I am absolutely of the view that we want our beliefs to line up with fact. What we believe ought to align with what is true. We are crazy to believe what we know isn’t true!

Whilst I believe that God has given sufficient evidence of his existence and the truth of the gospel to us, it bears saying that knowledge of sufficient evidence is not necessary. Specifically, God may make himself known really to us by his Spirit even in situations where we are not in possession of all the evidence that one might wish to gain.

In fact, receipt of the Holy Spirit in this way is more important than substantial evidence. The bible is quite clear that nobody can believe unless he is born again or born from above. Nobody can believe unless they have been made alive by God’s Spirit. This new life in the Spirit is necessary for belief and it is perfectly rational for somebody to experience this new life and thus believe the gospel without necessarily having access to all the potential evidence that a non-believer may deem necessary for belief. The work of the Spirit is crucial to belief; evidence some might deem sufficient is not.

Exploring this question, William Lane Craig offers some further detail in the following video. He is asked about something Dostoevsky once said about remaining with Christ even if the facts point in the other direction. Craig suggests there are two separate questions being asked and picks them apart: