by Mike Robinson
|There is a lot of proof and evidence for God|
Now that I am older I still cannot help believing in God. I believe in God now because unless I have Him as the All-Conditioner, life is Chaos (Cornelius Van Til).
A few notable reasons I believe in Jesus Christ:
He is God.
He died for my sins.
He rose from the grave and displayed compelling evidence for His resurrection.
He revealed potent evidence for His claims including over 300 predictions He fulfilled.
No one ever spoke like Him.
No one in history compares to Him: His love, mercy, grace, and truth infinitely transcend that of all men combined.
Besides, atheism is impossible.1
Jesus: Unique and Winsome
I am the way, the truth, and the life … (Jesus, John 14:6).
He runs off with all their hearts. This is what Jesus does when He touches people, and it is both powerful and very moving. Jesus established who He was as He healed the blind, calmed the sea, and rose from the dead—come on. Yep. Jesus did things only God could do. Did anyone think Jesus would have all the proof, position, and power and never use it?
Time and again he did. Boom. Dead Lazarus come forth. And he did. Later, nailed to the Cross outside of Jerusalem, hands pierced, his body submerged in wrath and judgment, Jesus dies for the sins of the lost—atonement, propitiation, and expiation—before rising from the dead as He slammed death, hell, and the grave. "I came to serve not to be served," Jesus said. Love had won. "I came to save people from their sins," he exclaimed. "And to seek and save that which was lost."
It’s still a thrill. And you can’t help but delight in the goodness of God when you ponder the magnetism of Jesus, you end up loving life more because your love for Him grows deeper, which is a result of His immeasurable charm. This allure of Jesus is as striking as it is lasting—there’s nothing like it—not even close. But still there’s the church, scripture, forgiveness, and unconditional love. Jesus, the person and the grace, further evidence that Christ, healer and forgiver, is who He claimed to be: God come in human flesh.
The assumption is that the true religion will have evidence as true truth is displayed, and this assumption is brought to you by human nature made in the image of God—a nature (ontology) that is reasonable, seeks evidence, and builds upon truth. Like most assumptions, many fallen individuals disregard it, and many embrace religions (Islam, Hinduism, Mormonism, etc.) or ideology (atheism) that lack evidence, because the falsehoods serve to please sinful hearts: which are untrustworthy above all things. Press the truth of Christianity on the unrepentant nonbeliever and they will dig in and hold to the firmest stage of denial. Yes, evidence and proof help. Yes, share the reality of the glorious person of Jesus. But the overdue acceptance by fundamentalist Muslims and rigid atheists remains askew. Hard hearts? The meaning is clear: stony hearts can only be softened by God’s grace through His Word and Spirit.
We think of the world as containing particular things some of which are independent of ourselves; we think of the world's history as made up of particular episodes in which we may or may not have a part; and we think of these particular things and events as included in the topics of our common discourse, as things about which we can talk to each other. These are remarks about the way we think of the world, about our conceptual scheme. A more recognizably philosophical, though no clearer, way of expressing them would be to say that our ontology comprises objective particulars. It may comprise much else besides (P.F. Strawson).
I know God exists because He saved me through Jesus and He changed my heart by grace through the Spirit. I believe in God because of beauty, truth, reason, moral absolutes, and most of all because of Jesus. Jesus stands as the majestic Logos who is full of grace and truth; so awesome that all men combined do not compare to Him. He is everything to me and He alone is enough for me to know God must exist.
Knowing Him is so stupendous, so marvelous, that there is not a trace of doubt in my heart when I contemplate His person and His work.
Christianity is Flourishing
Christianity is thriving. Sorry, cynics. Jesus is received as Lord and Savior in growing numbers across China, Africa, and South America. It is a broad reality often seen through the keyhole of Americana. But the reality is stunning: Billions confessing the Lordship of Jesus Christ across the globe.
All of it sounds inspiring and encouraging and maybe even faith-deepening, because the earth belongs to Jesus Christ. He is not a mere doctrine. He never was. He is life itself.
Proclaiming the truth of Jesus is a powerful endeavor. Displaying the proof regarding the revelation of Christ is a delightful undertaking. Since the cross is a mighty instrument of truth, nobody knows how many cranky atheists have been stopped cold by the power of the cross and the evidence for Jesus Christ. So why not run up the score? Design! Information! Miracles! Archaeology! Messianic prophecy! There’s no surer way to make an impact than to be precise and comprehensive. (Basically you need to talk like a Jeopardy winner.) Bellicosity is for suckers. It’s what the New Atheists employ in place of rational argumentation.2 Hold back? No way.
Think about it. There’s design in the cosmos, there’s information in the DNA code of every living thing, and Jesus had hundreds of prophecies predicting His arrival to confirm His claims. Would you have paid much attention to somebody who told you that, well, uh, believe me because I say so, well hey, they have a nice holy book, and um, they have a lot of followers and they, um, have palatial sacred buildings, would you have believed in that religion?
Not me. But that’s what most religions have. So they, like atheists, rest upon blind irrational faith. Hooray!
We will rest on truth and revelation.3 Please throw away sightless unfounded faith. We’re going to be in eternity much longer than on earth, therefore we must rest on truth.
Worldview Reasons for Christianity
All worldviews are open to charge on particular claims as well as individual assessments of specific evidence (disagreement over interpretation of particular evidence is often the case among interlocutors—while both are susceptible to confirmation bias). Apologists for specific worldviews have answers pre-formulated for particular issues. This means trading brute evidence (or swapping uninterpreted facts) is not the chief method of finding truth apropos worldview analysis.
There is colossal evidence and impressive proof for the existence of God. Nonetheless, I maintain one must go deeper and broader than mere evidence. One should ask: What are the required a priori conditions necessary to ground immutable universals (including geometrical truths, laws of logic, moral absolutes, identity, attributes, distinctions, mathematical invariants, etc.)? Answer: God. He provides the universal operational aspects of rationality.
Christian theism furnishes these universal functioning features; atheism, in principle, fails. Non-Christian worldviews are deficient when it comes to accounting for immutable universals. These actualities are required to even begin an inquiry concerning the truth of worldviews. To examine, analyze, and discern proper particulars, one needs a worldview that has the necessary rational architecture that supplies immutable universals.
Materialistic atheism believes that only the cosmos exists—the matter and motion within the universe are everything. Does the cosmos have the capacity to ground immutable universals? No. The material cosmos comes up infinitely short since it is a particular mutable (changing) thing; it lacks universal reach (it is not omnipresent) and it is always in a shifting and variable flux. Thus, the material cosmos fails to ground the immutable operational features of human experience. Since immutable universals exist, strict materialistic atheism cannot be true.
Christian theism posits things, Forms, entities, norms, concepts, and laws that are immutable, universal, and non-physical, but the atheistic materialist denies this at his own peril and self-stultification. Christian theism brings with it the ability for coherence, moral law, inductive truths, and all the a prior rational requirements for intelligibility.
The Laws of Truth and Logic
The laws of truth are not psychologistic, but are necessities of logic; they are objectively true and in force. These laws are not bound to the fleeting subjective opinions or thoughts of men. They are necessarily utilized by all men, but a particular man or set of men (and their particular brains) lack the ontic capacity to ground these laws. I draw from this that only an immutable and universal power-source can ground the laws of truth—this is God.
The always-in-flux cosmos lacks an unchanging nature to ground the laws of logic. Nonetheless, many modern atheists assert that these laws are not laws; they are not fixed and universal. Yet, these laws are surely fixed and universal. The laws of logic are not material laws that may change forasmuch as truth must utilize these principles. Posit them as mere brain accessories or cerebral tools and that will place them in the subjective psychologistic realm. That cannot be true because these laws are objective and necessary. Thus the principles of logic are not mere human conventions or limited to subjective governance. One must be pre-committed to their independence from the human brain (and the cosmos) and their absolute normative governance—they are transcendent. John Frame observes: “People may very well interpret the expression ‘law of thought’ by analogy with the ‘law of nature’ and then have in their mind features of thinking as mental occurrence. A law of thought in this sense would be a psychological law … That would be a misunderstanding regarding the task of logic, for truth has not been given its proper place.” That is one reason it is proper to refer to these laws as the “laws of truth.”
The Reasons Why I believe in Christianity
• Grace: Because of God’s grace I have faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.
• The Holy Spirit: The Holy Spirit opened my heart to believe in Christ through the Word of God.
• Bible – Proof: The Bible has massive archeological proof.
• The 333 Predictions about Jesus that were fulfilled: Only God could predict and then arrange all the events that were prophesied concerning Jesus.
• The Resurrection of Jesus: There is amazing proof for the Resurrection of Christ.
• The Cross: The only place of atonement to wash away my sins is found in Jesus by way of the Cross.
• Justification: Christianity is the only faith among the 30,000 religions of the world that provides complete soteriological Justification—it’s the only religion whereby one is saved by grace alone.
• Sin: All people sin just as the Bible maintains. One can clearly see sin in the lives of people and displayed daily in the news.
• Proof found in the universe: The universe is designed—design requires a designer.
• DNA: Language. Language requires a mind. It would take a Divine mind to place the DNA language in our cells.
• Logic: Only God (immutable, perfect, everywhere present) can be the source of the laws of logic (immutable, perfect, everywhere present).
1. One would have to be omnipresent to disprove God, so only God could disprove Himself, which is incoherent and impossible. Claiming God doesn’t exist anywhere is a universal negative—a specific universal negative that is impossible to prove. A universal negative is a claim that asserts something does not exist anywhere. Some scholars claim one cannot prove a universal negative. The assertion that God doesn’t exist is a universal negative. The universal assertion that “God doesn’t exist” cannot be proven. Nonetheless, the actual claim that “one cannot prove a universal negative” is itself a universal negative. It claims, universally, no universal negative can be proven anywhere. So under its own standard it fails. Moreover, the claim that there are no completely black boxes with orange all over is a universal negative. It maintains, universally, there are no completely black boxes with orange all over. If a box is wholly painted black, then it cannot be orange all over. Hence, no completely black boxes with orange all over exist anywhere. This entails that one can prove a universal negative. Nonetheless, asserting that God doesn’t exist anywhere is a universal negative—a particular universal negative that is impossible to demonstrate. Even the cynic Voltaire observed, “The very impossibility in which I find myself to prove that God is not, discovers to me his existence.”
2. Leaders of the New Atheists aim to reprogram believers and make them atheists. http://goddoesexistuknowit.blogspot.com/2014/06/atheist-peter-boghossian-wants-to-treat.html3. Rational pre-commitments assist in directing one’s investigation and analysis of the data (as well as its interpretation and communication). This admission is often difficult to get from some atheistic inquirers to acknowledge. What worldview can furnish the a priori necessities and rational tools for science, analysis, research and proof? Christian theism delivers the epistemic ground for the a priori immutable universals utilized in rational enquiry and proof; in principle, materialistic atheism cannot furnish the aforementioned ground. What is obligatory to account for analysis and proof is a first principle that has the ontological endowment to not only ground it, but to account for proof and its preconditions—all the universal operational features of knowledge. The loss of the immovable point of reference, in principle, leaves the ungodly bereft of a resource necessary to construct the analytical enterprise required to prove anything. Without God, one cannot hoist the necessary a priori operation features of the intellectual examination of evidence and proof. The Christian worldview supplies the fixed ontic platform as the sufficient truth condition that can justify induction, immutable universals, attributes, identity, and the uniformity of the physical world. But materialistic atheism lacks such a fixed ontic platform. Consequently, it fails to provide the sufficient ground required to justify enquiry, research, evidence, and proof.