Author

Why isn’t there just one indisputable proof for the existence of God available in a convenient, easy to wield soundbite? I mean, wouldn’t that be a great weapon to use in our debates with atheists, something they just can’t deny?

And what should that proof look like? Since God is a supernatural being, not beholden to the physical laws of nature, should it be a supernatural feat or sign of some sort? Who should decide what evidence is acceptable or sufficient?

I asked Dean, a self-described atheist, what evidence he would deem acceptable, and he said he would like to see just such an indisputable, supernatural proof.

But no such proof exists. Instead, we are left with an overwhelming amount of “clues” as to God’s existence, which, if taken individually, aren’t always that undeniable. But when we take the time to explore them, to consider their implications, to meditate on such things as the origins and order of the universe, the universal belief in morality, beauty and a higher personality to which we are accountable, and thoughts of eternity; taken together, the clues for God’s existence are so convincing as to be all the evidence we need.

Paul assures us that, in effect, the clues are indeed undeniable when he wrote “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” He was saying that there really is no such thing as an “atheist”, because the Creator is evident in the creation. Instead of passively living in unbelief, Paul would say that atheists are actively living in denial of the obvious.

Problem is, the clues for God are not so obvious that they can all fit into a quick soundbite or even a half-hour conversation. The mountain of clues are out there, even to be able to say ours is a reasonable faith, but they require humility, patience, and perseverance to work through. Instead of a quick slogan to silence our opposition in one slam dunk, the many clues require time and effort and communication in order for us to build our case.

And that requires a willing audience.

How can an atheist be a willing audience, patiently working through the many clues that make a case for God’s existence, especially if it only leads to the hard truth that if God does exist they will be held accountable to Him?

They can’t. Although the knowledge of God is evident in His creation, the God denier doesn’t see it, but lives in denial of the obvious. Instead, Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 2 that God uses us as believers “…to spread the aroma of the knowledge of him everywhere.” Just as there are many pleasant and foul odors we encounter in life, this “aroma” can either draw people in or drive them away, because “…To the one we are an aroma that brings death; to the other, an aroma that brings life.”

And maybe it’s those quick slogans we look for to win debates that cause us to smell of death. Maybe if we are less concerned about winning debates and more concerned about winning hearts through patience, mutual respect, and active listening, we might just have the aroma of life.

I hope I did just that in my dialogue with Dean, and would appreciate any comments positive or negative as to how I came across. either with the aroma of life, or the aroma of death. (sit in on our conversation at https://youtu.be/tecXT4PmXRA)

Discussion

5 comments

  1. Mon V. Curameng says:

    In alternate universe/reality where God is obvious, arguments for Him are meaningless (or am I speaking a redundant meaningless statement?). However, in our world, everything seems a necessity for knowledge and appreciation of the good. If all is black or white, it’s impossible to identify or ascend.

  2. John Thoele says:

    This is actually my favorite kind of evangelism. Real honest conversation and relationship. I hope they got each other’s numbers and hung out more. In my experience it’s like using a rifle vs. a shotgun. A shotgun or sporadic preaching and tract bombing might hit something, but a rifle, a sure shot is more effective. Continued honest sitting at the table and just relating works better. Yes, there’s a chance they might not convert, but the relationship will challenge and strengthen your faith I feel.

  3. Madison Willoughby says:

    Romans 1: 18-20 tells us that NO one has an excuse for not knowing God. I’m not trying to be argumentative, but God seems to be under the impression that we have all the ‘proof’ we need. First, we aren’t called to prove anything, but to give a reason for the hope within us. Proof implies capitulation on the part of the listener over which we have no control. Theirs is the choice to believe or not believe. Second, what possible ‘proof’ could there be which hasn’t already been given? When Abraham spoke with the rich man, denying his suffering filled pleas, Abraham told him that if his brothers failed to listen to Moses and the prophets, they wouldn’t be persuaded even by someone who rises from the dead. So, the failure is not found within the evidence or hope we have to offer, but within the heart of the one who listens.

  4. Jonathan Martin says:

    The hiddenness of God is a part of His plan. He wants us to make a genuine choice based on a sincere desire to know Him. Just like his parables, he hides himself from the casual uninterested observer.

  5. Joe A Smith says:

    Man doesn’t come to Christ based on evidence it is only by the Holy Spirit.