Arguments for and against the existence of God have been proposed by philosophers, theologians, scientists, and others for thousands of years. In philosophical terms, such arguments involve primarily the disciplines of epistemology (the nature and scope of knowledge) and ontology (study of the nature of being, existence, or reality) and also the theory of value, since concepts of perfection are connected to notions of God. A wide variety of arguments exist which can be categorized as metaphysical, logical, empirical, or subjective. The existence of God is subject to lively debate in philosophy, the philosophy of religion, and popular culture.

The Western tradition of philosophical discussion of the existence of God began with Plato and Aristotle, who made arguments that would now be categorized as cosmological. Other arguments for the existence of God have been proposed by St. Anselm, who formulated the first ontological argument; Ibn Rushd (Averroes) and Aquinas, who presented their own versions of the cosmological argument (the kalam argument and the first way, respectively); Descartes, who said that the existence of a benevolent God was logically necessary for the evidence of the senses to be meaningful; and Immanuel Kant, who argued that the existence of God can be deduced from the existence of good. Thinkers who have provided arguments against the existence of God include David Hume, Kant, Nietzsche, and Bertrand Russell. In modern culture, the question of God's existence has been discussed by scientists such as Stephen Hawking, Francis Collins, Richard Dawkins, and John Lennox, as well as philosophers including Richard Swinburne, Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig, Daniel Dennett, Edward Feser, and David Bentley Hart.

Atheists generally maintain that arguments for the existence of God provide insufficient reason to believe. Additionally, some contend that it is possible to affirmatively disprove the existence of God, or of certain characteristics traditionally attributed to God such as perfection.

Fideists acknowledge that belief in the existence of God may not be amenable to demonstration or refutation, but rests on faith alone. The Catholic Church maintains that knowledge of the existence of God is available in the "natural light of human reason". Other religions, such as Buddhism, do not concern themselves with the existence of gods at all.

[size=28pt]Philosophical issues[/size]


Empirical arguments
Aquinas' Five Ways

Main article: Quinque viae
For in depth analysis of the individual arguments, see unmoved mover, first cause, argument from contingency, argument from degree, or teleological argument.
In the first part of his Summa Theologica, Thomas Aquinas developed his five arguments for God's existence. These arguments are grounded in an Aristotelian ontology and make use of the infinite regression argument. Aquinas did not intend to fully prove the existence of God as he is orthodoxly conceived (with all of his traditional attributes), but proposed his Five Ways as a first stage, which he built upon later in his work.Aquinas' Five Ways argued from the unmoved mover, first cause, necessary being, argument from degree, and the teleological argument.

The unmoved mover argument asserts that, from our experience of motion in the universe (motion being the transition from potentiality to actuality) we can see that there must have been an initial mover. Aquinas argued that whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another thing, so there must be an unmoved mover.
Aquinas' argument from first cause started with the premise that it is impossible for a being to cause itself (because it would have to exist before it caused itself) and that it is impossible for there to be an infinite chain of causes, which would result in infinite regress. Therefore, there must be a first cause, itself uncaused.
The argument from necessary being asserts that all beings are contingent, meaning that it is possible for them not to exist. Aquinas argued that if everything can possibly not exist, there must have been a time when nothing existed; as things exist now, there must exist a being with necessary existence, regarded as God.
Aquinas argued from degree, considering the occurrence of degrees of goodness. He believed that things which are called good, must be called good in relation to a standard of good—a maximum. There must be a maximum goodness that which causes all goodness.
The teleological argument asserts the view that things without intelligence are ordered towards a purpose. Aquinas argued that unintelligent objects cannot be ordered unless they are done so by an intelligent being, which means that there must be an intelligent being to move objects to their ends: God.

Rational Warrant

Philosopher Stephen Toulmin, notable for his work in the history of ideas that features the (Rational) Warrant: a statement that connects the premises to a conclusion.

Joseph Hinman applied Toulmin's approach in his argument for the existence of God, particularly in his book The Trace of God: A Rational Warrant for Belief. Instead of attempting to prove the existence of God, Hinman argues you can "demonstrate the rationally warranted nature of belief".

Hinman uses a wide range of studies, including ones by Robert Wuthnow, Andrew Greeley, Mathes and Kathleen Nobel to establish that mystical experiences are life-transformative in a way that is significant, positive and lasting. He draws on additional work to add several additional major points to his argument. First, the people who have these experiences not only do not exhibit traditional signs of mental illness but, often, are in better mental and physical health than the general population due to the experience. Second, the experiences work. In other words, they provide a framework for navigating life that is useful and effective.All of the evidence of the positive effect's of the experience upon people's lives he, adapting a term from Derida, terms "The Trace of God": the footprints left behind that point to the impact

Finally, he discusses how both religious experience and belief in God is, and has always been, normative among humans: people do not need to prove the existence of God. If there is no need to prove, Hinman argues, and the Trace of God (for instance, the impact of mystical experiences on them), belief in God is rationally warranted.

[size=29pt]Deductive arguments[/size]

[b]Ontological argument

Main article: Ontological argument
The ontological argument has been formulated by philosophers including St. Anselm and René Descartes. The argument proposes that God's existence is self-evident. The logic, depending on the formulation, reads roughly as follows:

>God is the greatest conceivable being.
>It is greater to exist than not to exist.
>Therefore, God exists.

Thomas Aquinas criticized the argument for proposing a definition of God which, if God is transcendent, should be impossible for humans. Immanuel Kant criticized the proof from a logical standpoint: he stated that the term "God" really signifies two different terms: both idea of God, and God. Kant concluded that the proof is equivocation, based on the ambiguity of the word God. Kant also challenged the argument's assumption that existence is a predicate (of perfection) because it does not add anything to the essence of a being. If existence is not a predicate, then it is not necessarily true that the greatest possible being exists. A common rebuttal to Kant's critique is that, although "existence" does add something to both the concept and the reality of God, the concept would be vastly different if its referent was an unreal Being. Another response to Kant is attributed to Alvin Plantinga who explains that even if one were to grant Kant that "existence" is not a real predicate, "Necessary Existence", which is the correct formulation of an understanding of God, is a real predicate, thus according to Plantinga Kant's argument is refuted.

[size=28pt]Other arguments[/size]

These two arguments follow from possible deductions, i.e., they can be set up as deductions and therefore are placed here.

[b]Argument from Meaning.

Argument from Ethics, being one type of view by ontologically considered intelligence.

Inductive arguments

Inductive arguments argue their conclusions through inductive reasoning.

Another class of philosophers asserts that the proofs for the existence of God present a fairly large probability though not absolute certainty. A number of obscure points, they say, always remain; an act of faith is required to dismiss these difficulties. This view is maintained, among others, by the Scottish statesman Arthur Balfour in his book The Foundations of Belief (1895). The opinions set forth in this work were adopted in France by Ferdinand Brunetière, the editor of the Revue des deux Mondes. Many orthodox Protestants express themselves in the same manner, as, for instance, Dr. E. Dennert, President of the Kepler Society, in his work Ist Gott tot.

Other arguments

The will to believe doctrine was pragmatist philosopher William James' attempt to prove God by showing that the adoption of theism as a hypothesis "works" in a believer's life. This doctrine depended heavily on James' pragmatic theory of truth where beliefs are proven by how they work when adopted rather than by proofs before they are believed (a form of the hypothetico-deductive method).
The argument from reason holds that if, as thoroughgoing naturalism entails, all human thoughts are the effect of a physical cause, then there is no reason for assuming that they are also the consequent of a reasonable ground. Knowledge, however, is apprehended by reasoning from ground to consequent. Therefore, if naturalism were true, there would be no way of knowing it—or anything else not the direct result of a physical cause—and one could not even suppose it, except by a fluke.
The anthropic argument suggests that basic facts, such as humanity's existence, are best explained by the existence of God.

[b][size=24pt]Qualia-based arguments[/size]:

Some philosophers see the existence of Qualia (or the hard problem of consciousness) as strong arguments against materialism and therefore for the existence of material and immaterial entities.
The teleological argument argues that the universe's order and complexity are best explained by reference to a creator God. It starts with a rather more complicated claim about the world, i.e. that it exhibits order and design. This argument has two versions: One based on the analogy of design and designer, the other arguing that goals can only occur in minds.
The hypothesis of Intelligent design proposes that certain features of the universe and of living things are the product of an intelligent cause.Its proponents are mainly Christians.
Arguments that a non-physical quality observed in the universe is of fundamental importance and not an epiphenomenon, such as Morality (Argument from morality), Beauty (Argument from beauty), Love (Argument from love), or religious experience (Argument from religious experience), are arguments for theism as against materialism.
The transcendental argument suggests that logic, science, ethics, and other serious matters do not make sense in the absence of God, and that atheistic arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency.
The argument from degree, a version of the transcendental argument posited by Aquinas, states that there must exist a being which possesses all properties to the maximum possible degree in order for such properties to be coherent.
Argument from belief in God being properly basic as presented by Alvin Plantinga.
Argument from the confluence of proper function and reliability and the evolutionary argument against naturalism, which demonstrate how naturalism is incapable of providing humans with the cognitive aparatus necessary for their knowledge to have positive epistemic status.

[size=24pt]Argument from Personal Identity[/size]

Argument from the "divine attributes of scientific law".

Subjective arguments

Arguments from historical events or personages

Christianity and Judaism assert that God intervened in key specific moments in history, especially at the Exodus and the giving of the Ten Commandments in front of all the tribes of Israel, positing an argument from empirical evidence stemming from sheer number of witnesses, thus demonstrating his existence.
The argument from the Resurrection of Jesus. This asserts that there is sufficient historical evidence for Jesus's resurrection to support his claim to be the son of God and indicates, a fortiori, God's existence.This is one of several arguments known as the Christological argument.
Islam asserts that the revelation of its holy book, the Qur'an, vindicates its divine authorship, and thus the existence of God.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also known as Mormonism, similarly asserts that the miraculous appearance of God, Jesus Christ, and angels to Joseph Smith and others and subsequent finding and translation of the Book of Mormon establishes the existence of God. The whole Latter Day Saint movement makes the same claim for example Community of Christ, Church of Christ (Temple Lot), Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite), Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite), Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerite), etc.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite), similarly asserts that the finding and translation of the Plates of Laban, also known as the Brass Plates, into the Book of the Law of the Lord and Voree plates by James Strang, One Mighty and Strong, establishes the existence of God.
Various sects that have broken from the Church of Christ (Temple Lot) (such as Church of Christ "With the Elijah Message" and Church of Christ (Assured Way)) claim that the message brought by John the Baptist, One Mighty and Strong, to Otto Fetting and W. A. Draves in The Word of the Lord Brought to Mankind by an Angel establishes the existence of God.

[size=30pt]Arguments from testimony[/size]

Arguments from testimony rely on the testimony or experience of witnesses, possibly embodying the propositions of a specific revealed religion. Swinburne argues that it is a principle of rationality that one should accept testimony unless there are strong reasons for not doing so.

The witness argument gives credibility to personal witnesses, contemporary and throughout the ages. A variation of this is the argument from miracles (also referred to as "the priest stories" which relies on testimony of supernatural events to establish the existence of God.
The majority argument argues that the theism of people throughout most of recorded history and in many different places provides prima facie demonstration of God's existence.

Arguments grounded in personal experiences

An argument for God is often made from an unlikely complete reversal in lifestyle by an individual towards God. Paul of Tarsus, a persecutor of the early Church, became a pillar of the Church after his conversion on the road to Damascus. Modern day examples in Evangelical Protestantism are sometimes called "Born-Again Christians".

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God

I didn't read all of this long epistle but here's a brief summary from my own research...philosophers never really had a conclusion as to the existence of God,"Philosophers opined that the existence of God is based on the name God because there gotta be a name called God" In contrast with the Atheist who jumped into conclusions and blunted that NO GOD while freethinkers like myself just say God IS UNKNOWN and STRANGE,so how would you fall out with your family,played by friends and end up trusting an UNKNOWN STRANGER?

This attempts to prove the existence of God is interesting..
From the story, i deduced that you can prove God by logics, materialism or a little from both...
I also believe everything has its won beginning.. Nothing existed before something. And nothing can exist without a creator.. Everything in the universe is so ordered and has its own cause whether we scientist have found that out or not. There's definitely a creator.. Somebody has just got to order things around..

God exist but needs arguments to back up his existence, eh?. .Ok pls where are you best arguments for the existence of the sun?. . .You don't need any arguments to show that the sun exist, do you?. . .

mazaje:
God exist but needs arguments to back up his existence, eh?. .Ok pls where are you best arguments for the existence of the sun?. . .You don't need any arguments to show that the sun exist, do you?. . .

I used to think you were an atheist, now you ate getting me confused.

paulGrundy:


I used to think you were an atheist, now you ate getting me confused.

Re-read what i wrote. . . .Seems you are lost. . .

mazaje:


Re-read what i wrote. . . .Seems you are lost. . .

Am lost

paulGrundy:


Am lost

Read it word for word, and take note of the punctuations. It's clear.

LOL my guy you just indiscriminately copied the entire Wikipedia page for "Existence of God." Na so e reach?

I am 100.1% sure that you haven't actually read through each argument to see what they say, and to come to your own conclusions on each one. Otherwise you would have realized that a lot of them contradict each other, even regarding their definitions of 'god'. Really, this is just a list of all the arguments that have been proposed for the existence of a 'god', both sensible or otherwise.

Maybe you should have posted the rest of the page containing arguments against the existence of God for us all to consider. After all, doesn't it befit a person to consider both sides of an argument before taking a stance?

needless to argue if there is/are force(s) behind the macrocosm (the circle of existence) but mankind is still very far from finding the truth.
however, " God" as described/portrayed by organized religions is a big HOAX.

Scyllapatron:
needless to argue if there is/are force(s) behind the macrocosm (the circle of existence) but mankind is still very far from finding the truth.
however, " God" as described/portrayed by organized religions is a big HOAX.

Baba, don't be too hopeless nao. The answer might just be around the corner. Who knows? All it takes is maybe 2 more Einsteins. Of the 7 billion plus alive today, the odds are not too bad. You feel me?

mazaje:
You don't need any arguments to show that the sun exist, do you?. . .

The wind is INVISIBLE and yet no one is arguing that it isn't there either.


Hahaha. These guys kill me with laughter, I swear.

The holy books make too many huge claims about their individual Gods, that's what the problem is. Its difficult to prove anything after making claims of that magnitude. The proof cannot be wishy washy, like those SCOAN TV miracles. Hahaha.

Scyllapatron:
needless to argue if there is/are force(s) behind the macrocosm (the circle of existence) but mankind is still very far from finding the truth.
however, " God" as described/portrayed by organized religions is a big HOAX.

Out of over 100,000 religions in the world, one of them must be the truth, don't be too hasty to jump into conclusions.

paulGrundy:


Out of over 100,000 religions in the world, one of them must be the truth, don't be too hasty to jump into conclusions.

......... am sure you are not too hasty to jump into the conclusion #bold, anyway, i advise you do some research on the origin of those religions.
NB: quote me only when you have done the research, otherwise, i won't entertain fish-brain debate/argument.

have a nice weekend.

paulGrundy:


Out of over 100,000 religions in the world, one of them must be the truth, don't be too hasty to jump into conclusions.

Why are you wasting time trying to convince people that there is God? We ve passed this stage in nairaland long ago. Pls don't take us backwards. Just preach the word and keep moving. Its not everybody that will enter heaven. It is whosoever will.

honourhim:


Why are you wasting time trying to convince people that there is God? We ve passed this stage in nairaland long ago. Pls don't take us backwards. Just preach the word and keep moving. Its not everybody that will enter heaven. It is whosoever will.

Am not trying to prove the existence of God to anybody, a blind man is blind and can never see no matter the magnitude of the size of the object dangled in front of his eyes.

Am only trying to provide any perspective on the existence of God debate. Just for the record!

I see people who wrote on non existence of God as people who knew God exist. Only a fool will say there is no God. Can these people ask themselves the following questions:
1. Who could av separated the planets from each other without colliding with themselves
2. Who could been the source of air we do not see and yet we feel it
3. Who could av made the sun the source of all energy and yet no man or man made object can go to the sun
4. Who could av know the source of the black air in your body except the programmer God
There is more than enough proof that there is God if you need a reason.

Scyllapatron:


......... am sure you are not too hasty to jump into the conclusion #bold, anyway, i advise you do some research on the origin of those religions.
NB: quote me only when you have done the research, otherwise, i won't entertain fish-brain debate/argument.

have a nice weekend.

I was expecting this reply from you but anyway thanks for your contributions to this thread,
I'll leave you with this text

1 Corinthians 2:14

14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are _foolishness to him; nor can he know them, [size=25pt]because they are spiritually discerned[/size].

^^^^^
Proverbs 18:15: “An intelligent heart acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge.”

do some research, study, learn and acquire knowledge.

cheers!!