Arguments for the Existence of God: 1) Anthropological, 2) Cosmological, 3) Ontological, 4) Teleological, 5) Congruity, and 6) Law 1) ANTHROPOLOGICAL ARGUMENT: HUMAN NATURE REVEALS A PERSONAL GOD. The anthropological argument is also called the moral or psychological argument because it reasons that the higher parts of human nature could never have come from non-intelligent matter. Man’s intellect must come from the First Cause, and since the First Cause possesses qualities far higher and different than materialism (proved by cosmological and teleological arguments) then man must have come from God. Strong considered the anthropological argument highly complex and divided it into three parts, including: 1. Man’s intellectual and moral nature must have had for its author an intellectual and moral Being. 2. Man’s moral nature proves the existence of a holy lawgiver and judge. 3. Man’s emotional and voluntary nature proves the existence of a Being who can furnish in himself a satisfying object of human affection and an end which will call forth man’s highest activities and ensure his highest progress. 2) COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT: NATURE REVEALS GOD’S POWER AND GODHEAD. The cosmological argument is based upon the fact of causation or that God is the First Cause. Because something (nature) cannot come from nothing, and something (Creation) does exist by itself, therefore there must have been a force more powerful than nature to create the world. Hence, the existence of Creation implies a Creator. The word “cosmological” comes from kosmas (world) and logos (word). It is a study of the world as it reveals God. Two things are known about God from the study of nature. First, “His eternal power,” and, second, His “Godhead.” This means a study of nature reveals the omnipotent power of God and the personhood of God. What 3 things is the Cosmological argument dependent upon? The cosmological argument depends upon the validity of three contributing truths: (a) that every effect must have a cause; (b) that the effect is dependent upon its cause for its existence; and (c) that nature cannot produce itself. Major Premise: The present world reflects an interrelated existence that is described as a cause-and-effect relationship. Minor Premise: Everything begun traces its existence back to an independent and all-powerful First Cause that had a prior existence. Conclusion: Therefore, the world must be the result of an omnipotent and eternal First Cause that exercises free will. 3) ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT: OUR THOUGHTS OF GOD IMPLY THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. This is not one of the strongest arguments for the existence of God. But the probability of God’s existence is established in the descending credibility of the previous arguments. However, once God’s existence is accepted and the aspects of His self-revelation are examined, the ontological argument illustrates His existence. The word “ontological” comes from ovτoς (ontos, being) and λoγoς (logos, word). This is an argument to prove the existence of God from man’s idea of a perfect being. It was originated by Anselm during the Middle Ages. He said man has the idea of a perfect being. Since a more perfect or greater being cannot be conceived, there must be a perfect being to correspond to the idea. Anselm implies actual existence is a necessary conclusion to actual thought of the most perfect being. He stated, “An ideal thing, however perfect in conception, cannot answer to the idea of the most perfect. Hence we must admit the actual existence; for only with this content can we have the idea of the most perfect being. This most perfect being is God. Therefore God must exist.” This argument does not reason from effect to cause as do the other arguments to prove God’s existence. Whereas the others are inductive in nature, this is deductive, and as such does not lead to probability or certainty, but to logical certitude only if the premise is unchallenged. But the phenomenology of perception is greatly influenced by subjective desire, subconscious motives, and sociological conditioning. The rationalistic philosopher Descartes added an inductive aspect to this argument. He said the idea of a perfect and infinite Being cannot be derived from a finite and imperfect man. Therefore, there must be a perfect and infinite Being who put an idea of His being in man. 4) TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT: DESIGN IN THE UNIVERSE IMPLIES/REVEALS A DESIGNER. The word “teleological” comes from τελoς (telos, end) and λoγoς (logos, word), which is a study of God as He is revealed in the design or goal of His Creation. God is an intelligent Creator because of the design that is apparent in the animate and inanimate universe. Thus, the teleological argument implies a Creator because of the design that is apparent in the world. Hodge notes the teleological argument “is ultimately based upon the recognition of the operations of an intelligent cause in nature.”x Thiessen states the argument, “Order and useful arrangement in a system imply intelligence and purpose in the originating cause; the universe is characterized by order and useful arrangement; therefore the universe has an intelligent and free cause.”xi Thiessen cites Psa. 94:9 as a biblical example of the use of the teleological argument. Here the psalmist reminds us that someone “planted the ear” and “formed the eye.” Baker goes as far as to state that the teleological argument demonstrates the personality of God, writing, “the various things and objects which make up the universe appear to have been made to fulfill a purpose, to accomplish a certain end. There seems to be some intelligence or mind behind the Creation, i.e., a Cause which is intelligent and purposeful, and therefore personal.”xii Some might question whether intelligence alone is enough to determine personality without an indication of emotion. 5) ARGUMENTS FROM CONGRUITY: THE EXISTENCE OF GOD IS IN HARMONY WITH THE FACTS. “Congruity” means agreement, harmony or correspondence. This is not a separate argument for the existence of God, nor does it add any content to the general self-revelation of God. The existence of God is in harmony (congruity) with all facts, whether those facts be connected with man’s innate knowledge of God, the revelation of God in nature, or the knowledge of God that man can have through or as a result of his rational process. This argument states that since there is a lack of conflicting evidence that God does not exist, the rational mind can only accept the existence of God as revealed through general revelation. What does the existence of laws imply? Laws imply the existence of a lawgiver. B. LAWS IMPLY THE EXISTENCE OF A LAWGIVER. This aspect of the general revelation of God is debated by theologians. What does law in society give evidence of? Some feel that the existence of laws in society or the existence of a moral law within the individual is evidence of God’s self-revelation. They argue that, since laws are an extension of the nature of God, the presence of laws in society are our evidence that God has made man a social creature and placed within man a desire for law and order. Obviously they do not say civil law is meritorious, but that its existence reveals God the lawgiver. Also, they imply that man’s inborn impulse to judge others who break the law is evidence of that law. Dr. Elmer Towns, Dean of Theological Seminary and Department of Religion Liberty University, Lynchburg, VA Textbook: Theology Today, pgs. 36-42
Posted on: Sun, 06 Oct 2013 23:39:04 +0000