Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The Existence of God: Argument for and Against
Existance of God
Existance of God
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The Existence of God: Argument for and Against
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.
Back in 1200s, St. Thomas Aquinas has provided "five ways" to prove for the existence of God, which I am persuaded by, and hopefully others would see the same 'light' in this argument--unfortunately, it does not provide sufficient answers regarding the 'nature of God' (Bailey and Martin, 2011, 37). All five arguments share the "form of logic called syllogism," "initial premise, starting from the empirical facts," and the existence of "transcendent cause" to everything (Bailey and Martin, 2011, 25). Here, I will choose the second way, the argument of "efficient cause," which I feel it as the most compelling argument and sums up other arguments to demonstrate for the existence of God. 'God,' here is defined as the God introduced in the Bible of Christianity.
In essence, the second argument said that there must be cause--or beginning--to everything, which ultimately, gives rise to effect, result, or the end. Consequently, second effect must be created and caused by the "first element of series" (Bailey and Martin, 2011, 34); therefore, the effect and existence of nth (equals to the last or end) element in series are ultimately caused and created by the 'first element,' which we call God. It is probable that first element may give direct rise to nth element. Other than God, nothing is considered infinite. So, God does not have a cause; and hence, it would have no effect.
Think of any person. What gives rise to that person? The answer is his or her parents--parents (sperm and egg) are necessa...
... middle of paper ...
...in God.
Reasoning like this, alone is not sufficient to prove the existence of God, but it provides us with firm ground to rationally approve and understand the existence of God. One must have faith, to truly acknowledge and believe in the existence of God because as God is perfect and we are not, we cannot see or know the true perfect with full confidence, unless God intervenes--"faith is the gift of God" (Ephesians 2:8).
Works Cited
Bailey, A and Martin, R 2011, "First Philosophy" Second Ed.
Classnotes, Jon, Miller, Phil 115, 2011, Queen's University
Hubble, Edwin. 1929, "A Relation between Distance and Radial Velocity among Extra-Galactic Nebulae" Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp. 168-173
The Holy Bible, 1973, 1978, 1984. New International Version. International Bible Society
Descartes second argument for proving God’s existence is very straightforward. He has four possibilities that created his existence. Through process of elimination he is left with God being his creator.
The question of God’s existence has been debated through the history of man, with every philosopher from Socrates to Immanuel Kant weighing in on the debate. So great has this topic become that numerous proofs have been invented and utilized to prove or disprove God’s existence. Yet no answer still has been reached, leaving me to wonder if any answer at all is possible. So I will try in this paper to see if it is possible to philosophically prove God’s existence.
Aquinas’ second proof for the existence of God is a sound argument. Aquinas’ argument about the efficient/agent cause is philosophically persuasive because it is easy to apply to things. The second proof is based on the notion of the efficient cause. The efficient cause is based on a chain of cause and effects. Aquinas does a suitable job in proving God’s existence through the order of caused causes through the world of sense.
It is my view that God exists, and I think that Aquinas’ first two ways presents a
Throughout our course we have read and considered many ideas, however for the duration of this paper I will focus on two core ideas. These are the ideas that God is the first efficient cause and whether God is good. For the duration of this paper I will look at Aquinas’s five ways, Hume’s refutation of God being the efficient cause. Also Dostoevsky’s and Hume’s explanation that God is not good because of the abundance of pain. Throughout the class what I have come to learn and was most impacted by is that God is not what we prescribe him to be in our different religions. Also the arguments that always stood out for me were the arguments of Hume and his skepticism. It is my goal through this paper to explain that God is not the entity
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.
Secondly, the first and second arguments are invalid because the way the Big Bang happened and the universe was created was left to a good deal of chance and it would have been illogical for God to have created it that way. If God did create it in this form then it would be contradictory to Aquinas' idea of a completely rational, benevolent, and omnipotent God. Aquinas' third argument is unsound because he states that not every entity can fail to exist, but during singularity all of the matter in the universe is suspended in one lawless and unlocatable point. The lack of governing laws and any way to tell where that point would have been is proof that it may not have existed. The scientific proof of the beginning of the universe renders Aquinas' first three arguments from Summa Theologica unsound.
The Orion Nebula is a spectacular sight. Consequently, it has been a preferred target of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) over recent years. The HST has provided a great deal of insight into the complicated process of star formation. In June of 1994, C.
Instinctually, humans know that there is a greater power in the universe. However, there are a few who doubt such instinct, citing that logically we cannot prove such an existence. St. Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologica, wrote of five proofs for the existence of God. The Summa Theologica deals with pure concepts; these proofs rely on the world of experience - what one can see around themselves. In these proofs, God will logically be proven to exist through reason, despite the refutes against them.
Thomas Aquinas takes up the argument for God’s existence by providing the concept that what belongs to a being is either from its nature or extrinsic factors. By this principle, people must have an origin. Just as I am a product of the extrinsic factors known as my parents, my parents are of their parents, so on and so forth. Aquinas believes there must exist a beginning to this chain and there is nothing else conceivable to be responsible for the origin of humans besides his God. Aquinas also uses the same logic with causes of motion as another reason for God’s existence. The essence of Aquinas’ logic is that God exists because he (or she or it) exists and is the only entity for which this is so. This rationale is also circular in nature. Both these arguments prove God’s existence only for those who are already believers, making them fall short of their true
An argument that's been going for as long as religion has existed is the existence of God. There are always people out there that want the believers to prove to the non-believers that God exists. Thomas Aquinas is the one to start the idea that the non-believers should be the ones trying to prove to the believers why there is no God. Making the non-believers take the action to research the proof that God doesn't exist. Professor Ralph McInerny mentioned in his article, that believers are tired of having to answer the same old questions and doing the research to show non-believers that God does exist (p.1). For once, let's have the atheist do the work to show the proof there is no God. The reasons why the atheist should be responsible for proving
...roofs of God’s existence are basically the same in that they are all, essentially, examples of cause and effect. This cause and effect does not neccesarily prove there is a God but it does lead one to wonder what may be the highest cause, and for this there is no proof.
Thomas Aquinas uses five proofs to argue for God’s existence. A few follow the same basic logic: without a cause, there can be no effect. He calls the cause God and believes the effect is the world’s existence. The last two discuss what necessarily exists in the world, which we do not already know. These things he also calls God.
While Aquinas has some good arguments about the existence of God, there were a few flaws in his argument.
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. The mere claim, that there could be a "Proof for the Existence of God," seems to invite ridicule. But not always are those who laugh first and think later. Remember how all-knowing doctors/scientists laughed at every new discovery?