How can we know that God exists?

At the moment I am reading a history of philosophical thought over the centuries. I have followed with interest the relationship and the frequent tussles that some of the brightest minds in history have had in trying to wrap their minds around the notion of “God”. Some have included a “God factor” in their philosophy of the way the world works, others have seen God as the enemy of rational thought. What I mean is that they looked derisively on those who have used the mystical explanations that different religions have offered for simple natural phenomena (think of Zeus and co as an explanation for weather patterns) and sought to establish rationality as a substitute for a supernatural God. More than that though, I was curious at how people throughout the ages have wrestled with the question of God’s existence. Which brings me to this question – how can we know that God exists?

If God exists, what evidence should we expect to see of him? The challenge is that it is too late for me to wrestle with this question in my blog without bias towards the belief that God exist, because I am already convinced. So let me pose the question differently – if someone were trying to convince me that aliens created us and our planet and still live today in a galaxy far away, what evidence would I expect to see of them?

 

I could look at the creation itself and ask myself – is there evidence of intelligent design here that cannot be explained by natural or human causes? Then I would naturally begin to wonder at Why? If they made us, what purpose did they have in doing so, do they expect or require anything from us? If so, have they communicated this in anyway or do they harvest produce from our existence at their whim? I would imagine that they would have a purpose in our design and that they would communicate that purpose compellingly and universally so that we would not fail to fulfil their purpose (it would seem to me a terrible waste of their effort to take all that time to create us for a purpose and then fail to adequately communicate that purpose to us!)

For the first question I would conclude that there is indeed compelling evidence for alien’s existence! (right about now I am missing my whatsapp emoticons). I see evidence everywhere I look for intelligent design, this one is a no-brainer for me. The level of complexity and perfection in every small detail in our universe is so far beyond any natural or human authorship that I feel it really speaks volumes about its origins. What about the “why?” though? What purpose could they possibly have for creating us? I don’t know of any mass “harvesting” of our produce. Which leads me to the next point, have the aliens communicated their intentions to us compellingly and universally? Well… if they have, I clearly missed the memo. So what are we then, a reality show for their entertainment? An amusing idea... but I think not.

After starting out well, the argument for alien authorship falls flat for me. I don’t care how many confirmed alien “sightings” there may be, for these simple reasons they will never make a believer out of me. I’m sorry but psychedelic drugs are too cheaply and widely available for me to take these witnesses seriously. So you may be wondering how I become a God-believer then? How different is it believing in God compared with believing in aliens?

In answer to that question, what if I applied the same logic that I put to alien authorship to God authorship? Well, I would find for the first question of intelligent design that, again, there is compelling evidence for it. It is not a massive step of faith for me to believe that both myself and this universe were designed by an external God. What about the “why?” Does God expect or require anything from us? Has he communicated this in a way which is both compelling and universal?

Jesus told a story about this. The story goes that a certain man planted a vineyard and set managers in charge of it before leaving on a long journey. After some time he sent servants to come and collect his share of the profit from the managers at the farm. When his servants got there the managers mistreated his messengers and sent them back empty handed. He sent many servants with the same purpose but they were all treated badly. The owner of the vineyard grew frustrated with the shameful treatment of his servants and finally decided to send his son. ‘They will respect him’ he thought, ‘for he is my son and heir to the farm’. When the son arrived at the vineyard, however, the managers mistreated and killed the farmer’s son because they knew he was the heir and they felt threatened by him. Jesus finished up this story with an ominous question, what do you think the owner of the farm will do to those managers when he returns to his farm?...

For me this story has a very sobering meaning. Truth be told, throughout recorded history God has sent messengers to proclaim his righteous requirements (look no further than the history recorded in the Bible). They were not ordinary men but men imbued with unnatural boldness and authority. Not only this but they were often accompanied by “supernatural” evidences or signs of divine authority. All of these were ill-received and shamefully treated, not because we denied their authenticity but because we despised their message.

Last of all, God sent his son who became flesh and blood, a man who told us everything we needed to know about our life-breathing Father and sovereign creator. He told us what God requires of us and how we can meet his requirements. There should be no doubt surrounding his divine origins for he was an extraordinary human being. He was announced by angels, unfettered by the laws of nature – he walked on water and multiplied food, he cured diseases with a touch and finally (and conclusively I think) raised himself back to life after we had killed him in the most excruciating way that men could devise.

Like all the messengers before him, we could find no fault in God’s son but we hated his message. We felt threatened by our creator’s heir and sought to establish ourselves as masters of a world which we never created. This is the simple truth. It’s not pretty but there it is. So does God exist? Has he communicated his intentions in a compelling way which cannot be denied? Has he proclaimed his message so universally that nobody could “miss the memo”? I don’t know what your conclusions will be but I can tell you mine.

I think God’s communication with us could have been more compelling if he had come in person with a worldwide “shock and awe campaign”. I mean like with the angels blowing trumpets, lightning bolts from heaven, blinding bright lights and a booming voice that split the rocks. That’s how I would have done it. Obviously we would need at least one such visitation in every generation (that would make it nice and democratic) so that no one could have any excuse. But God didn’t do it that way. He came in human form, for starters. He calmed storms with a word, he called dead people out of their graves, he spoke with calm assurance that made demons scream, it wasn’t glamorous or showy but it was patently obvious to all who witnessed him that he was no ordinary man. Nobody could deny that he was God’s messenger, they just hated his message.

I am tempted to wait for another visitation which I can see for myself, but I cant. I cant afford to take that chance because I know what he said the first time he came. He said that when he returns it will be to deal justly with all those who have mistreated and ignored all the messengers which his father has sent. There will be no more opportunities for “believing” then. At that time everyone will know for sure but it will be too late.

People will still argue that it’s impossible to know if God really exists, and maybe for them the evidence is not as compelling as they would like it to be. Maybe. Or maybe, like the people in the story, they prefer it that way. To be free of the farmer while enjoying all the fruits of his farm. Maybe we feel more powerful when we mistreat the pesky prophets and kill the heir when he comes while we reassure ourselves that we are entitled to what we have and reserve judgement on all the evidence which testifies that we are guilty.