Proof of God's Existence While Philosophers have sought thousands of years to provide proof that God exists, which of these arguments: Ontological argument (God contains all perfections, including existence. God necessarily exists), Cosmological argument (All things are the result of earlier causes; that causal sequence had to begin, and only God could have begun it), or Argument from design (Things in nature demonstrate too much complexity and design to have arisen by accident; God must exist in order to have created and designed that complexity), seem to be the best proof of the existence of God?  

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles
You are trying to use logic, a human invention, to discuss the "existence" of a being or force beyond logic. Just because we can form the sentence "Does God exist?" does not make the inquiry valid.
Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

If there were a proof of God's existence, there would be no controversy.  Saying things like, "the complexity of our world proves a devine intervention in its creation", is no more a proof of God's existence,than saying "I'm sure there's a God because I don't think man created his own universe."

A significant problem in discussions like this revolves around what one's idea of God happens to be.  Is she a force, a being...or merely that ill-defined thing we call "nature"?

Since there is no universal definition of God, and vast differences in religeous beliefs throughout the world, the likelihood of proof of God's existence to the satisfaction of the majority of human beings seems unlikely in the extreme.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

1. "God contains all perfections, including existence. God necessarily exists": This addresses more the identity, the defining attribute, of God rather than addressing the causative principles behind the presence of God.

2. "All things are the result of earlier causes; that causal sequence had to begin, and only God could have begun it": This presents a logical fallacy since an exhaustive catalogue of the inceptions of causalities doesn't exist.

3. "Things in nature demonstrate too much complexity and design to have arisen by accident; God must exist in order to have created and designed that complexity": This is persuasive speculation based upon observable fact. Of the three, this is most plausible since it acknowledges within itself its speculative nature.

A fourth persuasive argument option favored by some is akin to the persuasive argument for the notion of romantic love, one never yet successfully refuted: "I feel something life changing, valuable and affirmative and euphoric otherwise unaccountable; therefore it must be God [or: therefore it must be love]".

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

I don't need proof - I believe. Because I believe, I interpret all things through the lens of my faith and belief in the existence of God. Because I interpret all things through that lens, I don't have to explain how God came to exist before all other things or how God caused or shaped the creation of the universe - I believe that it happened and that many things are beyond my human ability to understand or explain in a rational, logical manner.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

There is no way to prove that God exists.  There is also no way to prove that God does not exist.  God also might have existed, but exist no more.  After all, some believe that God is dead.  I am not sure how that fits in with your definition of Heaven and Hell, but it does get complicated.

Posted on
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Until God materializes and addresses each and every living creature on Earth, there can be no proof that God exists, and atheists and agnostics would not believe in God even in the case of this scenario. "Faith" is the key word here, and the belief in a Supreme Being is based on this one word. 

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Out of the three, I would say that argument by design is the easiest support.  However, I also agree with post 3 that this is still very subjective.  I see God in the design of nature because I believe in God.  The designs and intricacies of life support my belief but they do not prove it.  I think the whole point is that you can't prove God exists.  Of course, you can't prove that he doesn't exist either.  Belief in any deity is a matter of faith rather than proof.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

None of these three seems to be any real sort of proof.  I agree with the basic idea of Post #3.  I would add to that the argument that, if everything must be the result of an earlier cause, then we have to wonder what caused God.  I don't think that it's proof to say "everything came from something else UNTIL WE GET TO GOD."

We can't prove the existence of God.  It's something we have to take on faith or on the evidence of our own emotions.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

The problem, as #3 clearly states by example, is that any attempt to prove God must be by a process beyond human reason, or as the Catholics like to say, as an "Act of Faith."  That requires a jump from one postulate to another, which may or may not be logically warranted as in a proof, as statement #2 in the preceding post analyzed. If God is All-in-All, the Be-All and End-All, human constructs, which by definition serve to delineate, cannot contain the concept of a divinity, since by definition a divinity transcends all human constructs.

Certainly there is structure, wonder and beauty in the Universe. Those may be presented as evidence of divinity, but they are not proof.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

The ones that you mention are certain the most popular ones. However, there are others. While I was in graduate school one of the famous ones was rooted in history. The argument goes something like this. The vast majority of people in the world from a historical point of view believed in the divine. This went across different cultures and peoples. Atheism is something fairly new. In addition, sociologists point out that religion is on the upswing even in our modern world. So, the sheer number of people, according to this line of reasoning has some power.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team

We’ll help your grades soar

Start your 48-hour free trial and unlock all the summaries, Q&A, and analyses you need to get better grades now.

  • 30,000+ book summaries
  • 20% study tools discount
  • Ad-free content
  • PDF downloads
  • 300,000+ answers
  • 5-star customer support
Start your 48-Hour Free Trial