There is a God

Hello there. I hope you will debate fairly and respectfully, Unlike other atheist users on this site (ahem. . Backwardseden. . . Ahem). You are welcome to present reasons and proof why you believe what you believe. I just want to tell you that I am a Roman Catholic and will try to be fair and reasonable without too much bias. I would also like to say that God loves you and wants you to be with him in paradise. Here are several reasons why God must exist: 1. Existence Argument There are things which come into existence. -Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else -There cannot be an infinite series of past causes -Therefore, There exists a first cause which did not come into existence. In other words, The first cause always existed. 2. The Design Argument -The universe displays a staggering amount of intelligibility, Both within the things we observe and in the way these things relate to others outside themselves. That is to say: the way they exist and coexist display an intricately beautiful order and regularity that can fill even the most casual observer with wonder. It is the norm in nature for many different beings to work together to produce the same valuable end"for example, The organs in the body work for our life and health. -Either this intelligible order is the product of chance or of intelligent design. -The chances of this being left up to chance are 456 quadrillion to 1. -Therefore the universe is the product of intelligent design. -Design comes only from a mind, Or the designer. -Therefore the universe is the product of an intelligent Designer. 3. The Argument From Conscience -Now where did conscience get such an absolute authority"an authority admitted even by the moral subjectivist and relativist? There are only four possibilities. -From something less than me (nature) -From me (individual) -From others equal to me (society) -From something above me (God) -Let's consider each of these possibilities in order. -How can I be absolutely obligated by something less than me"for example, By animal instinct or practical need for material survival? -How can I obligate myself absolutely? Am I absolute? Do I have the right to demand absolute obedience from anyone, Even myself? And if I am the one who locked myself in this prison of obligation, I can also let myself out, Thus destroying the absoluteness of the obligation which we admitted as our premise. -How can society obligate me? What right do my equals have to impose their values on me? Does quantity make quality? Do a million human beings make a relative into an absolute? Is "society" God? -The only source of absolute moral obligation left is something superior to me. This binds my will, Morally, With rightful demands for complete obedience. 4. The Common Consent Argument -Belief in God"that Being to whom reverence and worship are properly due"is common to almost all people of every era. -Either the vast majority of people have been wrong about this most profound element of their lives or they have not. -It is most plausible to believe that they have not. -Therefore it is most plausible to believe that God exists. The capacity for reverence and worship certainly seems to belong to us by nature. And it is hard to believe that this natural capacity can never, In the nature of things, Be fulfilled, Especially when so many testify that it has been. True enough, It is conceivable that this side of our nature is doomed to frustration; it is thinkable that those millions upon millions who claim to have found the Holy One who is worthy of reverence and worship were deluded. But is it likely? It seems far more likely that those who refuse to believe are the ones suffering from deprivation and delusion"like the tone-deaf person who denies the existence of music, Or the frightened tenant who tells herself she doesn't hear cries of terror and distress coming from the street below and, When her children awaken to the sounds and ask her, "Why is that lady screaming, Mommy? " tells them, "Nobody's screaming: it's just the wind, That's all. Go back to sleep. " 5. The Truth Argument This argument is closely related to the argument from consciousness. -Our limited minds can discover eternal truths about being. -Truth properly resides in a mind. -But the human mind is not eternal. -Therefore there must exist an eternal mind in which these truths reside. This proof might appeal to someone who shares a Platonic view of knowledge"who, For example, Believes that there are Eternal Intelligible Forms which are present to the mind in every act of knowledge. Given that view, It is a very short step to see these Eternal Forms as properly existing within an Eternal Mind. And there is a good deal to be said for this. But that is just the problem. There is too much about the theory of knowledge that needs to be said before this could work as a persuasive demonstration. 6. The Argument For the Origin and Idea of God This is an argument made famous by Rene DesCartes, The brilliant thinker. -We have ideas of many things. -These ideas must arise either from ourselves or from things outside us. -One of the ideas we have is the idea of God"an infinite, All-perfect being. -This idea could not have been caused by ourselves, Because we know ourselves to be limited and imperfect, And no effect can be greater than its cause. -Therefore, The idea must have been caused by something outside us which has nothing less than the qualities contained in the idea of God. -But only God himself has those qualities. -Therefore God himself must be the cause of the idea we have of him. -Therefore God exists. Consider the following common objection. The idea of God can easily arise like this: we notice degrees of perfection among finite beings"some are more perfect (or less imperfect) than others. And to reach the idea of God, We just project the scale upward and outward to infinity. Thus there seems to be no need for an actually existing God to account for the existence of the idea. All we need is the experience of things varying in degrees of perfection, And a mind capable of thinking away perceived limitations. But is that really enough? How can we think away limitation or imperfection unless we first recognize it as such? And how can we recognize it as such unless we already have some notion of infinite perfection? To recognize things as imperfect or finite involves the possession of a standard in thought that makes the recognition possible. Does that seem far-fetched? It does not mean that toddlers spend their time thinking about God. But it does mean that, However late in life you use the standard, However long before it comes explicitly into consciousness, Still, The standard must be there in order for you to use it. But where did it come from? Not from your experience of yourself or of the world that exists outside you. For the idea of infinite perfection is already presupposed in our thinking about all these things and judging them imperfect. Therefore none of them can be the origin of the idea of God; only God himself can be that. backwardseden will not be allowed to vote during the voting process. Sources: http://www. Peterkreeft. Com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence. Htm#11 http://gradresources. Org/evidence-for-gods-existence/