This question is one of the most important questions of this generation. The answer has profound implications for how someone hopes, lives, behaves, and is remembered. So what is the answer?
The modern paradigm has presented a case that science and evolution have replaced God. Let’s compare the atheistic worldview to that of the Christian to see which can stand up to scrutiny.
Jason Lisle has submitted a powerful argument for the existence of God: namely that without God, we could not know anything. Since we know things, then there is a God. Check out his article here to follow the progression of the reasoning.
Here’s my understanding of how the logic of objectively proving that God exists is formulated.
Since everyone interprets evidence according to their worldview, then no evidence is conclusive in exposing either the shortcomings of the Christian’s worldview or the atheist’s worldview. An example of this would be the existence of fossils. An atheist would interpret the evidence and say that fossilized dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. A Christian would interpret the existence of fossils as exactly what is expected if the historical flood buried everything under tons of sedimentary layers. Same evidence. Different conclusions depending on one’s worldview. So the answer has to go one level deeper to analyze one’s worldview. Which worldview has contradictions?
The atheist’s worldview assumes that there are only material objects in an ever changing universe.
The Christian worldview assumes that God is the Creator and that He has revealed himself to humanity in his written Word, the Bible.
Which worldview would best account for the existence of the laws of logic, objective morality, objective truth, beauty, and intelligence?
All of these things are immaterial concepts. So, if there are immaterial laws of logic that do not change, how can the atheist account for the existence of immaterial laws in a constantly changing universe? Laws of logic make perfect sense in a Christian worldview as they are the way that God thinks, and he has imparted this ability to humanity. Colossians 2:3
Another inconsistency for atheists would be the behavioral contradiction. Jason Lisle describes it this way:
For example, consider the atheist university professor who teaches that human beings are simply chemical accidents—the end result of a long and purposeless chain of biological evolution. But then he goes home and kisses his wife and hugs his children, as if they were not simply chemical accidents, but valuable, irreplaceable persons deserving of respect and worthy of love.
The Christian does believe that people are valuable, deserving of respect, and worthy of love, but it is because we are created in the image of God. He gives humans value. In the atheist worldview, people do not have intrinsic value since they are simply the culmination of purposeless chemical accidents.
I’m quite sure that the atheist would claim that there are some objective morals if you tried to steal from him, assault someone in his family, or caustically burn his house to the ground. But he would not be able to account for the existence of these morals since they are immaterial, universal, and unchanging. Objective morals exist, but they do not fit in the atheistic worldview. Don’t misinterpret, atheists can act morally (and most do most of the time), but they simply cannot account for the existence of objective morals.
Objective Truth has its roots only in either knowing everything or having someone who knows everything reveal some of it. Christians do not know everything, but the omniscient Creator God has revealed some of his knowledge to us so that we can know things for certain. The atheist cannot know things for certain because he must leave open the possibility that some future knowledge might overturn something he currently thinks is reliable. If he cannot know anything for certain, then it logically follows that he knows nothing.
This brings us to another contradiction because atheists do know things. They know things and make truth claims all of the time, but since they have no justification for preconditions for intelligibility, then they are contradicting themselves. Romans 1:18-20 tells us that atheists do not exist. Everyone knows that there is a God, but those who claim that there is no God is suppressing the truth.
For further research on this topic, see ProofThatGodExists.org
This video goes through the process of helping someone understand the preconditions of intelligibility, and I found it to be helpful in explaining this very deep question.