Five proofs for God
(1) It is impossible for a finite being to be the net effect of an infinite regress of prior causes and effects, as that would be the equivalent of saying that I could possibly give you a dollar after I flick the light switch an infinite amount of times, where in fact you would never get to the dollar if that were the case. Therefore, it is necessary that there be one being that is infinite and uncreated. That being we call "God".
(2) Logical absolutes are concepts which require a mind to account for them. These are the law of identity, the law of excluded middle, and the law of non-contradiction. These concepts are transcendent, in that they are a priori and cannot be falsified empirically insofar that if you were to travel a million miles one way and a million miles the other way, they would still hold true. These laws are the grounds for understanding, language, and any other forms of logic in the fields of philosophy or quantum physics (including trivalent logic, which falsely proposes that the law of excluded middle is disproved). Logical absolutes cannot be dependent on human minds, because human minds are different and what one person believes is logical may not be what someone else believes is logical and it is quite clear that you could conceive of possible worlds where no human beings exist and the laws of logic would still apply. Yet you would not be able to escape the fact that the laws of logic require a mind (because truth and concepts exist in a mind) and could not avoid the presupposition that there is a mind. And if you have only two possibilities to account for something and the other is falsified, then the other is validated by default. Therefore, since logical absolutes cannot be accounted for if God does not exist, then clearly God does exist as the logical absolutes are concepts grounded on a divine intellect.
(3) Moral absolutes are also transcendent and require a mind to account for them. Natural scientists cannot look under rocks and find moral absolutes. And yet we assume that there is a framework of right and wrong in humanity. Moral absolutes cannot be dependent on human minds for the same reason that logical absolutes cannot be dependent on human minds: Human minds are different and what I think is moral may not be what you believe is moral. And you would have no basis for falsifying my morality. Morals are ends in themselves and if they are for any utilitarian reasons, then they have no moral worth and true morality does not exist. For if morality is dictated by utility, then something which is immoral at one time period could be immoral at another time period. Moreover, morality would be contingent rather than necessary and transcendent. Therefore, if God does not exist, then everything would be permitted. Yet I would grant that no sane person could possibly believe that everything is permitted. Therefore, the existence of morality proves that there must be an infinite mind through which the moral concepts are.
(4) It is well documented by historians that Jesus Christ was a real human being. His existence is confirmed in the writings of Josephus, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, Julius Africanus, Talmud, Lucian of Samosota, Mera Bar-Serapion.. and most importantly, Matthew, John, and Luke. Moreover, it is well documented that there were MANY eye witnesses who claim to have seen Jesus alive after the crucifixion, and all of these people were willing to suffer prolonged torture and death for what they knew they had witnessed. People will not die for what they know is not true, but they will die for what they believe to be true. These people knew what they saw. That is enough to convince me that the resurrection really happened. The Christian martyrs either saw Christ after his death or they did not. If they did not, then why would they be willing to die for a lie? Could they all have been mentally ill? We are talking about THOUSANDS of people here. This was enough to convince PAUL, who was a violent persecutor of the Church.
(5) In "A Brief History of Time", Stephen Hawking points out that the universe has to be EXACTLY how it is and if it is even an infinitesimal amount different, then we would have no universe. The mass of the proton, the mass of the electron, gravitation force, etc. has to maintain the EXACT values that it does in order for the universe to be what it is. The universe is clearly finely tuned. If there is no divine intellect, then the universe would be the result of natural devices which are completely void of any intent, since intent only exists in minds. To believe this is absurd. That would be like assuming that winds could write "Hello, how are you?" in the sand on the beach.