Various philosophers would argue that the existence of God is just an imagined thing of our thoughts. However, there are other kinds of accuracy that could be discussed, but at the end of the day, they are not convincing. The awareness that the God exists is reality among different kind of believers (Dawkins 12-37). Most believers claim to have their God and have a strong understanding of his nature, and even admit that he has a purpose for their lives. This sort of relationship is gained on the sensory and faithful basis. Several arguments have been put across in attempts to explain God’s existence. While some of them have denied God’s existence, majority of them overpower these pessimistic views about God’s existence by logically asserting that God exists.
The Ontological argument is one of the most vital attempts to exhibit the existence of God. This argument defines God as the Supreme Being that can be conceived, and, therefore, he must exist, because a being that does not exist would be a virtue of the fact and would lack the aspect that contributes to its magnitude. The big question from the critics is whether the existence really contributes to being’s magnitude. The Ontological argument explains the idea of all-perfect being, as what it means by God (James 260). Such perfections comprise all-powerful, all good, and all-knowing, and this leads to conclusion that God is all-perfect being. On the other side, according to this argument, if a being was all-knowing, this would mean that everything is encoded. However, if everything was encoded, how comes human beings have free will? Moreover, if God was all-powerful and all-good, will he not be willing to eliminate all evil from the world? Since God is all-powerful, he would definitely have the capability of doing so, but evil still exists in the world.
Cosmological argument, which is also known as the argument from the first cause, proposes another vital proof of a coherent justification for the existence of God. This justification was developed in the 18th century. The significant description of this argument contends that to explain the existence of the dependent universe is crucial to propose a necessary being whose existence is not dependent on anything else. God is this necessary being. Critics have argued that the universe might be the brute fact (a fact without explanation) of the existence. They affirm that proving the existence of God is not the same as proving the existence of a necessary being. Some properties which are considered essential to God might lack in a necessary being, such as all-good. Cosmological argument explains that every event must have a cause, which in turn must have its cause, except that there should be the first cause, which itself is uncaused (James 260). Therefore, a being that we call God is the first cause that is uncaused. The argument contradicts itself because the first argument portrays that for every event to happen there should be a cause, while the second idea contrasts that there must be an event which is its self uncaused, and therefore, this argument fails.
The existence of God can be also proved according to teleological argument, which is also known as the argument from design. It asserts that the universe resembles a machine. An 18th century theologian, William Paley best supported this view. The theory states that since the machines are produced by bright beings, and because the universe may be considered as a single high multifaceted machine, it is probably that great intelligence created the universe, and that great intelligence is believed to be God. An 18th century Scottish philosopher, David Hume presented a classic analysis of this argument, which maintains that the analogy to a machine is insubstantial and that other analogies are just as credible. For example, since the universe is thought of as a living organism, this means that the universe might have been formed by reproduction rather than by design. Teleological argument affirms that the universe exhibits regulation and, more significantly, purpose. The universe must have a designer/creator. God is the creator/designer (James 261). This view argues that the universe is a machine, but supposing the universe is more like a living organism, such as a plant, then a plant has neither a designer nor a creator.
The atheist argument denies the suggestion of spirits. Atheist explanation discard the postulation that there is disembodied spirit or that spiritual entities of any kind implement a relaxed agency, which implies that there is no God (James 281). The atheist argument fails because it cannot prove that there are no intangible spirits. Atheistic thinkers have generally acknowledged an effective base for ethical issues. For instance, atheists stress on moral reflection as personal rather than authoritarian, this-worldly than rather than other-worldly, so that the rewards of moral endeavors of human self-respect and merit must come from the quality of the cultured living (James 282). The argument does not succeed since it is based on the prior assumption that God does not exist and the principal that there are no intangible spirits. Atheists as well believe that there is no good reason for one to believe that God exists (James 297). The majority atheists acquire this and the reality that God does not exist to be the identical distinction. If we were to amend the subject, this argument would make sense. Suppose we had said that there is no tremendous explanation for anyone to trust that the flying pink elephants exist, then flying pink elephants do not exist. No problem with the very last argument, since flying pink elephants would be infinite creatures, but God is not a finite being, as long as the ordinary universe is concerned. Therefore, this argument fails too.
At some point, the world felt that God’s existence can never be proven, and yet human mind demanded answer on his existence. There is nothing wrong with investigating God’s existence, although the logical answers are not adequate to explain the spiritual reality of God (Dawkins 12-37). However, we have the freedom to do as we wish. The brains that we have allow us to explore matters about the world and the universe. Still, some people are looking into the future to prove the existence of God. They have deferred their conclusions till the right time comes, but Descartes has a different opinion.
Descartes meditates on what he knows and how he knows it in his meditation. He makes reservations for his preliminary beliefs to discover whether what he really knows is true or not. The major basis for knowledge of all those things that he has experienced is the senses. Body senses give us the traits of finite existence but does not give us existence itself. The mind has limited know-how, but it has one infinite proposal it can reflect on; so that for infinite to use it properly, it must be first brought down into the finite. Descartes finds himself in the problem of proving God’s existence in his attempts to find infallible truth of his foundational believe. This moves him from the world and makes him examine the inhabitant idea of infinity in his thoughts of God’s existence. In Descartes attempts to describe God’s existence, he compares his own life with actual appreciation and the connection between God and good. Through a scientific process, Descartes determines the form of existence that God must have. In the beginning, Descartes shows that to exist is to be good, and therefore, all things that have a superior goodness must have a higher or an extra complete existence (Freddoso 56-66). The idea that God is the highest good shows that God should have a higher existence than human does.
It is not because God is bigger or stronger, but he has an objected reality; so the reality of God is the same as the one we have. The idea that God does not come from potential to being affirms that he is an actual being. However, God has not created everything and everyone with precision, since this would mean that God shares our potential and existence; thus, a human could develop into God. Humans are defective, and therefore, they need to nurture for what is there to mature. God is immeasurable, and for that reason we have a connection with him, because we have been given inestimable will, and only wholly infinite beings can produce infinite things. God is one with no diversification. God is not a diverse number of parts; he is unison and does not transform. Humans do not exist in the same way physically.
The greatest gift to humanity from God is the potentiality to do the good. There can be found a scientific idea of God. Descartes stated that he deals with ideas, and the experience from the surrounding world has certainly been his learning form. In his effort to understand the world, his encounter with the world around him has shaped his understanding. When then idea has nothing to do with the world around him, he deliberately creates the cause and effect that has to be equal. The change from the potential to actual is what is termed as life. This enables him to know why he cannot go any further than the place that he occupies in his own progress of his actuality. We are led to believe that we choose to do good because God is in charge of our life. God does not prearrange one’s life in which way he or she does the good, and therefore, one’s way to do good is legitimate; one has to get enough understanding of his/her own life to do the good. God has given us infinite will and can build the destiny of our life, but since it is truly ours, we have to build the understanding of ourselves. What we do not know, we should admit that we do not know it. We should accept that we do not know ourselves as intelligences.
Descartes actually confronts the purpose of his life and connection with God in his meditations by questioning all things. Descartes was able to know the existence of God and the way he exists by investigating the innate idea. Descartes knew that the purpose of existing is shaping attributes of God, which is to accomplish the good. In the course of adventuring on his investigation to find infallible truth, he faces the problem of God’s existence and turns from the world to study the intrinsic idea of infinity in his contemplation of God’s existence (Freddoso 20-45). Eventually, Descartes described what God’s existence is compared to human life and truly understood the connection between God and good. Essentially, there exists a supreme unnatural authority, and this is God.