Does God Exist? Proof vs. Evidence
A primer to Aquinas' Five Ways, or Proofs of God's existence
It depends on what you mean by “proof.” People often have a strange idea of what proof really is. In this preface to a series on Aquinas Five Proofs of GOd’s existence we’re going to talk about proof, evidence, why they differ, and how they’re often misapplied. This will prime and prepare you for the rest of the series.
Even if some of this seems philosophical or intimidating, I promise I’ll make it relatable and easy for anyone to understand.
FYI: The short audio intro above began a series I produced when I was publishing to Locals. It never made its way to Substack, but I’m gradually migrating it here. References to “Catholic Adventurer” or “Locals” are dated ones. Okay, let’s move on.
ARTICLE
Proof is essentially a judgment call based on the evidence at hand. For instance, in a murder trial a jury could find someone guilty of murder without a murder weapon, relying instead on evidence like the suspect’s possible motive, his relationship to the victim, and his proximity to the crime scene. Even if there’s no physical evidence, the available data could still lead to a conclusion—proof, or lack thereof.
Proof, then, isn’t always something the evidence itself tells us outright. It’s a judgment we make about that evidence. In the same way, proving God’s existence is a judgment based on the available evidence. But here’s where it gets interesting: there are two kinds of evidence we can consider—logical evidence and material evidence.
Logical vs. Material Evidence
Logical evidence is based on reason. It doesn’t require physical proof. For example, let’s say you leave a plate of food on the table and go into the kitchen. When you come back, the plate is empty. There may be no photo of your dog scarfing down your meal, but given the circumstances, it’s reasonable to conclude that your dog got to it. There’s no physical evidence, but the logical explanation best fits with the data.
Material evidence, on the other hand, is tangible. It’s physical—things like paw prints or sauce stains would be material evidence. It can be seen, measured, and quantified. But in the case of God’s existence, material evidence is impossible to find. Why? Because God isn’t a physical being—He exists outside the realm of the material world.
So, Can We Prove God Exists?
Given that material evidence is out of the question, we rely on logical evidence. And when we examine that evidence, we can make a very strong case that God exists—or at the very least, that He very likely exists. In fact, if you follow the evidence logically, the conclusion becomes so certain that we, as rational beings, must conclude that God absolutely exists.
To recap, there are two kinds of evidence: logical and material. Since God isn’t physical, looking for material proof of His existence is actually a bit misguided. If you ever do find material evidence of God, what you’ve really found is evidence of something else entirely—like an alien, perhaps!
The Five Ways of St. Thomas Aquinas
In this upcoming series, we’ll look at St. Thomas Aquinas’ “Five Ways” of demonstrating God’s existence. Maybe you’ve heard/read/studied this before, but you haven’t gotten my treatment of it yet. Here’s a quick list:
The Argument from Motion
The Argument from Efficient Cause
The Argument from Necessary Being
The Argument from Gradation
The Argument from Design
I’ve spent a lot of time discussing these arguments with atheists, and I’ve yet to see a convincing counter-argument that successfully debunks Aquinas’ reasoning. Remember, logical evidence is about finding the best conclusion based on the available data—nothing else fits better than the existence of God.
In the next episode of this series, I’ll break down Aquinas’ first argument: the Argument from Motion.
These will be PREMIUM posts, available to paid members but with a preview for free subscribers.
God bless you, and I look forward to continuing this journey with you.