Argument for the Existence of God–Counter Arguments are Unsatisfactory


A society without God is unsatisfactory and inadequate to the point of nightmarish.  As proof, we only need to examine–no need to look very closely–the condition of American society at the beginning of the twenty-first century.  We have sunk to the depths in moral standing and are perplexed by the fact that we have no comprehensive explanation of the world and its existence.  We are lost.  (See Walker Percy, Lost in the Cosmos)

What recourse do we have?  We can create our own reality and follow it.  Can we find meaning there? Can we bridge the gap between what the world appears to be and what our needs as humans are?  We must decide where we stand because existence requires it.  There is no exit from this necessity.

The Christian decides for God.  In fact, everybody must decide for or against God.  He has no choice.  The mere fact of living requires a judgment on this central issue.  The absurdist and the nihilist exclude this choice of  God and meaning.  They begin with the fact that life has no meaning. Really?  One is not permitted to make certain choices about God.  Why would they be excluded?  There is no lack of confirmation of the reality of God; but, the nihilist does not recognize this fact.  At the very beginning he makes a huge assumption that he does not feel he must defend.  Yet, he must defend his viewpoint at the beginning.  This fact means that he must justify his rejection of God beyond simply rejecting God. The argument does not begin with whether one should live or die in a world without God.  The argument begins with whether God is a reality or not.

The Christian defends his belief with the trustworthiness of biblical witnesses and logical argument.  Beyond such defense is the simple fact that without God life is indeed absurd and not worth living despite Camus’ assertion that life can be worth living.  The absurdist and the nihilist start far away from where their argument should begin.  They need to justify their assumptions–the primary one being that life confronts us as meaningless.  It does not confront me and millions of others as meaningless.  Good arguments back the idea of a meaningful life.

Moreover,  these modern philosophies of despair do not only destroy any meaning, they actually provide a compelling reason NOT TO LIVE.  Belief in God is fundamental to human existence and the welfare of human beings.  Even in its idolatrous forms religion provides a rationale for living, though belief in the one true God is the height of wisdom and sensibleness. Only the well-off intellectual with beverage in hand can sit at a café table with his compatriots near Notre Dame with some satisfaction at the meaninglessness of life.  But, many cry for justice that the world does not provide.  The promise of religion is that justice will have the final word.

Counter-arguments for the non-existence of God are simply weak.  They have no historical credibility as does Christianity, nor do they provide a strong logic of defense.  They do not provide a way of life or living.  They do not provide the basis for serving the neighbor.  Under their regime they make an essentially selfish creature, namely, US, more selfish and deliver no argument for social cohesion.

The Church’s witness should continue as strong or stronger than ever in face of these philosophical challenges.  We make the leap of faith; because, it is essential for human thriving and welfare.  And, more importantly, because belief in the God revealed in Christ is true.  We are not among the deluded, but among those who  are confronted by a holy God who calls us to be His own.  We will play this script of truth until the end of the world.


Michael G. Tavella

Saint James the Elder

June 25, 2024


Adriel Peregrine