Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Proof of the existence of god
St. anselm ontological argument
Proofs of God's existence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Proof of the existence of god
Proving existence of God The existence of God is a very fundamental topic on which many philosophers have argued and till date there is no physical proof of His existence. At some point or the other of our life, we all ask the question, does God exist? The answer to this changes our way of living, our thinking and how we understand or interpret the world. If one answers a yes then they live for a purpose and hope for eternity, while others create their purpose on planet earth and understand death as their final end. Most of the religions have a general view that God is not only omnipotent (capable of doing anything) and omniscient (all-knowing), but also, supremely benevolent (all-good). These religions would mainly include Christianity, Judaism and Islam. However, does He actually exist? How can a reasonable person believe in his existence when one cannot even see Him? There are different types of arguments by different philosophers proving the existence of God. According to Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) a German philosopher there are only three possible bases on which to prove God’s existence: no experience, many experiences and one experience The first argument is the ‘Ontological Argument’. Unlike the other two claims, this one is not based on evidence. ‘The Design argument’ depends on the nature around us and ‘The Cosmological argument’ is based on scientific evidence, the cause and effect. However, the ontological argument by St. Anselm (1033-1109), which is described as non-experiential or a priori in character, states that if God exists then he should be perfect and it is an imperfection not to exist, therefore, since God is perfect He exists. St. Anselm said that “God is a being than that which nothing greater can be conceive... ... middle of paper ... ...s easier for me. However, there are some philosophers who argue against His existence by saying for example, God is infinite goodness and if He existed, there would be no evil, but there is evil in this world so He does not exist. Secondly, they say every natural thing can be explained by science or nature and all voluntary things can be explained by human will so there is no need for His existence. But these statements were responded to by saying that it is a part of infinite goodness that He should allow evil to exist and for us to extract the good out of it. And the second argument was replied by saying that whatever is done by nature or done voluntarily must be traced back to a higher cause other than human will because these can change and fail and all things which are changeable and capable of defect must be traced back to an immovable principle, which is God.
Without God live is meaningless. We have no purpose for existence except to exist and at the end of life all that is left is death. If there is no life after death and no offer of immortality then life itself is absurd (Craig).
In conclusion I am left pretty much in the same place as I have started. It is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God philosophically. For every philosopher who publishes his or her opinions on the subject, three more are there to tear it down. In the end I think it is best that man does not figure out the answer to this lifelong question. Some things are better left unanswered.
Throughout the world, most people believe in some type of god or gods, and the majority of them understand God as all-good, all-knowing (omniscient), and all-powerful (omnipotent). However, there is a major objection to the latter belief: the “problem of evil” (P.O.E.) argument. According to this theory, God’s existence is unlikely, if not illogical, because a good, omniscient, and omnipotent being would not allow unnecessary suffering, of which there are enormous amounts.
In relation to the replies about the problem of evil it is very implausible that an omnibenevolent god could exist since evil is present. However in terms of the problem of evil, there is not enough information or reasoning to suggest either god’s existence or non-existence. Christians could simply argue that god is not always omnibenevolent and that everything happens for a reason, including evil, perhaps part of a plan that current generations undergo suffering for the greater good of future generations. In contrast, atheistic people could suggest that if that were true then that is unfair and god is not suppose to be unfair.
Does God exist? That is the question that so many scholars, peasants, governments, and individuals have been trying to answer from the beginning of human civilization to the present and beyond. Every group in the history of mankind, from Taiwan to Jamaica, from the top of Russia to the bottom of Chile, has said yes to a form of divinity. Their religions have ranged from one God to one million Gods to no God and these religions have defined culture, tradition, lifestyle, and the society of the place; they have ruled nations and defined nations, inspired nations and controlled nations. Not every person has been a believer but every culture has had a belief.
William Lane Craig is not the original creator of this argument. It was originally created by Ilm al-Kalam, but Craig is a modern philosopher that has restored this argument. In this argument, Craig asserts that the reason the universe exists is because God created it. This cosmological argument is unique because all other variations of cosmological arguments show that the universe has always existed and has an infinite past. The first premise states that “everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of existence” (Philosophy of Religion). The second premise says that the existence of the universe has a beginning which means its past is not infinite (Philosophy of Religion). From these two premises, we can conclude that something created the universe and if something caused the universe to exists, then it had to be caused by God. These two conclusions prove that God does exists. This argument implies that the universe does not have an infinite past. Even though it doesn’t directly say that the universe has a beginning, it can be proven mathematically by showing that infinity cannot exists.
Whether god exists or not has been in discussion for thousands of years, and an important discussion. Whether it is rational to believe in god or not is another story, like believing in god itself, this topic has brought many discussions. It is one thing to discuss whether god is real or not and it is a complete other to discuss whether it is rational to believe in god or not. I believe that while there may not be any convincing evidence or arguments that God does exist, I do still believe that it is still rational to believe that god does exist. I think this because, believing in God is not simply just believing that he exists, but believing that it can bring good to our lives, we otherwise would not have. It teaches us to have a moral responsibility not only to others, but ourselves. It is obvious that many people do believe in god, but many of us choose to do so for reasons other than just believing in God. I do believe that just because there is no evidence, that does not mean God doesn’t exist. Like I said, God brings more to our lives than just a belief, but an ability to achieve a better one. And even if God is just an imaginary figure, he is an imaginary figure that brings hope and goodness to our lives, which we can never discount.
Does God exist? Since the appearance of mankind on the earth and up until today--would probably continue in the future--this question brought people to think, reason, and come up with the evidence, to present the best satisfactory answer.
Opponents of God’s existence argue if an all-knowing and good god exists, why is there such an abundance of evil in the world.
If God did not exist, he would not be the greatest being imaginable. He is the greatest thing imaginable. Therefore, he does exist. From this argument, God’s existence is viewed. as necessary (Ayer. A. J. 1973).
There are many theories to why a God might exist, but the Ontological argument tells us that a God is a necessary truth based on the self-contradictory or denying the existence of God. They use the proposition of the concept of God to argue the implied existence of God. This is to suppose that God is by definition the greatest thing imaginable and that to imagine something greater which can also exist is impossible. They use the general rule of positive and negative existential claims to try and prove the existence of God. they do this in a number of ways, with the classic version of the ontological argument being the most recognized, the reductio ad absurdum ("reduction of absurdity") of the ontological argument and the modal versions of the argument. It explains that nothing can exist in the imagination alone, it must also exist in reality to truly exist, and they have decided that there has to be such a being that exists in the imagination and in reality that noting greater can exist. I do not find this argument to be true in stating the fact that God must exist in reality, al...
The idea of God being the designer of the universe in this theological argument is something that hasn’t been scientifically. proven, therefore science disagrees with the idea. The design argument is split into two parts: design quality and regularity. design for a quality purpose. Design quality argues that the order and regularity evident in the universe is proof of a designer.
Humans can never know for the certain why the universe was created or what caused it but, we can still create arguments and theories to best explain what might have created the universe. The cosmological argument is another idea to prove the existence of god. Many philosophers debate wheatear the cosmological argument is valid. The cosmological argument starts off quite simply: whatever exists must come from something else. Nothing is the source of its own existences, nothing is self-creating []. The cosmological argument states at some point, the cause and effect sequence must have a beginning. This unexpected phenomenal being is god. According to the argument, god is the initial start of the universe as we know it. Though nothing is self-creating cosmological believers say god is the only being the is self –created. Aquinas, an Italian philosopher, defended the argument and developed the five philosophical proofs for the existence of god knows as, the “Five Ways”.[]. In each “way” he describes his proof how god fills in the blanks of the unexplainable. The first way simply states that, things in motion must be put in motion by something. The second was is efficient because, nothing brings its self into existence. The third is, possibility and necessity [!]. Aqunhias’ has two more ‘ways’ but for the purpose of this essay I won’t be focusing on them heavily. These ways have started philosophers to debate and question his arguments ultimately made the cosmological argument debatable. The cosmological argument is however not a valid argument in explaining the existence of god because the conclusions do not logically follow the premises.
Does God exist? That question has been asked by people for centuries. Christians, Jews, and Muslims would all say that God exists. They would claim that He is the creator of all things and is of a higher being than man is. Others would claim either that God does not exist or that God is not what the Christians, Jews, and Muslims say He is. Both Anselm and Aquinas address this question: Anselm in his "Proslogion" and Aquinas in his "Summa Theologica." The opinions of Anselm and Aquinas as to the nature of God are the same, although Anselm lacks the proof to back up his claims.
Though there is some debate as to the existence of God, the matter has not been sufficiently proven one way or the other. In the event that there is a God who is consistent with the traditional Western theory of a tri-omni being and whose existence is proved through use of the Cosmological Argument, its existence cannot be disproved by the Problem of Evil. The Problem of Evil itself is disproved by the Free Will Defense and the compatibility of Determinism with the Free Will Defense. Much to the relief of St. Thomas Aquinas, the existence of evil cannot in and of itself disprove the Cosmological Argument.