Mind Games
Survival Course Manual

1. The existence of God

1. On proving God exists

Arguments for the existence of God range from those that are said to prove God exists conclusively, to those that only go as far as saying that God's existence can be shown to be reasonable, to arguments that claim it is unnecessary to prove God exists since it is clear to everyone anyway, to arguments against the possibility of arguing for God's existence at all (that belief in God is solely a matter of faith).

Arguments for God's existence can be generally categorized as arguments to God and arguments from God. The former argue from things or ideas in our own experience to the conclusion that God exists. The latter argue from the existence (reality) of God to the possibility of things or ideas in our own experience. Classical theistic proofs are examples of arguments to God; explanatory and presuppositional arguments are examples of arguments from God (see 1. B. below).

Arguments to God typically are constructed in either deductive or inductive form. Deductive arguments begin with established facts and deduce God's existence. These are believed to prove conclusively that God exists. Inductive arguments look at various facts of our experience and conclude that there must be a God behind it all. These at best offer a high probability, although exponents of such proofs often put arguments together to form a cumulative case which carries a greater degree of certainly.

Arguments from God begin with the reality of God, and argue that it is only because of His reality that the universe exists and functions as it does.
 

2. Arguments for God's existence

1. Classical theistic proofs -- arguments to God{3}

   Ancient Greek philosophers indulged in speculation about God or ultimate realities. When Aristotle was "rediscovered" in the Middle Ages his philosophy was employed by philosophers and theologians such as Thomas Aquinas who offered his "five ways" of proving God exists. These arguments have carried down to our day and are still employed, albeit in modified forms. We'll look at a few of these proofs.

1. The Cosmological Argument

According to this argument, the existence of the "cosmos," the creation, argues for the existence of a creator. Central to this argument is the following proposition: If anything now exists, something must be eternal. Otherwise, something not eternal must have emerged from nothing. Since we have no experience of such events, this is taken to be impossible.

If something exists right now, it must have come from something else, come from nothing, or always existed. If it came from something else, then that something else must have come from nothing, always existed, or come from something else itself. Ultimately, either something has always existed, or at some point something came into being from nothing (which, again, is impossible).

Therefore, if anything exists, then something must be eternal. If something is eternal, it is then either an eternal being or an eternal universe. Scientific evidence strongly suggests that the universe is not eternal, but that it had a beginning. In addition, if the non-personal universe is that which is eternal, one must explain the presence of personal creatures within that universe. How does personal come from non-personal? If something is eternal and personal while the universe is finite and non-personal, then there must be an eternal being. This being is taken to be God.

One of the most often-asked questions concerning this cosmological argument is, "Where did God come from?" While it is reasonable to ask this question about the universe since (as stated above) the strongest evidence argues for a universe which had a beginning, asking that same question of God is irrational, since it implies of Him, something found only in the finite universe: time. By definition, something eternal must exist outside both time and space. God has no beginning; He is (Exod. 3:14).
 

2. The Teleological Argument

The word "teleological" comes from the. Greek word telos, meaning "end" or "goal." The idea behind this argument is that the observable order in the universe demonstrates that it functions according to an intelligent design. The classic expression of this argument is William Paley's analogy of the watchmaker in his book, Evidences. If we were walking on a beach and found a watch in the sand, we would not assume that it washed up on the shore having been formed through the natural processes of the sea. We would assume that it had been lost by its owner and that somewhere there was a watchmaker who had designed it and built it with a specific purpose.

Some evolutionists maintain that the argument from design has been invalidated by the theory of natural selection. Richard Dawkins, a scientist at Oxford, even speaks of evolution as "The Blind Watchmaker," saying that it brings order without purpose. However, the theory of evolution faces major obstacles in scientific circles to this day, and it is grossly inadequate in its explanation of the ordered species of animals in this world (see Creation/ Evolution in Section I of this notebook). The best explanation for the order and complexity that we see in nature is that the divine Designer created it with a purpose and maintains all things by the word of His power (Heb. 1:3; Col. 1:17). 

3. The Moral Argument

The moral argument recognizes humankind's universal and inherent sense of right and wrong (cf. Rom. 2:14-15) and says this comes from more than societal standards. All cultures recognize honesty as a virtue along with wisdom, courage, and justice. These are thought of as absolutes, but they cannot be absolute standards apart from an absolute authority! The changeless character of God is the only true source of universal moral principles; otherwise all morality would be relative to culture preferences (see Measuring Morality in Section 11 of this notebook). 
Each of these arguments follows the same basic pattern. God has provided us with a witness to Himself in the creation, and we are called upon to believe in Him on the basis of what we have seen: "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so they are without excuse" (Rom. 1:20).
2. Explanatory arguments

Explanatory arguments are those that say the reality of God best explains what we see around us. They begin with such things as the cosmic order or moral behavior -- the same types of facts that the classical proofs employ -- and conclude that there must be a God behind it all. Philosopher Ronald Nash explains:

The noted features of reality are exactly what we should expect to find if the theistic worldview is true. The case for theism is made even stronger when we find things in the world that we would not expect to find if Naturalism were true or if theism were false.... The explanatory power of theism is based not on single, isolated arguments but on the cumulative case one gets by reflecting on the existence of the universe, the order of the universe, and the facts of human rationality, moral consciousness, and religious experience.{4}

Does Christianity offer the best explanation of the world around us? For starters we can compare it with naturalism on some important issues. Note what theologian John Frame{5} says:

Let us think through the consequences of each [an impersonal beginning to the universe and a personal one]. If the impersonal is primary, then there is no consciousness, no wisdom, and no will in the ultimate origin of things. What we call reason and value are the unintended, accidental consequences of chance events.... Moral virtue will, in the end, be unrecorded. Friendship, love, and beauty are all of no ultimate consequence, for they are reducible to blind, uncaring process.... But if the personal is primary, then the world was made according to a rational plan that can be understood by rational minds, Friendship and love are not only profound human experiences, but fundamental ingredients of the whole world order.... Moral goodness, too, is part of the great design of the universe.... Beauty, too, does not just happen for a while; it is the art of a great craftsman.{6}


Reason, morality, and beauty, then, have no ultimate meaning in a naturalistic universe. But our experience of these things is that they do have meaning. A personal foundation for our universe (namely, God) best explains the reality of such experiences.

Frame also speaks of creation in this context. People who hold to a naturalistic worldview seek impersonal explanations for the natural order.
Why is this so? Is it not initially at least equally plausible that impersonal matter, motion, and force can be explained by the decisions of a person? We have all observed how persons create and harness impersonal objects and forces to do their bidding. In a factory, human workers produce a tractor (designed and planned by people); a farmer uses that tractor to plow his field. But we have never seen a plowed field produce a farmer, or a tractor produce a work force. The very idea seems ludicrous {7}

Explanatory arguments function inductively. Rather than saying that one argument conclusively proves the God of the Bible exists, these arguments added up -- each of which is inconclusive alone -- are believed to give a high probability that God exists.
 
 
3. The presuppositional approach arguments from God{8}


Presuppositional apologetics is a method according to which God and His Word are authoritative. It is with those realities established that we should begin apologetics.

Regarding the question of God's existence, presuppositionalists ask first what the Bible has to say about the matter. Scriptural testimony regarding the knowledge of God is that God has presented Himself in such a way that everyone knows He exists (Rom.1:20). No logical proofs -- at least of the deductive kind -- are to be found. Looking for arguments that God exists in Scripture is a little like looking for arguments that Abraham Lincoln existed in a biography about him: his existence is simply taken for granted. In Scripture, God "proved" His existence through His dealings with mankind.

Sometimes Paul's speech in Athens recorded in Acts 17 is cited as an example of a theistic proof. But there Paul simply described God and told about what He had done. This is more an example of testimony than proof.

A valid question is how we know God exists "through what has been made" (Rom. 1:20)? Some philosophers say the teleological argument answers this question; we know God exists because we deduce his existence from the design and order of the universe. Presuppositionalists respond that everyone knows Go d exists, even those who've never heard of theistic proofs, and that the classical proofs don't necessarily conclude with the biblical God.

Also, if the unbeliever doesn't find the proofs compelling, he might feel justified in denying God. For presuppositionalists there is no justification in denying God; everyone knows He exists, and everyone will answer for that knowledge.

This approach argues at the very basic level of our unargued-for beliefs or presuppositions. One's presuppositions about ultimate realities determine how one interprets facts. Either an individual must begin with the presupposition that God exists or he will never be able to properly interpret the facts of his experience. To start from atheistic (or other) presuppositions is to get off on the wrong foot from the beginning. It is held that facts themselves have no meaning unless one presupposes the God of the Bible is behind them. All of our knowledge and experience are incoherent and meaningless if not built on the foundation of God.

4. Conclusion


Even if one thinks the existence of God can't be proved conclusively through logical arguments, it seems entirely reasonable to present reasons that might serve to persuade a person to acknowledge God. Given that there is much confusion in the world today about God, even those who believe that everyone deep down knows God exists should adopt a charitable approach and provide pointers to God if not proofs. If the unbeliever is stubborn in his unbelief, that will be revealed in time.

On the other hand, if it's true that everyone knows God exists, the greater burden is on unbelievers to acknowledge God than on believers to present compelling proofs for His existence.. We must remember that God doesn't come to the bar of judgment before unbelievers. Rather, He waits patiently for them to end their rebellion and turn to Him (Rom. 2:4; 11 Pe. 3:9).