Is there Evidence for Christianity?

By Elias Ayala (MDiv & M.A.T.)
Is there Evidence for ChristianityYes, there is evidence for Christianity. Evidence refers to the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. The available body of facts and information available to the interested seeker does in fact support and indicate the belief or proposition that Christianity is true. For instance, the evidence within cosmology points to the truth of the belief or proposition that there is a transcendent cause of the universe. The evidence of fine tuning for intelligent life points to a designer of the universe. The evidence of objective moral values and duties point to a ultimate foundation for right and wrong. The historical evidence surrounding the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth is quite strong. All of the evidences that come from each of these areas of study and inquiry provide a powerful case for the truth of Christian theism.

However, many of these evidences are very convincing to Christians and even some skeptics. But the real nature of the disagreement is over the presuppositions and worldview assumptions we all bring to the table when considering the data which we then in turn seek to use as evidence in support of a belief or proposition. Hence, if the person we are sharing these evidences with have incorrect presuppositions, then they will not come to the correct conclusions with regards to those evidences. So, perhaps the Christian can press the envelope here and suggest a more ambitious argument, an argument that would not leave room for escape. I suggest an argument along the lines of the following: The evidence for Christianity is that it is only the Christian understanding of the world that can make sense of the very concept of evidence itself.

Suppose the debate over evidence is between a Christian theist and a materialistic atheist. When discussing the issue of evidence it is helpful to discuss the presuppositions necessary for something like evidence to even make sense. In order for evidence to be intelligible, one must presupposes the laws of logic. The interesting and relevant features of the laws of logic is that these laws are conceptual by nature. They are immaterial, universal, and unchangeable. That is to say, that they are not themselves material, they apply everywhere (universal), and they do not change. A question we can ask is on what worldview does something like these universal conceptual laws of thought make sense?

Can a worldview which says at base, “all is matter in motion” make sense of immaterial universal laws of thought? Absolutely not! If “ALL” is matter in motion, but the laws of logic are not matter, then it would follow that said laws don’t exist. Or, if they do exist they are grounded in a material foundation. However, how can conceptual, universal, and unchanging laws of thought be grounded in a material, that is to say, physical foundation? Such a notion would not make any sense. On this view the laws of logic are either physical which is absurd, or they do not exist which would undermine knowledge itself, since any claim to knowledge, and any argument which can be formulated to argue anything would have to by necessity presuppose the laws of logic.

On Christian theism, conceptual, universal, and unchanging laws of thought make complete sense given the fact that they would reflect the universal and unchanging mind of God. Man, being created in the image of God would by necessity function rationally and logically given their created-ness as God’s image bearers. The Christian worldview can provide a coherent and rationally consistent account of the laws of logic which the very concept of evidence presupposes, and hence, the Christian worldview by extension can provide a rationally coherent and consistent account of the very concept of evidence itself. Indeed, if such an account is the case, Christian theism would by extension provide a rationally coherent account of everything rational since anything that is rational must presuppose the laws of logic.

Comments are closed.