Does God Exist?
For many decades, the question of God’s existence has lingered amongst scientists, philosophers, theologians and many other categories of people. The controversies on the topic have to put forward persuasive arguments against and for this proposition. Indisputably, the debate about God’s existence is a lively one. The attempt to unravel the question is engaging and presents one with a wide-ranging issue that requires redress (Moody 4). At the same time, philosophers and theologians have tried to answer this question over so many years. For instance, in Hebrews 11:6, the Bible says that the acceptance of God’s existence is premised upon faith. Hence, this essay explores the topic as to whether God really exists. Taking an argumentative edge, this paper supports the God’s existence being predicated upon Does God Exist?, which is the work of Todd C. Moody that takes the form of a dialogue on the proofs of this fact.
Oscar’s failure to believe in God is premised on that no one has given him enough proof (Moody 2). The burden of proof is upon the theist. Nonetheless, the burden of evidence cannot be arbitrary. To prove God’s existence, there are many logical principles involved. David adds that this event is beyond common sense. On the contrary, Oscar argues that in fact, truth is a relative concept. Things in our minds are mere abstractions. However, God is not an abstraction. In other words, facts impinge into our minds. According to David, there is more to reality especially to what we see, hear and touch (Moody 4). Therefore, God’s existence is considerably less unbelievable. Common sense says that rocks, oceans, trees et cetera are real. On the other hand, common sense does not state anything about God’s existence. David enunciates the fact that God is way beyond common sense (Moody 6). Similarly, Sophie asserts that anyone who makes positive existence claim bears the burden of proof (Moody 6). To believe in God’s existence, it is important to be open-minded. Havving faith in God requires proofs alone and not anything else. However, such evidence may vary in degrees. It is impossible to believe that unicorns and leprechauns exist since there are just mythological creatures, products of fertile imaginations. Practically, it is not simple to adduce evidence regarding something’s existence. In the same berth, argumentation that God exist requires a proof, which is impossible to find.
There are dissimilar kinds of atheists – strong and weak ones (Moody 13). Strong atheism contends that God cannot exist, while weak atheism postulates that God may exist but He does not exist. Conversely, agnosticism is the perception that God’s existence is unknown (Moody 14). Agnostics are not believers: “. . . a belief in God is completely unsupported, bordering on irrational…” (Moody 1).
However, the conversation between Oscar, David and Sophie is based merely on what the truth is vis-à-vis what is true or false. Atheists postulate that the imperfect design of the universe is a proof of God’s inexistence. Therefore, this burden does not fall on a theist alone. There are many logical arguments towards this end. The existence of God is purely a matter that is beyond common sense. For Christians, possessing faith is important. It follows that God’s existence is premised purely on faith and not common sense. It is not possible to please God bereft of faith in Him. For science, there must be undisputable facts supported by common sense. This cannot be true about faith. Atheists argue that God’s existence is not supported by sufficient reasons. His existence cannot be affirmatively disapproved. For fideism, believing in God is not acquiescent to either repudiation or demonstration. Thus, it is purely a question of faith. His transcendence is beyond common sense. Trying to demystify His exercise is an exercise in futility. If He never existed, God could never be the greatest imaginable being as this would definitely contradict the definition of God. Believing in God is unsupported and maybe irrational. However, this does not invalidate God’s existence. Cosmological argument is grounded on that there must be a cause for every effect (Moody 51). Everything in the universe has an effect. Therefore, there is a cause for anything to exist. Ultimately, something ‘uncaused’ must exist for anything to exist. God is the ‘uncaused’ cause and eternal, bereft of either an end or a beginning (Moody 15). God caused the universe:
Client says about us
The service was excellent. I like 123helpme more and more each day because it makes my life a lot easier.
I needed help with a Psychology essay, this was just what I needed. Definitely worth the money.
THANK YOU!!! I got an A+ on my essay and will be promoted to the next level. I am so appreciative of what you did for me.
There is an awesome staff at your custom essay writing company. I feel confident that any time I need a paper to be written, you are able to accommodate me and I will get a great result for my money. You are true professionals who know how to run their business very well!
A huge thank you to 123HelpMe.org and the writer who finished my paper so quickly! My college professor didn’t ask for any corrections and I was really happy with the mark I got. So I think your writing service is very good. I was able to keep in touch with my writer while my paper was being written. I think the paper and the reference pages are great. I’m completely satisfied!
They’re just ideas in our heads; they depend on us for existence, I don’t doubt that the idea of God exists, any more than I doubt that the idea of the tooth fairly exists. What I doubt is that either of these ideas is about anything real (Moody 3).
In Moody’s book, Sophie, David and Oscar conclude that God is not some kind of mathematical object. There are people who believe the real are only those that will never go away. Consequently, God is irreducible to anything. He is irreplaceable. Based on this conception, God exists and He is real. His existence is not simply a perception as David in Does God Exist? tried to argue. He is a reality. The world is based on observation. Therefore, it is not objective. More aptly, the world has so many ideas that are imperceptible to humankind. God is the omniscient super-observer of the universe. God is a necessary being in the universe. His existence is important to all of us. Amongst human beings, God’s existence is a normative concept. There is no need to prove His existence. Additionally, believing in God is rationally warranted. As earlier elucidated, God remains the supreme conceivable being. Since existing is greater than existence, then according to ontological argument, God exists. Theism is not just a hypothesis but a reality. To argue that God does not exist is to commit an argumentum ad ignorantium informal fallacy. To claim that God does not exist since his existence cannot be proven or has not been proven and vice versa is to commit an error in reasoning. Both immaterial and material things exist in the universe due to God. Ethics, logic and even science are senseless without God. With scrupulous constancy, atheistic arguments rebut themselves with time. We all have a free will to believe in God’s existence or inexistence (Moody 70). However, we do not have a supernatural intelligence.
In conclusion, the belief in God’s existence is a matter of faith. If God did not exist, then life would have no meaning. Without hope and faith, it is impossible to believe in God. Consequently, without faith it is not possible to please God. In a world characterized by unredeemed and gratuitous suffering, believing in God is an imperative. To make sense of the world and its origins, it is inevitable to understand God. This essay has demonstrated that there is no need to prove God’s existence. For the ontological argument, God is an existing perfect being, while for the cosmological argument, everything has its cause and effect. God is the first cause of things. Things in the universe have been designed for some specific ends. Lastly, the moral argument postulates that ethics is enforceable due to belief in God because of the ability to differentiate right to wrong, whereas the experiential arguments posit that most people have experiences with God, and thus, he exists.