The existence of god based on

It is not possible, Cleanthes argues, that we would hesitate for a moment to ascribe some design and purpose to this voice and conclude that it bears some resemblance to the intelligent source of a human voice D, 3.

The existence of God Based on Religious Experience

Supernatural beings may be able to conceal and reveal themselves for their own purposes, as for example in the tale of Baucis and Philemon. I will allow, that pain or misery in man is compatible with infinite power and goodness in the Deity, even in your sense of these attributes: It follows from this that many other hypotheses and conjectures, consistent with the evidence presented, may be considered as no less plausible.

There could be trigger factors or contexts to having such an experience, for example, near death experiences, conversion to another religion or better set of valuesindividual or collective worship and the sheer beauty of the universe.

In many spiritual systems religious or independent of religion the human instinct is held in high regard. Is God able to prevent evil but unwilling to do so?

Nature of relevant proofs and arguments[ edit ] John Polkinghorne suggests that the nearest analogy to the existence of God in physics is the ideas of quantum mechanics which are seemingly paradoxical but make sense of a great deal of disparate data.

Another question then arises, beyond psychological disorder, are we experiencing God, or have we misunderstood? From this perspective, the central issue is not whether Hume is right in claiming that it is impossible for any miracle claim to be established as morally certain i.

If they are educated, sensible and critical we will more readily believe them than if they are ignorant and gullible. James lists four qualifiers of mystical experiences: In other words, presuppositionalists do not believe that the existence of God can be proven by appeal to raw, uninterpreted, or "brute" facts, which have the same theoretical meaning to people with fundamentally different worldviews, because they deny that such a condition is even possible.

The enormous degree of evil in this world, and the vast range of forms that it takes, are impossible to explain or justify from our human perspective i. Lewisin Mere Christianity and elsewhere, raised the argument from desire. For the logical positivists and adherents of similar schools of thought, statements about religious or other transcendent experiences can not have a truth valueand are deemed to be without meaning, because such statements do not have any clear verification criteria.

That no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavours to establish; and even in that case there is a mutual destruction of arguments… EU, By this means, human beings hope to control what they do not understand and are afraid of.

In an especially important passage, which was inserted into the Dialogues shortly before Hume died, Philo elaborates on his view. Then he is not omnipotent. Given this account of miracles, understood as violations of laws of nature, how should we evaluate claims that miracles have occurred?

If God is both willing and able to prevent evil then why is there evil in the world? It is clear that the theist is in no position to support this claim.

If we cannot reduce talk about God to anything else, or replace it, or prove it false, then perhaps God is as real as anything else. Maimonides argued that because every physical object is finite, it can only contain a finite amount of power.

Are there any marks of a distributive justice in this world? There are a number of objections to the ontological argumentwhich many, though not all, accept as decisive. We have no experience of any Zs at all.

Perhaps the harsh stance of the Logical Positivists does not produce any answers to our continuous questions.The ontological argument is an argument for God’s existence based entirely on reason. According to this argument, there is no need to go out looking for physical evidence of God’s existence; we can work out that he exists just by thinking about it.

Jan 20,  · Can Science Prove The Existence Of God? The things I listed earlier are based on the assumption that any life that’s out there is going to be like us in the sense that it will be based on. Other arguments for the existence of God have been proposed by St.

Existence of God

Anselm, who formulated the first ontological argument; Ibn Rushd (Averroes) and Thomas Aquinas, who presented their own versions of the cosmological argument (the kalam argument and the first way, respectively); René Descartes, who said that the existence of a. Other articles where Existence of God is discussed: Western philosophy: Anselm: proofs of the existence of God, all of which are based on Neoplatonic thought.

The first proof moves from the awareness of a multiplicity of good things to the recognition that they all share or participate more or less in one and the same Good, which is. Similarly, since we have no (abstract) idea of existence, distinct from the conception of particular objects, there is no basis for claiming, as does Descartes in Meditations V, that the idea of God implies his actual existence.

Whatever idea of God we are able to frame is an idea of something that we can conceive of as either existing or not existing. 1. Examine the strengths and weaknesses of the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience.

Hume on Religion

(18) 2. ‘The argument merely indicates the probability of God and this is of little value to a religious believer.’.

The existence of god based on
Rated 3/5 based on 57 review