The quest for God and proof of its existence has been an ongoing topic for both believers and non-believers. Almost anyone, depending on his position on the subject, has tackled this issue at least once in his lifetime. It is a known fact that science, in its disposition and approach towards empirical and material evidence, is dismissive of the argument about the existence of God. Science would always find the premise on God as an existent being a fallacy and totally groundless. It is up to philosophy to bring light to the subject of God. The philosophical approach can try to expound the nature of God or the concept behind it. Understanding God and its nature is the basis of philosophy–unlike science which needs finely analyzed material evidence to arrive at any conclusion.

The most convenient approach to understanding the nature of God is the use of dialectical approach. As opposed to science, which asks the question “how come“, philosophy posits the question of “why” to all things. It tries to go deeper than mere physical reality to arrive at a point. God can never be understood unless one will start asking the whys about Him.

The history of philosophy predates science and it has established a variety of schools of thought over many centuries that tried to tackle the subject about God. Immanuel Kant for example stated that you should “act in such a way that the maxim of your will could always hold at the same time as a principle of a universal legislation.” This line is in parallel agreement with Pascal’s thinking on the subject that even if the existence of God cannot be established by reason, one should wager that He exists because living a life of a believer has everything to gain and nothing to lose. Epicurus tried to use a “detractory” form of philosophy in his critique of God in trying to understand its nature. Teleological Reasoning, a philosophical approach that espouses design and purpose, holds that man is designed for God–that man exists because he was created by God and was for God. The modern form of teleological argument is the philosophical approach of Intelligent Design. This is an assertion that everything in the universe can be best explained by an intelligent cause and not by an undirected course of action like the one espoused in natural selection.

While many people would consider philosophy as irrelevant in today’s highly scientific world, the truth is that it has played a major role in the growth and development of almost every aspect and code of conduct of every institution in the planet. This is the reason why philosophy remains to be the best tool in arriving at knowledge about God and his nature. While many would consider religion as the only option in understanding God, it is actually philosophy that is best suited for the task. This is due mainly to the inherent limitations of each religion such as parochialism mentality–the thinking that only the God of my denomination or religion exists and nothing else – that restricts a bias-free idea about what God is and its nature. Philosophy is not hindered by biases derived from religious belief and it is free to study God from all angles.

There are many philosophical beliefs that do not mix with Christianity.  These philosophical arguments cannot account for their system or contain inherent self-refuting contradictions and, most of the time, end up in the list of bold assertions about reality that resulted to irrationalism. One of such philosophies is logical positivism. Essentially, this philosophy is a fusion of a modified version of rationalism and empiricism – it believes that tangible and observational evidence is necessary to arrive at knowledge. This philosophy aimed to discredit all metaphysical arguments. John Locke’s popular version of empiricism that theorizes the mind as a clean slate (tabula rasa) at birth is a typical example.

The Positivists Philosophy

The main argument for Positivists starts with empirical verification. All knowledge exists because they can be proven empirically using known scientific facts and processes. A glass of water is true because one can see and feel both the glass and the water – they can be readily proven physically and one’s senses can perceive them.  A metaphysical statement like “God exists” cannot be proven or perceived and therefore should be denied. One cannot bring God to a laboratory and studied. But then again, this philosophy collapsed based on its primary premise as well. How can positivists be certain that their statement “knowledge comes through sensations” is true when they cannot verify their own starting principle?

Still after this apparent downfall from grace, many followers tried to create variations of this school of thought but they all arrived in irrationalism. These schools of thought never stood again due primarily to their internally generated self contradictions. They are one and the same with another line of thinkers that assert “there is no truth“. How can they be so sure about their argument, that it’s the truth, when in the first place there is no such thing as truth? Such assertions are common for many non-Christian philosophies.

The Non-Christian Philosophy

People with non-Christian beliefs normally have atheistic or materialistic (or a combination of both) views. Pagan world-views revolve around principles of morality, science, and logic. However, if one is to look closely, adherents of this world-view fail to show how laws of morality, science, and logic can arise in a materialistic world. In other words, many of the non-Christians who have this view proclaim their beliefs in such things but fail to demonstrate the consistency and relevance in a materialistic setting.

In philosophy, this is termed “begging the question“. For instance, in the area of morality, non-Christians have a difficult time defining the difference between right and wrong in relation to their world-view. This is a clear cut example of ignorance. Nevertheless, there are still many people today that see this ignorance as a virtue to be promoted. This makes laws against evil such as crimes arbitrary formalities in society. In many of today’s pagan democracies, a small margin of majority votes can sway the general population to switch sides or go to a different direction. People with this belief system approach the issue of morality especially in defining right from wrong as if they have a blank mind (tabula rasa).

Their attempts to make clear the issues of morality are arbitrary and they usually borrow definitions from Christian world-view to fertilize the barren landscape of their own belief system.

In the world of Philosophy, there have been a lot of arguments about the existence of Supreme Being or God. Since no one ever saw this Being, one cannot just arrive at truth using sense-perception but only arguments. These arguments must also have to prove, in any way possible, that there is indeed a Supreme Being other than the beings which can be seen in the world.

It is a lot easier for the skeptics to disprove God’s existence due to lack of sense-perception which is often the obvious ways of arriving at truth. In Epistemology, the validity of truth can be attained through sense-perception and validated by arguments. However, in this case, only arguments have to prove that there really is a Supreme Being who is overlooking all other beings alone.

There were three arguments to have successfully proved God’s existence and disproved Skeptics’ doubt on the said matter. Let me present them to you one by one:

The Ontological Argument on God’s Existence

Ontology is yet another branch of Metaphysics which mainly deals with the nature of all beings. Saint Anselm has used this branch of philosophy so well that he was able to prove God’s existence successfully.

In this argument, the existence of Supreme Being is proven through the use of the Laws of Logic; once a concept of God is conceived in the mind of a person, God’s non-existence is impossible. Skeptics’ arguments are totally worthless when they tried to disprove the existence of God; the fact that they think about God, which is not existing, they already have the idea of God. Thus, God exist in their minds just by thinking that He does not exist.

“Anything that can be thought of, exist.”

God as the First Cause

If a thing does not exist, Someone has to bring it into existence.

Such is the case with the argument of causality. The fact that the universe exists is evident that someone had put it into existence somewhere in the distant past. “Nothing” will only result to nothing unless acted upon by Someone who exists. Only then that something will start to exist. If there was no Supreme Being existed before all beings in the universe, then who made all these existing beings exist? We know for a fact that all things in the universe will cease to exist in the future. Therefore, everything has a beginning and an end. If there is no Supreme Being, who is the cause of all these beings in the universe today?

The argument of causality does not just prove God’s existence but also His Eternal power.

Inborn Morals as Proof of God’s Existence

All beings are born “good.” The term “good” is defined in philosophy as deprivation of “evil.”  Thus, moral laws exist in the essence of every being. These laws command us and tell us what should be done and what not; they are in a form of commands. That will bring us to a question, “Who is the commander?”

Moral laws have absolute authority which should be followed at all cost. However, in order for moral laws to have authority, they must come from Someone with full authority who will transcend all human authorities. For example, a man is naturally afraid to murder someone. What is working inside him is the moral law (conscience) which hinders him from doing it. And who commands such law?

We cannot deny the fact that there are still people who do not believe in God–the skeptics. And as pointed out in the previous article (The Practical Impossibility and the Theoretical Absurdity of Skepticism), it is futile not to believe in anything or Anyone.