Essay on The Existence of God

1. The Cosmological Argument for the existence of God is based on the principle of cause and effect. What this basically means is that the universe was the effect of a cause, which was God. One of the oldest and most well known advocates of the Cosmological Argument was Thomas Aquinas who outlines his argument for the existence of God in his article entitled The Five Ways. The first way in his argument is deals with motion. Aquinas says that in order for something to be in motion something had to move it because it is impossible for something to move without the presence of some sort of outside force upon it. Therefore the world around us, nature, and our very existence could not have been put into motion without the influence of the

There are three arguments for the existence of God, and it is important that we should learn, understand, and use these arguments. The first argument is the cause and effect argument. The cause and effect argument uses the principle of cause and effect. The principle of cause and effect is that every measureable effect has a cause.

If He did not exist, then you could still think of an even greater being (one just like God that you said did not exist, except this one would exist). Existence must be one of God's attributes because to remove it, you would still be able to fathom a greater God (one which does exist). The problem most have with this argument is that it seems to simply list existence among God's attributes, rather than show it. The argument appears to say whatever you can imagine should be true in reality.

“The problem of evil is often divided between the logical and evidential problems.” At the heart of each problem is the belief that the existence of God and the existence evil are incompatible. They present an “either/or” dilemma: either God

The problem of evil features an argument questioning the existence of god in relation to evil, attributing both atheistic and theistic replies.

Evil can be categorized into two forms, moral evil and natural evil. Moral evil is brought about by bad choices that stem from our free will. Natural evil is bad things that happen to people, whether they deserve them or not. The problem with evil is,

The argument over the existence of God is one that has been argued for centuries. In Evil and Omnipotence1, J.L. Mackie argues that an all-good, all powerful God is logically conflicting with the existence of evil, as the very reality of evil is enough to provide an argument against the existence of God. A form of his argument can be stated as: 1. If God exists, God is omnipotent. 2.

The reason that we even have an experience of a perceived evil is because for the soul to experience itself as any particular thing, the exact opposite of that thing must come into the realm of existence. In other words, in this relative existence, hot cannot be hot without cold, darkness cannot be without light, and you cannot be you without that which is not you. So I believe that what we call evil is just the opposite end of the spectrum of good, not something separate.

Another attempt to prove the problem of evil is the evidential version of the argument. This argument attempts to show inductively that the existence of God is not likely. This form is much

The problem of evil as suffering is a problem of what to do with the obstacle for the believer but also an obstacle to unbeliever to converge because they do not think it harmonising. In contradiction to compatibility, an atheist often suggested that the present of evil entails the absence of God. Atheist argued, if God exists, then as an omnipotent, he is able to prevent the evil occurrence. For omniscient, it implies under any circumstances evil will occur if he does not act. Then, being perfectly good, he will prevent its occurrence and so evil will not exist. Based on this above proclamation, the existence of God does not compatible with the evil of whatever kind. However, theists response to this logical problem of evil by an atheist is that necessarily perfectly good being, foreseeing the occurrence of evil and able to prevent it, will prevent evil. The essay will first, define what evil is according to Swinburne as one of the philosopher of religion, Second, Swinburne four categories of evil will be discussed (Physical evil, mental evil, state evil, moral evil). Third, Phillip logical and existential problem evil will be discussed through. How will all these above assertions be a problem to those that and does not believe in God.

Important point: Evil does not mean God does NOT exist, but only implies that God’s probably has a lesser chance of existing.

. the first question would be that if God can do the possible then why isn’t evil eliminated out of the world? This raises the question of impossibility that we will be discussing next That the existence of any evil proves it is logically impossible for a Perfect being to exist Thinking that God can do anything raises the question of impossibility. The main atheist argument goes back to “if there were a God, there would be no evil in the world, there is evil, therefore there is no God” (dumm pg263). This was considered a valid argument that the atheists had.

Now it might be a surprise to learn that steps 2—7 of this argument are relatively uncontroversial. Most philosophers would agree that if God's existence is even possible, then he must exist. So the whole question is: Is God's existence possible? The atheist has to maintain that it's impossible

This argument continues to questioning God’s capability to vanish evil (omnipotent), capability to know Satan’s actions (omniscient), and capability to desire cessation of evil (omnibenevolent). As the logic continues, I feel that the analysis shows depletion of faith. It shows lack of faith because this argument implies that the justification of God’s nature/attributes are dependent upon the evil existence. I understand that philosophers and critics have to use these analogies in order to find truth. However, there are other evidences that prove God’s all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good attributes. The miracles of healing terminal diseases that doctors cannot explain is just one example. God’s attributes are seen everyday through his creations, the sun, the night and day, the air we breath, etc. We witness and feel His attributes daily, 24/7, 365 days,

A theist would object to this argument by telling us that God is “inscrutable”. One could argue that it is not possible to know, nor fair to assume, that God is omniscient, omnibenevolent or omnipotent in ways that we, as mere humans, could ever understand. They would contend that it is not possible to know for sure whether evil is consistent with God or not (Chapman, 2017), as we do not understand the ways that God is all-knowing, all-loving and all-powerful, therefore we cannot know for sure that evil is not consistent with these