...prove God doesn’t exist”. This is the response one often hears when the question of God’s existence is raised. If God is not material, but spiritual, then science can’t prove that he exists, because he can’t be measured. Also, science can’t disprove, because it can’t give a definite answer. In this paper, I will present both sides of the argument and conclude that God must exist. First, I will begin by examining Augustine’s evidence supporting God’s existence. Then, I will lay out the opposing viewpoints. While I present Augustine’s evidence, I will give special attention to his primary argument which is based on the fact that if there is something superior to reason, then it must be God. We are not asked to believe in God on the basis of faith alone, without any evidence, but we can indeed prove the existence of God to a reasonable degree of certainty. Even though we can prove that God exists with a reasonable amount of certainty, I ponder whether or not there is a sound argument for the nonexistence of God. I order to prove anything; we must first start with a foundation that must be accepted as truth. Augustine begins with the platform that we exist. Augustine makes this clear to Evodius by saying “It is obvious that you exist, and this could not be obvious unless you were alive, therefore it is also obvious that you are alive” (33). The mere fact that we can argue is a proof of our existence. Next he asks whether or not we are alive. We must also agree to this because in order...
Words: 1048 - Pages: 5
...then we have to accept that God created us for a reason and wants to forma relationship with us, this has its negativites however. IF we accept that then we must accept that all atrocities that have occurred have happened and God has no qualms with it happening. The support for viewing God as a creator comes from the Book of Genesis. The mention of God in this book has led to the belief that God created the world “ex nihilo” or out of nothing. In Genesis it is also implied that God wants to have a relationship with his creation because he has given them a list of commands to follow (the Ten Commandments.) This draws a parallel with the Aristotelian idea of God as more of a prime mover. This would make God an external agent working with matter, nor is he an agent over against other agents. This two ideas contrast here because if God were to not be against other agents, he would not have banished Lucifer, as it is told in the bible. Another point of conflict between these two ideas of God lies in the problem of evil. If we accept the traditional idea of God as a master craftsman we must accept that he himself made all things in the world and therefore they must be perfect. This however leaves us confused when evil arises as it does not explain the existence of evil, ugliness and less perfect forms such as disease and disability. Moreover, If God created the universe and everything that happens within the universe including evil and suffering. Since in Aristotle’s theory of God...
Words: 885 - Pages: 4
...McCloskey tried to show that atheism is a more reasonable and comfortable belief than that of Christianity. McCloskey argued against the three theistic proofs, which are the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument from design. He pointed out the existence of evil in the world that God made. He also pointed out that it is irrational to live by faith. According to McCloskey, proofs do not necessarily play a vital role in the belief of God. Page 62 of the article states that "most theists do not come to believe in God as a basis for religious belief, but come to religion as a result of other reasons and factors." However, he feels that as far as proofs serve theists, the three most commonly accepted are the cosmological, the teleological, and the argument from design. It is important to note that he considers these arguments as reasons to "move ordinary theists to their theism." (McCloskey 1968) This is not necessary the case and contradicts the former statement that most theists do not hold to these proofs. As such, the attempt to dispute these arguments as a reason not to believe in God is almost not worth attempting. If theists do not generally hold to these proofs as reasons for faith, then why bother trying to dispute them to theists? Continuing to do so seems as though he is motivated to prove a point few are not interested in disputing, and thus is purposely trying to set up theist belief as ridiculous; in other words, he is looking to pick...
Words: 2073 - Pages: 9
...an article titled “On Being an Atheist,” written by the Australian philosopher H.J. McCloskey, atheism seems to do just that. In fact in his article, McCloskey not only bashes the classical arguments for God’s existence using the problem of evil, but also offers it as the reason why one should not hold to the belief in all-knowing, all-good, all-perfect, all-powerful God. However, as seen in the arguments against McCloskey’s beliefs in atheism, such a belief is not only a sin against God, but has devastating effects to all of mankind. McCloskey claims that arguments, named “proofs” in his article, offer no significant evidence to establish a case for an omnibenevolent God, and therefore should be disregarded.1 However, McCloskey is using the classical arguments the wrong way and in a manner they were not designed to be used. The problem with referring to the classical arguments for God’s existence as “proofs” implies a sense of certainty. These arguments were not meant to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of God, as McCloskey believes. Rather these arguments take a best explanation approach for the existence of God. They simply argue the best explanation man has for certain effects within the universe is the existence of God. That is not to say the existence of God is the only explanations for these effects. These arguments are certainly defeasible, meaning there is a possibility one could be wrong about these arguments and/or one could provide a counter claim that...
Words: 2208 - Pages: 9
...The Problem of Evil William Lane Craig Examines both the logical and probabilistic arguments against God from suffering and evil. The problem of evil is certainly the greatest obstacle to belief in the existence of God. When I ponder both the extent and depth of suffering in the world, whether due to man’s inhumanity to man or to natural disasters, then I must confess that I find it hard to believe that God exists. No doubt many of you have felt the same way. Perhaps we should all become atheists. But that’s a pretty big step to take. How can we be sure that God does not exist? Perhaps there’s a reason why God permits all the evil in the world. Perhaps it somehow all fits into the grand scheme of things, which we can only dimly discern, if at all. How do we know? As a Christian theist, I’m persuaded that the problem of evil, terrible as it is, does not in the end constitute a disproof of the existence of God. On the contrary, in fact, I think that Christian theism is man’s last best hope of solving the problem of evil. In order to explain why I feel this way, it will be helpful to draw some distinctions to keep our thinking clear. First, we must distinguish between the intellectual problem of evil and the emotional problem of evil. The intellectual problem of evil concerns how to give a rational explanation of how God and evil can co-exist. The emotional problem of evil concerns how to dissolve people’s emotional dislike of a God who would permit suffering. Now...
Words: 3493 - Pages: 14
...Since time commenced, people have questioned and debated the problem of evil and why evil exists. If evil is the spiritual balance of good than without the presences of evil, we would not know the genuineness of good. This belief may be explained by the contrast theodicy that God may have reasons for evil in society. An example of a contrast theodicy would be that bad things happen to good people and is the connection between evil and God’s intent of good. People also question why God does not take away the suffering of people from the world. Again, a theodicy can give an explanation to this question. The big-plan theodicy explains that suffering may be part of God’s big plan and needs to happen for good of humanity. There are two...
Words: 1849 - Pages: 8
...Chapter IV. Doctrine of Knowledge Problems of Epistemology The first philosophical problem confronted by Augustine after his conversion was the problem of knowledge in a twofold perspective. * Whether we know the truth. * How we know the truth. The first response to the first problem is a severe critique of skepticism. His response to the second problem is the doctrine of illumination, which substituted the platonic doctrine of the reminiscence and which the Aristotelian doctrine of abstraction. A. CRITIQUE OF SCEPTICISM: MAN KNOWS TRUTH * Augustine shows that man can know the truths with firmness, such as his principle of non contradiction and of course his own existence. No one can doubt his own existence, because the doubt itself is the proof of existence. Meaning how a person will doubt something that doesn’t exist, everything that is doubted it is existing. When one doubted something meaning he doubts an existing object. * “I am most certain” St. Augustine states, “of my being, knowing and loving; nor do I fear the arguments against these truths of the academics, who say, ‘and what you deceive yourself ‘if I deceive myself that means that I am, I exist. Certainly he who does not exist cannot deceive himself; if I deceive myself then through this very fact I am. Since I exist, from the moment in which I deceive myself, how can I deceive myself about my being when I am certain that I am, through the fact itself that I deceive myself? Therefore...
Words: 2273 - Pages: 10
...strong statements against the belief by asking the atheist to provide sufficient proof that God exists. However, McCloskey is not the only person who is unsure and asks questions God’s existence based on personal beliefs or influence. From the beginning many people have had questions about God and his existence. He wrote numerous books on atheism between 1960 and 1980 including the famous book, God and Evil. This paper evaluates the credibility of McCloskey’s article “On being an Atheist”. One of the McCloskey’s core arguments against theism is his demand for any proof that ascertains theists’ beliefs on God’s existence. He believed that atheism is more comforting than theism because most Christians do not believe in God because of proof but because of certain reasons and factors, he is looking for more solid evidence in God’s existence. However, there are several reasons why a person should believe in the existence of God. Firstly, theists believe that God is the creator of all things and of nature. Therefore, God is the creator of all things in existence and that affect both the atheists and theists are affected by this. The Bible also states, that Koran and other religious literatures all communicate the existence of a high power with some similar characteristics. These writings have been in existence for several years without any alteration of which both theists and atheists draw their arguments. Therefore, to some point, atheists have to believe that God exists in order to make...
Words: 1660 - Pages: 7
...debated between mainly two types of beliefs: atheism and theism. Obvious to every individual, “God” cannot be seen, heard, or touched. Scientifically, there is no concrete proof of God’s existence. Simply, an atheist would assert that God does not exist due to scientific reasoning and logic and Rowe’s argument from evil. However, a theist would refute the atheist’s argument with Paley’s design argument and Swinburne’s free will defense. Ultimately, what can truly be known about God’s existence? God’s Existence Versus Logic From an atheist’s perspective, there is no evidence supporting God’s...
Words: 1208 - Pages: 5
...Is the existence of God logically consistent with the existence of evil? The existence of evil is a seemingly irrefutable fact of life, one which Davies considers to be “the most discussed topic in the philosophy of religion.”1 This presents the theist with a dilemma, forcing them to make attempts at reconciling the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent and wholly good God with that of evil. Kreefy stresses the extent that this ‘problem of evil’ challenges theism, going so far as to claim that “more people have abandoned their faith because of this problem than for any other reason.”2 In the course of this essay, I intend to show that the existence of evil gives one sufficient cause to doubt traditional theism; and that one is rationally justified in doing so. In order to achieve this end, I shall identify the problem of evil, evaluating some of the major defences and theodicies proposed by theists and ultimately demonstrating that such attempts at accounting for the existence of evil are neither adequate nor convincing. The problem of evil is presented in two distinct modes; these being the logical argument from evil and its evidential counterpart. The logical problem of evil stems from the “contradiction involved in the fact of evil, on the one hand, and the belief in the omnipotence and perfection of God on the other.”3 At first glance, this contradiction is merely implicit, being made explicit through the presupposition that if God were a wholly good being, then He would...
Words: 2152 - Pages: 9
...Counter-Argument Towards J. L. Mackie’s Evil and Omnipotence In “Evil and Omnipotence” J. L. Mackie argues that God does not exist because of his idea of the 3-0-God which states that God has to be omniscient, omnipotent and omni-benevolent to fulfill the properties of a true God. Perhaps the strongest argument that Mackie gives is that God can only be two out of the three properties in order for evil to exist thus stating that god cannot exist because he does not fulfill all three properties. In this paper, I will argue that this argument fails because Mackie is basing his points on his own thoughts about God. Mackie starts out his argument by stating that the problem of evil proves that either no god exists or at least the god of Christianity, Judaism and Islamic does not exist since the problem of evil provokes the three properties of God. Mackie supports this claim by saying, “These additional principles are that good is opposed to evil, in such a way that a good thing always eliminates evil as far as it can, and that there are no limits to what an omnipotent thing can do.” (Abel p.91) and concludes this claim with, “…propositions that a good omnipotent thing exists, and that evil exists, are incompatible.” (Abel p.91) Adequate solutions are also what backs up his major point about the problem of evil and states that God cannot be all knowing while being all-powerful and all-good because evil exists and would mean that God is unaware of evil in the world. God can be all-knowing...
Words: 1136 - Pages: 5
...Explain the role of the following in the rise of atheism * Science * Evil Atheism is when someone doesn’t believe in the existence of God. There are two types of Atheism negative and positive atheism. The negative atheism is when someone have no knowledge about God and doesn’t believe in it; while on the other hand the positive atheism is when they have the knowledge but still doesn’t believe in God. Over the years things started to change, Science came and people now have better understanding of things around them. These have made a major impact on people’s faiths and believe, which has caused an increase of atheist people. Back in the old days, everything was seen as either a miracle or a punishment from God. But since Science came along, it gave an explanation for why things happen and supporting it with evidence. This had made people question the existence of God, because God became no longer ‘the explanation’. For example: At first people thought that God had created the universe, but then Science came and argued this fact with a theory called the Big Bang theory, which is the explanation for how the universe started. Stephen Hawking said: “ Before we understand science, it is natural to believe that God created the universe. But now science offers a more convincing explanation”. What he means is that there are no evidence that proves that God did create the universe, but science do. Therefore Science is much logical than believing in God. Here when the rise...
Words: 952 - Pages: 4
... it will be the existence of god. In debating the existence of god, we must consider all arguments for and against whether or not god exists. The most commonly debated argument when arguing against god is the problem of evil. Evil is defined as the existence of human pain and suffering. If there is a god, and this god is all loving, all knowing, and omnipotent then how can there be evil in the world? How could a god allow human pain and suffering where seemingly none is deserved? There are many arguments retorting to this, but two stand out. First, God created the best possible world. Evil plays an important role in our world, the world is better off with some evil than it could be with no evil. Second, moral evil on our planet is due to human free will. Since God gave us freedom, which is a necessity of a perfect world, it is the fault of humans that moral evil exists. It is the combination of these two arguments that prove god and evil can coexist. In disproving the validity of the “problem of evil” we only need to prove the possibility that god could coexist with evil. We should also note that there are two different types of evil; natural evil which includes natural disasters, and moral evil which involves humans causing pain and suffering upon other humans. Abler 2 Evil is in the eyes of the beholder. If you are a Theist, you believe that evil is wrong and God is all powerful and is able to rid the world of its evil. If you view evil as the way David ...
Words: 1367 - Pages: 6
...world to be the best of all possible worlds, since God, as a benevolent deity, would not have created anything different. This is a difficult assumption for the modern reader to digest, as we are surrounded by examples of evil every day in the news. Leibniz proves the existence of God by a priori and a posteriori arguments. Leibniz declares that there are two kinds of truth: truths of reason, and truths of fact. Truths of reason are a priori, while truths of fact are a posteriori. Truths of reason are necessary, permanent truths, and proceeding from a known or assumed cause to a necessarily related effect (deductive). Truths of fact are contingent, empirical truths relating to or derived by reasoning from observed facts (inductive) (Davidson, 91). Both kinds of truth must have a sufficient reason. Truths of reason have their sufficient reason in being opposed to the contradictoriness and logical inconsistency of propositions which deny them (Davidson, 93). Truths of fact have their sufficient reason in being more perfect than propositions which deny them. The Priori on pre-established harmony in so far as such harmony demands an author, and this is God. The posteriori explains everything that exists must have sufficient reason for existing, and this reason is God. (Davidson, 96) Leibniz used the Monads to expedite his theory of God’s instilled harmony. His best known contribution to metaphysics is his theory of monads, as exposited in Monadologie (Monads). Monads are to the...
Words: 2180 - Pages: 9
...The concept of religion itself is extremely complex and has been in existence for ages. Religion has been used as a mode of connection with a higher order being in order to have bliss in life and afterlife. There are different perspectives by many philosophers who argue about the controversial topic- existence of God. Some philosophers believe that due to the existence of evil and suffering in our world, it poses a serious challenge to the belief in the existence of a perfect God. In this paper however I am not concerned with the question whether God exists or not but I rather will be discussing the Western concepts of God as well as the Eastern one, followed by the dual existence of a higher being and evil. I will also emphasize on Immanuel Kant's perspectives on religion and radical evil as his views intrigued me the most among all the other philosophers, mentioning my own belief on religion and God. Western thought about God has fallen within some broad form of theism. Theism is the view that states there is a God, which is the creator and one who sustains the universe and is unlimited with regard to knowledge (omniscience), power (omnipotence), extension (omnipresence), and moral perfection. Western philosophy has interfaced most widely with Christianity, Judaism and Islam has also had some influence. The orthodox forms of all these three religions have embraced theism, though each religion has also yielded a wide array of other views. The western concept of God reveals...
Words: 2120 - Pages: 9
