Proving the Existence of God, Part 2

In the previous post, I discussed the possible stances regarding belief about the existence of God. The three possibilities were agnosticism, atheism, and theism. Agnosticism was ruled out as a truly viable option leaving only atheism (there is no God) and theism (there is a God) as tenable positions on the existence of God. That led us to the next obvious question, is the evidence in favor of God’s existence or is it the opposite?

Before one can answer whether there is sufficient supporting evidence or not, some details must be determined. For starters, who has the burden of proof concerning God’s existence, is it the atheist or the theist? In discussing this, it is important to first understand the nature of scientific proof. In order for evidence to be submitted as scientific proof, the one making the hypothesis moves forward under the assumption that the hypothesis is correct. Before a theory or hypothesis is deemed reasonably proven, a succession of tests or evidence that agrees with the hypothesis must be present. There must always exist, however, the possible falsification of the hypothesis by a subsequent test or evidence. Without the ability to disprove the hypothesis, it does not meet the criterion to be truly scientific, according to Karl Popper. When there is an absence of contradictory evidence or evidence that proves the hypothesis false, this validates the hypothesis as true since one could theoretically run an infinite number of confirming tests.

The theists argue there is much evidence to support the case for God’s existence. In court proceedings after the one making the claim has provided sufficient evidence in support of that claim, it is then left to the opposition to disprove the evidence and subsequently the claim. The theists have brought forth evidence to support the claim that God exists, and the burden of proof has, therefore, been shifted to the atheists.

I will now take up the case of the atheist rather than simply state or provide an endless supply of evidence that proves God’s existence; it is more convincing if the only available sources of falsification are shown to be without substance. Three sources of falsification of God’s existence are: the universe, evolution, and the resurrection of Jesus.

Concerning the universe, Victor Stenger wrote:

So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end; it would simply be. What place then, for a creator?
Stenger also requires that before a Creator can be postulated, it must be demonstrated the universe had to have happened supernaturally. However, Stephen Hawking acknowledged that the laws of physics that governed the beginning of the universe have no bearing on the existence of God other than to demonstrate he was not arbitrary when he created the universe.

Evolution also suggests that God is not the creator by attempting to demonstrate that all living things evolved by purely naturalistic means. Evidence that everything seen today arrived by natural processes contradicts the claim God created everything.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is another source of falsification because Jesus claimed to be God. To substantiate his claim he predicted his death, burial, and resurrection. If he failed to be resurrected, then he was not God.

If the universe is eternal or is self-existent, if evolution is true, or if Jesus was not truly resurrected, then the existence of God is effectively falsified. If you think that I am out in left field on this, then just ask yourself why there is so much debate in our culture about these three topics? It is not because people just enjoy the conversation, it is because people’s worldviews are at stake with the outcome of these things—particularly the first two. The next few posts will examine the evidence concerning these three areas.


links to other posts in this series:

1 Response to "Proving the Existence of God, Part 2"

  • Anonymous Says:

    I'd like you to have a look at my statement on this but it is too long I think for your system.

    You can find me as GunneLPercher on youtube. If you send me a private message there, I can send it to you directly.

    GLP