Is It Our Responsibility to Prove that God Exists?

As is usually the case, a group once gathered around me following a sermon I delivered on the topic of the rise of Fundamentalist Atheism.  As we discussed some of the issues and implications raised by my sermon, interestingly, one person asked the question, “Is it our responsibility to prove that God exists?”

Now that is a good question!  There are a number of possible meanings in that question and thus a number of possible answers.  In relation to the discussion on worldviews, I believe the only answer can be, “Yes”.

Consider the human condition as described so admirably by the writer of Ecclesiastes:

I have seen the burden God has laid on men.  He has made everything beautiful in its time.  He has also set eternity in the hearts of men; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end. (Ecclesiastes 3:10-11)

Despite anyone’s opinion on the source of this angst, no one can or will deny that there is something intrinsic to human nature that reaches beyond itself for meaning, purpose, and connection.  Philosopher Edward John Carnell has written,

Something inside cries out against the conclusion that a purpose-seeking man has been hatched by a purposeless universe.  The urge may be ill founded; it may have to be disqualified.  Yet, there it is: Our heart tells us that there are destinies at stake in this life.   We cannot eradicate this voice.  Wisdom dictates, therefore, that before one decides whether or not this witness is trustworthy, a thorough investigation be conducted; lest through either oversight or default an everlasting loss in the soul be sustained.¹

Richard Dawkins might say that this consistent ‘something’ makes no sense from an evolutionary perspective.  And he would be right.  This angst does not benefit humans; it only serves to disrupt the comfortable living of any given person and, usually, at the most inconvenient times.

If we were simply animals then, yes, there would be no need or even capacity for us to have or maintain such a yearning.  Yet, there it is.

Ignoring Dawkins’ wisdom, Jesus instructed his disciples with this command:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations [...] (Matthew 28:19–20)

This “go and make” to which Jesus refers deals with this angst by asserting the Christian’s primary responsibility to convince others of the existence of God.  It would be impossible to believe Jesus and emulate His lifestyle unless we also believed that God existed.  Believing that God exists and emulating Jesus’ lifestyle satisfies this angst apparently inherent to humankind.

The apostle Paul highlighted one aspect of this great commandment when he instructed his readers to destroy barriers to belief in themselves and others:

For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does.  The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world.  On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.  We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.  (2 Corinthians 10:3–5)

The fact is that not every one in our world thinks like Jesus.  Even worse is the fact —and Dawkins is a perfect example— others will try to convince you not to think like Jesus and even that you are not allowed to talk about thinking like Jesus, especially with your own or others children.  That is Dawkins’ worldview.  Are Christians not also allowed the same freedom to promote our worldview in the public forum and thus to engage in friendly and constructive debate?

According to apologist Dan Story,

There are two ways to respond to arguments against Christianity, and the route taken will depend on the kind of objections raised.  Some objections take the form of genuine questions [...] other types of objections raised by unbelievers [...] are more philosophical and are part and parcel of broader, well-entrenched belief systems [in other words, worldviews].²

Of course, there is a right and a wrong way to promote a biblical worldview in the public forum.  The words of the apostle Peter sum up well the best practice to this end:

You must worship Christ as Lord of your life.  And if someone asks about your Christian hope, always be ready to explain it.  But do this in a gentle and respectful way.  Keep your conscience clear.  Then if people speak against you, they will be ashamed when they see what a good life you live because you belong to Christ (1 Peter 3:15-16).

Everyone in a liberal democratic society is permitted the privilege to freely share their beliefs and the reasons for those beliefs.  No one is permitted to offend others, nor to belittle the beliefs of others, but this practice for Christians would not be in accordance with the apostle Peter’s instructions anyway.

It is important to realise though that explaining our beliefs necessarily involves referring to evidence that justifies our beliefs, when and if such evidence is available.  I fear that, in not wanting to offend others, Christian apologists neglect discussing the evidence for a biblical worldview.  The categories of beliefs³ and standards for evidence and justification apply to us as much as they do to anyone.⁴

So if we are going to think like Jesus then it is very likely that we will find opportunity to describe and justify our biblical worldview in conversation with others.  Indeed, Jesus commands that we create such opportunities.  And the most fundamental question of all for any worldview is: Does God really exist?  So, yes, we have a responsibility to prove that God exists!

Endnotes