The concept of the existence of God has been a subject of debate for years. Many philosophers have attempted to weigh in on the situation and have come up with different theories arguing for or against the actuality of God. Most of these philosophies can be categorised as subjective, empirical or subjective. Despite the presence of all these theories, the question about the existence of God remains a mystery. The existence of many religious affiliations also viciously arises this question. This subject is especially heating up in the 21st century where many people have abandoned any religious affiliations and do not believe in God. As such, this essay aims to explain some of the philosophical reasons why it is possible that God exists.
The very idea of an all-perfect being implies that it is possible that God exists. This is explained via the ontological approach which was first articulated by St. Anselm. He argued that the mere fact that human beings have a conception of an all perfect being means that God must exist. He defined it as, “that than which nothing greater can be conceived” (Teske, 1980). He explained God as a being who has all conceivable perfection. His aim is to refute one who thinks that God does not exist. This fool possesses two features: he is conversant with the claim that God exists and he does not believe in this existence. Anselm’s objective was to prove that this combination is unstable. He believes that any person who understands the meaning of the concept of the existence of God can in fact be led to believe that God does indeed exist. According to him, the atheist is not only mistaken but also his position is internally inconsistent. The mere fact that the atheist understands that God exists in the understanding is a concession because God cannot exist in the understanding alone but also in reality (Teske, 1980).
Thomas Aquinas gave five ways of proving that God actually exists. The first was the way of motion where he argued that the fact that things move and change implies that there is something else in action which causes the motion. There cannot be an infinite regress and thus there must exist an initial unmoved mover. This mover is what is referred to as God. The second was the way of causation. Here he explained that everything has an immediate or efficient cause which cannot go back infinitely (Vaughn, n.d.). As such, there must be a first uncaused cause which is what is referred to as God. The third was the way of contingency which he explains by arguing that it is not necessary for any specific thing to be existent but there exist rather contingent things (Vaughn, n.d.). Everything did not exist at some point in time thus all is merely contingent. In view of this, there must be a necessary essence that created all contingent things. This is who we call God. The fourth was the way of goodness. Here, he explains that things have a certain degree of perfection; some are lighter or heavier, warmer or colder, or smaller or bigger. The existence of degrees implies that there must a level of maximum perfection. This maximum perfection is God (Ake, 2009). The last way is the way of design. Everything in the world is ordered to particular ends. Even those that are unintelligent are predisposed to this rather than that. This order which is inherent in inanimate things requires a certain type of intelligence to direct it which is what we call God. What makes these five ways somewhat unrefusable is the fact that they originate from plain fact about the earth; an element which is undisputed even by the scientific knowledge. Based on this simple observation of the world, St. Thomas shows there can be no other explanation about these facts other than the existence of God.
The teleological argument which is sometimes called the Design argument proves that God does exist. The best example of this type of an argument was William Paley’s watch argument. Basically, he argues that based on the fact that all parts of a watch work together in a certain way to keep time, it warrants to say that this piece of machinery has a creator. This is because it is far too complex to have come into existence by other means such as evolution. Therefore, human beings are artifacts designed by an intelligent being for a purpose and the world resembles the human artifacts. Consequently, it is possible that the world also was intelligently designed for a purpose. In view of this, it is possible that the world was created by an intelligent designer who is God. Everything in the world is made with some level of sophistication and this could not have happened by chance. When examining the world and observing the complexity of its components, the only possible explanation is the existence of an otherworldly being who made everything possible. The fact that God exists is the simplest explanation for the existence of things.
The free will defense is the theism explanation of the existence of God even in the face of evil. According to many theists, moral evil is caused by free agents who were created by God. The omniscient and benevolent God created a world with people who have free will knowing that it is possible for them to commit evil. The existence of free agency is better compared to a world with no conscious beings (Ake, 2009). One way in which free will works is by distancing God from evil. Moral evil is not brought about by God but by the free agents. As such, God is not responsible for any evil in the world. Furthermore, the free will defense justifies the existence of moral evil by justifying the creation of free agents. Without, the concept of the free will, then there would not be the concept of goodness. A world without free agents will be morally void. In view of this, theists believe that the good that exists due to the free agents outweighs the bad. Therefore, God did good by creating free agents although there was the risk of some committing moral evil.
Atheist however, contest the existence of God by criticizing the concept of free will. The existence of evil and suffering in the world today evokes a serious challenge to the belief in God. If then there really existed an all knowing being, then he would know about all the horrible things that human beings go through. Also, if God was all powerful then he would be able to retaliate against all the evil and suffering. Moreover, if he were morally perfect then he would want to do something about it. And yet, there are all these problems in the world but no one to stop them. The problem of evil is basically a moral protest (Vaughn, n.d.). Furthermore, the fact that the free agents are the ones who commit moral evil implies that God is directly responsible for the evil in the world. As such, it is arguable that God can be blamed for his negligence in creating free agents even though he did not actually perpetuate this evil. Moreover, some atheists argue that human beings use the free will defence to justify God’s failure to intervene. However, this take is arguable as the existence of God does not actually mean that he is the dictator of the actions of human beings. God created them to have the freedom of choice. Choosing to do evil is just an implication of the human weakness.
Conclusion
Based on the given different proofs in this paper, it is evident that God exists. Although most of the proofs are intangible, it is clear that for the world to be there must have been something else working. Most importantly, there are no philosophical arguments that can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. However, this fact does not weaken the case of God’s existence. It simply puts the question of his existence among other questions. Therefore, in order to know that God exists, we should weigh the evidence and consider the alternatives instead of looking for undoubtable conclusions.
Works Cited
Ake, Stacey. "Does God Exist Or Does He Come To Be?." Philosophy And Theology, vol 21, no. 1, 2009, pp. 155-164. Philosophy Documentation Center, doi:10.5840/philtheol2009211/26.
Teske, Roland J. "Anselm And Talking About God. By G. R. Evans." The Modern Schoolman, vol 57, no. 3, 1980, pp. 278-278. Philosophy Documentation Center, doi:10.5840/schoolman198057347.
Vaughn, Lewis. Philosophy Here And Now.
