Existence Of God Book Report

in this world, and they are effects derived from a cause. The effects in turn

Modern debates over religion, more specifically God, focus primarily on whether or not sufficient evidence exists to either prove or disprove the existence of a God. Disbelievers such as biologist Richard Hawkins tend to point to the indisputable facts of evolution and the abundance of scientific evidence which seem to contradict many aspects of religion. Conversely, believers such as Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith describe the controversial aspects of science, and how the only possible solution to everything is a supreme being. However, mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal refused to make either type of argument; he believed that it was impossible to determine God’s existence for certainty through reason. Instead, he suggested that

There’s still a possibility today, that their theory of how the world was created can be incomplete. Why is it that you can believe what scientists tell us about and not believe that God exists? Others might argue that God was the one that gave us free will, so he could have seen evil coming, yet he still gave us free will. But, then how would he have let us have a voice if he had not given us free

Falsifiability- It appears throughout history claims can never be considered true until tested which can indicate the difference between God and Science. Wortham (2015) indicated, “The teacher has acknowledged Tyisha’s claim that animals have goals, but she goes on to argue from lines 555–567 that, while humans and animals both have goals of one kind, humans also have a second, distinctive kind of (‘‘long range’’) goal. By making a valid claim about animals’ goals, Tyisha has caused the teacher to revise her argument “(p. 5).

This writer was taught all through school about science. Man evolved, the universe was created by the Big Bang Theory. While this is what was taught in school, there was not much more thought past the basic concepts. While thinking about these theories, there are still questions to how evolution occurred, and who/what caused the Big Bang Theory. Therefore, God could be the answers to the unknown questions.

Once the foolishness of a religious idea is revealed by science, the religion soon disregards that as a part of their beliefs. It now becomes a part of science and leaves the realm of religion. The interesting bit is that even when ideas have been disproven in the realm of science, religion still seems to be plagued by belief perseverance. A Case that is heated between these two Magisterias is the age of the earth; science states that the earth is 4.54 Billon years old which was deduced from radiometric dating. On the other end of the spectrum the earth is claimed to be only 6000 years old which is evidently not true.

It is not possible for an infinite God to exist in a person’s finite understanding. The Christian God discusses frequently the concept of trusting him with all a person has. Trust is the basis of the Christian relationship with God. A way for God to want his people to trust him is by them not knowing and understanding fully his infinite being. If his followers know everything about him, then there would not be any need in relying on trusting God. Anselm gives another reason people’s finite minds not being able to understand. He breaks it down into people understanding God in their imagination and in reality. The problem with this break down is both imagination and reality are both finite. While an imagination might be able imagine a greater object than what exists in reality, both are still finite. When something or someone is infinite, it is always going to be larger than imagination and reality combined. Like with the number infinity, people cannot grasp where it begins, ends, or even the amount. That is because there is no beginning, no end, or no amount and person can pinpoint on it. The same goes with the concept of an infinite God. There is no beginning, end, or value that a person can grasp in their finite

Chapter four of the Roots of Wisdom describes three primary arguments for the existence of God, these arguments include an Ontological Argument, a Cosmological Argument and a Teleological Argument. All of these aforementioned cases express valid philosophies and rational theories, however they also appear to be incomplete, by that I mean to say, they lack the “hard evidence” in which our scientific community demands as proof that God exists. I could just as easily turn the table in the same direction, demanding that our scientific community present the same “hard evidence that God does not exist, however that course of action would only add to the ambiguous quest for truth and would in the end solve nothing. With that stated, it is my belief

Biology professor Kenneth Miller’s central argument is that science should not undermine one’s faith in God. “Science itself does not contradict the hypothesis of God.” He makes this argument by stating that science explains the things that God has made and in doing so, trying to prove the existence of God through natural or scientific means does not make sense. Once the supernatural is introduced, there is no way to use nature, thus science, to prove or disprove its existence. Miller argues that science gives us the window to the dynamic and creative universe that increases our appreciation of God’s work. The central point of his argument is evolution. Creationists, of the intelligent design movement, argue that nature has irreducible complex systems that could have only arisen from a creature or designer. This theory is widely supported among devout believers in the Bible and God. Miller argues that if they truly believe this, completely ignoring hard facts and theories, then they are seeking their God in the darkness. Miller, a Christian himself, believes that this “flow of logic is depressing”; to fear the acquisition of knowledge and suggest that the creator dwells in the shadows of science and understanding is taking us back to the Middle Ages, where people used God as an explanation for something they have yet to or want

The philosophical arguments presented in this document are not of religious text, nor scientific observation or established fact. Rather the premise of this God proof is bring together and share the various theories on which other God proofs have established foundations. I have heard it quoted that “Philosophy goes where hard science can 't, or won 't. Philosophers have a license to.” Therefore, with this in mind, I attest that it is more than problematic to construct an argument authenticating the unequivocal proof of the existence God. If nothing else this may be food for thought.

Aquinas says we experience causality Nothing is the cause of itself causes are other than their effects. There cannot be an infinite regress of caused causes. If there were an infinite regress, the effects we experience here & now would not exist. Therefore, there must be some first cause and this we call "God." There is also the law of argument by design, we naturally work towards a goal, we also lack the knowing of the outcome, but we reach our goal by being pointed in the direction, therefore there is an intelligent being pointing us in the direction and that would be proof of “God”.

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

The question is that is it possible to prove the existence of God in a strictly scientific? Answer is incredibly straightforward that there is no individual in the world who could come back with a solid proof whether God exists or not. One of the primary difficulties is the lack of a general characterization of the existence or nonexistence of which is required to be proved. First of all, for the benefit of further narrative, I would like to give the most general definition of "God" as far as possible including all possible variations. Consider our world as a great computer stylish game or a social network. For such a system may well be the one who designed it, created, wrote and performs systemic organization (Everitt N.p.). If you doubt the presence of Facebook creator and administrator of this network, it will look at least strange.

Throughout a majority of history up to this present date, we have come to rely on science as a means of explanation behind the reasoning behind many things: mathematics, chemistry, physics, and biology. When regarding the subject of a greater entity or supreme being, the quote “Where science ends, religion begins” can be used to explain that there are things in which science cannot possibly hold the answer to, and the only reasonable explanation behind these things point to a greater being. Acquiring this newfound knowledge has altered my viewpoint on God, going on to strengthen my faith and belief in God now that I had been presented with scientific proof that God must have existed. There have been times throughout my life where curiosity had overcome me and I found myself asking whether or not God had actually existed, and now that I have been presented proof that he exists, all of my doubts have been washed away. There are three major areas in our universe that science cannot provide an explanation for, and can only be proven to be possible if a greater being had come into play. These topics included: the beginning of the universe, the design of the universe, and the complexity of our DNA.

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 that God 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.