Understanding and Countering Proofs of God's Non-Existence

Although explicated on many occasions and by many different authors, the teleological argument for the existence of God provides the best springboard from which to launch contemporary convictions of faith. In the revised edition of his earlier The Existence of God, Richard Swinburne constructs a solid outline that reveals the exact structure of the teleological argument. He presents both forms of the teleological argument , holds each under the light of skeptical review and then provides insight and defense that allows for careful philosophical review.

God’s existence cannot be proved nor disproved, but this is an attempt to refute the existence of this all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good being through an analysis of arguments and theories that try to prove or insinuate His reality.

Most religious zealots have no doubt about who created and the source of the origin of the universe. The same is true of the existence of the omnipotent, omniscience and omnipresent God. Although God may not be seen or heard or touched, however; by faith, we believe of his majestic existence. His existence as God cannot be measured in terms of Gallup surveys or scientific proofs to show otherwise but “religious thinkers” according to James and Stuart Rachels have offered numerous thesis for the for the existence of God, starting with the argument from design, with its subtitles such as the wonders of nature; the “best-explanation arguments and the same-evidenced argument” (Rachels). In either of the cases, the conclusions drawn were similar in the sense that the universe was created by an intelligent designer.

Which argument for the existence of God is strongest? Why? This is the specific issue that this paper will address. While there are many millions of people in the world who believe in the existence of God or Allah, Brahman, Jehovah, among other names there are also millions who do not believe in the existence of God. This dispute is an ancient one; and as Deepak Chopra points out, since we cannot see God and because He is "…nowhere and everywhere at the same time" and because he "…transcends nature… [and] leaves no fingerprints in the material world," it is easy for non-believers to challenge Christians as to God's existence (Chopra, 2000, p. 41). Christians on the other hand point to the creation of the Universe and to the natural world on Earth as evidence of a Creator's work.

The question about the existence of God or, more generally speaking, of a supernatural entity that steers the course of the world, is probably as old as humanity itself. Many great philosophers were concerned with this basic and yet so important question which remains to be a controversial issue to this day! In the following I will commit myself to the above-mentioned question by firstly reconstructing Anselm´s proof of God´s existence and secondly considering his position in the light of the critique put forward by Gaunilo, Aquinas and Kant.

The arguments which question the validity of God's existence, have more than likely, persisted for over several centuries. However, amongst these arguments, questioning the existence of God, exist major arguments presented in the teleological and cosmological arguments. In “On Being an Atheist,” McCloskey (1968) sets out to reiterate his position as an atheist by offering counterarguments to specific theistic positions. Moreover, while contending his claim that the arguments which question the validity of the existence of God are fundamentally false and that without absolute proofs, people ought to dismiss the idea that there is an omniscient and omnipotent being. Likewise, he alleges that the major indicator of the non-existence

In this essay I will be discussing the controversial topic of God’s existence. I will be weighing up the facts and making a decision when I conclude my essay. People take things like nature, miracles and your conscience and say it proves that God is real. On the other hand people believe that the Big Bang made nature, miracles are fabricated or are the work of scientists and doctors and your upbringing gives you a conscience. It is up to you to decide what you believe but I am sure that this essay will help you to decide which side you will support.

God, as according to the Judeo-Christian tradition, is an omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly benevolent being. It is here that evil, as we know it in our own lives, seems to contend with the idea of a God being through the Judeo-Christian tradition. Many philosophers, poets, authors, and artists tried to consider ways of conceiving a perfect God through the existence of evil in the world. It becomes the goal of many authors and philosophers to find ways to justify the existence of God as being compatible with the existence of evil found within the world

The proofs of God’s existence offered follow a logical sequence with the aim to convince the reader to believe. However, these proofs, at some stage, all offer a presupposition which flaws the author’s argument. These presuppositions are harmful because if the assumption can be disproven then the remainder of the argument collapses. Thus, the proofs of God’s existence are not compelling because they are all based on flawed presuppositions.

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.

Most religions worship a God that is omniscient, all good, and omnipotent. However, this view creates the problem of evil. If God knows evil exists, despises it, and has the power to destroy it, then the manifestation of evil in our current reality calls into question God’s very existence, since he logically should have gotten rid of any malevolence (Mackie). In practice, this principle calls into question a believer’s relationship with a higher power who seemingly allows sin. In theory, the presence of evil becomes a reason to disprove a supreme deity. On the other hand, if the problem of evil can be proven wrong, it could nullify one of atheism’s strongest arguments (Snyder). This paper will attempt to discuss the problem of evil, how it

An argument presented to challenge the existence of God titled “The argument of unbelief,” concludes that because there are people who do not believe in God, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God cannot exist. The argument is presented as such; God does not exist. If God exists, he is omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent. Yet God is not omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent. If God was truly omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent, then the world would not contain non-belief. Despite all of this, the world does contain non-belief. In other words, not everyone on earth believes in the existence of God, given our definition of God, this becomes problematic.

However, we might wonder if a God existed as theists believe his existence, he would be omnipotent, omniscient, and entirely good; he would not let any act of evil happen to innocent people. This means that any actions that happen under his watch have to be good since he is the one and only creator of the cause and everything in it. It is obvious that with these many instances of evil that happen in this world, any argument to prove this existence would be refuted. Earthquakes, Hurricanes Matthew, Katrina, etc.…, are a few examples of many others. These kind of evil come and destroy the world and many people’s life especially innocent children. It is confusing if really there is a wholly God who accepts the occurrence of such evils in the world.

What is God? Simply we can say that god is our creator, he is the one that created this universe and all the living beings. He is almighty and has knowledge of everything. But for decades, there has been different arguments for explaining the theory of god’s existence. Although different religions might see god in different perspectives, the main concept of god is almost the same in every religion. God is a fragment of our belief (Fénelon, François de Salignac de La Mothe-). We are a very curious species. We want to define everything by logic. It's not just this decade, mankind has been looking for logical explanations of various events since its dawn. Therefore, the biggest mystery or question that comes to our mind is "who created this world and all the living beings in it?" Thus, emerged the concept of God. People started believing that we were created by a superior being, and different religions were built around this concept. In this paper, we will discuss various arguments surrounding the existence of God.

With monotheistic religions being centered around the idea of a God, the search for the proof of this God has led philosophers down many paths. To start, they often try to find a sign of God’s power; whether that be through nature, the universe, or our own consciousness, perception drives our thoughts about our relationship with God. However, what is this relationship like? Is it personal? Or is it on a scale that transcends space and time? Philosophers will try to use this broad idea of God to plug holes in our theory of everything. But is this a fair use of God? Would God judge our actions? Through these questions, ancient philosophers attempt to answer the ultimately unknowable: what is God? Proving God is regarded as the first step in answering this question, the question of the universe. Since the birth of philosophy, philosophers have used many methods in order to find a proof. Some choose a logical, mathematical deduction while others use general, inductive statements to show correlations. I will attempt to provide an overview of the three main types of arguments, compare and contrast them, and provide insight into how society should interpret them. The three main types of arguments are teleological, using “intelligent design” to question the creation of magnificent experiences; cosmological, exploring the nature of objects in the universe and their ultimate causes; and ontological, seeking a deeper meaning to consciousness in order to find a greater power.