ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Religion and Philosophy»
  • Atheism & Agnosticism

Does God Really Exist? My Argument for God

Updated on September 1, 2016
Patrick Patrick profile image

Patrick Patrick just recently started posting articles on Hubpages. He is a graduate with a degree in Bio-medical Sciences.

God is not Dead

Argument For God
Argument For God | Source

Is God Really There?

Arguments for and against the existence of God are fairly common in the world of philosophy. Whether from the empirical approach or plain rationalism, the argument about God (and creation in general) is far from over - Wanna hear my argument? No? Damn it.....I’ll give it any way. So let's get right to it.

For as long as our history as human beings has been documented, various individuals have claimed to have encountered God or Angels. That is a fact- They have claimed this. Now, while a good majority has either lied with others being delusional or experiencing hallucinations etc, we have to wonder if there are a few who may have actually encountered God or Angels. I know many Christians will argue that many Jew got to interact with Jesus, which is evidence enough- But let's not Jesus for this argument-Is there any other proof?

Through philosophy and science, a good number of "very smart" individuals have come to one conclusion- There is no God and there is no such thing as creation. While I do not have any proof to show that God exists, I have to say- Any "Intelligent" philosopher or scientists who can argue with a hundred percent certainty that there is no God is a complete FOOL. Why do I call them fools? Think for a moment about how big the universe is- Does it have any end? To what extent does it spread across space? It is so damn big that some very prominent scientists of our time have noted it would be foolish to assume that we are alone.

Now, it is a fact that no scientist or philosopher, or any other person for that matter has all knowledge about the entire universe- physical. So, if they don't have all knowledge about the physical, how can they say they have some real knowledge that a supreme creator does not exist?

I have always been of the opinion that those who vehemently argue that there is no God either have their own agenda or are simply not as intelligent as they think they are.

Let's be realistic for a moment- is there a single argument or proof that can convince us that there is no God? If your answer is yes, then it is likely that you did not pose questions to such arguments and you are easily convinced by any argument out there.

Let's use some little assumptions, shall we?

Imagine for a minute that you are all alone, and an Angel appears to you (An angel or God himself) - Just for argument sake. Now, you encounter this supernatural being and decide to go out and share this information with others, even scientists and evolutionists, telling them that you really did see and angel or God. Here is a fact, if you are not regarded to as crazy, or under the influence of some drugs, you will be called a liar- Why? Well, you have no evidence. But what if you really did see the angel or God? What is you really did encounter them? Would you look at atheist’s arguments the same again ever?

Atheists, scientists and evolutionists argue from their own understanding, from the knowledge they posses, from what makes sense to them- but what if all their knowledge and understanding is not enough? There is so damn much about our own world we don't know or have haven't discovered, let alone the universe. So what right does these "intelligent" have to argue with certainty that there is no God? Children in schools are being taught that evolution is no longer a theory, but a fact with religion being prohibited in schools- Is that right?

Again- let us work with some assumptions- yes?

Assume for a moment that God really did exist (even if you believe in God :)) now, do you suppose that it would be easy to figure him out? Would our human minds and understanding be enough to understand who the creator really is? Can we discover him with our science and reasoning?

God would not be as great and supreme as He is if he could simply be discovered fully understood. I am not saying there is actual proof that God exists, but I have not read or seen any evidence or argument that can fully convince me that there is no God.

Back to the assumptions I used before- If you actually encounter God, then the reality is that you would have a hard time proving this to anyone, more-so the scientists- so what does this mean? It means that even if God actually exists then they would not believe it. This is reason enough for me to doubt anything that a scientist, atheist or evolutionist argues about God.

Man likes to think he knows everything. He lies to believe he understands and all the knowledge he posses is enough to either prove or disapprove various issues.

I was recently reading an interesting article that argued that man has actually become more intelligent than ever before. This suggested that man today is smarter than he ever was. But is this really true? If you were to ask me then I would say that we as human beings are simply building on the knowledge and ideas of those who came before us. Individuals like Leonardo Da Vinci came up with ideas; they drew these ideas down and tried working on them. Today we have perfected them. Does this make us any smarter than them? You be the judge of that.


Some Final Thoughts

In closing; I have to say, while no one has actually shown sufficient proof to show everyone that God exists, no one has given sufficient evidence and argument to prove that He doesn’t. Scientists and evolutionists today are in such a big hurry to prove that they are relevant and to get their names in the history books that they will simply argue the half truths they posses. Why? Why are they using so much energy and putting so much effort to get people to give up their belief in God? I find it interesting how religious scholars and religious scientists do not get much recognition as fame as the atheists ones. Science and philosophy has always been a platform for man to find real and true answers about our origins and our future. This is why all sorts of scientists and philosophers (atheists and religious) are well documented in history books. They all had important arguments to present. This is not the case today.

A very popular philosopher recently said that all true philosophers are dead. I agree with him a hundred percent. All we have today is a bunch of fame hungry individuals who will cannot be said to be real philosophers.

What Do You Think?

I Believe
I Believe | Source

What Argument/Evidence Do you Have For/Against God's Existence?

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Patrick Patrick profile image
      Author

      Patrick 12 months ago from Nairobi

      You said it Bill. It is only the trouble makers who should not be approved. That will only allows those with good intentions to share and discuss. You couldn't have said it any better.Thanks mate.

      Paladin, I have been reading some of your work, and will be commenting my views :) All in good faith. Thank you so much for the link, I will definitely look it up. I am always open to different points of views. It's how we learn from each other and contribute to each other positively.

      Thank you guys,

    • profile image

      Wild Bill 12 months ago

      Probably the better thing to do, instead of denying all outsiders from commenting, is to not approve those who wish to stir up trouble.

      You can always tell a troll because they have unapproved comments. But like Paladin said, we are getting off subject. Let's carry on shall we?!?

    • Paladin_ profile image

      Paladin_ 12 months ago from Michigan, USA

      You're quite welcome, Patrick. Personally, I'm both an atheist and an anti-theist. That said, I feel there's much to be gained (by both sides) in civil debate over issues of theology.

      Naturally, I recommend my own hubs for those who are interested in the atheist viewpoint. As for the theist viewpoint, I highly recommend Lawrence Hebb's hubs. Unlike some theists here on HP, he's a very thoughtful and well-researched hub author, and I have no doubt you'll find plenty to appreciate there:

      http://hubpages.com/@lawrence01

    • Patrick Patrick profile image
      Author

      Patrick 12 months ago from Nairobi

      Hi Paladin. I am grateful to hear from you again my friend. I understand your position and why you feel you need to control he dialogue. I am not sure where you stand on religion, but do hope that like me you do love everyone regardless of their beliefs. As writers, regardless of our faith and beliefs, I think we should be open to hear what others have to say as long as it doesn't push us to being angry or hating each others. At the end of the day, we are all human beings with different opinions.

      Like you said before, we all just have to be civil about it,

      Thank you once again.

    • Paladin_ profile image

      Paladin_ 12 months ago from Michigan, USA

      Patrick, I wholeheartedly agree with the notion of wanting everyone to join in the discussion. I've tried to promote the inclusion of all voices on my own hubs. But the antics of this particular troll are so insidious and persistent that I was left with no other option.

      The problem with non-registered users commenting on hubs is that, if they are ill-intentioned (and this troll certainly is), they can proceed with no fear of repercussions from HubPages. Indeed, the only person who suffers is the author, whose hub is flagged by this troll after people respond to his taunts and provocations.

      Indeed, "anti-theists," as well as theists, are drawn to hubs in the "Atheism and Agnosticism" category. That makes sense. The difference is that those who actually care about engaging in honest discussion will comment or debate on particular points, while the trolls will simply appear, make provocative comments, and wait for the sparks to fly.

      All that aside, I fear we've gone off on a rather negative (though, unfortunately, necessary) tangent. It appears you're quite a prolific author here on HP, and I look forward to reading more from you!

    • Patrick Patrick profile image
      Author

      Patrick 12 months ago from Nairobi

      I agree with what you are saying Bill. I do not wish to keep anyone off since we are all sharing, and I would love to hear more on the topic.

      Thank you

    • profile image

      Wild Bill 12 months ago

      Hey Patrcick,

      Paladin is right about HP having a couple of bad trolls. They should be coming here pretty soon since you wrote a Hub about believing in God. The anti-theist crowd is attracted to this subject like moths to a flame.

      As for not allowing outsiders from commenting, that is not a very bright idea. HP allows people like myself to comment without an account because we are readers not writers, which is why I don't have one. If you didn't allow comments from the outside then that could turn outside readers off and thus you could only exclusively have HP writers reading your material. That doesn't make much sense does it?

    • Paladin_ profile image

      Paladin_ 12 months ago from Michigan, USA

      Patrick, I note the previous commenter mentioned "trolls." I've also been having a problem with them.

      We have at least a couple of real bad ones here on HubPages. The worst of them -- a real slimeball -- likes to post from an anonymous account, and I've been forced to limit comments on my own hubs to only registered users. My advice to you is to do the same. In the long run, it will probably save you a lot of grief.

      In any case, again, thanks for the hub and the discussion! :-)

    • Patrick Patrick profile image
      Author

      Patrick 12 months ago from Nairobi

      Thanks Bill. No bad blood.

    • profile image

      Wild Bill 12 months ago

      Great Hub Patrick! You have presented everything very well. I also like how you can handle the trolls. Kill them with kindness! Keep up the good work.

    • Patrick Patrick profile image
      Author

      Patrick 12 months ago from Nairobi

      Not at all. It's all love

    • Paladin_ profile image

      Paladin_ 12 months ago from Michigan, USA

      No problemo. I hope I didn't appear to be nitpicky, but I know I appreciate comments from others on my own hubs, and recognize that it helps me shape my own views and arguments for the better. In the end, I firmly believe that it's possible to disagree and still be civil.

    • Patrick Patrick profile image
      Author

      Patrick 12 months ago from Nairobi

      I found these articles to be important- Just acknowledging my mistakes :) (https://www.aclu.org/joint-statement-current-law-r... (http://www.icr.org/article/does-law-require-public...

    • Patrick Patrick profile image
      Author

      Patrick 12 months ago from Nairobi

      Thank you for pointing out the problems with my argument mate. I guess I "just go served" if I may put it like that. I realize it is a very weak argument, but my main objective was to show that no one can argue with certainty that God does not exist- Or otherwise I guess,

      Again, thank you for pointing out my mistakes. I appreciate it.

    • Paladin_ profile image

      Paladin_ 12 months ago from Michigan, USA

      A belated welcome to HubPages, Patrick!

      First, I should note that you're mistaken about a number of minor details in your hub. For example, you state that it is taught in schools that "evolution is no longer a theory." Actually, it IS taught that evolution is a theory. As someone with a degree in bio-medical sciences, you should understand what that means in a scientific context.

      Also, religion is NOT "prohibited in schools." The only legal prohibition that exists is against the use of public school facilities and employees to promote or endorse religion -- especially one religion over another. On a personal basis, students and teachers can pray all day if they wish (as long as they're not disrupting class).

      As for the main point -- the problem with your argument for God's existence is that you haven't really made an argument for God's existence. What you've actually offered is an argument for believing in something because it hasn't been disproved. And you haven't even really made an argument for that, aside from pointing out that human beings have a limited understanding of their universe.

      Now, believing something that hasn't yet been disproved isn't inherently reckless or even illogical. Indeed, it has some measure of practicality. After all, we can't personally verify EVERYTHING we're ever been told, or we'd spend every waking minute of our lives researching and playing detective.

      This is why we develop practical standards for what we believe. Most of us subscribe to the excellent axiom that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. For example, I'm inclined to believe you when you make the quite ordinary claim that your name is Patrick. However, if you tell me that a huge asteroid is headed for Earth and all our lives are about to end, I'm going to require some pretty compelling evidence -- especially since this belief is going to dramatically change what's left of my life!

      The existence of God is arguably the most extraordinary claim of all, and you've devoted at least half of your hub admitting that no evidence exists for it. In a practical as well as a logical sense, I'd say that's a fairly compelling reason to doubt it!