Common Objection #24- "There is no evidence for God."

I recently had the opportunity to serve as a juror.  As I sat and listened to both sides present their case, it became very clear shortly into the proceedings that the case the defense was presenting was very poor.  When the proceedings had concluded, my fellow jurors and I were dismissed into a back room to discuss our verdict.  We all agreed that the defense had presented his case poorly and that his client was far from credible.  However, not once did someone claim, "The defense offered NO evidence!"  On the contrary, we all agreed the evidence presented was poor, but surely it still counted as evidence!  We may not have found the evidence persuasive or convincing, but it still counted as evidence.  There is strong evidence and weak evidence, but it all still counts as evidence!  And therein lies the point.

When skeptics assert that "There is no evidence for God," [1] their statement is clearly and demonstrably false.  Over the years, believers in God have put forth numerous arguments as evidence for His existence.  A sampling is as follows:

1. Kalam Cosmological Argument
2. Leibnizian Cosmological Argument
3. Moral Argument
4. Ontological Argument
5. Fine-Tuning Argument
6. Argument from Reason
7. The Argument from Beauty
8. The Argument from Desire
9. Transcendental Argument
10. Information Argument from DNA
11. Argument from Intentionality
12. Thomistic Arguments
13. Historical Evidence for Jesus' Resurrection

Now, let me state that it is at least possible that all these arguments are false;[2]  however, do they not, at the very least, count as evidence for God's existence?  The skeptic may find the evidence unpersuasive, but it still counts as evidence!  Therefore, when the skeptic asserts that "There is no evidence for God," they are clearly and demonstrably mistaken.

In reality, the evidence for Christianity is quite persuasive and compelling for those willing to consider it.  Just ask cold-case homicide detective J. Warner Wallace.  For 35 years Wallace was a self-described "angry atheist, a skeptic who thoughtfully dissected Christians and the Christian worldview...", but when he used his detective skills to investigate the claims of Christianity, he became a follower of Jesus Christ.[3]  

Courage and Godspeed,

1. I have heard this claim recently in two different interactions.
2. Although I obviously think not!
3. You can read about Wallace's investigation in his book Cold-Case Christianity which we reviewed here.  I also highly recommend Jim's website here.


Anonymous said…
wow, your standards of evidence are pathetically low if you actually consider any of that garbage to be valid evidence for the existence of a God.
obviously you are skipping very important steps.
Chad said…
Hello Anonymous One,

Please feel free to educate me about the said "important steps" I am skipping.