The Existence of God Essay

St. Thomas Aquinas, a philosopher who had a theory that everything that happened started with God, and he proposed the idea that he is the first omni-being. In this essay, I will be discussing Aquinas’s proof of the existence of God through his five ways and the two major problems that are wrong with his theory.

One burning and enduring problem in philosophy to which we have given considerable examination is the question of the existence of God--the superlative being that philosophers have defined and dealt with for centuries. After reading the classic arguments of St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas, the contentious assertions of Ernest Nagel, and the compelling eyewitness accounts of Julian of Norwich, I have been introduced to some of the most revered and referenced arguments for and against God's existence that have been put into text. All of them are well-thought and well-articulated arguments, but they have their holes. The question of God's true existence, therefore, is still not definitively answered and put to rest; the intensity of this

Thomas Aquinas was a famous philosopher and theologian from the 1200’s who dedicated his life to praising and explaining the existence of a higher being, God. Aquinas presents his evidence for the existence of a higher being through five distinct ways in the Summa Theologica. These ways give reason for God’s existence through the cause, existence and final cause of different events and objects. The two first ways made by Aquinas are the most influential sources I found that provide good evidence for the existence of God and are the ways I will be analyzing. Aquinas first way explains that there must be an unmoved first mover who initiates change in reality but is not itself changed while his second way explains that there is a first cause to everything, which causes a chain of causes that cannot go on to infinity. These two ways presented by Thomas Aquinas provide, in a way, some evidence up front for people to conclude that indeed there is a higher being who is God. However, Aquinas first and second ways need to be deeply explained and ridded of objections to truly convince everyone, instead of just some, that there is a being who is the unmoved mover and first cause of everything.

In this essay, I am going to argue that God exists. The three main concepts that I’m going to talk about which which are the problem of evil, the fine tuning argument and the moral argument. According to theism, God is: “that being which no greater is possible, and he is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent.”. By having a God who only desires good, and us living in a world where evil exists, it is logically impossible and that is what created the problem of evil. There are two sides of the problem of evil which are the logical and evidential argument. The logical side states that:

== == == == ==

In his Proslogion, written in 1077-1078, St. Anselm of Canterbury, introduced the first formulation of his ontological proof for the existence of God. In an effort to gain a deeper knowledge and acquaintance with his creator, Anselm set out to logically deduce God’s existence from the very definition of God. In the Proslogion he writes, “God is that which a greater cannot be thought. Whoever understands this properly, understands that this being exists in such a way that he cannot, even in thought, fail to exist” (Anselm, 101). Anselm uses this definition as the fundamental argument for his proof of God’s existence. He argues that if the “fool” or disbeliever denies the existence of God, he is still capable of understanding the definition of God, thereby God exists in his mind as a mental image but not necessarily in reality. However, since the very definition of God is “that which a greater cannot be thought” and surely what exists both mentally and in reality must be greater than what exists only mentally, then God’s existence in the fool’s thoughts must inevitably imply his existence in reality, as well. If that’s not true, than the thought the fool has cannot be of God, since if that thought only exists mentally then there must be something greater than it is and that goes against Anselm’s definition. Ultimately, according to Anselm’s definition, it would be self-contradictory to deny the existence of such a being.

The topic most discussed in philosophy is undoubtedly the one concerning the existence of God. If God exists, we probably have to make him accountable. The universe would probably have a meaning and a purpose. Also, our very existence may not be cease after physical death. But if God does not exist, we are probably here by chance and we have no accountability to any transcendent. This life is probably all we have, so we should live as we please. The question arises - "Does God exist?" At first glance, it seems contradictory to prove the existence of something that is elusive, ineffable, incomprehensible. How to prove the reality of a being who, by definition, is not given in phenomenal experience? My position is that it is impossible to prove the non-existence of God, since I believe that God exists. I would use it the cosmological arguments, teleological and Ontological to prove that God exists.

During the thirteenth century, a time when many religions ruled the world, philosophers were trying to figure out solid ground on proof that God exists or where he came from. Then came Thomas Aquinas, he provided five compelling arguments for the existence of God. First the argument of motion, second the argument from efficient cause, third the argument from necessary being, fourth the argument from gradation, and fifth the argument from design. While the five arguments have their strengths and weaknesses, the most compelling is the second argument and the least compelling is the fourth argument.

Therefore, there was some event En-1 that caused En and some event En-2 that caused En-1…

== == == == ===

God’s existence has long been a topic of controversy, one that spans the course of many centuries and––because of its nature––will never be resolved. Two notable philosophers have attempted to prove God’s existence: Saint Thomas Aquinas and René Descartes. Despite having been influenced by the former, Descartes’ arguments––while similar to Aquinas’––are reached through noticeably different methods.

== == == = =

I think that Aquinas first couple of ways presents a successful argument for the existence of God. And so does William Paley. Aquinas do indeed accomplish their purpose in establishing the existence of a Highest Imaginable Being. As for Paley’s offers his famous argument from design for God’s existence, he attempts explain how the mechanical watch would infer from the difficulty of the universe and the difficulty apparent determination design proves must have been made by an intelligent designer.

Philosophers formulate treatises on similar topics, one specifically which has been approached several times, the existence of God. Each philosopher has a varyingly different theory on how whether in fact God does exist, or that he does not exist. Evidently, God’s existence has not been settled and will continue to be deliberated until humans no longer exist, however, there are philosophers who are more successful at arguing for God’s existence than other theories do. Thomas Aquinas, a renowned philosopher and regarded as one of the greatest Christian theologians, wrote about God’s existence which is superior to other philosophers who have attempted to provide their own insight to the topic. Thomas Aquinas’s proof for the existence of God is logical and provides an excellent argument for God’s existence.

In “The Brothers Karamazov” by Fyodor Dostoevsky made a famous claim that establishes the link between the existence of God and morality. Apart from the controversy related to the scope of the quotation, the discussion on the proper translation and interpretation of the words of Ivan Karamazov. For instance, in his article “Dostoevsky did not say it” D.Cortesi claims that Dostoevsky did not make such claim (Cortesi 1). However, the research by Russian-speaking authors shows that the original text of “The Brothers Karamazov” contains the statement under study (Volkov 1). Coming to the scope of the claim, one should concentrate on the reasons for making such claim, as well as the relation between the moral beliefs of secular humanists and