During this past weekend I saw the film, God's Not Dead. The story centers on Josh Wheaton, a college freshman and Christian who signs up for a philosophy course taught by a professor who is a rabid atheist. True to form for too many of our nation's educators, the professor tries to force his atheist faith upon his students by having them write, "God Is Dead" on a piece of paper on the first day of class. When Josh refuses, the professor says that he must then be willing to defend the proposition that God exists. Josh accepts the challenge.
The movie is about more than just Josh and his professor. The disparate stories that all seem to combine to color the picture of God's existence in the end, allows the viewer to depend on a living God not only from Josh's academic exercise to prove his existence, but through the miracle of His love that changes the lives of the movie's characters. I will not expound anymore on the subject of the movie because I do not wish to reveal too much. It is an experience more than a movie, and I highly recommend its viewing.
God's Not Dead did cause me to reflect on the real scientific and logical support for the existence of God. The most rational reason for a belief in God came from the 17th century mathematician, philosopher, and physicist, Blaise Pascal, entitled "Pascal's Wager." Pascal postulated that:
Humans all bet with their lives that God exists or does not exist. Given the possibility
that God actually does exist and assuming the infinite gain or loss associated with belief
in God or with unbelief, a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to
believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss
(some pleasures, luxury, etc.)
When I first became aware of Pascal's Wager years ago, it struck a chord with my logical mind that gave reasoned support to my spiritual beliefs. I would disagree with Pascal on the minor point that there is a finite loss to one who lives his life in belief of God and it turns out that He does not exist. Because that person would have actually gained the non-material accouterments of living a pious life whether God exists or not.
The more scientific, and less philosophical, argument for the existence of God is the recent discoveries in constructing the human DNA genome. Many scientists working on DNA research have begun as agnostics or even atheists. But after having discovered the intricate programming that exists in DNA molecules, they were forced by science and logic into the conclusion that some form of higher intelligence created it.
I have always believed that everyone has faith; that faith is either in the existence of God or in His non-existence. And those who hold tightly to the unsupported position of God's non-existence have the forces of logic and science aligned against them. Furthermore, it is an empty and meaningless existence if this ephemeral life upon this planet is not followed by an existence far more eternal. Conclusive to my argument is that not only does God exist, but he has given all humans the ability to exist untethered by the bounds of this planet through belief in Him.