Arguments for the Existence of God


A.Knowledge of God Via the Natural World
1. William Paley's "Watch and the Watchmaker"
William Paley, an archdeacon of the Anglican faith, wrote a teleological argument for evidence of the existence of God. In it, he asks the reader to imagine a person who stumbled upon a watch in the woods. He then says that she wouldn't think for a second that the device was not made by an intelligent creator. It was obviously made for a purpose and all the gears and buttons and levers work together to tell time. Here are two premises and a resulting conclusion for this argument: Premise 1-The existence of design necessarily points to a designer. Premise 2-The universe exhibits marvelous design. Conclusion=The universe has a designer.

2. C.S. Lewis' Argument for the Existence of God
Lewis’s Premise (1): Everyone knows, and so believes, that there are objective moral truths.
Lewis’s Premise (2): Objective moral laws are very peculiar in that they are quite unlike Laws of Nature and “natural” facts.
Conclusion: The existence and nature of objective moral facts supports the existence of an intelligence behind them serving as their basis and foundation.
Basically he's saying that we all have a common human nature and that leads to the question: where does it come from?

3. The Golden Ratio
The Golden Ratio is an irrational number discovered by the ancient Greeks, which is found mysteriously embedded throughout all kinds of natural bodies. It strongly suggests that the universe exhibits intelligent design.

4. The Anthropic Principle
Premise 1: Odds of universe accidentally forming in a way to make intelligent life possible are slim.
Premise 2: But intelligent life exists.
Conclusion: The universe was deliberately formed in order to make intelligent life possible.
As the text puts it, imagine you are walking along a beach as far as the eye can see. You know that one grain of salt lies somewhere in the sand. You stoop down to pick up a single particle and it's the salt. That's about the same odds as you existing. Do you really believe you beat those odds by chance?

5. Kalam's Argument
Premise 1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause outside of itself.
Premise 2: The universe (everything which exists in time) began to exist.
Conclusion: The universe had a cause outside of itself.
Basically, there has to a beginning somewhere along the lines. And that leads to the question: what started it? (God)

6.

The chart says that if we believe in God and he really does exist, then we end up happy. If we don't believe in God and he really does exist, then we're screwed. If he doesn't exist, then it won't matter in the afterlife.

7. Argument from Degrees of Perfection
This is a pattern of different forms of existence. The least form is a non-being. Then the next better thing is matter. And the next better thing is vegetation (an addition of life). Then the next thing is animal (which includes consciousness). Then the next better thing is human being. The progression is obvious. The hierarchy of nature points to a Being who is infinitely intelligent and infinitely free.

B.Knowledge of God Via the Human Person
1. Argument from Religious Experience
There are four existential realities that elicit this. They are: man's need for meaning, the mystery of death, the thirst for happiness, and the pain of loneliness. From all these considerations, we can make one conclusion. The existence of God would unquestionably satisfy our desires for meaning, love, security, and peace.

2. The Argument from Conscience
Conscience is one's sense of right and wrong which comes from knowledge, intuition, and personal experience. If God does not exist, and I am free to play by my own rules, then why does my conscience occasionally bother me? If I honestly believe I'm acting for my best good or the good of others why should my gut tell me otherwise?

3. The Argument from Natural Law
This is very much like C.S. Lewis' argument above. Human beings constantly argue about what is morally permissible. The mere fact that we argue indicates that an objective standard of behavior exists-one which applies to everyone. Since it is obvious that human beings are not its source, where does this standard come from?

My Own Thoughts
I think that many of these arguments are persuasive, but some others not so much. The one that works best for me personally is Kalam's argument. I just can't seem to wrap my mind about the universe existing for infinity, having no beginning and no end. It had to have started at some point and common sense points me to a creator of some sort. And I think that the creator is God. But when I start thinking about the universe I start thinking about how vast it is and how many other galaxies and solar systems there are out there. When I start thinking about that I wonder why God would make all those other planets and if he made life somewhere far far away. But that's besides the point. Some other arguments that have very valid ideas in them are C.S. Lewis' argument and the argument from natural law. Some arguments that don't point to the existence of God for me are the Golden Ratio and Pascal's Wager. For the Golden Ratio, I think it's because I don't understand it. And Pascal's Wager seems too simple to show the existence of a God. Overall, the most valid and persuasive argument that I rely on is the Kalam argument.






For cool backgrounds like this one, go to www.grsites.com