Skip to main content

God Exists


 

“The fool has said in his heart there is no God (Psalm 14:1).” There must be many fools in the world because there are plenty of people who say they do not believe in any God; it isn’t just that they reject the God of the Bible, they reject the idea of any sort of higher power. Over the years Christians have offered several proofs for the existence of God. 

 

One argument points to morality. The human race is a moral race, even though there is plenty of immorality. The very fact that we classify immorality as the opposite of morality speaks to our general moral compass. While some issues are up for debate, there is a universal understanding that some things are definitely wrong. Murder is wrong in every culture. Taking someone’s personal property is wrong in every culture. We operate by a moral code from a young age. When you hear a child say, “That’s mine,” or “I had it first,” they are appealing to a universal standard of right and wrong.

 

How could this morality have evolved? Morality is not something tangible. Darwin’s survival of the fittest means we would actually be inclined to take another’s property—even his life—if it helps us get ahead. Its why the lion kills and eats the gazelle. Romans 2:15 says God’s law is written on human hearts. The fact that people are moral points to the existence of God. The atheist may claim to be “good without God,” but God defines what is good. The universal code of morality can only be explained as coming from the God who created humanity. 

 

Similar to morality, human consciousness is also an intangible characteristic of mankind that cannot have evolved. Consciousness is one of many proofs of the second argument for God’s existence, the argument from design. Trying to make the case that life created itself is an exercise in futility. Even if that somehow happened (it couldn’t), how did it evolve consciousness? That isn’t something made up of atoms or chemicals. Our ability to reason points to an Intelligent Designer. Descartes famously said, “Cogito, ergo sum (I think, therefore I am).” We can tweak his comment to, “Cogito, ergo Dues est (I think, therefore God is).”  

 

Another argument for the existence of God is known as the ontological argument (ontology refers to being). Anselm of Canterbury defined God as “that than which no greater can exist.” The strongest being we can conceive of is, by definition, God. The wisest being we can conceive of is also God by definition. The argument from ontology says that existing in reality is greater than existing only as a thought, therefore, God must exist. If God were nothing more than abstract thoughts, rather than an existential being, then you and I would be greater than God because we are real. If God is the greatest thing in the universe, then He must be real because existing is greater than fantasy. 

 

Saying there is no God is simply an illogical position. Or as David put it in Psalm 14, it is a foolish position. Don’t reject the arguments for the existence of God. He created you and wants to be in a relationship with you. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The “Christians Hate Gays” Myth

During these Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) hearings before the Supreme Court I keep hearing how much Christians hate gay people. This was news to me since I am a Christian and I don’t hate gay people. I also go to church with over 1000 other Christians, and if any of them hate gay people, they sure haven’t told me. Before moving to South Carolina I worked at or attended several churches in Texas; prior to that I spent a decade going to church in Florida. Guess what? No one hated gay people. In fact, I don’t know any Christians who hate anybody. The very uniform of a believer is his love, and if a person does not show consistent love, then he is not actually a believer. Are there non-believers who hate gay people and claim to be Christian? Of course. But that doesn’t represent Jesus or His church. Equating  hateful sign-wavers with Christianity is like equating a kindergarten baseball team to the New York Yankees. They may claim to be playing the same

Famous Frauds in Homosexual Science Part 2: Twin Studies

A second piece of shoddy science has been heralded as proving people are born gay. This time, instead of cadavers, living twins were studied. This study compared male identical twins to male fraternal twins; in each set of twins, at least one man was homosexual. 22% of the fraternal twins showed both brothers to be gay, compared to 52% of the identical twins. Since identical twins are closer genetically than fraternal twins, this study claimed that genetics play in to homosexuality, or that people are born gay. But an obvious question that arose from this study is, why did 48% of the identical twins only have one gay brother? If they are so close genetically, then 100% of the identical twins should have two gay brothers. This study does more harm than good to the argument from genetics. There are other factors to be considered. One is that the men doing the study (Richard Pillard and Michael Bailey) could have intentionally picked fraternal twins that the

The Rose of Sharon and Lily of the Valley

If you have spent much time in church you have probably sung some songs with lyrics like these: “He leads me to his banqueting table, his banner over me is love… Jesus is the rock of my salvation, his banner over me is love.” “Sweetest rose of Sharon, come to set us free.” “He’s the lily of the valley, the bright and morning star…” But are those songs biblical? They come out of the writings of the Song of Solomon, but are we to understand those lines as describing Christ? The Song of Solomon is a collection of love poems that were written between two people who were deeply in love and about to be married. While we know that King Solomon is one of the writers, the other’s name has escaped us, and we know her today simply as the Shulamite woman. Some people believe that since this woman is not named then she never existed; some teach that this book is pure allegory, only existing to serve as symbolism. King Solomon, they say, represents