God's Existence

Life's Illusion is a not only a brand but more importantly an ideology. We want to see the world for what it is, without illusions or delusions, in hopes of creating a better societal paradigm. Probably the most common question we ask ourselves, is who and what are we and where did we come from? The most common answer we have come up with as a society and civilization is the existence of an afterlife and omnipotent being. We have compiled a short list of ideologies for and against the existence of god and an afterlife. We hope you find this information interesting and thought provoking as it has helped us find our way in the world.  

The nature of the contradiction in the states of mind of an atheist is that atheists do not believe in god. This infers that there is still a god they choose not to believe in him by their own reasons. Another contradiction according to Anselm is that Atheists believe that there is something else conceivably more powerful than god although god is omnipotent.

 Relationship between conceivability and existences.

  • According to Anselm a thing that necessarily exists is greater than something that contingently exists. Meaning that anything that can be conceivable to the mind, a human can find errors and conceive of something better. In order for god to be omnipotent, god must be a necessary being in which we cannot comprehend or see. There is no contradiction in a non-existent X as there would be with a contingent G that doesn’t necessarily exist. Meaning that contingent things in our world cannot be necessary. Being at a contingent state of being entails the imperfections that a necessary power might have therefore God being necessary is necessary in his omnipotence

 Posteriori proofs for god’s existence. (Aquinas 5 ways)

  • Argument of motion
    • Some things are in motion
    • Whatever is in motion is moved by something else in a state of actuality
    • A thing can be in a state of actuality or potentiality
    • So a thing cannot be the move and move itself
    • There must be a first mover or unmoved mover.
    • Therefore god exists.
  • Argument from the first cause or Nature of Efficient Cause
    • There is an order of efficient causes in the world
    • A thing cannot be the cause of itself, since it cannot be prior to itself
    • There must be a first causer.
    • Without the cause there is no effect.
    • Hence god exists.
  • Possibility and Necessity
    • Things in nature contingently exist
    • Things that contingently exist did not exists prior to their existence
    • So before they existed nothing was in existence
    • If everything has contingent existence, than nothing should be in existence.
    • There must necessarily be a thing who’s necessity is not caused by another, but causing the necessity of others.
    • Hence, god exists

Posteriori proof vs. priori proof

  • a posteriori proof is a proof that does not use reason but experience.
  • A priori proof is the contrast stating that the only way to gain knowledge is through the use of reason.

Efficient Cause

  • Efficient cause
    • The one that imposes the change
  • Material cause
    • That which is changed
  • Final cause
    • The end or purpose for which a change is produced
  • Formal causes
    • That into which something is changed

 Teleological Argument (Intelligent Design)

  • Our world could not of been created by dumb luck
  • From the distance we are to the son to how much oxygen and nitrogen consist in the air to how heated our planet is everything is created by some kind of intelligent designer to give our planet life.

Against Gods Existence 

Humes Criticism for the teleological argument is that if the universe is infinite and matter and motion are eternal than everything must happen at least once.

2nd is that it is a bad analogy; you cannot compare a watch to a watchmaker and universe to a universe maker.

3rd if there is an imperfect deign, then there must be an imperfect designer which goes against the statement that god is all good, all knowing, all true and good, and all powerful.

God Exists                                                      God does not

Believe: infinite gain finite loss

Finite loss

Not believe: infinite loss finite gain

Finite gain


Pascal faith and reason

  • Faith and reason are incompatible
  • Faith and reason are incomprehensible because god is all knowing and infinite
  • Practical reason is compatible with faith
    • Faith the knowing, practical the doing

Pascal believed that in order to believe you had to basically drown yourself in the habits of the believing. The human is very habitual by nature and the more you do it the more you will enculturate yourself into believing that that is your reality and then practical reason starts to envelope into faith.


  • Anything that causes human suffering
  • Natural
    • No human catalyst
  • Moral
    • Responsible person for suffering

The problem with evil         

  • If god is all powerful, then there is not limit to what he can do
  • If god is all knowing then there is no limit to what he knows
  • If god is all good then there he desires to eliminate evil as much as god can.
  • Evil Exists

Logical Problem of Evil

  • The idea of god who is all knowing, omnipotent, etc. is logically incompatible to the reality of evil. 

Evidential Problem of Evil

  • considering the cases of senseless evil in the world it is more probable that goes does not exist.

4 circumstances of evil

  • pain
  • general laws
  • limitations
  • inaccuracies
    • draught
    • earthquakes
    • rain is good but too much is bad, etc. 

Hick on the difference between Augustinian and Ireanean theodicies

  • Augustinian
    • When god created the world it was perfect… but then Adam and Eve created the downfall for human kind.
      • Inconsistencies internally
    • Irenaean
      • Image
        • Beasts -> Humans
      • Likeness
        • Human -> Children of god

Suffering of the soul are necessary to achieve some kind of greater good.

Morality begins with agreements

  • Language, morality, religion

Russell value of Philosophy

Thus, to sum up our discussion of the value of philosophy; Philosophy is to be studied, not for the sake of any definite answers to its questions since no definite answers can, as a rule, be known to be true, but rather for the sake of the questions themselves; because these questions enlarge our conception of what is possible, enrich our intellectual imagination and diminish the dogmatic assurance which closes the mind against speculation; but above all because, through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind also is rendered great, and becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good.

Leave a comment