Divine Creationism: Proving The Existence Of God

The conclusion is there is God. A theoretical proof for the existence of God, then, is only intended to mediate a reflexive awareness of the fact that man always and inevitably has to do with God in his intellectual and spiritual existence, whether he reflects upon it or not, and whether her freely accepts it or not (Sabourin, 1986, p. 32). It is what you believe. For believers, God is the explanation of why there is anything at all: why there is intelligibility, why there is freedom (Brown, 2012, p. 4). You desire to believe in God; you want that in your life. It is probably hard for some people not to believe in God. They may have had disappointments in life, tragedy, or not been taught about God. I think so many people have doubts

In the world we live today we are making new and profound scientific discoveries everyday but there is a realm that is untouchable for the scientific field which is the realm of religion. In Dr. Amir Aczel’s book Why Science Does Not Disprove God, he argues against scientists such as Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins who attempt to refute the existence of god using different sciences. Dr. Aczel clearly notes that the purpose of this book is not to prove the existence of god but rather to state that science has not disproved god and will not disprove god.

The famous William Paley has a different ontological argument within his text Natural Theology. The title of the reading gives insight to the theory, which focuses on something called natural design. The writing is based on an intricate and extensive analogy between the man made and the natural. For instance, Paley describes a man made watch in great detail. This intense detail sets the notion that each piece must have been put in place by someone, whom we can infer is a watchmaker. He then compares this to the intricacy of nature, which must have been made by a supreme diety. Such complexity could not have come about by chance. Only the most

Descartes’ ontological argument is an echo of the original ontological argument for the existence of God as proposed by St. Anselm in the 11th century. To illustrate the background of the ontological argument, Anselm’s argument works within a distinct framework of ontology that posits the existence of God as necessity by virtue of its definition. In other words, for the mind to conceive of an infinite, perfect God, ultimately implies that there must indeed be a perfect God that embodies existence, for perfection cannot merely exist as a mental phenomenon. God is, according to Anselm, self-evident in the mind. Criticisms to this argument can be found in Anselm’s contemporary, Gaunilo, who argues that such an argument can be used to - put

And yet, intelligent design theorists and Creationists look at nature and see the work of a divine designer, God, a reflection of his intentional purpose to create the universe. Where their theories are flawed with no real proof, Darwin uses inverse thinking that suggests that important things can indeed stem from unimportant things. Instead of relying on unproven mysteries to prove that God created the universe, evolutionists have scientific evidence to prove that no God was needed to create the universe. As scientific knowledge grows and more evidence of evolution is found, the story of evolution gains more strength, giving atheists more rational reasons to believe that God did not create the

The Cosmological Argument, in my opinion, does provide "proof" that a God or Superhuman being exist. According Rowe (2007), the Cosmological Argument lies with the fundamental premise of Principle of Sufficient Reason or PSR (Rowe, 2007). However, Rowe would argue that no one has succeeded at showing  that PSR is an assumption that most of us share (Rowe, 2007, p.32). As far as "proof", I believe the argument does a "sufficient" job at proving God's existence using a logical argument of deductive validity. Deductive validity identifies the premise of the argument asking only one question, If the premises were true, would its conclusion have to be true (Rowe, 2007, p. 22). A yes or no answer to this vital question will help you to reach a conclusion.

Some Abrahamic theists claim that the harmony of the universe is proof of an intelligent designer. This argument is known as the teleological argument and has evolved from classical philosophy to modern theology. In addition, subscribers of the Abrahamic religions also hold that God has attributes that include omniscience, omnipotence, and benevolence. Fundamentally, God is all knowing, all-powerful, and all good. In contrast, God created a perfect universe that is in harmony, but occasionally practices miracles. Can the teleological argument, miracles, and God’s attributes coexist in a rational universe? This essay’s goal is to demonstrate that

The first strength of the design argument for the existence of God is that it argues that God is the best explanation for the apparent design in the universe. The only evidence needed is one to simply step outside, for it is clear to see aspects of the universe that are perfectly adapted to fulfil their function: such as the roots of trees. The argument is strong because all around us is evidence of purpose, order and suitability for human life. There is evidence of deliberate design all around us that are greater than the works of humanity can ever achieve, and this clearly points towards an intelligent, personal and infinitely greater designer. This designer is God.

The design arguments for the existence of God center on the principle that an intelligent designer, in this case God, has crafted our world so that each item has a purpose and significant meaning. Additionally, the world is a complex and sometimes enigmatic system of elements which work together to sustain life in a way that some argue is unlikely to have occurred by pure chance alone. Therefore, some philosophers credit a divine being as the source of this order and purpose in the universe. Furthermore, William Paley offers a version of the design argument in which he employs simple analogy between a watchmaker and God to demonstrate God’s presence. However, critics of this approach to proving God’s existence object to this simplistic analogy of the origin of natural components in the world and instead argue that an evolutionary perspective better explains the existence of such objects and therefore, for the sake of simplicity, a divine being does not need to remain in the equation. As a result, both the objections of flaws in the format of Paley’s argument and the needless inclusion of God as a designer cannot successfully be refuted by supporters of Paley.

The opposition to this theory comes in part from those whose religious beliefs are contradicted by it, those who claim that evolution is “just a theory,” and claim it is not a sound science because of the label. To understand that evolution is true and reliable, the definition of the word theory in a scientific context must first be understood. In Richard Dawkins’ “The Greatest Show on Earth,” this is explained, ”The Oxford English Dictionary gives two meanings… Theory, Sense 1:... a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the known facts… Theory, Sense 2: A hypothesis proposed as an explanation: hence, a mere hypothesis,speculation, conjecture…” It is proposed in this book that scientists and creationists are using these definitions in different contexts. Creationists use the second sense of the word theory, meaning a speculation of no value, and scientists use it in sense one, that of a proven hypothesis. In science the word theory is surpassed only by the word law in the sense of conveying certainty. In science, a theory is a hypothesis that has never been disproven, such as the theory of gravity. Evolution has been proven many times over through both observation and experiment, which is the reason it is taught in public schools. Though it has uncountable examples, only a fraction will be mentioned. Transitional fossils are one of the major concerns on the part of creationists. They use gaps in the fossils record to argue its unreliability. Transitional fossils are the species that lie in between the transition from one species to its ancestor or descendant. When these fossils are missing, it can seem far-fetched for a whale to develop from a land dwelling dog like animal, but when the fossils in between these two species are discovered, the transition becomes clearer. Though

Existence of God as a perfect being who has created the world has always been the subject of continuous debate for the scholar people and philosophers. During the history many different arguments have been proposed for the existence of God. Some of these arguments are based on science, some based on history and some based on philosophy. Two of the most important philosophical arguments in this matter are the ontological argument and cosmological argument. Each of these arguments tried to proof existence of God in different way.

This argument contends that an intelligent designer of the world does exist, and structured the universe so that most natural things fit together for a clear purpose. We can recognize that things in nature seem to be made for specific reasons that are too fortunate to be accidental. For instance, we observe that giraffes have extremely long necks and conveniently eat from the tops of trees. We can also identify that planet earth is just the right distance from the sun and moon to sustain human life. If either of these things were less ideal, there would be drastically worse outcomes for the giraffes and humans on earth. The harmony we witness in nature compels the belief in an intelligent designer.

While a person may not have the ability to argue the experiences of another person, one can certainly argue the differences in these reported experiences. Accounts from different people, who cite various experiences, creates an argument against the existence of God, based on religious experiences. Utilizing these inconsistencies, people attempt to refute the existence of God by outlining these inconsistencies with various reports of the people claiming to have received these experiences (Holt, 2008). Persons who are skeptical of the religious experiences to support God will look to find inconsistencies within the stories of those reporting these experiences. However, to the believer, variances are a way of action for God. None of the miracles performed within the Bible were performed in the same manner. While the overall miracle may have been the same, the manner in which it was performed may vary. As an example, Jesus healed two blind men in vastly differing ways. One man, Jesus spat in the dirt to create mud, then rubbed the mud on the man’s eyes and instructed him to wash in the pool of Siloam, to which the man

Throughout the course of this essay we shall examine two of the major philosophical arguments for the existence of God. The arguments that we are going to focus on shall be the Design argument and the Ontological argument. We shall compare, evaluate and discuss both the Design (or teleological) argument for the existence of God and the Ontological Argument for the existence of God, as well as highlighting philosophical criticisms of both theories too. By doing so, we shall attempt to draw a satisfactory conclusion and aim gain a greater understanding of the respective theories and their criticisms of each theory.

If the question was posed as to what is the debate between creationism vs. evolution consist of, the thought that it is ‘“God did it” vs. “Natural processes did it,”’ (Scott, 2004) may arise. Science cannot absolutely prove or disprove Creation or Evolution. Yet scientist and the remainder of society use creationism and evolution to prove our existence. Creationist believe in the Christian account of the origin as recorded in Genesis. Creationism is the belief that statements such as “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (NIV) found in Genesis 1:1 and also “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (NIV) found in John 1:1. Evolution is the belief that everything just changed over