Belief in a Higher Power as Cumulative Evidence for Rational Theism

Introduction

Despite not constituting conclusive proof, the global prevalence of belief in a higher power provides cumulative support—across sociological, epistemological, and psychological domains—for the rational warrant of theistic belief and its deep resonance with the human condition. This article examines how widespread belief functions within a cumulative-case apologetic framework, drawing on Reformed epistemology, the concept of the sensus divinitatis, and cross-cultural data. Emphasizing scholarly sources over popular discourse, it argues that belief in God is not only intellectually defensible but existentially coherent.

Global Sociological Data on Belief in God

According to an international analysis of over 200,000 individuals across 22 countries (the Global Flourishing Study), belief in God, gods, or spiritual forces remains consistently high—even in diverse demographic segments such as education, age, and service attendance (Aglozo et al., 2025). Furthermore, Pew Research found that a median of 61% across 34 countries agree that God plays a vital role in their lives, with 62% reporting religion as an essential element in daily life (Pew Research Center, 2020).

In the United States, approximately 88% of adults believe in God or another higher power—54% affirm “God as described in the Bible,” while 34% accept some other higher spiritual force (Pew Research Center, 2023).

Collectively, these data underscore that believing in a higher power is globally prevalent and sustained across cultures and demographics.

Reformed Epistemology and the Sensus Divinitatis

Alvin Plantinga’s Reformed epistemology provides the philosophical backbone of this argument. He contends that belief in God can be properly basic—a non-inferential belief grounded in experiential sensitivity, comparable to belief in external reality or memory (Plantinga, 1983/2000) Central to this is John Calvin’s concept of the sensus divinitatis, an intrinsic human capacity to apprehend the divine, suggesting that belief in God is naturally produced under appropriate cognitive and environmental conditions (Plantinga, 2000; Naugle, 2003)

Dominik Whittaker connects Plantinga’s ideas with findings from cognitive science of religion, arguing that religious belief—which may stem from innate cognitive faculties—justifies the status of such beliefs as properly basic until sufficiently challenged (Whittaker, 2020) While critics like Koons challenge the epistemic basicity of faith in God, noting that even perceptual beliefs are not fully epistemically independent (Koons, 2011) the broader apologetical approach acknowledges these criticisms while still valuing the holistic epistemic role of faith in God as foundational for many.

Cumulative Coherence: A Broader Apologetic Picture

Although the argument from popularity (argumentum ad populum) is fallacious when used alone, when combined with epistemological theories like Reformed epistemology and cognitive predispositions such as the sensus divinitatis, it contributes to a cumulative-case apologetic. The near-universal spread of theistic belief suggests not only cultural diffusion but potentially a shared cognitive architecture guiding humans toward the divine.

This is reinforced by findings showing that, irrespective of demographic variations, belief in God transcends service attendance and education, especially in countries where theism is normalized (Aglozo et al., 2025) . Such consistency points to faith in God as plausibly rooted in both human cognitive structure and cultural reinforcement.

Counterarguments and Responses

A critical objection asserts that widespread belief does not equate to truth; populations have believed falsehoods en masse. The article counters this by framing belief in God not merely as empirically popular, but as epistemically coherent when paired with theories like properly fundamental beliefs or sensus divinitatis.

Critics such as Koons argue that Plantinga’s theory overstates the autonomy of belief by assuming non-inferential judgments are automatically epistemically independent (Koons, 2011). However, even if a properly fundamental belief in God is not conclusively justified, it can still be seen as rational and foundationally plausible—especially when theistic belief is intertwined with personal experiences, existential longing, and cognitive predispositions.

Further, while empirical research shows correlations between religiosity and lower scientific literacy or differences among scientists and philosophers, these observations do not negate the epistemological basis for belief; instead, they remind us that belief in God operates in different domains, emphasizing experiential and existential dimensions over strictly scientific ones.

Apologetic Implications and Conclusion

The data and philosophical frameworks presented in this study converge on several apologetic conclusions that reinforce the rationality of theistic belief.

Universal Theistic Belief Suggests an Innate Disposition Toward God
The persistent and global nature of belief in a higher power aligns with the theological concept of the sensus divinitatis—an innate capacity for perceiving the divine as articulated by Calvin and developed by Plantinga (2000). This broad distribution across cultures and historical epochs is difficult to explain solely by sociocultural transmission, supporting the theistic claim that humans are created with an intrinsic orientation toward God (Naugle, 2003; Plantinga, 2000).

Widespread Belief Coheres with Properly Basic Theism
According to Reformed epistemology, belief in God is properly basic, grounded in foundational cognitive faculties and not requiring inferential proof to be rational (Plantinga, 1983/2000). The fact that such belief emerges naturally and is held by the vast majority of humanity provides epistemic corroboration: it is neither fringe nor anomalous, but part of a shared human experience (Whittaker, 2020).

Global Belief Supports the Plausibility, Not Just the Popularity, of Theism
While the argument from popularity (argumentum ad populum) is logically invalid if used in isolation, the convergence of prevalence with philosophical warrant creates a cumulative-case argument. This cumulative plausibility reinforces that theism is not an arbitrary worldview but a deeply embedded aspect of human cognition and culture (Craig, 2008; Koons, 2011).

Belief Aligns with Existential Human Needs
Existential apologetics emphasizes that theism uniquely addresses core human longings for meaning, morality, justice, and hope (Lewis, 1952; Wright, 2010). The universality of such belief suggests these longings are not incidental but correspond to an actual transcendent reality, in the same way that physical hunger corresponds to the existence of food.

Cognitive Science of Religion Supports Theistic Interpretation
Research in the cognitive science of religion indicates that humans are naturally predisposed to detect agency and infer purpose in the world (Barrett, 2004). While naturalists interpret this as an adaptive evolutionary byproduct, theists can reasonably interpret it as design-consistent: humans were created with the capacity to know God.

Secular Declines Do Not Invalidate the Core Argument
Although secularization trends exist in some societies, belief in a higher power remains resilient even among the religiously unaffiliated (Pew Research Center, 2023). This persistence, despite cultural and philosophical shifts, underscores the deeply rooted nature of theistic intuition.

Apologetical Utility: Widespread Belief as Common Ground
From a practical standpoint, the near-universal presence of belief in a higher power offers a valuable entry point for apologetic dialogue. It enables Christian apologists to begin with a shared human intuition before moving toward more specific evidence for the God revealed in Scripture (Craig, 2008; McGrath, 2012).

Conclusion
While the global prevalence of belief in a higher power is not proof of God’s existence, it serves as a significant component in a cumulative-case apologetic. When interpreted through the lenses of Reformed epistemology, the sensus divinitatis, existential apologetics, and cognitive science of religion, such a belief provides a strong rational foundation for theism. It affirms that faith in God is not merely a cultural artifact but a belief consonant with humanity’s deepest intellectual, moral, and existential needs.