Arguments for God's Existence

The definition of God's dictionary is a kind of supernatural and immortal, and has special power for human and natural life and matters. With many other people in the world, I believe that there is a higher person, also known as God. Therefore, I keep the existence of God. In reality, there are only two arguments that support the existence of God. One comes from reason and the other comes from experience. Rational arguments are ontological arguments.

Philosophers, atheists, and agnostics raised arguments against the existence of God. Some of these arguments argue that the existence of God does not correspond to observed facts; some are arguments that God does not exist because God's concept is incoherent or chaotic. Others criticize the evidence provided for the existence of God. Another argument states that the existence of the omniscient God is incompatible with the facts of free will - human beings have certainly made a choice. If God is omniscuous then he must know in advance what people will do in certain circumstances. In this case, people can not substitute God to actually know what they do, free will is an illusion. Furthermore, if a person chooses to commit a crime, can the person freely crime the crime?

Before attempting to explain and evaluate the moral argument about God's existence, it is beneficial to understand the purpose of God's existential argument. Of course, though the views on this are diverse, most contemporary supporters do not believe that theoretical arguments are "proof". They should provide effective arguments and prerequisites that reasonable people can not deny. Such success criterion obviously sets high criteria for success, and supporters of the argument of the writer can hardly meet such standards in philosophical discussions of interesting conclusions in fields other than formal logic It correctly points out. Is the premise of these arguments reasonable, at least for reasonable people, more reasonable than rejection?

SørenKierkegaard casts doubts on the existence of God and rejected all reasonable arguments about God's existence (including the theoretical argument) on the ground that it is necessarily accompanied by doubt. He argues that arguments in design do not take into account future events that may help weaken the evidence of the existence of God: the argument will never prove the existence of God. In philosophical section, Kierkegaard wrote: God's work is this, only God can do them. That's it, but where is God's work? I can guess that his work is not given directly and instantly. Natural wisdom, tenderness, and wisdom in world governance - Can these appear on the surface of things? Are we facing the most dreadful suspicion here and are not it ultimate to deal with all these questions?