What is your Verdict?

I work as a trial attorney. In trials, evidence is presented and verdicts are determined based upon the evidence. I present you with the opportunity to be a juror in the ultimate Verdict Form question and the questions are this:

1) Is there empirical evidence for the existence of God?

2) Based upon your reason and the evidence, can you render a verdict that it is more likely than not that God exists?

Many claim there is no evidence for God. But the question is not one of a lack of evidence, but, rather a matter of sufficiency of evidence. I submit to you—the juror, that the universe does not merely suggest a designer known as God; it overwhelmingly declares it. I appeal not to the Bible or a burning bush or even Jesus Christ or faith. Instead, I ask you to simply observe the natural order. The precision of natural laws, the delicate balance of cosmic constants, and the profound intelligibility of the physical world are not gaps in knowledge but signposts pointing to an intelligent cause.

Ultimately, the real question is not whether evidence for God exists, but whether we are willing to acknowledge what is plainly before us.

I. The Cosmic Lottery and the Illusion of Chance

Imagine your neighbor buying a single Powerball ticket where the odds of winning are 1 in 292 million. Now imagine not only winning THAT jackpot but also every major lottery on Earth, SIMULTANEOUSLY, on the same day. The probability of this occurrence by chance is so infinitesimally small that no rational person would believe it. Reason would dictate the conclusion that the outcome was rigged or intentionally designed.

Mathematically, this analogy vastly underestimates the improbability of the universe’s fine-tuning. The precise conditions necessary for life did not just align once but across dozens of independent physical constants, each requiring extraordinary precision. The probability of this occurrence by random chance is so small that, mathematically speaking, it is indistinguishable from zero.

II. The Astonishing Precision of the Universe

Scientists have discovered that the universe operates according to an intricate balance of physical constants. These values govern fundamental forces, the behavior of matter, and the very possibility of life. If any one of them were altered, even slightly, the universe would be inhospitable to life.

A. Gravity’s Fine-Tuning (N)

The force of gravity is determined by a fundamental constant. The ratio of the electromagnetic force to the gravitational force between protons is about 1 in 10 raised to the 36th power. If this ratio were even slightly different, stars would either collapse too quickly or never form at all. What does this actually look like? It looks like this:

1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 or One in one undecillion.

To put this in perspective, imagine covering the entire United States with grains of sand and selecting one specific grain at random. That is the level of precision required for gravity to allow a life-permitting universe.

B. The Cosmological Constant

The rate at which the universe expands is governed by the cosmological constant (dark energy). It is fine-tuned to approximately 1 in 10¹²°.

This means that if the force of expansion were even slightly stronger, galaxies and stars would never have formed. If it were slightly weaker, the universe would have collapsed in on itself.

The odds of getting this value correct by chance are equivalent to hitting a single, atom-sized target on the other side of the observable universe with a dart.

C. The Strong Nuclear Force

The strong nuclear force holds atomic nuclei together. If it were 0.5% stronger or weaker, the universe would lack essential elements like carbon and oxygen, making life impossible. This delicate balance is absolutely crucial to the foundation of chemistry.

Imagine constructing a skyscraper where every brick must be placed with atomic-level precision. This means a shift of one by the width of a hair, and the entire structure collapses. THAT is the delicate balance necessary for the universe’s stability.

Each of these constants (and many others) must be precisely as they are at the same time for life to exist. The combined probability of this happening by chance is estimated at 1 in 10 to the power of 500. This is a number so vast that it exceeds the total number of atoms in the observable universe (10 to the power of 80)

Denial of fine-tuning is not a scientific position but an exercise in willful blindness.

III. Aquinas and the Order of the Universe

St. Thomas Aquinas, in his Fifth Way, argued that unintelligent things consistently act toward ordered ends. Just as an arrow does not fly toward a target without an archer, the laws of physics do not align themselves with perfect precision without a guiding intellect.

Aquinas’ reasoning applies directly to modern physics:

—The laws of nature exhibit perfect mathematical consistency.

—These laws govern the behavior of matter in a way that allows life to exist.

—Because the laws themselves lack intelligence, they must be the result of an intelligent cause.

Aquinas’ conclusion is inescapable: the intelligibility and order of the universe point to God.

IV. Can the Multiverse Explain Fine-Tuning?

Atheists or those who deny God’s existence or those who charge the “God of the Gaps” fallacy often attempt to counter fine-tuning by appealing to the multiverse hypothesis—”the idea that an infinite number of universes exist, each with different physical constants.” They argue that if enough universes exist, then one like ours would inevitably appear.

However, this explanation fails for several reasons:

1. The multiverse lacks empirical evidence. There is no direct observation or experiment confirming the existence of other universes. Accordingly, such an idea requires a level of faith equal to that of any consecrated religious and denies the observable mathematical evidence.

2. Even if a multiverse existed, it would require its own fine-tuning. What mechanism generates these universes? What laws govern them? A multiverse merely pushes the problem back further—it does not solve it.

3. Infinite randomness does not produce order. If you give a monkey a typewriter, he will not write Shakespeare, no matter how many universes you imagine. Fine-tuning is not merely the result of infinite possibilities but of precise mathematical harmony.

Ultimately, the multiverse is not an alternative to design. It is an admission that design exists but an attempt to explain it away without invoking a designer.

V. The Most Rational Conclusion

We are left with three possibilities:

1. Chance — “The universe simply got lucky” This is statistically absurd based upon the mathematics above.

2. Necessity— “The universe had to be this way.” But no known law dictates that the constants had to take these precise values.

3. Design— “The universe was fine-tuned intentionally by an intelligent cause.”

Given the astronomical improbability of chance and the lack of necessity, design seems the only rational explanation.

VI. The Sufficiency of Evidence

The claim that there is “no evidence for God” is not a statement about facts, it is a statement about perception. The problem is not that the evidence is absent, but that it is too overwhelming for some to accept. 

As noted, if someone won every lottery on Earth on the same day, we would not attribute it to luck. We would recognize an intelligent force behind it. And yet, the fine-tuning of the universe is far more improbable than this scenario.

The sufficiency of evidence is not in question. What is in question is our willingness to acknowledge it. The order of the universe is not a cosmic accident. It is a message, a signature written into the fabric of reality by the Divine Architect.

To deny this is not skepticism. It is a refusal to see what is plain, simple and self-evident. The question has never been, “Is there enough evidence for God?” The real question is, “Are we willing to accept the sufficiency of the evidence already before us?”

So, gentlemen of the jury, I submit to you that not only is there empirical evidence for God by probability but, the consideration of this evidence through reason leads to the only logical conclusion which is the existence of God.