The statement “God is omnipotent” raises more issues and complexities the any other three-word sentence, not least due to the disagreement over what omnipotent actually means. A long side this, numerous contradictions, incoherencies and philosophical problems arise, all of which lead me to conclude that man’s traditional conception of God is simply an impossibility.…
If the world is full of horrors, does God really exist? At the beginning of the work it is clear that his belief in a benevolent God is unconditional, and he cannot imagine living without faith in a divine power, but this faith is traumatized by his experience during the…
In the grand scheme of humanity, much of its existence has been spent pondering just how much control a God could even have in a world that has given so much trouble and torment to the inhabitants of a tumultuous planet. Humans have been without a doubt the most dominant species to exist on the planet, establishing domain over every facet of life that has come across our paths. It is almost this very reasoning that has left humanity wondering about this higher being called God, chiefly because there must be something that is able to transcend even the capabilities of even the most intellectual creatures on this planet. As C.S Lewis says in his Abolition of Man, “At the moment, then of Man’s victory over Nature, we find the whole human race…
For centuries, the idea of god and his relationship with human beings has been altered and adjusted according to the beliefs of different people. God has been molded to fit the beliefs of Christianity, Islam and redefined in Judaism. To some, God does not exist and to others, God is heaven and earth. To stoic philosophers like Epictetus, god is a playwright who assigns a role for each and every living thing, instilling himself as the rationality to all things like a conscience. To Christian, Judaism, and Islamic followers, God is an almighty divine being who is capable of both miracles and devastation, and one who must be obeyed, as seen in Genesis. These two Gods, who both hold the power to predetermine our lives, differ in the idea of free will and the practicality of it.…
First, some atheist arguments that may be brought up in the beginning is as follows: God is omnibenevolent and would thus desire to eliminate evil, and God is omnipotent and thus could eliminate evil. Evil exists in the world, thus God does not exist since evil exists. This is a common argument that may come up about the existence of evil in the world. Most of the evil in the world only occurs because we choose to create it. When God created the world he gave each individual free will instead of creating people who could not make choices of their own. The consequence of this is that some individuals may choose to abuse their freedom, but this price is worth having to pay so that human beings can have genuine freedom. Ultimately, God has his own good reasons for allowing suffering and evil to exist…
The mere existence of a greater being, God has been a debate for longer than almost any other scientific in history. We are told that McCloskey refers to arguments as proofs and often implies that they cannot definitively establish the case for God, so therefore they should be abandoned. He says that because these arguments/debates, have no proof he dismisses the term argument and refers to them as “proofs”. McCloskey states that theists do not believe in God because said proofs but rather than as a result of some other significant change in their lives. Because of the fact that we cannot “prove” God exists we should not believe in such an all-powerful being. There are no proofs in Scientific Method’s either. In conducting a scientific method, the goal is not to prove a theory but merely to evidence that a theory has the potential to be correct or incorrect. Does this information mean that science is wrong? There are different proofs such as ontological proofs which carry no weight with the theist. There are three proofs cosmological, teleological, and argument from design. Theism feels there must be a cause or a “creator, someone who brought things into being and hold everything in his hands.” They believe in design and purpose which necessitated the belief in God. He states if you know nothing about evolution it is easy to misconstrue our adaption for the environment as design and purpose. He states theism is a comfortless, spine chilling doctrine. I believe the proofs are needed for a theist. The mere existence of the world constitutes no reason for believing in such a being. The cause of the universe must be necessary because they claimed God is the reason for the existence. All things are contingent, why do they exist? This will be incomplete unless there is necessary being (a being that existence requires no explanation). There are three common objections to the argument. Temporal versions which does not know the age of the universe, so they suggest the…
Imagine having no limits, no limit on anything. This includes the power to create anything, be anything, anyone who you choose to be. Conjure up any idea possible and think about what it would be like to be able to do it with no remorse, no questions, no restraint. A plan so unimaginable not any other person could comprehend it. A person so strong no army could stop them. Imagine being so immense they're unavoidable. It can be hard to fathom anyone being so dominating, so in control. In a way that is true because the only thing that fulfills these qualities above is the God Almighty. God in every way has the attribute of infinity, He is outside of time, He has always existed, and lastly he knows and controls all things.…
I found William Paley’s design argument in The Watch and the Watch-Maker the most compelling and thought provoking because I thought he had an interesting point symbolizing the watch as the universe and the watch-maker as the universe-maker or God. Paley doesn’t give a scientific explanation, but instead bases his work on observation and logical thinking unlike Robin Collins’s argument in his work, A Scientific Argument for the Existence of God, which is supported by quantum physics etc. Paley comes up with eight main points that supports his view on the existence of God. Some of his points, however, are repetitive and is based on speculations rather than clear evidence. His ideas are based on the concept that the complexity of a watch should be made by a supernatural being since nature cannot make intricate designs on its own. As much as I find Paley’s design argument the most compelling, I do not share the same view as him regarding the existence of God because I believe that there isn’t enough scientific support for his argument. I do, however, agree with one of his statement “that its several parts are framed and put together for a purpose--that they are so formed and adjusted…” (63-64) There really are certain things in the world that seems unnaturally adjusted and formed such as the golden ratios in nature and the fibonacci sequence which is a mathematical pattern found in nature.…
Pascal says “If there is a God, He is infinitely incomprehensible, since, having neither parts nor limits, He has no affinity to us’’ (Pascal, 2). Throughout Pascal’s argument he makes the constant notion believing in order to gain finite happiness, how is it possible to know if God is willing to provide this infinite gain if he is infinitely incomprehensible? This critical mistake is the very reason Pascal’s argument doesn’t work, we just don’t have the knowledge to know about what truly happens after death. Pascal makes his argument for God by noting “you must wager. It is not optional” (Pascal, 3). In which one has the choice of believing in God or not to believe in God, whether we want to risk the chances of infinite happiness or to rot…
For this motion, although atheists and Christians have a different view of whether God exists or not, however they can both agree with this motion. Christians believe that God is infinite (above human experience), so there is no way of knowing him, and unlike humans he is not limited. God is often described as being transcendent (above human experience), inscrutable and unknowable so it’s impossible for humans to comprehend what he is like. Though atheists don’t believe in God and since it can’t be scientifically proved that he is real, there is no way of knowing what he is like, if he exists. In the Bible God is described as being loving but what sort of God allows bad things to happen, it can be argued that God is unpredictable. My last argument for this motion is from an agnostic point of view how can one know about what one has never seen, heard or experienced. The Bible conveys his teachings but there is no physical proof that he exists.…
Logically there is powerful and vastly intelligent designer who created the universe. In addition, the Designer who has fine-tuned this universe couldn’t be impersonal because he has created a universe in which man can sustain oneself and succeed; therefore God is not an impersonal God. In Scripture we read in Luke 12:7, He knows the very strands of hairs on our head. In Psalm 139:13 we read that He has knitted you together in your mothers womb. Lastly, in Jeremiah 1:5, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.” At the end of the day we can set aside the mathematics of the fine-tuned universe, look at the creation around us, believing that it is probable that an personal Being has created all this. A very personal Being set this earth into motion for His pleasure using each one of us as tools in His…
The argument that I have chosen for this assignment and feel more comfortable using when trying to convince an open-minded non-believer in the existence of God, is number 19 “The Common Consent Argument.” In my own words this argument argues that it is common that all individuals worship, respect, and admire God, many individuals has had their wrong opinion and been wrong their beliefs, and that everyone should believe in God and that God really do exist. It argues that there is some kind of God is intrinsic or innate and has existed deliberately in almost the whole humankind in history and if God didn’t exist, then God wouldn’t be as popular as he is. The strengths of the argument are that individuals all over the world people in God and a common part of the lives of individuals and their daily lives. Two of the arguments weaknesses are that it does not show the differences in the actual existence of some form of God and the desire that individuals have for God. The belief well-known in God can reflect the existence of God or the desire of the community for a protective force to have an answer for the hard questions, such as what happens after death and the reasons why it thunders. Another weakness is that the argument fit into place in a reasonable misleading notion misleading notion that is known as the bandwagon misleading notion. The attributes of God supported by the argument are: “For believing in God is like having a relationship with a person”, “God really is there, given such widespread belief in him”, “God is the result of childhood fears, that God is a projection of our human fathers: someone up there can protect us from natural forces we consider hostile”, and “God must be a cosmic projection of our human fathers.” I think that the argument might affect the non-believer intellectually and emotionally, because there are so many individuals who have their own view and their own opinions on God, many who believe that God really do exist and many who…
“Sixthly, he would be surprised to hear that the mechanism of the watch was no proof of contrivance, only a motion to induce the mind to think so.” (Page 56) William Paley confidently suggests that there must have been a designer to make such a complex piece of machinery due to the undeniable fact that, to make something so complex, a well thought out plan is needed. A watch has intricate components that have a distinct shape and position within the watch. According to Paley, all of these parts have not come together by chance because it would be unnatural for something with such a particular combination to occur. Based on this, someone must have used their intellect to plan the exact arrangement of these parts so that it comes together to serve a purpose. A watch is a complex device, but nature is even more intricate. With this in mind, nature must have a designer because everything regarding nature is complex and it is very unlikely to be created without contrivance. Convincingly, Paley came up with the notion that there must be a God or transcendent being that created the universe, as well as all of the nature within it due to the fact that it seems implausible for something so complex to have been created with no thought or planning.…
existence of god is highly improbable. I’ll put this argument in the simplest of terms. For…
Within our society, it is usually assumed that we have free will. If you were to ask a random person on the street, they would most likely respond to the question, "Do you have free will or is there Fate" with the affirmation that they make their own decisions, because God gives us free will. Yet in the assumption of the fact that God gave us free will, there is a logical disconnect that most people ignore. How can God exist in a world where we can change the outcome of a situation in a way that is unpredictable to God? It is my stipulation that the Judeo-Christian view of an omnipotent God and free will cannot exist together. Additionally, the believe in an omnipotent God necessarily affirms the concepts of fate, while the believe in free…