There have been generations of debating over whether God exists and how the universe was made. Many atheists and theists/creationists have argued over scientific proof that the Bible is accurate and that God exists. People have said that science and spirituality are separate, and cannot coexist. The world has so many mysteries concerning this and the earth's creation. All people can do is debate, and choose what they put their faith in. For instance, Bill Nye, a famous scientist who also was in his own television show for children, Bill Nye The Science Guy; does not believe that God constructed the earth and that the theory is absurd. he was in a debate against Ken Ham, who did approve of the theory that God did construct the earth. They had a two hour debate over God, and of course there is no winner since no one can agree on the same beliefs. I saw a nine minute interview of Bill Nye on his thoughts. He said that he admired Ken Ham's passion, that he actually swears by what he was fighting for. Then …show more content…
People only believed he was a prophet, but even the Bible itself declares him the Messiah. "...You have never heard his voice or seen his form, nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent. You study the scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. " (John 5: 37-40). This scripture counts for the Jews. They have not seen Jesus as the son of God, thus far the Bible says so itself. The Bible says Jesus is real and Genesis states that God constructed the universe. Humans are complex beings with a purpose, the things we can build and improve. Creatures around us are fascinating and live in their own cycles, there are galaxies and possible life forms on the outside. That alone is proof that a supernatural being had a role in the grand design of the
The existence of God is quite controversial issue. God has different names in the world, and a lot of people, strongly believe in his existence. While, on the other hand, there are also people who don’t believe in his existence. In their discussion entitled “Does God Exist?” William Lane Craig, who is the supporter of the idea of existence of God, debates with Austin Dacey, who is an atheist, on the idea of existence of God. They provide the strong arguments and their debates are quite interesting, and innovative (not similar to those arguments, we usually read about in book). These are the fresh views on the question of existence and non-existence of God.
Roger White presents an interesting argument for why God must exist. In his argument, White states that everything in the world is finely tuned to live its life accordingly. In order for this to be possible, God must have finely tuned all beings so that they were well fit for life. In depth, this argument is, “If a fact stands in need of an explanation, and a hypothesis explains this fact better than anything else, then they support each other. Our universe being so perfect for life is a fact in need of explanation. The hypothesis that God has finely tuned everything to be where all living beings can exist in this universe is an explanation to this fact. No other hypothesis compares to such a standard as this one. Therefore, the fact that our
The Proof of the Existence of God There are many arguments that try to prove the existence of God. In this essay I will look at the ontological argument, the cosmological. argument, empirical arguments such as the avoidance of error and the argument from the design of the. There are many criticisms of each of these that would say the existence of God can’t be proven that are perhaps.
Truth, what is truth? This question itself has a thousand answers, no person can ever be sure of what truth is rather, truth can be justified, it can checked for reliability with strong evidences and logic. If the evidence proves to be accurate then it can be established that a certain answer is the truth. However, have we ever tried to think about what intrigues us to seek the truth? To think about a question and set foot firmly on the path of knowledge. Definitely it has! That was the very cause itself which is why this world has witnessed some of the greatest philosophers like Aristotle, Plato and Socrates etc. along with the school of thought. The ability to think and reason is one of the greatest ability humans have, it is what distinguishes us from the animals. It is what gives us free will, the ability to control our own outcomes. However, it is that ability to ‘think’ itself which has caused men to rebel with the myths and statements established about the unseen and natural forces since the beginning of time. It gave rise to questions such as: Do aliens exist? Is there a world of the unseen? Life after Death and the most popular question since the beginning of times, Does God exists? And the answer is ‘yes’. Here is how I will justify my stance.
what is normal and usual; that it is not usual to be able to describe
The Design Argument For The Existence Of God This argument is also called the teleological argument, it argues that the universe did not come around by mere chance, but some one or something designed it. This thing was God. This argument is a prosteriori because the observation of the natural world is taken into the mind to conclude that there is a designer. The belief that the universe was designed by God was triggered by things like the four seasons; summer, spring, autumn and winter, that change through the year.
Saint Aquinas defines the existence of God with the upmost clarity. Saint Anselm and William Paley attempt to tackle the existence of God but are weighed down by weaknesses within their argument. Even with Saint Anselm being a Christian theologian, he does not incorporate his personal religious beliefs into his argument. St. Anselm relies purely on logic and ontology to define what he constitutes as God, defined as a being in which nothing greater can be thought. This definition is general enough to be consistent with what various individuals establish as their “God.” Anselm uses Tinkerbell as an example to defend his thought to reality premise. Tinkerbell relies on the faith from children to believe in her existence for her to exist. For Anselm, if something is thought then in some realm, it must exist. However, St. Anselm does not address crucial arguments that deteriorate his position. The translation from thought into reality is not clear. A sole idea constructed by the mind does not establish its place in reality. Dragons are thought and even read to a child during their adolesc...
and how the World came about. But can people judge what it says in a
There are different viewpoints on the question “what is the universe made of?” I think that both science and religion offer their own explanation to this topic and they sometimes overlap, which creates contradictions. Therefore, I do not agree with Stephen Jay Gould’s non-overlapping magisterial, which claims that there is a fine line separating science from religion. That being said, I think the conflict between science and religion is only in the study of evolution. It is possible for a scientist to be religious if he is not studying evolution, because science is very broad and it has various studies. In this essay, I will talk about the conflict between religion and science by comparing the arguments from Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins. I argue that science and religion do overlap but only in some area concerning evolution and the cosmic design. Furthermore, when these overlaps are present it means that there are conflicts and one must choose between science and religion.
In today’s society, many topics create a very substantial amount of controversy between different groups of people. From abortion to the healthcare reform, there are countless topics of discussion. One of the major and ongoing controversial topics in the religious community is the Big Bang theory versus Creation. One side of the controversy is, predominately, the scientific community, with the other end obviously being the religious community. Genesis 1:1-2 says: “First this: God created the heavens and earth—all you see, all you don’t see.
God can be defined as a being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions (1). There are many people that do not believe in any religion. People who do not believe in a religion have no reason for believing in a God. People who do not believe in a God and argue against the existence of God are proving something that is completely false. There is a God for numerous reasons.
In this essay I discuss why there is proof that there is a supernatural being known as God, who has created everything we know and experience.
'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light…'(Gen 1:1.5) '…then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. '(Gen 2:7) This part from the bible is a typical example of what people used to believe before scientists came and gave logical explanations to the questions of mankind.It is possible, of course, to define a non-supernatural "religious" worldview that is not in conflict with science. But in all of its traditional forms, the supernatural religious worldview makes the assumption that the universe and its inhabitants have been designed and created by "forces" or beings which transcend the material world. The material world is postulated to reflect a mysterious plan originating in these forces or beings, a plan which is knowable by humans only to the extent that it has been revealed to an exclusive few. Criticising or questioning any part of this plan is strongly discouraged, especially where it touches on questions of morals or ethics. Science, on the other hand, assumes that there are no transcendent, immaterial forces and that all forces which do exist within the universe behave in an ultimately objective or random fashion. The nature of these forces, and all other scientific knowledge, is revealed only through human effort in a dynamic process of inquiry. The universe as a whole is assumed to be neutral to human concerns and to be open to any and all questions, even those concerning human ethical relationships. Such a universe does not come to us with easy answers. We must come to it and be prepared to work hard. According to Thomas W. Clark science and religion are in a battle from the day that scientists got in the fields of the theologises
The relationship between science and religion has been debated for many years. With strong personal opinions and beliefs, it is not surprising that no progress has been made in this argument. In my opinion, I feel as though religion and science have to be related in some way. There is no possible way people can separate two things that attempt to prove the same facts. My belief is that a metaphorical bridge has to be formed to connect the two. Personally, I feel as though science can be a compliment to religion, and that the scientific discoveries can and should be used to prove that God exists, not disprove it. If science did this, then the relationship between science and religion could be a friendly one. If that happened, people could stop debating and fighting over the two, allowing priests and scientists to talk and work together peacefully.
Some feel that scientist are atheists. Some scientists say we still believe in God. St. Thomas answers some questions about faith and science and why faith cannot be tested by the rules of science. In obj.4 he says, “ Because the object of science is something seen, whereas the object of faith is the unseen, as stated above”(258). What he is saying is science is something that has to be seen and proven whereas faith is something as unseen and relies solely on an individual 's beliefs. St. Thomas also says, “ In like manner it may happen that what is an object of vision or scientific knowledge for one man even in the state of wayfarer, is , for another man, an object of faith, because he does not know it by demonstration”(258). Meaning that what one person sees as scientific and fact, can appear to another man as just another sign of faith, faith has no bounds whereas science has boundaries and