The Existence of God
Whenever it came to the topic of whether or not there is a god I would always think of the sky and all the stars and the pictures of space and all the other planets, and I would just think that someone or something had put all this together. So for me there has always been a God, but during my freshman year I came across the First Cause Argument which revealed to me a simpler way of looking at the matter of whether God really exist or not. Everything comes from something no matter if were talking about humans, animals, earth , or the entire solar system; so when I look at the the source of everything, it becomes clear to me that there is a supreme being capable of doing anything, a God.
The first cause argument tries
…show more content…
to prove existence of God by looking at the universe existence itself. At some point in time the universe itself came into existence. This argument states that anything that exist has been brought into existence by something else that exist, it states that it is impossible for anything to nothing. So even when it comes to the universe there had to be a figure separate from the universe itself that brought the universe into existence. Within this first cause argument there may appear to be a conflict in that the belief that everything comes from something, and while that belief is true there is also the belief that the supreme being that created the universe would be something entirely different and separate from the universe and everything that came from it, the supreme being would have been eternal. Another argument is St. Thomas Aquinas' Argument From Motion which I find to be very stable, he explains that our senses reveal to us that somethings are in motion, and that things are put in motion when a potential motion becomes an actual motion. An actual motion is the only thing that can put a potential motion into an actual motion. Aquinas also asserts that this motion does not exist in an infinity therefore there was something that puts everything into motion by itself without being put into motion itself by any other. That being or thing that is able to put all other things in motion without any help itself must be that perfect being, God. When looking at the existence of God, I also tend to gravitate towards Descartes Meditation III , for me it clicked almost immediately after reading. With everything in this physical world, I am able to gain an idea of it or about it because I'm able to observe it with one of my senses. When it comes to the idea of God there is nothing that I can look at to see an example of so when I look at the being of the concept of God, that concept had to have come from God. I have no way of imagining a perfect being but yet I have the idea or concept of a such being so it has to exist. At the same time there is doubt within this meditation, but Descartes goes on to point out that in Meditation V that there are instances where we can think of things in, and out the same time not be able to identify them in this physical world. In Meditation V Descartes points out that in his mind he is able to think of his thoughts of geometric shapes even though his senses don't necessarily reveal these things to Descartes himself. Taking this thought he applies it to God who is a perfect being therefore not lacking anything, and with that God exist because as a perfect being he lacks nothing including existence. Descartes goes on to explain that just because he is capable of thinking of something that does not make the thing that he is thinking of real. He explains that when thinking of a triangle he also thinks of the angles of that triangle equaling two right angles as he puts it or 180 degrees, but even this doesn't make the triangle exist. God on the other hand is different and according to Descartes, God being a perfect being possess existence itself, so whenever you think of God who have to automatically apply that existence because God is the being where existence comes from. The Argument From Design I feel is another solid argument for the existence of God especially when it comes to all of the counters of modern science.
The Argument of Design states that the universe is the product of intelligent design, and that design can only come from a designer therefore the creator of the universe was created by an intelligent designer. If we assume that modern science is right when they say that the universe started with the big bang,and that the explosion sent all types of matter in different directions. We then have to question whether it was just chance everything lined up perfectly for earth to produce and sustain life. What happened that earth was able to develop solid mass while others plants do not necessarily have, but happened that earth developed an ozone layer that happens to protect life on earth from being burned up by the sun. With all the different examples out there everything happened just right for life to come into existence on earth and that makes it unreasonable that the universe came into existence exactly how it did, as opposed to being created specifically. The Argument From Design states that after considering all of the different outcomes it seems unanimous that a being like no other did everything for a reason so that the so that life could exist, there's just no way possible that all of those events could occur so perfectly without a perfect being orchestrating all of these events. With everything happening how it did it appears to be sufficient proof that there is a perfect, and eternal designer who did everything so that he could bring life into existence for his own
purpose. The thing that all these arguments have in common is that they agree that something put everything into existence and that the only possible explanation of everything coming into existence is that there is a supreme being that has always existed and is self sufficient and that being is responsible from bring everything else into existence. To me the only way a person who reads these arguments and still rejects the idea of God either wants to just deny the idea of a supreme being or they reject the idea everything comes from something. If a person accepts that were all just here and there is no God and we all are a result of the Big Bang, then I would ask them where do they think the stars come from because the Big Bang was simply just the result of the explosion of a star. I believe that with all of the arguments presented that I have done a sufficient job in arguing in the favor of the existence of God. Works Cited Ariew, R., & Watkins, E. (1998). Modern philosophy: An anthology of primary sources(2nd ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. Co. Descartes' Life and Works (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). (n.d.). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes-works/ St. Thomas Aquinas. (1920). Summa Theologica (2nd ed.).
Thomas Aquinas, a leading scholar of the Middle Ages, argued that “Everything in the universe has a cause. Trace those causes back and there must have been a First Cause that triggered everything else. God is that First Cause.” This was known as his “First Cause” argument.
To infer God’s existence by ‘Argument from Design’, Rachel has taken the example of amazing things that are present in nature around us such as eye, the most complicated part of body system, the way eye is attached to the human body and the phenomenon by which it performs it function is astounding and such types of creations cannot be occurred randomly by chance. Although, it is only the creation of some intelligent designer. Whereas, in the case of evolution and intelligent design, the author put forward the “Theory of Natural Selection” given by Darwin. In this theory, Darwin stated that evolution occurred among the species due to the changes in their environmental conditions and to adopt these changes, certain changes take place among the specific characteristics of the species in response to such environmental conditions. Therefore, through the process of natural selection, organisms passed their newly adapted characteristics to their off springs and then new generations born with such characteristics which help them to survive and reproduce in altered environmental conditions.
After reviewing these two different theories, intelligent design seems to be the more logical of the two. In nature there are endless examples of the complexities that would have required an advanced
There are several forms of the design argument. The general form of the design argument starts with the basic idea that certain parts of the universe are such that they indicate that they have been designed and have a purpose. The argument uses this fact to prove the existence of an ultimate designer, in particular, God.
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.
John Polkinghorne’s The Universe as Creation does its best to not convince the reader of Intelligent Design, but rather to dissuade the reader from the notion that although the is intelligently designed, but in this way, it has made science possible.
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.
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.
able to question the idea. It is also debatable as to whether or not a
The Moral Argument for the Existence of God Kant did NOT put forward a moral argument and anyone who said he does is wrong!!!! Kant rejected all attempts to argue from the world to God, he regarded such an exercise as impossible. However he thought that God was a POSTULATE of practical reason. If you share Kant’s assumptions, then it becomes necessary to assume that there is a God.
Traditionally, there are four primary arguments for the existence of God: the cosmological argument, teleological argument, ontological argument and the moral law argument.(Vlach) The term cosmological comes from the Greek word kosmos which means world. The cosmological argument for God’s existence is as follows: The world could not exist on its own so there must have been a first cause that brought it into being. This first cause is God. Or put another way, the universe could not just exist on its own—someone or something must have made it. This cause of the universe is God. The teleological argument is also known as the argument from design, the Greek word telos means purpose or design. The argument goes like this: The universe evidences great complexity or design; thus, it must have been designed by a great Designer or
Talking on both sides of the debate, each side feels as though the other has no scientific reasoning come up with their theory. In reading the article written by Shipman, the evolutionists believe that intelligent design has no concrete evidence on how the world was crea...
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.
many philosophers agree that a major weakness of the pragmatic argument is there is no way of
...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.