What is the ontological argument for the existence of God?
The ontological argument is focused on depicting the existence of God through reasoning. From the ontological argument, there is the emphasis of the existence of God both in reality and in understanding (Wolfson, 2008). From a reasoning perspective, we believe that there is a superior being. Hence, the existence of the superior being emanates from conception and acceptance of the realities.
What is Gaunilo’s perspective about the existence of God?
Gaunilo compares the existence of God to the establishment of an island upon another. There is the prospect that proving the existence of God is through the analysis of the greatness that can be conceived by the society. Great making all powerful being should have been in existence to enable the marvels evident (Wolfson, 2008).
What cosmological argument is posed for the existence of God?
The origins of the universe have been known. However, for the commencement of the universe formation to prevail, there ought to have been the first cause. Hence, God is viewed as the first cause to the commencement of the formation of the universe (Wolfson, 2008).
What is the contingent argument?
As living things, we are mortal. Therefore, as mortal individuals, we depend on another being for existence. God is the necessary being who was involved in our creation. Hence, it applies to believe in a superior being.
Other;arguments for the existence of God
What is the teleological argument on the existence of God?
The teleological argument is based on the analysis of life and the basic conditions. Hence, the conditions to enable life were precise as if established by a superior being. Therefore, the conditions of life were started by God.
Is it reasonable to believe in God? No
What is the logical argument about evil and its relationship to the non-existence of God?
The logical argument is based on the analysis of the characteristics of God in refuting His existence. God is viewed all powerful, yet He cannot eliminate evil in the society (Cooper, 2006). If God were omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent, then He would logically have eliminated evil from the society.
What is the relationship between free will and the existence of God?
Researchers such as Wolfson, (2008) assert that free will should be a clear description of the non-existence of God. As a human who possesses free will to do good and evil, the desire to do evil is extensively prevalent. If omnipresent and omnipotent God exist, then there could have been clear guidelines to mitigate the level of evil in the society.
What is the probability of God existing in the current world?
Researchers argue that in the current environment, the existence of God is a complex topic. In a world filled with horrendous coupled with gratuitous evil, the possibility of Godts existence is unfathomable (Warburton, 2004). Admittedly, is God existed, and then the potential to eliminate all evil should be evident. Further, all the evildoers would have faced the wrath of God.
Evil is a point of view
It is the belief that evil entails the absence of good. As a negative act, evil is a revelation of both the absence of God and anything positive. In the face of the extensively evil environment, the prevalence of good is a daunting prospect for individuals (Warburton, 2004). Then people cannot believe in God when the only thing evident is the prevalent nature of evil.
Do evil things happen to raise concern about the existence of God?
People in most instances raise doubt about a superior being in the presence of sorrowful instances. As a general issue of concern, people feel that facing saddening instances such as the death of a relative can raise an issue about the existence of God. Most importantly, people raise concerns about the religion they are accustomed.
Cooper, J. W. (2006).T Pantheism–The Other God of the Philosophers: From Plato to the Present. Baker Academic.
Warburton, N. (2004).T Philosophy: the Basics. London: Routledge.
Wolfson, H. A. (2008). The knowability and describability of God in Plato and Aristotle.T Harvard Studies in Classical Philology,T 56, 233-249.