Is there evidence for God’s existence?
The answer depends upon the meaning of the word “evidence”. If you are referring to scientific evidence, then the answer is no (perhaps). There is no substance that you can put in a test tube and confirm that it is God. And for this reason, the naturalist assumes that he is simply the realist; he is simply the child from The Emperor’s New Clothes who cries, “But he isn’t wearing anything at all!”, and reveals the stupidity of the emperor and all the people who bought into the idea that the emperor is wearing “invisible clothes”.
But I would like to suggest a metaphor. Is there any evidence within the paint of a painting that the painter exists? In one sense, you can search the colors and contrasts of a painting for as long as you want, but you will never find “the painter”. But of course, that is the wrong path to discovering and understanding the painter.
I believe this is the great fallacy of the atheists’ claim that there is no evidence for God. They are looking for evidence of a builder in the building itself, but the builder is completely other than the building (transcendent). They are searching for evidence of the Author in the characters of the story, but the Author transcends the reality of the story.
Yet in paintings, songs, buildings, and stories there is indeed an important and significant sense in which there is great evidence for the Creator. Thus, there is validity to the conversations around the teleological and cosmological arguments for God’s existence.
This is obviously not a comprehensive post, but rather a conversation starter. I am eager to hear feedback. I believe that many of my atheist/naturalist friends would be able to form an articulate and reasonable response.
So here’s to beginning one of the most important conversations!