preconditioning belief in the existence of the Christian God”. The clearest demonstration of this is found in morality. I have yet to see a satisfactory source for morality apart from a moral God.

c. Plato’s Cosmological argument follows this line of reasoning, “Every finite/contingent being has a cause + Nothing contingent can cause itself + A causal chain cannot be of infinite length = There must be a first cause (or necessary being).” Anselm would say it is greater to be a “necessary” being than a “contingent” one, so God must be a necessary being by definition. The infinite recurrence theory obviously takes issue with the 3rd statement and I believe the string theory takes issue with the 2nd.

d. Aquinas’s Teleological argument comes from Romans 1:20, which Paul says, “For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse”. This is the primary basis for the Intelligent Design movement, which follows an “inference to the best explanation” that an information rich system necessitates design. William Dembski’s Design Inference explains how science approaches the question of whether or not a thing was designed. He cites “improbability” and “specificity” as the two major variables. This is how they avoid the tendency to read design into something.

e. Lee Strobel wrote his book The Case for Christ based on the legal evidence that Jesus Christ existed, claimed to be God, and demonstrated His claims to be true. John 1:18 says that we can see God through His son Jesus. Believers and non-believers alike reported His miracles, He fulfilled almost 200 prophecies and was witnessed by over 500 people as risen from the dead, many of whom died rather than recant this testimony. Strobel puts it well when he says, “people may be willing to die for something they mistakenly believe to be true, but no one would die for something they know to be UNtrue.” For more on that, I suggest reading his book or at least viewing the website.

f. My theory of “Emotional Denial” is based partially on Paul, who states in Romans 1:18-19 “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.” I believe that all humans inherently know that God exists (somewhat similar to Jung’s archetypes). However, before this truth can truly reach our consciousness, it passes through our emotions (which battle between honesty, selfishness, etc). Jesus said that anyone who truly wants to find God will (Matthew 7:7). I believe that atheism and all false religions are a result of human reasoning seeking to find a way to deny God without feeling guilty. I am, however, open to criticism J

g. Though I think each of these has validity, I don’t believe that any of them truly change a person’s mind. The Bible says that it is only God who can truly change a heart, and it is personal experience of God’s presence in my life that convinces me more than anything. There’s a camp song that says “don’t try to tell me that God is dead, I spoke with Him this morning.” Though no one has seen God any more than they can see gravity or honesty, we can see how He affects things, and we can understand His qualities. I will gladly share more on this if you ask, but this email is long enough already.

You say “I have great respect for religion and the morality it can inspire”, and I appreciate that, but I want to point out that the helpfulness of religion is not the point, but only a side-effect. There was a time when the best defense for Christianity we could present to hard evolutionists was “the Bible makes promises that I have experienced to be fulfilled in my life.” However, these days the helpfulness of religion can be a major distraction from the central point of whether or not it is true. CS Lewis said that if Christianity is true, then we all need to follow it whether it is helpful or not, and if it is false then we need to know that as well and stop living a lie even if it’s a nice one. That being said, I can’t see a basis for morality apart from God, and I can’t see a purpose to life apart from the mission of God on this earth, but I’d cherish your perspective on this.

I hope you find this helpful, or at least somewhat coherent. I don’t claim to have all the answers, and I’m nowhere near as well read on these issues as some others, but I hope you have seen that I have not accepted this blindly. It’s a big deal to commit your life to something you can only believe to be true. Hebrews 11:1 calls faith “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see”. Ultimately, I believe there will never be irrefutable proof either way while we are on this earth. Evidence can only get you to the point where it is reasonable. The Bible is God saying “I’ll catch you,” but we can’t be sure until we jump.

Please feel free to respond (positively or negatively) and if you need someone closer to the research or to the article you mentioned, I will try to connect you that way.

Your cojourner in the quest for truth,

Jeff Grant