Most philosophers have given up George Berkeley's proof for the existence of God as a lost cause, for in it, Berkeley seems to conclude more than he actually shows. I defend the proof by showing that its conclusion is not (as is often supposed) the thesis that an infinite and perfect God exists, but rather the much weaker thesis that a very powerful God exists and that this God's agency is pervasive in nature. This interpretation, I argue, is consistent with the texts. It is also an important component of Berkeley's philosophical project, which consists of launching many small arguments (rather than one large argument) against his philosophical and theological opponents.