I believe that there is a true God who is involved in the world. If it would not be for our God who is keeping everything under His control, the world would cease to exist. God is the one who created this world. He is the only being who is eternal. God was not created. He created the world and continues to be very much involved in it. God created everything in this world from nothing. Then He formed man from the dust of the earth. After He formed man, He breathed into him the breath of life. This special way of creating man caused man to be a special creature formed in God 's image. In some world views, man becomes no different then the rest of creation. An example of this would be able to be found in naturalism. When we are looking at the world through the Bible, though, things change. One topic of discussion is whether we will live eternally from the time we have come into existence or not. Do we just go into oblivion or is their a way we still exist? Well since I base what I believe from the Bible, the Bible tells us that we will live forever in heaven or in hell depending on our decisions while here on earth. This leads us to the discussion of ethics. Is there any such thing and who comes up with them? Well, again I turn to the Bible. God is a holy and just God. He is also a loving God. God loved us and wanted to have a relationship with us. He also wanted someone who would worship Him. This is why God made man. Since God wanted someone to love
Thesis Statements 1. Because of man's ignorance and curiosity, arguments for the existence of God have been made over the years. Basically, these arguments are divided into two large groups i.e. logical and metaphysical. Actually, these arguments seek to prove that the existence of a being or having faith with at least one attribute that only God could have is logically necessary. 2. Believing and having faith in God will only resort to one thing–goodness. 3. Faith has something to do with one's conception about God. 4. The existence of God remains a matter of faith since it's difficult to "prove" God to someone who does not believe. 5. There are arguments that attempts to give information of what they know about...show more content...
The analogy just doesn't work. Second, some say that the theories of the big bang and evolution better explain the complexity in the universe. Third, some say that even if the teleological argument is true, it does not prove the existence of the Christian God.
3. Ontological Argument
The third argument for God's existence is the ontological argument. This argument is unlike the cosmological and teleological arguments in that it does not argue from evidence in the natural world. Thus, it is not a "cause and effect" argument. The ontological argument can be stated in this way: "God is the greatest being imaginable. One of the aspects of perfection or greatness is existence. Thus, God exists." Or put another way–"The fact that God can be conceived means that he must exist." This argument for God's existence was developed by the twelfth century theologian and philosopher, Anselm. It is based on Anselm's declaration that God is "that which nothing greater can be conceived." The ontological argument has been very controversial. Even many who believe in God's existence question its validity. A contemporary of Anselm named Guanilo responded to Anselm. Guanilo said that one could imagine a perfect island but that did not mean a perfect island exists. Others have said you can imagine a unicorn but that does not mean unicorns exist. Thus, many challenge the idea that
Get more content
God is good all the time. His love for us is never ending, but he longs to have a relationship with each of us. As humans there are many times God pours out his blessings and we don't even acknowledge them because we get to caught up in our selfish wants. God promises blessing over the Israelites and indeed he does bless them however, they were too preoccupied with their own desires that they didn't see God working in Israel. God blessed Israel time and time again, giving them food when there wasn't any. 1 Samuel 8:20 "Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles." The Israelites wanted what the other nations had, a physical leader, God wasn't good enough. Because the people wanted to pick their king and have it the way they wanted, God granted them with what they had asked for. In the eyes of the Israelites Saul would be the perfect King. Because Saul had victory over Nahash the Ammonite he was seen as an authoritive figure in Israel and the people rejoiced that he was king. He reflected qualities that seem fit for a king; handsome, physically fit, and battlefield material. Nonetheless Saul was missing something very important for a king; his trust and faith in God. For the reason that Saul was disobedient to God the kingdom began to fail. " Finally, Saul's disobedience to in following the divine command of exterminating the Amalekites caused Yahweh to reject him as king." ( the Book)
Bertrand Russell has arisen one of the most important issue, which attracts the psyche of every human being. The existence of god has been a question that has plagued mankind started to think logically since forever. People believe in God but when they are asked, have you seen god? The answer usually is negative. Like many other authors, Bertrand Russell had written an article on this controversial topic of "is there a God" in 1952. Before arguing on this topic, it is important to know the background of author. Bertrand Russell was a British philosopher, logician, essayist and also a social critic. He belongs to an atheist family and he had a large amount of research on these types of topics. Writing on these types of topics becomes biased no matter what your beliefs are. An atheist would try to prove the non–existence of God while a theist would try to prove God`s existence. Besides seeing, observing and hearing, there is a faith present in the heart of believer. Although, almost every religion claims that God exists no one has ever seen him, and it is in human nature that man believes only what he sees, still the people do believe in God because they cannot simply accept that this whole universe can be created on its own. However, since a lot of phenomena in the universe can be explained on the basis of science, and quantum mechanics in particular, hence, there is a large amount of people who do believe that there is no God.
The bigger question that Russell seems to handle Get more content
Persuasive Essay: Existence of God
The debate on the existence of a god has been a popular topic among philosophers. Thomas Aquinas, a famous Italian philosopher, provided a set of arguments that he believed proved the existence of a god, who brought the world into existence. These arguments provide a sound reasoning behind the existence of god upon the basis that there are a series of events and these events are somehow caused into being. Aquinas explains this uncaused first cause to be god. The first proof he makes in order to prove the existence of God, is in regard to the motion of the world. Aquinas observes that everything in the world changes and that, "everything that changes is made to change by something else," (Perry pg. 44). This statement is often refuted by the view that there may be an infinite chain of change that has been going on forever. In refutation to this, it can be said that we would not be able to account for the change/motion that we see in the world if there was an infinite amount of causation. If you trace back the causes of motion to their causes of motion and so on, you can relate it to looking at a line segment labeled from A to B. If you did this with the causes of objects you would find an infinite amount of causes and you would never get to A but you know A exists because there is a line segment. If there was not a first cause or starting point then we would not be able to account for the motion that we see around us. Some may make the
The book I read for extra credit was Is there a God? By Richard Swinburne. The book was originally published in 1996. The theme of the book is spirituality and God, Basically the struggle to believe in God. Richard Swinburne was born to two nonreligious believers and got a B.A. in Philosophy, politics and economics. His religious stance isChristianity. The book focuses on both a science and religious. The book is more set for a western religion view, which is Christianity, Judaism and Islam. The book talks about different types of science: physics, chemistry, psychology, sociology and physical science. There are several questions addressed or being assessed in this book. The main question asked is "Is there a God?". Some of the little questions
Get more content
Do You Believe in God? Do you believe in a higher power that cannot be touched or seen? Some people believe that there is a higher power known as "God" and others do not believe that someone can exist that cannot be seen or touched. God is known to be "Infinitely good" according to philosopher Saint Thomas Aquinas, but other philosophers such as Fredrik Bendz' do not believe that a God can exist because it simply is not logical. Everyone has their own reasons to why or why not God exists, but in this essay I am going to discuss why I believe in God, the evidence, philosophical position that is closest to my views, and the possible criticisms. In my own experience, I have to say that I do believe in God more than anything else in this world. I grew up in a Christian home since I was a little girl and I have always been involved in the church. Over the years I have found that many people have tried to explain why God cannot simply exist because He simply is not tangible. In my opinion I believe this to be false because I have learned that without God I cannot make it through the daily struggles that life brings me. Even though He is not "tangible" I feel Him all the time and I simply go on faith that He is real. Everyone believes in something that comforts them and that they believe happens to them when they die. I believe that even though I cannot see or touch God I know He is watching over me and keeping me safe. If someone were to ask me if they could convince me to
Proof Of The Exsistence of God Either God exists or He doesn't. There is no middle ground. Any attempt to remain neutral in relation to God's existence is automatically synonymous with unbelief. The question for God's existence is really important. Does God exist? Theology, cosmological, teleological and ontological arguments are all have ways to prove the existence of God. With all of these great arguments how can one deny that there is a God. There is a God and with these reasons I will prove that.
There are two types of theology discussed in chapter nine of Kessler "Voices of Wisdom," revealed and natural theology. Revealed theology comes from such sources as the Bible and according to St. Thomas Aquinas...show more content...
Cosmological arguments were started at the time the questions of the universe were first asked. The existence of motion to the existence of a first mover as the cause of movement, was argued by Aristotle. This first mover he called God. The reason for this was that nothing caused God to move yet God was responsible for the motion of all other things. Thisargument is based on presumptions in other cosmological arguments. The first was that something could not cause itself, second something cannot come from nothing, last there could not possibly be an infinite amount of cause and effects.
St. Thomas' view was of God is an infinite, all–good, all–knowing, all powerful, perfect being who created the universe and now has sole command over it. This view is known as theism. St. Thomas states that a first cause must be in order to have cause and effect now. For if we take away the first cause there would be no effect following there for the universe would have never been created which is impossible because we can prove the universe does exist. He also argues that there are things in the universe that have the possibility of existing and not existing, we have seen things that have existed and than destroyed, thus proving that there is the ability of being and not being. There was a time when
Get more content
An Argument for the Existence of God
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.
This paper's purpose is to prove the existence of God. There are ten main reasons that are presented in this paper that show the actuality of God. It also shows counter–arguments to the competing positions (the...show more content...
For such answers, science relies on the values of personal beliefs of those who use it. Science itself offers no moral guidance or values to govern our lives. All science can do is show us how natural law works, while telling us nothing about its origins.
Some have assumed that an evolutionary explanation of life would make God fiction. This overlooks some problems. Even if we assume that scientists will someday find enough ?missing links? to confirm that life appeared and developed gradually over great periods of time, unsolved theories would still show the need for a creator. As a result, many scientists who believe in evolution also believe that the universe in all of its immensity and complexity did not ?just happen.? Many feel compelled to acknowledge the possibility or even likelihood of an intelligent designer (God) who provided the ingredients for life and set in motion the laws by which it developed.
The next two passages are both taken from the Bible. They focus on how humanity has denied the existence of God only to prove to itself that there is and always will be a God. The two passages are, ?Mankind has been described as incurably religious. In unguarded moments of trouble or surprise, in prayer or in profanity, references to deity persist. Those who would dismiss such thoughts as bad habits or social vices are left with unanswerable questions. Denying the existence of
I grew up in a relatively religious family, however while I attended Catholic school, my family allowed me to form my own opinions and never forced me to think a certain way. In Catholic school I took religion class and we primarily learned about the history of Catholicism. There was never much debate or discussion about the existence of God. My teacher quickly shut down any questions that even remotely question the core beliefs of Catholicism. Without a sound explanation for why I should belief and also probably because of recent social trends I was skeptical of God's existence. However, this year I learned about several logical arguments in that support and against the existence of God. I have come to the conclusion that there is something greater than people, which created or prompted the creation of the universe. Something must have prompted the start of the universe and created life. Despite the fact that I am not confident that there is caring or intervening God, I believe that God exists. Plantinga's, Richard Swinburne's, and Thomas Aquinas' arguments convinced me to be more open and less skeptical in God's existence. Like theism, atheism is a belief that is not certain. Atheists can propose theories with logical reasoning but they do not know for a fact that God does not exist. Plantinga's argument from analogy explains that people cannot know for certain that other minds exist and similarly people cannot know that God exists. But despite the lack of proof, people
Get more content
God Does Exist!
P1: God is a maximally great being.
P2: If God is a maximally great being, then God is a necessary entity.
P3: If God exists necessarily, then God exists in all possible worlds.
P4: If God exists in all possible worlds, then God exists in our world.
P5: If God exists in our world, then God Exists.
C1: God Exists
My argument is a great argument. A maximally great being is defined as an entity who possesses all favorable attributes such as love and morality. These attributes also include necessity. A necessary entity is one that exists in all worlds and cannot be proven false, making it a favorable attribute. A square, for example, necessarily exists. The square cannot exist in our world with only three sides. Because it can't exist in our world with only three sides, it can't exist in all possible worlds. Therefore, a necessary entity cannot be false, and...show more content... However, this is considered to be logically absurd. By asking if a maximally great being can make a burrito so spicy, that even he can't eat it, is to imply that the definition of omnipotent is the ability to do the logically impossible. In actuality, the definition of omnipotent is to have a very great or almighty power, not to do what is logically impossible. It is similar to ask if God can create a square with three sides. The three sided square does not exist in this world. If it cannot exist in this world then it cannot exist in any possible world because the square with four sides is necessarily existing. If it cannot exist in any possible world, then it's logically incomprehensible and cannot be answered by anyone. You can't use a logical absurdity to disprove God's existence because the argument has to follow order. If my argument about God's existence has to follow logic and order, then so does a refutation trying to disprove God's
Get more content
The Mystery of God's Existence
The mystery of God's existence has been a crucial element of many religious studies and traditions.
Who is God? What is God? Where is God?
To effectively discuss the existence of God, it is necessary to illustrate the notion of faith. People of faith believe thatGod does exist, and that relationship with God gives meaning to their lives. Others who are skeptical point to God as an obsolete hope of an ignorant human race. People today live in a world distinguished by sophisticated technology in which modern science has been a strong agent in questioning the existence of God.
Although many cannot articulate their reasons for believing in the existence of God, their faith is nonetheless definite...show more content... Furthermore, Aquinas asserted that there exists an Intelligent One who designs and directs all things, and apart from whom the meaningful structure and ordered process of the universe would not be possible. Peter L. Berger, a modern sociologist, approaches the existence of God by suggesting empirical evidence from within an individual which he collectively refers to as Signals of Transcendence. Berger points out that we, as individuals, have an inclination to call for ultimate order; a trust that everything will be "alright." This, in itself, is a belief of something beyond "natural" reality.
On the other hand, philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach contended that God was merely a projection of our own nature to explain phenomenon. Karl Marx declared that religion was "the sigh of the oppressed creature, the feeling of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless circumstances. It is the opium of the people." Moreover, science has provided for a scientific framework to explain questionable aspects of our lives; Copernicius discovered that the sun simply did not travel around the earth, Isaac Newton's reflection on gravity explained many mysteries of the universe, and Charles Darwin's evidence of evolution questioned the literal acceptance of the bible's creation story. Science has forced believers to focus on God's apparent absence in the world. Consequently, many theologians have moved away from religious presuppositions about God, shifting their
As you go through life trying to live right, there will be tempters and seducers trying to get you off your Godly path, but your promise from God is that you will not stumble if you continue to walk and live righteously. I know that as a young person it is hard to find a peer who loves the Lord and wants to live Godly, even within your youth group at church, but if you can't find a peer with like passions as you, then your best action would be to stay in prayer asking God to keep you strong enough not to become enticed with what others are doing and not to walk like them in their path and way of living. God is a realistic, critical thinker and He already knows that you have to go to school with children who don't love Him or believe in Him. He knows that you must mingle with them to a certain degree while at school, but just be careful not to become like the bad crowd. A good practice would be to ask God to show you someone at your school whom you could minister to about your belief.
Hopefully that will bring in a few friends with whom you have something in common. I know that having friends is very important to you. Young people need friends, but they don't need friends. Think about it... are children your age mature enough to really be a good friend to anyone? There are very few young people who really know how to be a good friend. Children are often prone to turning on each other. So you really have acquaintances, not friends and you should view them as such. That way you
The Design Argument for the Existence of God
While theology may take God's existence as absolutely necessary on the basis of authority, faith, or discovery, many philosophers have thought it possible to demonstrate by reason that there must be a God. The teleological argument, also known as the argument from design quite simply states that a designer must exist since the universe and living things display elements of design in their order, consistency, unity and pattern. The argument says that things in the world move towards goals, just as the arrow does not move toward its goal except by the archer's directing it. Consequently there must be an intelligent designer who directs all things to their...show more content...
Many components of nature appear to be very finely tuned for this, and the odds against this happening by chance are astronomical. Criticisms against these are the principles of self–organisation and evolution which provide complete explanations for apparent design and the odds against all possible universes are equally astronomical, yet one of them must be the actual universe. b, The idea that God exists and that he is the architect to serve the purpose that the universe is designed proves subjective. Different observations in the natural world can produce different theories to account for their existence. Also, the proof is built on analogy, thus if we find there are things in the universe that are disordered, then by analogy, the would imply there is no designer. Another thing wrong with the argument is that it is not obvious that the universe or living things are intelligently designed. Science, such as physics and biology, can prove that not everything that has a design is intelligently designed: "There cannot be design without a designer; contrivance without a contriver ... The marks of design are too strong to be got over. Design must have had a designer. That designer must have been a person. That person is GOD" (Paley). This seems logical because objects, such as a watch or a computer, have a design and therefore somebody had to design it.
Get more content
God And The Problem Of Evil
Everyday it is possible to read a newspaper, or turn on TV or radio news and learn about evil going on in our world. Banks are robbed, cars are stolen, violent murders and rapes are committed. Somewhere in the world the aftershock of an earthquake is being felt. Cancer is killing millions of people each year, while other debilitating conditions continue to affect many with no cure to end their suffering.President Bush said that our country is fighting a war against evil. We all agree that evil is real and cannot be ignored; the problem comes when we try and rationalize the concept of God and evil coexisting.
Two types of evil exist in ourworld today. Natural evil occurs when earthquakes, hurricanes,...show more content... There is no guarantee that a free moral agent will never choose wrongly. For a person to say that God should not have created people with the ability to choose sin, is saying he should not have created people at all. J.L. Mackie contends that God could have indeed created beings that would act freely (but always right). If this had happened we would not be free, but more like robots. If God had created creatures of superior moral character but lacking the ability to choose, these creatures would not be what we call human beings.
How we view the presence of God and evil depends on why we believe the world was created. If man is a fully created creature then the world was created for him to live in, a comfortable, pleasant place. Our world is obviously filled with suffering, danger, hardship of all kinds, so an all–powerful God could not have created it. To Christians the world is not a paradise where one can experience the maximum of pleasure and a minimum of pain. The world is a place of "soul making" or person making. As we try and understand the challenges of our lives, and our environment we may become "Children Of God".
How different our lives would be if we lived in a world with no pain and no suffering. No one could ever again injure another person. The person with a gun filled with anger intent on killing another would find his bullets harmless. The drunk driver would no longer kill
Theist: There is a God
Atheist: No there isn't. God does not exist.
Atheist: God does not exist because of the problems of evil.
Theist: Please elaborate
Atheist: If God is an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient being, then evil shouldn't exist. But because evil does exist in this world, God is not all–good and does not exist.
Theist: Can you support your statement?
Atheist: Yes of course. Omnibenevolent means all–good. If God exist, an omnibenevolent
God would stop evil because he want too and its in his nature. Also, since an omniscient being is all–knowing, God knows how to put an end to evil, but doesn't. Because God is omnipotent, he has all the power in the world to stop evil, but doesn't. Therefore he...show more content...
Theist: If God made everything in the world perfect and there is no evil, how can we
grow as human beings? If God gave us a perfect world, are we not being controlled?
Atheist: How are we being controlled in a perfect world without evil?
Theist: Because God already chose our life for us by living in a perfect world with no problems. Without any evil, there is nothing for us to do.
Atheist: There is a lot of things to do in a perfect world ....
Theist: But will we continue doing the same things over and over again? We will get bored because there is no new things left in this perfect world. We might be happy at first with a perfect world, but soon we will grow bored and tired of it.
Atheist: What if God was wrong? What if I want a perfect world without evil? What if I want to repeat the same thing over and over again ?
Theist: No. God will not allow that. God believes that we need evil in our life. He wants us to carve our own life and not be destined for a meaningless life.
Atheist: So God thinks that having evil in life is a meaningful life?
Theist: Yes, God thinks that since there is evil in this world, we will face many
The existence of God has been in question for as long as mankind has existed and thought logically. Many questions have plagued the human mind in regards to God, and there have been many arguments drawn with the hopes of proving the existence of a supreme being whom we know as God. The "God" question has been presented to every individual at some point in their lives. It is a topic that will bring forth never–ending questions and an equal amount of attempted answers. Many philosophers have formulated different rationales when examining the topic of God, some of which include how the word itself should be defined, what his role is in human existence, whether or not he loves us, and ultimately, if he even exists at all. Mankind cannot...show more content...
Anselm in this case defines God as "a being than which nothing greater can be conceived" (Anselm 30). Ontological arguments tend to be a priori, which is an argument that utilizes thoughts as opposed to empirical evidence to prove validity. Anselm addresses the Atheist fool in an attempt to disprove him "since the fool has said in his heart, There is no God?"(Anselm, 30). Anselm stressed that it is obligatory to recognize God as a perfect being that cannot be improved upon, and if someone understands the concept of God, then God exists in that person's understanding. It is greater to exist in reality than just simply the understanding. The fool understands the concept of God. Therefore the fool has God in his understanding. Suppose God exists only in the understanding of the fool and not in reality. We could then think of something exactly as it existed in the fools understanding but it can also exist in reality, and the being we conceived of would be greater than the being that exists in the fools understanding. Therefore God exists not only in the understanding of the fool but also in reality. By showing that God exists in reality as well as in the understanding, we see that it is imperative that we should believe in God and that it is indeed reasonable. A cosmological argument focuses on the notion of causation and that everything in the universe including us must have an initial cause, for nothing comes from nothing. Thomas
Get more content
I would like to begin this paper with saying that I emphatically believe that there is only one God. I do not believe for the health of ones spiritual life that entertaining the thought or existence of multiple deities is an intelligent decision. Those that believe in multiplicity of Gods can be found in many different religions including but not limited to Christianity. I grew up being taught these false teachings about who God was and how he operated in the lives of his followers.
There is a misconception among many Pentecostals about what most 'Trinitarians' in the twenty–first century believe. Understand when I say this, I am not condoning their beliefs or teachings in any way, shape, form or fashion. I am simply trying to shine a...show more content... Later on in life I am introduced to what is commonly known as "Oneness" and I can see God for who He truly is when reading His scriptures. Reading through the Old Testament you will see scripture after scripture that refers to God as one. All in all it has been tallied and there are over three thousand in the Old Testament alone that refer to God as one. That fact alone should be enough to convince anyone that there is only One God.
As God moved on me through prayer and fasting He revealed scripture upon scripture in His word to me that showed the unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and how they were in no way separate but were truly in complete unity and harmony in everything that they done because they were one in the same.
I will at this point attempt to explain a couple of scriptures that moved me in my understanding of who God really is.
In John 4:7–11 Philip had just been told by Jesus that if he had known him then he knew the Father. Philips response was to ask Jesus to see the father and let him know that would suffice them all. What stuck out to me while studying and reading this and caused me to see Jesus was the father was Jesus' response. He was astonished that Philip didn't understand that He was the father. Almost as if He couldn't believe that Philip would ask such a question or even question him not being God. So Jesus 'dumbed' it down for them
The Existence of God
What we call religious experience can differ greatly. Some reports exist of supernatural happenings that it would be difficult to explain from a rational, scientific point of view. On the other hand, there also exist the sorts of testimonies that simply seem to convey a feeling or a peace of oneness– something which most of us, religious or not, may possibly relate to.
Firstly, I will consider the nature of an experience. Experience involves encounters which are empirical (testable via senses). We draw non–empirical conclusions about many things and people– that they have orange hair and are 5 feet tall, that they are lonely and confused. These conclusions are mainly...show more content...
This is known through testimonies of the recipients of these experiences.
In categorising religious experiences is helpful to look at them as explicable through one of two theories: the objectivist thesis or the subjectivist thesis.
The objectivist view supposes that there is some object or actual entity– such as god– which exists independently of the experience, interaction which causes the experience itself. God is described as numinous. This is a term often used to describe the experience in which God's separateness is highlighted. This was put forward by Rudolf Otto in his book The Idea of the Holy. Otto religion sprang from experience of the holly. Because the word numinous has many associations he used numen, something which is wholly other than the natural world
An objectivist would argue that the religious experience is a proof of God's existence. However, others have criticised the reliability of religious experiences. The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes asked how it was possible to tell the differences between talking to God in a dream, and dreaming about talking to God. The objectivist thesis is ultimately the most traditional viewpoint since it views God as 'object'– that is, something which exists independently of us (such as a table or another person). However,
Does God Really Exists The idea of God has been one of the most debatable issues since the dawn of humanity and with it guided as well as deluded most lives in the pursuit for the truth. The impacts springing from the notion of God has from time memorial changed history, inspired more poetry and music including philosophy more than anything else, imagined or real. Peter Kreft once concluded that "The idea of God is either a fact, like sand, or a fantasy like Santa" (Lawhead, p. 334). Over the cause of time, different arguments have surfaced within and without the philoshophical boundaries in an attempt to either explain the reality of the non–existence of a God. A few of these claims include the, cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the problem of evil. However, although both arguments are insufficiently conclusive in their arguments about God, the cosmological argument seems to speaker quite louder than the rest and thus forms the basis of this paper: it generates the conclusion that God exists based on fundamental considerations about the cause of the world and why there is something rather than nothing. To begin with, teleological argument posits God's existence based on the appearance of design. The Cosmological and the teleological arguments are both based on empirical or a posterior reasoning and have their roots deepened in philosophy history. On the contrary, the problem of evils supports the argument that God does not exist based on the presence
Get more content