Evaluating the Arguments for God's Existence

Evaluating the Arguments for God's Existence

No one can prove to anyone the existence of God, as in a mathematical

proof. In my opinion the theory of reason is too limited to know

anything beyond human experiences. Throughout history many rational

arguments have been put forward but if you don’t believe in God, you

never will.

The cosmological argument is a classical argument for the existence of

God. It is also referred to as the first cause argument. The argument

is based upon the fact that there was a first cause behind the

existence of the universe. In my opinion, this argument doesn’t prove

anything because it contradicts itself by rejecting the infinite but

it says God is infinite. Also the suggestion that infinity is

impossible and that the universe had a beginning but it says God is

infinite. It could be argued that the first cause was physical,

material rather than God and as a human has a mother, doesn’t mean the

Universe does.

This argument could convince a believer of God but it would not

convince a non- believer because it cannot stand alone as a proof for

the existence of God. It would have to be supported by other evidence,

and scientific explanations like the Big Bang Theory offer reasons for

how the universe began.

Another argument is the design argument. It argued that the world

around us can be used as evidence to prove the existence of God -

through the natural order that occurs in our lives, bodies and minds.

He used the analogy of a watch to emphasis the complexity of our

world. To me, this doesn’t prove the Christian God because the jump

from a watch to a human is too great. Also the way the universe

functions is organic, but a watch is mechanistic. One could say that

even if this argument does conclude that the universe had a creator,

this does not necessarily mean that it still exists. In the argument

nothing implies that this creator or God must be eternal or have a non