Evidence For The Existence Of God

The most profound question is: Does God exist? Throughout history, philosophers and theologians have sought to answer this question, proposing countless arguments to demonstrate God's existence.

‍

God is not merely a matter of faith but a logical necessity grounded in reason. One can prove God's existence through rational analysis and natural reasoning. One does not need to take on faith.

‍

Can We Prove That God Exists?

‍

All of these arguments premise initial basic assumptions, and if these basic assumptions are accepted, they will lead you to the existence of God.

‍

It is important to note that despite all of the evidence, some people will ultimately not believe in the existence of God and will reject whatever premise they need to undermine the argument. Their rejection is pure ignorance, and it is fair to say that Atheism is the epitome.

‍

The enterprise of science must begin with premises that we cannot prove. Believing only in what science proves is an oxymoron that undermines science, which must exist through faith. Scientists can all agree that assumptions, called working hypotheses, are necessary and coincide with conclusive evidence.

‍

Although these arguments work and prove that God exists, they do not prove that God is precisely the God of the Bible.

‍

The Ontological and Cosmological arguments (Aquinas’ Five Ways and Contingency) agree that God is the necessary, ultimate, and most significant reality that explains existence. 

‍

• The Ontological Argument asserts that the greatest conceivable being must exist in reality, as existence is a necessary attribute of ultimate greatness. 

‍

• The Cosmological Arguments demonstrate that everything contingent requires a cause, and since an infinite regress of causes is impossible, there must be an uncaused, necessary being—God.

‍

While there are other arguments, such as the Kalam argument, these arguments are the best fit to support the evidence for God.

‍

The Ontological Argument

‍

The ontological argument aims to prove that God is the greatest conceivable being and observes what is ultimately real. This argument concludes that God must be real; we don’t have to look at anything in the universe to know that.

‍

The greatest conceivable being must have every attribute that contributes to greatness: infinite goodness, power, knowledge, etc. Because of these attributes, imagining another being with greater qualities is impossible.

‍

This being must be the most remarkable being in and beyond the universe, or this being may only exist in our minds.

‍

If this being existed in our minds, then it would be possible, by definition, to imagine an even greater one. This new one would be possible because we could imagine a being with one more excellent quality, and this being could potentially have the quality of actual existence.

‍

Because we premised that the greatest conceivable being must have absolutely every attribute of greatness, this being must also have the quality of existence in reality and not our minds.

‍

This being is God.

‍

St. Thomas Aquinas’ Five Ways

‍

St. Thomas’ five ways stem from the foundation of Aristotle’s evidence for God. This argument establishes a premise that things of a particular “type” need a cause, and nothing can be its cause. Therefore, things need to be caused by something else.

‍

There cannot be an infinite regress of causes: one cause leads to another, which leads to another, and so forth. There must be an ultimate beginning form of cause in this neverending chain of causes that is not derivative from other causes.

‍

Edward Feser’s Five Proofs of the Existence of God provides an excellent teaching on this beginning premise. Here is a summarized version:

‍

There is no doubt that change occurs, such as heat becoming colder, movement of an object, growth of an object, or something living to death. There are four kinds of change:

‍

• Qualitative change would be the example of heat becoming cold 
• Change concerning the location would be an example of the movement of an object 
• Quantitative change would be an example of the growth of an object
• Substantial change would be the example of a living thing giving way to dead matter 

‍

Since change is evident in the world, Aristotle argues that it cannot occur as something that comes from nothing, which is impossible. Change involves the “actualization of a potential,” meaning that something can change in a certain way, and then that change happens. 

‍

For example, imagine you have a cup of hot coffee. Right now, it's hot, but it has the potential to become cold if left out in the open. When the air around it cools the coffee down, that potential to be cold becomes real—that’s actualization.

‍

This fundamental principle leads to the idea that change requires a change—something that actualizes a potential state.

‍

There are two kinds of causal series: linear and hierarchical. A linear series of causes extends through time, such as the coffee cooling because someone pressing a button turns the air conditioner on. Such a series could extend infinitely backward. 

‍

However, a hierarchical series of causes exists simultaneously and is more fundamental. For example, a coffee cup is held up by a desk, which is supported by a floor, which is upheld by a foundation, and so on. 

‍

In this kind of series, each member derives its causal power from something else, meaning there must be a first cause that does not derive its power from anything else.

‍

This first cause must be purely actual, meaning it has no potentiality that needs to be actualized. It is the ultimate source of existence for all things and is not dependent on anything else.

‍

Aristotle calls this the unmoved mover or, in this case, the unactualized actualizer. Unlike material things that depend on prior causes, this first cause is self-sufficient, necessary, and eternal. 

‍

The argument does not require the universe to have a beginning; instead, it shows that at every moment, the existence of things must be explained by something that imparts causal power without needing to receive it.

‍

Thus, from the simple fact that change occurs, Aristotle concludes that there must be a fundamental, purely actual being that underlies all existence.

‍

Touching over Aristotle’s beginning premise, St. Thomas Aquinas’ Five Ways each presents a different perspective on why there must be a first cause or ultimate being explaining reality.

‍

The First Way: Motion

‍

The first way, the argument from motion, refers to any change. The term motion does not refer to movement but to changing things.

‍

Everything that changes must be changed by something else, and since there cannot be an infinite chain of causes, there must be a first, unchanging cause that exists outside of time—an "unmoved mover," which is God.

‍

The Second Way: Efficient Causation

‍

The second way, the argument from efficient causation, builds on Aristotle's idea that things require a cause to exist at any moment. Just as a painting requires a painter, something else must have brought everything into existence. 

‍

Since there cannot be an infinite chain of causes, there must be a first cause that is itself uncaused—this is God.

‍

The Third Way: Possible and Necessary Beings

‍

The third way, the argument from possibility and necessity, observes that most things in the universe are "possible beings"—they exist now but have not always existed.

‍

Humans are possible beings since we exist now, but we’re not necessary beings because the universe's history existed without us before we lived.

‍

Since everything possible requires something else to bring it into existence, there must be a "necessary being" that always exists and causes everything else to exist. This necessary being is God.

‍

The Fourth Way: Degrees of Perfection

‍

The fourth way, the argument from degrees of perfection, notes that things exist in qualities like goodness, truth, and nobility. These things of the world are classified along spectrums.

‍

For example, some things are hotter than others, and some things are colder than others. Other spectrums can observe how good something is, how true and noble they are, etc.

‍

Every spectrum must have a maximum, and things within it can only achieve that maximum. The ultimate maximum is the standard by which the values of the spectrum are measured. For example, things can only be good to the maximum extent of their goodness.

‍

Since there must be an ultimate standard against which these qualities are measured, there must be a being that possesses all perfections to the highest degree—this ultimate being is God.

‍

The Fifth Way: The Governance of the World

‍

The fifth way, the argument from governance, points out that things in nature work toward specific purposes, even when they lack intelligence. The things of the world are governed directly toward its goal, just as an archer directs an arrow toward its goal.

‍

Apart from humanity, we can observe that nature is directed towards particular goals apart from humanity. Since these directions are in nature itself, nature must have a governor. 

‍

An intelligent being must produce this natural order, and God is the being that governs the world and gives it purpose.

‍

The Contingency Argument

‍

The Contingency Argument, also known as the Leibnizian Cosmological Argument, was formulated by the polymath Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. It is based on the idea that everything we observe in the universe is contingent, meaning it could have been different than it is. 

‍

For example, a man could stand instead of sit, or a table could be red instead of green. Since everything around us is subject to change and does not have to be the way it is, we must ask: Why is anything the way it is right now? This question is not of how things came to be but why they are as they are at any given moment.

‍

Many people attribute this to the laws of physics, which dictate the universe's behavior. However, this leads to a more profound question: Why are the laws of physics the way they are? 

‍

If we seek an explanation for those laws, we might propose more profound, more fundamental laws. But if we keep doing this indefinitely, we fall into an infinite regress, where each explanation requires another deeper one without arriving at a final answer. Such an endless chain ultimately explains nothing.

‍

There must be a fundamental grounding in reality that does not require further explanation and serves as the foundation for everything else. 

‍

This ultimate, necessary cause must exist independently of everything contingent, explaining why reality exists and operates as it does. That ultimate cause is God.

‍

The Problem of Evil

‍

Though the problem of evil remains a mystery, we can trust that God allows suffering to bring about a greater purpose, whether spiritual growth, justice, love, or eternal reward. Evil and suffering are not signs of God's absence but opportunities for transformation, healing, and deeper union with Him.

‍

If evil does not produce good, God will not let it happen, but evil exists because God has a plan to create good from it, even if we cannot see what will happen.

‍

Despite our unknowingness, good will always emerge from evil, even if it takes a long time, perhaps even beyond our lifetime. We can see this through martyrs who have unknowingly spread the faith like wildfire, or the greatest of all goods: Jesus Christ.

‍

The Problem of Evil questions how an all-powerful, all-good God can allow suffering and wrongdoing in the world. Evil comes in two forms: moral evil and physical evil. 

‍

Physical evil can result from human choices in moral evil (such as theft or murder) and can also include suffering unrelated to human actions (such as sickness or natural disasters).

‍

While moral evil can lead to physical suffering, not all physical evil is caused by wrongdoing. The existence of evil raises the question: If God is all-powerful and all-good, why not eliminate evil?

‍

Some arguments, such as St. Augustine’s theodicy, believe that evils are instead the absence of good, which goodness is God. That God did not create evil and is not responsible for its occurrence.

‍

God could have chosen never to create the world or to eliminate all evil, but in doing so would also eliminate all that is good. Instead, God is not responsible for evil but tolerates it because it enables the greater good—humans willingly tolerate difficulties for love, happiness, and meaningful choices.

‍

Free Will

‍

The Christian perspective emphasizes that love requires free will. If God forced people to do only good, love would not be genuine. Thus, free will allows love to be freely chosen rather than programmed. However, with this option to choose good, the option to do evil also exists.

‍

We can see this in elements of moral evil, that God has given us a standard of what is good, and to disobey that standard, to ignore Him, is to do the opposite of good, which is evil. 

‍

For example, if God told us not to murder, but someone does not believe in what God has said, permitting the absence of Him in their life, then that person might murder using his free will unless there was some moral standard that told him not to.

‍

As we can also see in nature, physical evils might be necessary, such as a predator may kill prey to eat and sustain life, whether for its own good or for the good of the other animals that it must feed. This is the same case for humans; the living things we eat sustain our lives.

“Certain forms of physical evil...belong to the structure of created beings, which, by their nature are contingent in passing, and therefore corruptible. Besides, we know that material beings are in a close relation of interdependence, as expressed by the old saying: ‘The death of one is the life of another.’ So then, in a certain sense death serves life” - John Paul II (General Audience, June 4, 1986)

“With infinite wisdom and goodness God freely willed to create a world ‘in a state of journeying’ towards ultimate perfection. In God‘s plan, this process of becoming involves the appearance of certain beings and the disappearance of others, the existence of the more perfect alongside the less perfect, both constructive and destructive forces of nature. With physical good, their exists also physical evil as long as creation has not reached perfection” - Catechism Of The Catholic Church (310).

‍

Biological Free Will

‍

This sense of choice is difficult to view in other physical and emotional evils. With these sorts of evil, we can still see that there is an essence of free will that God allows, but not a conscious choice of ours.

‍

Some thinkers argue that physical and emotional evils are necessary for the development of life and the natural world. "Biological free will" refers to free will essential for natural processes, such as evolution, survival instincts, and adaptation.

‍

Theistic evolution is the idea that God used evolution to create life on Earth. It reconciles faith in God with scientific theories of evolution, suggesting that evolution is not a random or purposeless process but guided by God’s will and design.

‍

Although these physical evils are terrible, God perhaps allows them, such as death and sickness, to occur because the evolution of species requires a sense of free will to adapt, survive, and progress their genes further through natural selection.

‍

Physical evil is a byproduct of the freedom necessary for life to function and develop. For example, our pain receptors help produce fear, a response to perceive danger that motivates us to avoid risk.

‍

How would species evolve if it never needed the pressure of evolving? The necessity of biological free will also creates an opportunity for biological free will for evil.

‍

If one chooses never to shower again and gets sick, is it fair to blame God as the one who made them ill?

‍

Sickness results from biological causes and is created from other life forms, such as bacteria, fungi, viruses, etc. Cancer also results from biological causes; it is a genetic disease caused by gene errors that control how cells grow and divide.

‍

As a harsh truth, sickness impacts us all in tremendously heartbreaking ways. While God may intervene in some, most of these might not be directly from God but from life’s biological freedom, suggesting that much of the physical suffering in the world is not a direct act of God but rather a result of how life operates.

‍

Spiritual Growth

‍

Even if Atheists believe that God does not exist, that does not remove the suffering out of the equation, and evil still exists.

‍

From a Christian perspective, suffering is not meaningless—God can bring good out of evil. Just as a child receiving a painful injection from a doctor does not understand the long-term benefit, humans may not always see the purpose behind suffering.

‍

As full-grown adults, we can reason that if a child knew enough information, they would trust the doctor and accept the smaller pain to avoid the greater pain. We, too, can trust God even if we can’t see the purpose.

‍

Faith teaches that God allows temporary suffering to achieve a greater good in this life or the next. Christian hope rests on the promise that suffering will not last forever—in eternity, God will wipe away all pain and restore justice.

‍

“The fact that God permits physical and even moral evil is a mystery that God illuminates by his Son Jesus Christ who died and rose to vanquish evil. Faith gives us the certainty that God would not permit an evil if he did not cause a good to come from that very evil, by ways that we shall fully know only in eternal life.” - Catechism of the Catholic Church 324

‍

“Therefore, we do not lose heart. Even though our outer self is continuing to decay, our inner self is being renewed day by day. Our temporary light afflictions are preparing for us an incomparable weight of eternal glory, for our eyes are fixed not on what is seen but rather on that which cannot be seen. What is visible is transitory; what is invisible is eternal.” - 2 Corinthians 4:16

‍

“He will wipe every tear from their eyes, and there will no longer be death. Neither will there be any mourning or crying or pain, for the old order has passed away.” - Revelation 21:4

‍

Some suffering, we may see, serves no obvious purpose, although we can understand that God tolerates suffering because he will bring good out of it, and bring us closer to Him and closer to heaven:

‍

“Jesus asked me, Who are you? I answered, “I am Your servant, Lord.” You are guilty of one day of fire in PURGATORY. I wanted to throw myself immediately into the flames of PURGATORY, but Jesus stopped me and said, Which do you prefer, suffer now for one day in PURGATORY or for a short while on earth? I replied, “Jesus, I want to suffer in PURGATORY, and I want to suffer also the greatest pains on earth, even if it were until the end of the world.” Jesus said, One [of the two] is enough; you will go back to earth, and there you will suffer much, but not for long; you will accomplish My will and My desires, and a faithful servant of Mine will help you to do this. Now, rest your head on My bosom, on My heart, and draw from it strength and power for these sufferings because you will find neither relief nor help nor comfort anywhere else. Know that you will have much, much to suffer, but don’t let this frighten you; I am with you.” - (Diary of Faustina, 36)

‍

While the problem of evil remains a mystery, believers trust that God’s wisdom and love will ultimately triumph over suffering. Although someone suffers in this life, God can and will make it up to that person in the next life.