Here was an article in Relevant Magazine called We Don’t Have to Prove God Exists. I agree with many aspects of this article in that there is no need to ‘prove’ the existence of God. As Paul Copan says in his article “Atheism and the Burden of Proof”:
“We must distinguish between “proof” and “good reasons.” In the past, Christian philosophers and theologians have talked about “proofs” for God’s existence. To many, however, this suggests 100 percent, absolute, mathematical certainty — with absolutely no wiggle room for other explanations or alternatives. I have met plenty of people who claim that, even if an alternative to a “God-answer” is logically possible, then they do not have to take God seriously. “It is logically possible that the amazing finely tuned, life-permitting, life-producing, and life-sustaining universe came about by nonconscious, material, unguided processes.” Do we make important decisions or judgments in any other area of life on the basis of the slimmest of possibilities? Just because something is possible does not mean it is even remotely plausible. I have talked to skeptics, agnostics, and atheists who seem willing to risk everything based on the remotest logical possibilities — a very thin thread to hang everything on. It is logically possible that the universe is just an illusion too, but so utterly counterintuitive and implausible. Clearly, plenty of alternative possibilities need not detain us from taking seriously more substantive explanations.
Here is the point: We do not need 100 percent certainty to truly know. After all, we cannot show with 100 percent certainty that our knowledge must have 100 percent certainty. We believe lots of things with confidence even though we do not have absolute certainty. In fact, if most people followed the “100 percent rule” for knowledge, we would know precious little. But no one really believes that.”
However, back to the article We Don’t Have to Prove God Exists. The author says:
“Jesus never said “They shall know we are Christians by our proof,” but by our love. He says the greatest commandment is to love. The greatest thing we can do is love. Perhaps we put too much time and energy into trying to be right and not enough into simply speaking the truth in love and loving the people we speak to.
There is no greater evidence of the existence of God than to see His character reflected in the lives of His people. The greatest support we have to defend our faith is not science, reason, history or philosophy. The greatest evidence for God is the transformed life of His people.”
Well it is true love matters. And we need to reflect the character of God. But as I say elsewhere, Christians can’t afford not to be evidentialists.
The author agrees in giving evidence when he says: “There is so much evidence to support what we believe that we can have confidence and certainty in our relationship with God. We don’t need to call it proof. We can admit that while there are many things about God that we may never be able to definitively “prove.” What we might find if we do so is that intellectual honesty allows us to come across as less judgmental and superior and more honest and real. What we might just find is that if we stop trying to oversell our case that people are more open to hear it.”
After all, while a Christian can be loving, caring, and feed the poor and show good works, so can a Mormon, a Jew, or someone else of another faith. So in the end let’s not make a distinction here. They both can go together. After all, the ultimate embodiment of truth and love is seen in our Lord Himself.