Religious Experience As An Argument For The Existence Of God

Some of the three major arguments for the existence of God are cosmological, ontological, and teleological arguments. Cosmological argument is the reasoning that the being of the universe is powerful proof for the existence of a God who made it. There are two main forms of cosmological argument, the modal and temporal. Modal cosmological argument, also known as the argument from contingency, recommends that because the world may not have existed, we then need some clarification of why it does exist. When there is more than one likelihood, something has to decide which of the possibilities is understood clearly. Therefore the world is contingent, because there has to be a logical reason for its existence. This form of argument also claims that the only type of existence that doesn’t need any clarification is a being that does not failed to exist such as God. Temporal cosmological argument, also known as the Kalam argument, contends that all evidence are that there is a point in life at which the world began to exist, and that this starting must either have been caused or uncaused. The cosmological argument used by Aquinas declares that since nothing originates from nothing. Therefore the world must have been brought into reality by something outside it, which can be called "God".

The film God on Trial explores the controversy behind the existence of God and his goodness, in terms of the Jewish people and the Holocaust. One argument that is presented is that God cannot exist because he allowed the suffering of the Jews, despite the covenant that they shared; and if God did exist, then he could not possibly be good for the same reason. The other side of the trial that is presented is that God does exist, suffering is merely a test, and through faith the Jews and the Torah will prevail as shown in history. In actuality, this argument can be summed up in one sentence: God cannot be both all powerful and just. If God were all powerful then He would be able to put an end to suffering, and because he does not, He is not

Three Arguments for the Existence of God Many people debate about God’s existence. There are three arguments Christians use to prove God exists. These three arguments are the cause and effect, the design, and the moral arguments. Each argument shows a different piece of evidence for the existence of God. The Bible also gives evidence of God’s existence.

The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God The ontological argument is an a priori argument. The arguments attempt to prove God's existence from the meaning of the word God. The ontological argument was introduced by Anselm of Canterbury in his book Proslogion. Anselm's classical argument was based on two principals and the two most involved in this is St Anselm of Canterbury as previously mentioned and Rene Descartes.

Truth, what is truth? This question itself has a thousand answers, no person can ever be sure of what truth is rather, truth can be justified, it can checked for reliability with strong evidences and logic. If the evidence proves to be accurate then it can be established that a certain answer is the truth. However, have we ever tried to think about what intrigues us to seek the truth? To think about a question and set foot firmly on the path of knowledge. Definitely it has! That was the very cause itself which is why this world has witnessed some of the greatest philosophers like Aristotle, Plato and Socrates etc. along with the school of thought. The ability to think and reason is one of the greatest ability humans have, it is what

Examine some of the key principles of the argument for the existence of God based upon religious experiences

God’s existence, a debate that will continue on for centuries to come, or of course, until God comes back. There are numerous arguments for the existence of God; however, Christians have a difficult time effectively arguing with a non-believer because there are strengths and weaknesses of each argument. The moral argument attempts to demonstrate how one would even question the morality of something if there was no God. There is marvelous standard of which we hold ourselves to in order to separate good from evil and willingly avoid evil ways. There are two ways of analyzing which reality is correct, basically believe or not believe in God. However, the evidence remains there is a reason, an internal conviction that arises from something

A new eagerness and ideas of the awakened brought disagreement and isolation over the nature of religious experience. Edward researched the fruit of revival and his conclusion descried the revival in his own fellowship. He surfaced with a perceptive, doctrinal rooted plan of evidences by which improve participants might detect the true meaning of their religious experiences. He didn’t want to describe the mental and spiritual state of the awakened. He desired to establish signs of those who were restored by the spirt of God. “A sense of god’s beauty, sweetness, or holiness that saints apprehend or taste.” (Kling, 1) He later developed a new mindset to understand the renew work of God’s spirit. He defended the revival as God’s work by the legitimacy of the conversations. There was great and amazing work of conversations and debut among the people. He admitted that there were misconduct and glut but suggested advice of a writer. “He proposed “signs” by which an experience might be judged legitimately the

The ontological argument is a debate for God’s existence established absolutely on reason. According to this disagreement, there is no need to go out looking for physical confirmation of God’s presence; If we just believe we will be able to realize that he does absolutely exist.

Others make religion a mere projection of human wishes, a phenomenon that emerges at the

The argument from religious experience is the argument about the experiences of God to the existence of God. This argument is not an argument of if God exists or not. Instead, it is an argument that whether or not religious experiences prove that God exists. The argument expresses the fact that only religious experiences clearly shows the evidence for God’s existence. Do people claiming to have experienced God mean there must be a God?

For my project, I decided to discuss divorce with someone who has gone through it. By doing this, I selected questions to ask my interviewee regarding the divorce experience. I also found out whether faith played a role in her personal divorce process or not. My aunt Leonor De Leon is who I chose to interview for my project. Leonor became divorced a year and a half ago after being married for twenty-one years.

I believe that your statement “God affects a person’s thinking” is an important component of religious experience. Everyone’s individual experience is unique and I believe God tailors this experience to specifically what each person needs at the time. So many times people get caught up in ‘corporate religious experiences’ and then afterwards they are left wondering if they got swept away by the experience or if a meaningful experience really happened. The article When exorcists need help, they call him gives an interesting perspective on whether religion and science can mix (www.cnn.com). Studying the psychology of religion as a Christian may seem tricky, but I believe it is God who gives us all knowledge, including scientific. In the

a) Christians believe many different things about God’s nature; due to the huge spectrum of Christians that there are. However, as a general rule they perceive God as being one of the following four things:

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.