This presentation covers all the philosophical theories for the existence of God.

2.  It is fundamental question which we
used to ask ourselves at sometime in
our lives.
 The starting point for most philosophy
of religion is a very general doctrine
about the nature of God, known as
Theism. This is the view that one God
exists, that he or she is omnipotent
(capable of doing anything), omniscient
(knows everything), and supremely
benevolent (all-good)

3.  The first arguments for God’s existence is the
Design Argument, sometimes also known as the
Teleological Argument (from the Greek word
‘telos’ which means ‘purpose’).
 This states that if we look around us at the natural
world we can’t help noticing how everything in it is
suited to the function it performs: everything bears
evidence of having been designed. This is supposed
to demonstrate the existence of a Creator.
 Supporters of the Design Argument, such as
William Paley (1743–1805), claim that the
complexity and efficiency of natural objects such as
the eye are evidence that they must have been
designed by God.

4.  Argument from the analogy or
comparison between human eyes and
watch.
 This is an argument from an effect to its
cause: we look at the effect (the watch or
the eye), and from examination of it we
try to tell what caused it (a watchmaker
or a Divine Watchmaker).
 It relies on the principle that if two things
are similar in some respects they will very
likely be similar in others.

6.  Arguments from analogy rely on there being a strong
similarity between the two things being compared. If the
similarity is weak, then the conclusions that can be drawn
on the basis of the comparison are correspondingly weak.

7.  The second weakness of the argument is suggested by
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural
selection in the origin of Species.
 Darwin argued that complex organisms results from
natural selection, not design.
 Darwin showed how, by a process of the survival of
the fittest, those animals and plants best suited to
their environments lived to pass on their
characteristics to their offspring.
 Darwin’s theory of evolution in no way disproves
God’s existence – indeed, many Christians accept it as
the best explanation of how plants, animals, and
human beings came to be as they are: they believe
that God created the mechanism of evolution itself.
But Darwin explained theory of evolution as cause of
environment and Mechanism of Biological Adaptation
not GOD.

8. 1. Fails to support Monotheism- the view
that there is one God.
2. The argument doesn’t necessarily
support the view that the Designer was
all-powerful.
3. The designer is all knowing and all
good.

9.  The First Cause Argument, sometimes known as
the Cosmological Argument.
 It comes from Greek word ‘cosmos’ means
‘universe’, and concerned with the cause of the
world.
 The first cosmological argument was presented by
Greek philosopher Aristotle, who claimed that
there must be a ‘Prime Mover’ – the original
source of motion in our world.
 The First Cause Argument states that absolutely
everything has been caused by something else
prior to it: nothing has just sprung into existence
without a cause.

10. 1. Argument from the
motion.
 All moving object have a source of
motion.

11. 2. Argument from Causality
 Everything which exist must have cause
of its existence.

12. 3. Argument from Contingency
 Everything which exists is depend upon
something else for its existence and
might at some stage not exist.
 Possibility and Necessity.

13. 1. Self Contradictory:
 What caused God?
2. Not a proof:

14.  No evidence for a God who is either
all-knowing and all-good

15.  The word Ontological derived from Greek term
‘Ontos’ which means ‘being’ and ‘logos’ mean
‘rational account’.
 The ontological argument was proposed
by Anselm of Canterbury in 1078.
 The Ontological Argument show the existence of
God necessarily from the definition of God as the
supreme being. Because this conclusion can be
drawn prior to experience, it is known as an a
Priori Argument, a Latin word which means
"from the earlier“.

16. 1. God is "that than which nothing
greater can be conceived“.
2. Something which exists in reality
and in mind is greater than
something that exists as an idea in
mind alone
3. God may exists in either mind or
in reality as well.

17. 1. Absurd
Consequences
Gaunilo’s Perfect Island

18. 2. Existence is not a
property
 Kant's objection to the
ontological argument is that
existence is not a property that
can be attributed to beings like
we can attribute other
properties such as being blue,
hard, or round.

19.  It is a state of affairs that involves
the suffering of an innocent
human being.
 The presence of Evil in the world
seems to oppose the idea that
God is all good

20. 1. Natural Evil: It is a state of affairs
involving the suffering of an innocent
human being that is not the direct
consequence of any human action. The
natural evils are the evils we suffer at the
hands of nature, independently of our own
collective agency.

21. 2. Human Evil or Moral Evil: It is an
episode of suffering caused by human
activity. The human evils are the evils
we inflict upon one another.

22.  The problem of evil refers to the question of how to
reconcile the existence of evil with
an omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent.
 The argument from evil attempts to show that the co-
existence of evil and such a God is unlikely or
impossible.
 The problem of evil is often formulated in two forms:
1. The logical problem of evil
2. The evidential problem of evil

23. 1. Logical problem of Evil
If God is benevolent,
he would want to
remove evil and
suffering.
If God is omniscient,
he would know how
to remove evil and
suffering
If God is omnipotent,
he would be able to
remove evil and
suffering.
But evil and suffering
do exist
Therefore, God can
not exist
Both God and evil can
not exist

24. 2. Evidential problem of Evil

25. 1. Saintliness:
 The solution proposes that evil can be justified because
it produces greater moral goodness in the world than
would be present without the presence of evil.
Objection:
I. The first objection focuses upon the degree and extent
of suffering in the world.
II. It is not obvious that a world in which great evil exists
would be preferable to one in which there was less evil
and as a result fewer saints and heroes.

26. 2. Artistic Analogy:
 According to artistic analogy, evil
contributes the overall harmony or
beauty of the world.
Objection:
I. It is difficult to believe.
II. Theistic assumption regarding the nature
of God.

27.  The Freewill Defense states that evil
and suffering in the world are the
result of human beings’ free will, (the
ability to choose for ourselves what
to do).
 God allows evil for the sake of our
free will. Free will is a great good,
and it is impossible for God to give us
free will without allowing evil. So,
God allows evil to exist

28. 1. It make two basic
assumptions
2. Free will but no Evil
3. Doesn’t explain the Natural
Evil

29.  A miracle (from the Latin mirari, to wonder).
 Two definitions of Miracle first, something that is
not naturally possible and so must have occurred
because of supernatural intervention; and, second,
anything caused by supernatural intervention (even
if it is naturally possible).
 Both definitions are problematic — the first
because it is practically impossible to demonstrate
that something in particular cannot occur because
of natural means, and the second because it is
practically impossible to distinguish between a
natural and a supernatural event when both look
identical.

30.  According to Hume, a “miracle is a violation of the laws of nature.”
 Hume thought that the only evidence we have of miracles are
testimonies.
 “no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony be
of a such kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous”
 Miracle stories are chiefly found among “uneducated and uncivilized
nation”
 Religious people are the type to believe emotional miracle
stories.(Psychological Factor)
 Miracle testimonies found in all religions can not be true-cancel each
other out.
 Never been a miracle witnessed by enough “men”of “unquestioned good
sence”.

31.  This argument was given by a
philosopher and mathematician,
Blaise Pascal who is usually known as
‘Pascal Wager’
 According to this argument, the
existence of God depends upon one’s
self interest.

32. 1. If you believe in God and God does exist, you will be rewarded
with eternal life in heaven: thus an infinite gain.
2. If you do not believe in God and God does exist, you will
be condemned to remain in hell forever: thus an infinite loss.
3. If you believe in God and God does not exist, you will not be
rewarded: thus an insignificant loss.
4. If you do not believe in God and God does not exist, you will
not be rewarded, but you have lived your own life: thus an
insignificant gain.

34. 1. Can not simply decide to
believe
2. Inappropriate Argument