Chapter Thirteen - The Existence of God
This chapter is divided into three major areas:
1. THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
Is it possible to prove that God exists?
That depends on what you mean by "prove." Scientific proof or mathematical proof is not possible, but a high degree of probability is possible. This latter kind of proof is better termed "evidence," and it is convincing to those who have an inclination to believe, or at least to those who are not determined to disbelieve, that God exists.
Those who do not want to believe that God exists would probably reject any kind of evidence. Since they are unwilling to admit that God does exist, they prefer to say that He does not exist. This is itself a kind of "faith." For those of the "seeing-is-believing" mentality the arguments presented here may still not be satisfactory.
Our belief in God's existence, though reasonable and corroborated by a great deal of evidence, is still, in essence, a faith. We move now to the arguments for the existence of God. They fall into three broad groups:
1.1 Intuitive
A belief is intuitive if it is universal and necessary. Paul writes, "That which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them" (Romans 1:19). He goes on to say, "Since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen" (v. 20). This information leaves unbelievers "without excuse" (v. 20). Even the most depraved know that those who live in sin are "worthy of death" (Romans 1:32) and that all men have "the work of the Law written in their hearts" (Romans 2:15).
History shows that the religious element of our nature is just as universal as the rational or social one. Religion or a belief system is categorized as one of the universals in culture (Herskovits, Cultural Anthropology, p. 117). There are in man's belief everywhere, various forms of religious phenomena and awareness of the supernatural.
Often man's religion has degenerated because of unbelief. Paul writes that when men rejected God, "they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures" (Romans 1:21-23).
1.2 Biblical
The Bible regards all men as believing in the existence of God. Throughout the Bible, the existence of God is taken for granted. Arguments for the existence of God are not found as such anywhere in the Bible. The closest we come to a biblical endorsement of them is in such places as:
Romans 1:20: "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 that they are without excuse."
Psalm 19:1: "The heavens are telling of the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands."
The effect of such evidence is regarded by the psalmist as being so strong that he declares, "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God'" (Psalm 14:1).
The Scriptures begin with the majestic statement, "In the beginning God" (Genesis 1:1), and they continue throughout to take His existence for granted. Such texts as Psalm 94:9f and Isaiah 40:12-31 are not proofs of God's existence, but rather analytical accounts of all that is involved in the idea of God, and admonitions to recognize Him in his character of deity. Man's consciousness is aware of the existence of God, and the writers of Scripture had minds filled and aglow with the thoughts and knowledge of Him.
The value, then, of the philosophical arguments that follow is that they help us realize that Christianity is rational; that biblical faith is not blind, but based upon sound thinking. In evangelizing a world that believes Christianity is an escape from reality, it is important for us to know these arguments well.
1.3 Philosophical
The logic that lies behind each of these arguments is that of cause and effect. Each argument reasons from effects, or phenomena, to a sufficient cause, something that all human experience seems to support. In other words, a ball flying through the air required something or someone strong enough to put it into motion; a house on the corner must have been built by men with sufficient materials and time.
In the study of the philosophical arguments used for the existence of God, the following must be borne in mind:
since God is a spirit, we must not insist on the same type of proof that we demand for the existence of material things, but only on such evidence as is suitable to the object of proof; and
the evidence is cumulative, a single argument for the existence of God being inadequate, but a number of them together being sufficient to bind the conscience and compel belief.
1.3.1 The cosmological argument
The question behind the cosmological argument is:
"How do we explain the existence of the cosmos (from Greek cosmos meaning "world" or "universe")? Everything begun must have an adequate cause. The universe was begun; therefore, the universe must have an adequate cause for its production. In other words, unless something comes from nothing, something eternal must exist; and that something eternal is the sufficient cause to which the universe owes its existence and greatness."
The argument is implied in Hebrews 3:4, "For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God."
Materialistic atheists once challenged this argument by affirming that the universe itself is eternal; that there is no evidence for the cosmos having a beginning. However, modern science suggests that the cosmos did have a beginning. For examples:
Physics (the second law of thermodynamics, or the law of entropy) teaches that energy becomes less available in a closed system; our world is "running down." Energy is becoming less available. If the universe is running down, then it is not self-sustaining; and if it is not self-sustaining, then it must have had a beginning. Since the universe is not constant and since it has a projected end, it cannot be eternal.
Astronomy shows that there have been great changes in the heavens. Astronomy is increasingly favorable toward the theory of an expanding universe (in which things are moving increasingly farther from each other) beginning with a primal explosion; thus, a beginning.
Geology that there have been great changes in the earth. Geology recognizes the disintegration of radioactive minerals and uses this information to date the universe. If something has an "age," it cannot be eternal.
Chemistry holds to a theory of the consumption of hydrogen which is the source of most energy; thus a beginning.
All this shows that the present order is not eternal. Furthermore, the existence of the world is dependent. Can the whole be self-existent when the several parts that make up the whole are dependent? There is also a succession in the effects. Causes produce effects, but the causes are themselves the effects of something else. There must, therefore, be a first cause.
The only alternative to materialistic atheism, other than believing in the existence of God, is the absurdity that something comes from nothing. It takes irrational faith to accept this as an explanation of the universe. The principle of cause and effect is built into our experience, and indeed is the foundation of science itself.
The cosmological argument strongly argues for a sufficient cause; however, it does not establish that this is an intelligent, personal, moral and perfect being.
1.3.2 The teleological argument
The teleological argument (from Greek telos meaning "purpose") asks the question:
"How do we account for the obvious purpose and design of our universe? The universe is characterized by order and useful arrangement; therefore, the universe has an intelligent cause. In everday observation this argument is illustrated by the fact that all objects that reveal design (e.g. automobiles, computers, watches) are assumed to have, as their ultimate cause, a designer. The universe itself is characterized by design and specific order; thus, a designer exists. On the basis of all observable data, that which has purpose or design implies an intelligent cause."
This argument is supported by Psalms:
"When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which Thou hast ordained; what is man, that Thou dost take thought of him? And the son of man, that Thou dost care for him?" (Psalm 8:3f)
"The heavens are telling the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the works of His hands. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night reveals knowledge" (Psalm 19:1f).
"He who planted the ear, does He not hear? He who formed the eye, does He not see?" (Psalm 94:9).
The structures and adaptations in the plant and animal world indicate order and design. The planets and stars are all kept in their courses in good order. We can see a relation between the animate and the inanimate world. Light, air, heat, water and soil are provided for the maintenance of plant and animal life.
It has been objected that both men and animals have useless organs, or vestigial structures, and that therefore the teleological argument is invalid. But science is again and again discovering that the so-called useless organs are after all not useless. It has also been objected that there may be order and useful arrangement without design, that things may be due to the operation of law or chance. But the dependent character of the laws of nature rules out the former idea. These laws are neither self-originating nor self-sustaining; they presuppose a lawgiver and a lawsustainer. Paul uses this argument in establishing the guilt of the infidel (Romans 1:18-23).
The teleological argument suggests not only that the first cause is intelligent, but that it is outside the universe, for design is seen to emanate not simply from within, but chiefly from without, by the adaptation of things external to the organisms and by the disposition and orderly arrangement of vast bodies of matter. Therefore, we conclude that the argument proves that the first cause is intelligent and extra-mundane.
Added to the first, this argument establishes that the sufficient cause is intelligent. But again, it has its limitations; we cannot yet say that our sufficient, intelligent cause is personal, moral and perfect. It does not prove that the intelligent cause was God. Further, the existence of physical evil and disorder limit the value of this argument. With the other arguments for the existence of God, it has value, but standing alone, it is of reduced value.
1.3.3 The Anthropological argument
The anthropological argument (from Greek anthropos meaning "man") asks the question:
"How do we explain man's personality? Reason tells us that something as complex and wonderful as "personality" could not arise out of nothing. Ultimately, its sufficient cause must be a greater personal being - God."
The Bible explains the sufficient cause of man's personality in Genesis 1:27: "And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."
The anthropological argument, combined with the previous arguments, leads us to the conclusion that our sufficient cause is intelligent, extra-mundane and personal.
1.3.4 The moral argument
The moral argument is perhaps the most convincing of all arguments for God's existence. It asks the question:
"How do we explain man's conscience? The logic is this: Man's consciousness of, or sensitivity to rightness and wrongness implies the existence of a fixed moral law, and therefore, a lawgiver."
Herskovits observes that "concepts of right and wrong can be found in the systems of belief of all groups" (Herskovits, Cultural Anthropology, p. 230). Every man has a sense of obligation, of what is right and wrong, together with an undeniable feeling of responsibility to do what is right and a sense of self-condemnation when he commits what is evil. There is in him a voice that will not be silenced, ever saying to his inner consciousness. This presupposes that there is a speaker, and moreover, one that is Lord and Sovereign. Man's knowledge of good and evil is from God, as is his sense of obligation. The Bible appeals to the moral argument in proof of the existence of God (Romans 1:19-32; 2:14-16).
Conscience insists that there is a fundamental moral law in the universe and that it is our duty to observe it. Further, known violations of this moral law are followed by feelings of ill-desert and fears of judgment. In the Bible David is a good example of this (Psalm 32:3f; 38:1-4). Our consciences cry out, "He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you ... ?" (Micah 6:8), and "God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil" (Ecclesiastes 12:14).
There is a permanent moral law and it has supreme authority over us. Evolutionists do not like to admit this. They like to think of everything as constantly changing. But that conscience is not self-imposed nor developed from our primitive instincts by our life in society, is evident from the fact that the sense of duty has no regard to our inclinations, pleasures, or fortunes, nor to the practices of society, but is often in conflict with them.
Some argue that this moral sensitivity is created by people for the sake of their own advantage or desires. It is merely personal convenience. How do you explain, then, people who do something that is to their disadvantage because of a sense of "rightness"? For examples: I give money to support refugees; I return a lost wallet with cash in it; charities; etc. Where does the drive to abide by that rightness come from or the self-condemnation and rationalization when one doesn't abide by it?
Another objection is that moral sensitivity results from the consensus of the welfare of society; that is, it is the imposition of the majority rule upon an individual. Society, however, is only the aggregate of individual. Society, however, is only the aggregate of individuals (who apparently sense right and wrong). Further, it is beyond the cultural realm, for some morals are agreed upon by all societies (e.g. respect of property, punishment for crimes, etc.). These observations can only be explained by recognizing a consciousness of right and wrong within every man.
We must conclude that since this moral law is not self-imposed and these fears of judgment are not self-executing, there is a holy will that imposes this law and a punitive power that will execute the threats of our moral nature. Man's conscience testifies to the existence of a higher law, hence a lawgiver, outside of himself, outside of his society. This argument offers further support for the existence of God by saying that the sufficient, intelligent, personal cause, is a moral lawgiver.
1.3.5 The argument from congruity
This argument is based on the belief that the postulate which best explains the related facts is probably true. As related to the present discussion, it runs as follows:
"The belief in the existence of God best explains the facts of our moral, mental, and religious nature, as well as the facts of the material universe; therefore, God exists."
This principle may be illustrated from microscopic and telescopic studies. The particles that make up an atom are not discoverable by direct observation; they are inferred from the effects they produce and the combinations they enter into. Thus in science we assume that a postulate which explains and harmonizes the related facts is true. Should we not on this same principle conclude that there is a God, since the theistic postulate is in harmony with all the facts of our mental, moral, and religious nature, as well as with the facts of the material universe?
To believe in a personal, self-sufficient, and self-revealing God is in harmony with our moral and mental nature; history and natural law have an explanation; and the universal belief in a supreme being with its accompanying religious experiences can be accounted for. Atheism does not provide an adequate answer to satisfy the human heart.
1.3.6 The ontological argument
The ontological (Greek for "existence") argument is perhaps the most debated of all the theistic arguments for God's existence. It asks the question:
"Where did the idea of a perfect being come from? Since every idea in our human culture has some cause, the idea of a perfect being must have a cause. In an imperfect universe it is reasonable that a perfect being put such an idea into man's mind."
It has been argued that many ideas exist of beings which do not exist such as the imaginative creatures of the film world. However, each of these creatures are combinations of impressions of real things. The argument, after all, states that every idea has a cause, not necessarily an objective reality. What real things in man's environment could cause his idea of a perfect being? Only the existence of a real perfect being - God.
Thus, the arguments taken together reason that there is a sufficient, intelligent, extra-mundane, personal, moral and perfect being.
1.4 Conclusion
We may conclude from these arguments that there is a sufficient, personal, extra-mundane, intelligent, self-existent, moral and perfect being - that is, the God of the Bible. He is the incomprehensible (Job 11:7; Isaiah 40:18; Romans 11:33), yet knowable one (John 17:3; 1 John 5:20).
2. THE DEFINITION OF GOD
The term "God" has been so misused that we need to restore to it its original meaning in the Christian system.
2.1 The Biblical Names for God
2.1.1 Deity
The biblical names of persons and places often carry great significance. This is true of the names for deity. One of the most widely used terms for deity is El, with its derivations Elim, Elohim, and Eloah. It is similar to the Greek theos, the Latin Deus, and the English God. It is a general word to indicate deity, and is used to include all members of the class of deity. The plural Elohim is used regularly by the Old Testament writers with singular verbs to denote a singular idea. The compound El-Elyon designates Him as the highest, the most high (Psalm 78:35), and El-Shaddai as the Almighty God (Genesis 17:1).
2.1.2 Self-existent one
Jehovah or Yahweh is the personal name of Israel's God. The term is connected with the Hebrew verb "to be," and means the "self-existent one," or the "one who causes to be" (Exodus 6:2f; cf. 3:13-16). This name occurs in a number of significant combinations:
2.1.3 Presence with the hosts of angels
Adonai, my Lord, is a title that appears frequently in the prophets, expressing dependence and submission, as of a servant to his master. The title, Lord of hosts, appears frequently in the prophetical and post-exilic literature (Isaiah 1:9; 6:3). The meaning of this term is God's presence with the hosts of angels (Psalm 89:6-8; cf. James 5:4).
2.1.4 Almighty
In the New Testament the term theos takes the place of El, Elohim and Elyon. The names Shaddai, and El-Shaddai are rendered pantokrator, the almighty, and thoes pantokrator, God almighty.
2.1.5 The beginning and the end
The Lord is also called the Alpha and the Omega (Revelation 1:8), who is and who was and who is to come (Revelation 1:4), the first and the last (Revelation 2:8), and the beginning and the end (Revelation 21:6).
2.2 The Theological formulation of the definition
What is the definition of God?
Because God is infinite, a comprehensive definition giving a complete and exhaustive portrayal of God is impossible. However, we can give a definition of God insofar as we know Him and we can set forth the attributes of God as revealed to man.
God is:
3. THE NON-CHRISTIAN VIEWS OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
Men as a whole have refused to have God in their knowledge (Romans 1:28). Sin has so distorted their vision and corrupted their hearts as to make them reject the evidence and go on without a God or set up gods of their own creation. We shall, therefore, briefly examine the leading non-Christian views and reply to them. They fall into six classes:
3.1 Atheistic
The term "atheism" refers to a failure to recognize the only true God. As such, it applies to all non-Christian religions. But in a more restricted sense, the term "atheism" applies to three distinct types:
Practical atheism is found among many people. Many have rashly decided that all religion is fake. People like this are usually not confirmed atheists; they merely are indifferent to God. While perhaps acknowledging a God somewhere, they live and act as if there is no God to whom they are responsible.
Dogmatic atheism is the type that openly professes atheism. Most people do not boldly flaunt their atheism before men, for the term is one of reproach; but there are some who do not shrink from declaring themselves atheists. Communism openly professes itself to be atheistic and religion to be the opiate of the people.
Virtual atheism is the kind that holds principles that are inconsistent with belief in God or that define Him in terms that do violence to the common meaning of the term "God." Those who define God in such abstractions as:
are atheists of the second of these varieties.
The atheistic position is a very unsatisfactory, unstable and arrogant one. It is unsatisfactory because all atheists lack the assurance of the forgiveness of their sins; they all have a cold and empty life; and they know nothing of peace and fellowship with God. It is unstable because it is contrary to man's deepest convictions. Both Scripture and history show that man necessarily and universally believes in the existence of God. The virtual atheist adopts abstraction to account for the world and its life. It is arrogant because it really pretends to be omniscient. Limited knowledge can infer the existence of God, but exhaustive knowledge of all things, intelligences, and times is needed to state dogmatically that there is no God. The dogmatic atheist can be explained as being in an abnormal condition and their minds are full of false philosophy.
3.2 Agnostic
The term "agnostic" is the view which affirm that neither the existence nor the nature of God, nor yet the ultimate nature of the universe, is known or knowable.
The agnostic position, too, is highly unsatisfactory, unstable and often displays a false humility. It is unsatisfactory in that it suffers the same spiritual impoverishment as does the atheistic, but it is unsatisfactory also from the intellectual standpoint. It is unstable because it admits that it has not attained to absolute certainty. It often displays a false humility in that it claims to know so little. From the Christian standpoint, this is a false humility, for Christians regard the evidence for the existence of a personal, extra-mundane, almighty and holy God as ample and conclusive.
3.3 Pantheistic
Pantheism holds that all finite things are merely aspects, modifications or parts of one eternal and self-existent being. It regards God as one with the natural universe. God is all; all is God.
The errors and destructive character of the pantheistic view must be pointed out. Christians believe that there is a common originating cause, but they hold that it is outside the world as well as inside it. We affirm that we have the consciousness that we are free agents and that we are accountable for our conduct. If all things are necessitated, then error and sin are also necessitated. But if that is true, then three other things follows:
Therefore, Pantheism destroy the foundations of morals.
True religion is possible only between persons who retain their distinct individualities, for true religion is the worship and service offered by a human being to the divine being. When these distinctions disappear, true religion becomes impossible. Therefore, Pantheism make all rational religion impossible.
If man is but a part of the infinite, he is also but a moment in the life of God, when the body perishes, the personality ceases. Thus, there is no conscious existence for man after death. But we are conscious that we stand in the relation of personal responsibility to God and that we shall be asked to give an account of the deeds done in the body, whether they be good or bad (2 Corinthians 5:10). We know that after death, as in this life, there will be a difference between the good and the bad, that is, that our identity and individuality will be preserved. Therefore, Pantheism deny personal and conscious immortality.
If everything that exists is but a manifestation of God, and if God does not come to consciousness except in man, then man is the highest manifestation of God in the world. The Hindu thinks that when he can say, "I am Brahman!" then the moment of his absorption into the infinite has arrived. Pantheism flatters man and encourages human pride, they deify man by making him a part of God.
3.4 Polytheistic
Monotheism was the original religion of mankind. The first departure from monotheism seems to have been in the direction of nature worship. Sun, moon, and stars, the great representatives of nature, and fire, air, and water, the great representatives of earth, became objects of popular worship. At first they were merely personified; then men came to believe that personal beings presided over them.
Polytheism has a strong affinity for fallen human nature. Men join themselves to idols (Hosea 4:17) and find it most difficult to break away. Idolatry not only leaves the heart empty, but also debases the mind. Paul speaks of how men "professing to be wise, ... became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and fourfooted animals and crawling creatures" (Romans 1:22f). The Thessalonian believers are represented as having "turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God" (1 Thessalonians 1:9).
In the Bible the gods of the heathen are sometimes declared to be of no account and futile (Isaiah 41:24; 44:9-20), and at other times, the representatives of demons (1 Corinthians 10:20). This seems to mean that the worship of idols is the worship of demons.
3.5 Dualistic
This theory assumes that there are two distinct and irreducible substances or principles:
Dualism originated from Persian Zoroastrianism in the last half of the first century. They tried to solve the problem of evil by postulating two gods:
They hold that the God of the Old Testament is not the supreme God, for the supreme God is entirely good; he is the demiurge, who created the universe. There is a constant conflict between these two gods, a conflict between good and evil. They try to eliminate all Judaistic elements from Christianity and to substitute Zoroastrianism in its place. They say that God is limited in power and perhaps in knowledge, He is doing the best He can with the disobedient world and will ultimately triumph completely over it. Man ought to assist God in this struggle and hasten the complete overthrow of evil. God is considered as growing and as finite.
Surely, a finite God cannot satisfy the human heart, for what guarantee does such a God offer for the final triumph of good? Something unforeseen may come up at any time to frustrate all His good intentions; and how shall the believer keep up faith in prayer on such a theory? This theory clearly disregard of the many Biblical indications that God is perfect and unchangeable in His wisdom, power, justice, goodness, and truth, and it does not satisfy our idea of God. Christians do not believe that Satan is co-eternal with God, but rather a creature of God and subject to Him.
3.6 Deistic
For deism, God is present in creation only by His power, not in His very nature and being. He has endowed creation with invariable laws over which He exercises a mere general oversight; He has imparted to His creatures certain properties, placed them under His invariable laws, and left them to work out their destiny by their own powers. Deism denies a special revelation, miracles and providence. It claims that all truths about God are discoverable by reason and that the Bible is merely a book on the principles of natural religion, which are ascertainable by the light of nature.
The Christian rejects deism because he believes that we have a special revelation of God in the Bible; that God is present in the universe in His being as well as in His power; that God exercises a constant providential control over all His creation; that He sometimes uses miracles in the accomplishment of His purposes; that God answers prayer.
Some of the major worldviews on the existence of God are illustrated in the following chart:
3.7 Conclusion
According to the above reasons, we conclude that only the Christian view on the existence of God is correct.
4. REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY