This topic is a bit over my head for the fact that I never though this complex before about God. I can see Saint Anselm’s idea being well supported, but everyone has their own reality and ideas of what perfectionism really is? Does God have different forms, and personalities
However, he further explores the concept of God 's existence to find definite evidence which can support his principles and ideologies; a definite certainty. Descartes’s main argument can be seen in the Fifth Mediation as well as some earlier comments in the Third Mediation (New World Encyclopedia, 2016). Moreover, he argues that knowledge derives from the certainty of the existence of one’s own consciousness and the innate ideas it holds. To attain absolute certainty, Descartes uses the methodical doubt. This method is supportive of Descartes’s will to emphasis on doubt and question anything that can be doubted.
Same in the case of belief, Pascal’ s view is that people who believes in God’s existence is entitled to infinite gains. Under this situation people choose to believe in god because they can gains infinite benefits but not keep their logical mind. Thus, people's thinking is not always keep
According to a philosopher, Pascal Wenger, one 's belief about God existing is based on self-interest. He argues that it is in our interest to believe that God exists and hence from his point of view it is rational for us human beings to do so. Furthermore, he adds that if we believe in God 's existence and he truly exists then, we are bound to receive a reward in heaven but if he doesn 't exist we won 't have lost a thing. Finally, he concludes those who do not believe in God 's existence; then he exists they are bound to receive an endless penalty in heaven. Also, other arguments about the existence of God include the ontological perspective which tries to argue from the point of abstract reasoning.
Why would believing in a higher power create a positive effect on people if there was not any truth behind the belief? Those who object to this argument would say that the positive benefits of religious belief occur due to the placebo effect; however, this can disputed by the question of if religious belief is placebo in place of the real treatment, then what is the real treatment, and if the real treatment is materialistic, then why is it not old as happiness itself and why does the positive effects that it stimulates dissipate over time? This means that the positive effects have to stem from something or someone that is eternal and is not a part of the material world. Science has been stigmatized as the rival of religion because of its presumed ability to contradict religious beliefs; however, this stigma is a myth. Science and religion can work hand in hand in a similar fashion as reason and faith.
Descartes understands there is an existence of a superior being(God) due to the knowledge humanity has obtained. Indeed, certain ideas created can only be obtained through our mind and not our senses. Therefore, the idea of God, leads Descartes to believe there is a superior being influencing the ways of humanity. Hume on the other hand, relies on empirical evidence of the universe to prove that God exists. The natural Phenomena’s of the universe are clear representations of a superior creator: God.
These religious references build upon each other to develop Burgess’ notion that God created humans with free will, and how this leaves humankind flawed and prone to evil tendences. Though, despite this, humanity’s free will is the most important thing to both God and humanity itself. Burgess sees humans as beings
If someone believes that God created the world, then He is the reason why the laws of logic exist. Everything humans know today is because God himself made it that way. Humanity can be logically explained by God’s existence because if we believe in the religious stories which
Furthermore, the mind is believed to have been given to us by God in order to reach the truth; even Abdu’l-Baha, the successor of the Baha’i faith, states that “God has given us rational minds for this purpose, to penetrate all things, to find truth. If one renounce reason, what remains? The sacred texts? How can we understand God’s commands and to what use can we put them without the balance of reason?” Explaining that it would not be possible for them to gain access to everything without the usage of reason and that we would not be able to properly use God’s teachings without reason. The Baha’i resemble those who follow monism, accepting science and reason, though the difference is that the Baha’i see science as being given to by God and not a part of God, as in
Its all about beliefs if you ask me I would say that we do live in a matrix and are hook up into an experience machine, for me this would be God’s creation. We can not prove this is true but we also can not prove it is not. We think that what we perceive is real, because we touch, see, smell, hear or and taste it. But this are only signs that our brain gives us. What if nothing is real and it is all an illusion?