|← Innocent Suffering of Job||Catholicism →|
Does the world/universe or something in it give evidence of divine design? Explain.
The existence of world and everything it can be debatable when it comes to whether it gives evidence of divine design thus the answer can be both yes or not. As for the yes answer the world gives an evidence of divine design in that earthling in the universe is so beautiful y complex and fits so well such that one can therefore acquire that there must be a divine design and that most certainly points to existence of god. On the other hand one can argue that everything in the universe exists by chance and that things worked correctly such that those adapted to the prevailing conditions existed while those which failed were faced out hence it implies that existence of universe does not point to any divine design.
Does the theory of evolution undermine the design argument?
The theory of evolution doesn't not undermine the design argument and this is because the design argument assumes the existence of a higher intelligence who design ed universe with purpose while the evolution theory explain the complexities of the adaptive qualities of nature without postulating on the presence of an omnipresent thus he only give another point to design agreement that existence of such complexity in nature might as well point to existence of a divine designer rather than by chance.
Explain James's argument for God. Is it a version of Pascal's wager? Is it sound? Why?
Pascal's argument is that despite the assumption that God might exist its potential befits are so immense that tends to make theism rational but James version is something different that has to do with having God in us and our abilities to control the energy in the universe for our own good. Whether is sound or not depends on personal beliefs in religion and metaphysical elements.
Is James correct saying that you cannot really suspend judgment about God's existence?
I think James is right in saying that one cannot suspend judgment about God existence this is because one has to act as if God existed or as if he did not exist .therefore meaning that a judgment has been made regarding the actions being done which is a direct a portrayal of either existence of God or not. Suspension of judgment is a legitimate option for temporary periods but decision has to make eventually.
Is the question of God's existence live and momentous, as James says?
Whether God is live and momentous as James says depends on personal beliefs and this makes some humans to often see God as the benefactor in the skies who is filed with judgment. Hell and heaven are used as behaviour controllers and thus the tendency of religious to make humans to be born imperfect and sinful making their reprehensible believing that God is much bigger than such things. As a matter of belief I tend to belief that existence of God is live and momentous as James argues. God is you ,me and thus we are God in our owns making hence all of us are sacred and t love God is portrayed in the ways one loves all the natural things including the nature, animals and other human beings. There human beings are in control of the energy of the universe which is hidden while still on earth hence each one of us exists in the grandness all of which is God.
Which is " better" , to doubt everything that is less than certain or highly probable , or to believe falsehoods ?
Definitely believing n falsehoods doesn't seem to be the best option to make and doubting things that are less than certain is better. Basically not all belief of somebody are false and it's a fact that people have falsehoods that they have taken for truths therefore doubting less certain things means that one is able to be careful in dealing with such things through careful examination of each article leading to a building of proper foundation on which ones judgment and decisions on certain beliefs can be based.
"It is impossible for normal people to believe that free will does not exist. Therefore, it does exist". Evaluate this remark.
The statement that since it's impossible for normal people not to have a free will thus rendering it a statement intertwined between metaphysical situation and psychological statement and has no strict logical argument. The 'therefore' word used in the statement creates a false situation as opposed to 'it does' word therefore meaning that free will might as well not exist in normal people contrary to the initial deduction of the statement. The fact remains that people feel like they have free will therefore and that is why people perceive that it it's not possible not to have a free will.
"Most people believe in God; therefore , God must exist." Evaluate this claim.
The statement that since most people believe in God then he must exist is not true because many people believe in many things and belief in statements which does not have empirical evidence or proven facts does not make it true at all. In the past many people believed that slavery was alright and that earth was flat but eventually such beliefs were face out due to provision of evidence contrary to such beliefs. Truth is basically based on prove which most religious in the world have failed to therefore the statement is not true.
Is the fact that the world is intelligible evidence of divine design?
The fact that world is intelligible and that intelligently natural bodies act in ways directed towards attaining a designated ends especially after considering the empirical facts that operations of natural bodies are directed towards ends clearly shows that an intelligent deity exists. He died because God called on him." "The sprinkler stopped working due to fate". Are these claims equally meaningless? Explain. Is the claim "God exist" verifiable or falsifiable? Are any (other) claims made about God verifiable? The claims fall short of the verification principle as despite the attempts by ontonological argument it can not prove the existence of God hence it's not an analytically true claim. Therefore In order for the claim 'God exists' to be meaningful it must be empirically verifiable thus rendering such claims meaningless as for now.
Assuming there is scientific evidence that the universe had an absolute beginning, does that evidence also proves the existence of God?. Explain.
Assuming that there was an absolute beginning of the universe then it must therefore implies that there must be an eternal being who is exist and posses infinite knowledge which enabled him to create the universe. But the fact remains that such finite beginnings does not necessarily prove God existence. If God is all powerful, all knowing and all good, why does he/she allow evil to pervade the world? Why is the world filled with so much misery and suffering?ÿ If God is not all powerful how do you account for the existence of evil in the world? Evil is not real but rather a perception of the reality as people [perceive things to be evil which in real sense are nature in action, pain, grief, disease and death re normal experiences but human beings being fueled by religious and deflationary fancies more through wishful thoughts.