Proof of God's Existence & Activity: Is it possible? desirable?

SUMMARY: God seems to prefer a balance of evidence, with reasons to believe and disbelieve, so a person's heart and will (freely, not coerced by overwhelming evidence) can make the decision, and so we can develop a "living by faith" character with a trust in God serving as the foundation for all thoughts and actions of daily living.

Does God want us to be certain?
Sometimes debaters, using logical and philosophical arguments, try to prove or disprove the existence of God. But proof seems impossible. And I think that a "state of uncertainty" is the way God wants it to be, even though a lack of proof may feel frustrating for those who seek certainty.
Consider the most important event in Christian history, the resurrection of Jesus. If God had wanted everyone to be certain, most doubts would have been erased if the risen Jesus marched through downtown Jerusalem, showing everyone (not just Thomas) his hands and feet and side, asking the Roman soldiers "Was I dead three days ago? Am I alive now? Are you convinced?", and doing amazing miracles that would clearly demonstrate His power. Why wasn't this done? Why was the evidence merely impressive — with the testimony of many eyewitnesses whose lives were dramatically changed, a lack of disproof (no dead body could be produced,...), and more — instead of overwhelmingly decisive?
Or we can ask: Why doesn't God give everyone a Damascus Road Experience (Acts 9:1-31) that would convince each of us, not just Paul, that there is a theistically active God?
Or, when we examine the Bible and nature, we can find some evidence to support views across a wide range that includes young-earth creation, old-earth creation, theistic evolution, and atheistic evolution. Again, we can ask "Why isn't God more obvious?" Currently there is no clear and obvious theory about origins that is accepted by everyone. But if God wants us to recognize Him as Creator and to understand how He created, why is there evidence that would lead rational people to propose such a wide variety of explanations?
Although it isn't stated directly in the Bible, God seems to prefer a balance of evidence: there is enough reason to believe if we want to believe, but not enough to intellectually force belief against our will. Instead of overpowering us with undeniable logic or mighty miracles until we grudgingly give up and give in, God wants us to want to come to Him. With this balance there is authentic free will, and the choice is primarily made not by intellect, but by heart and will. * A balance is also needed for developing the "living by faith" character so highly valued by God. In a world where it may seem justifiable to be intellectually agnostic, God wants a non-agnostic faith, a total spiritual commitment, a true repentance followed by a complete trust in God that is manifested in all thoughts and actions of daily living. {* God also draws us to himself through the loving power of the Holy Spirit; this page won't discuss questions about Calvinism, re: human responsibility and divine sovereignty }

Yes, Evidence is Available
But authentic faith is not blind faith; it is not "trying to force yourself to believe what you know is not true." Strong evidence for Christian faith can come from four sources: recorded history, science, and personal experience that is first-hand or second-hand. History: The main basis for Judaic and Christian beliefs are the historical claims recorded in the Bible, which include miracles (concentrated in some time periods with selected people, especially Moses, Elijah & Elisha, Jesus & his disciples) plus other attention-grabbers like angels who become visible and audible. Science can also provide evidence to support theistic beliefs. Personal Experience: God can interact with individuals to supply personally customized evidence for His existence and activity. Interpersonal Experience: We can talk with other people, or read what they write, to share in their experiences and thoughts.
For me, all four sources have provided strong reasons to believe. For example, before becoming a Christian I had concluded — based on my study of the origin of life (it seems highly unlikely that natural process could produce life) and the many amazing life-allowing properties of the universe — that life and the universe probably had been designed and created by a designer/creator whose intelligence and power far exceeds our ability to comprehend. Also, God provided evidence, in many personal experiences, that He existed and was active in my life. I remain a Christian because I'm confident that The Gospel of Jesus is true, and because I want the grace and life offered by God. { But others can claim that these four kinds of evidence, when combined, give them reasons to not believe. And in recent years, proposals for a multiverse (plus anthropic principle) lets disbelievers say "so what" to evidence for a fine-tuning of nature, because it makes a non-designed multiverse one of three plausible explanations — along with an intelligently designed multiverse or intelligently designed universe — for the life-allowing properties of nature. }
When I claim that "nothing can be proved" I'm not advocating intellectual laziness or a radical relativism that denies the relevance of careful logical thinking. Even though there can be no proof, evidence can provide logical support for a rationally justified confidence, so only a moderate intellectual agnosticism is justified. An extreme agnosticism — as in the claims of radical postmodernists who propose an absolute skepticism (that since we cannot know with certainty, we can know nothing) — is not logically justified, and is not a wise strategy when choosing a foundational worldview for living.
Because each person gathers different evidence, and because our interpretations also vary, each of us will develop a different estimate for the plausibility of various worldviews. In most cases the evidence is not conclusive, and there may be several intellectually respectable options, including theism (of several types), deism, nontheistic religions (based on polytheism, pantheism, animism,...), atheism, or agnosticism. Usually, adjustments can be made to achieve logically consistent harmony. For example, I think the most reasonable explanation for apparent design in the life-allowing properties of our universe is actual design and creation by God, but other options (such as a theory of eternally existing matter with "an immense number of universes" so that even the extremely improbable becomes possible) are available for those who want to reach other conclusions.

A Summary
In an effort to avoid misunderstanding, I want to emphasize four points:
First, absolute truth does exist, even though we cannot know with absolute certainty what this truth is. For example, claims made in the Bible — that God created the universe, Jesus rose from the dead,... — are either true or false, and this truth or falsity does not depend on what you or I think. We do not "create our own truth." We create only our beliefs, which then influence our thoughts and actions.
Second, despite the impossibility of proof, evidence (personal, interpersonal, historical, scientific) can affect our estimates for the plausibility of various worldviews. As rational beings, we should try to rigorously analyze evidence (from observations and scriptures) in an attempt to find the truth. Therefore, I strongly support the activities of those who gather evidence that supports the truth claims of Christianity. In fact, I am one of these people. { And I defend the rights of those who gather evidence against the claims of Christianity. }
Third, God does miracles, but usually they are personal rather than general. For example, after his resurrection Jesus appeared to his followers but not the entire population of Jerusalem or Rome; God provided a spectacular Damascus Road Experience for Paul (and his traveling companions) but not for others; God gave Peter the temporary power needed to raise a woman from death (Acts 9:36-43) and "this became known all over Joppa" but the experiences arising from this miracle — for Peter, the woman and her friends, and the people of Joppa — were direct, personally customized, and localized, and were different than the experiences of people in other cities.
Fourth, I'm not advocating a spiritual agnosticism that claims "if there is not enough evidence for certainty, the most rational decision is to not decide." I agree with the premise (that evidence is inadequate for proof) but not the conclusion (that "not deciding" is the wisest choice); a moderate intellectual agnosticism is justified, but a commitment agnosticism seems unwise. I'm merely suggesting that we humbly recognize the limits of logical persuasion and the impossibility of proof, and see our world as an environment that permits free decisions and provides opportunities for living by faith in whatever worldview a person has decided to construct and accept.

Living by Faith
For those who diligently seek evidence and carefully examine it, there will be answers for sincere questions about the plausibility of Christian theism; then a decision can be made by the heart and will. The importance of the will continues in everyday living. An intellectual assent to theological propositions is only the beginning of an authentic Christian "born again" decision that leads to living by faith — with spiritual support from God, who promises to provide believers with whatever they need (faith, hope, love, joy, courage, strength, mercy, wisdom,...) for a full life — by making decisions, throughout each day, on the basis of trust in God's character and promises.

	Science-and-Faith Education for the Whole Person
SITE MAP	Effective Teaching	School Options	Learning Skills	Thinking Skills	The Nature of Science	Creation Questions	World Views	about ASA

Is there proof for the
existence and activity of God?

( and if not, Why isn't God more obvious? )

Is there proof for the existence and activity of God?

( and if not, Why isn't God more obvious? )

Is there proof for the
existence and activity of God?