Religion and Theology

Brief Introduction
Today more than ever, we had witnessed how arguments and evidences had arisen to prove the non-existence of God. Mathematical, scientific, pragmatic and even philosophical arguments are cited to prove His non-existence. As a response to this discourse, the theists do also have their own sets of arguments that prove otherwise. These arguments can be traced back to ancient Greek thinkers which was improved and developed by latter thinkers. In this paper, we are going to prove the existence of God using three arguments, ontological, teleological and cosmological.

Ontological Argument
The ontological argument proving the existence of God was first proposed by St. Anselm in the eleventh century. Later on, it was adapted and developed by different thinkers to prove the existence of God. The ontological argument or arguments is a way or method of proving Gods existence using the virtue of reason alone, without the use of evidences or observation in the world. It was said that ontological arguments are analytic in nature and operates through the use of a kind of knowledge referred as a priori which nature rest on the rationale of human beings. Using such a priori claims and logical operations or implications, the users of this argument proves the existence of God. (Oppy, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

First, it is necessary for us to establish or make it clear that some proclamations in the world like a five-sided rectangle can be falsified without the use of any evidence from observation. Such claims do not need any evidence from ones perception to be declared as untrue. Rather, it requires human rationality and the proper use of the operations of logic to assess and solve it. The definition of a rectangle states that it is a shape that is characterized by four (4) sides. To say that there is a rectangle and that particular rectangle has five (5) sides is absurd. Having four sides is a necessary characteristic of a rectangle. To say that there exist a five sided rectangle will be absurd and self-contradictory. (Toner)

The same logic or way of thinking is used by the ontological argument to prove the existence of God, God is embedded with the necessary characteristics that enable us to call Him as God. The same with rectangle, he possesses characteristic that are necessary for Him to be referred as God. Among these  characteristic which is essential is Gods perfection. Perfection implies existence, a being that is perfect cannot be a non-existent entity at the same time since non-existence is imperfection.  In fact, for the defenders of this argument, the statement,  God does not exist  is contradictory in nature. God possessing perfection which implies existence cannot be  non-existent at the same time. Saying that God does not exists is equivalent to  God who exists DOES NOT exists.  This is clear self contradiction of the statement or declaration it self.

Teleological Argument
The teleological argument which is also known as the argument of design is a way of proving God that combine both empiricism (i.e. observation) and rationalism (rules of logic) to prove the existence of God. Some of its earliest proponents are the early Greeks together with latter thinkers  and philosophers like Thomas Aquinas and David Hume. First of all, it is important to determine what teleological means. It came from the Greek word  telos  which means purpose or design. Hence, the teleological argument is a way of proving the existence of God using the purpose or the design of the natural world. (Ratzsch, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

As stated, the teleological argument operates using both observation and rules of logic. Primarily, we must first observe the complexity of the world around us. We can see how animals and plants are too complex in terms of its design and cycle. The complexity of humans, our functions, our capabilities, our design together with the complexity of the whole universe (e.g. planets, stars, universe) are also self-evident to us. In fact,  the complexity of the universe it self, together with the living and non-living things that reside on it can sufficiently prove the existence of a great designer who made the possibility of all these. It is impossible to comprehend for the human mind that the complexity of our function, architecture and capability is only a product of chance or luck. (Himma)

A common proof that we can cite for advancing the teleological argument is the history of the creation or building of the universe. Considering the Big Bang is true, only a slight variation to elements or factors like gravity can produce drastically different results. A slight increase in the degree of gravity can enable a big crunch that will not able the possibility of the emergence of life. A slight variation to the degree of temperature on earth can withdraw any possibility of life forming in Earth.

For the proponents of the teleological argument, it is impossible to think that the universe was only created by chance. The chance of our universe to be built in the same condition is one in a million. Without a grand designer who willfully design the universe and the life  that resides on it is impossible to comprehend. The complexity of our universe and the complexity of the living things and non-living things on it can only be made possible by a great designer (i.e. God) who purposely created the universe.

Cosmological Argument
The cosmological argument which is also known as the first cause argument is almost the same as ontological argument in its nature. The cosmological argument is largely based on the human reason or rationality with a little use of observation in the real world. The early proponents of this way or method of proving God or the creator are the ancient Greek philosophers Plato, Aristotle and the medieval priest, Thomas Aquinas. (Reichenbach, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

We must first establish the long causal chain that exist in our world. Whatever we witness today or whatever is happening now is a result of an earlier cause. That earlier cause is a result of a much earlier cause. This is a very long chain of cause and effects. If we trace this up to long causal chain, we can arrive in two distinct conclusion. The first conclusion will state that there is no end in this chain of causes and effects. There is an infinite set of causes if we traced back the long causal chain. The other distinct conclusion that is critically different from the earlier conclusion is the necessity of a first cause. This first cause is the father or mother of all the causes. The first cause is the cause of the second cause that resulted to the third cause, so on and so on. This conclusion is what the cosmological argument is rooted. (Toner)

Before we move on, it is necessary for us to determine first why the first conclusion is difficult to accept (i.e. infinite causes). The reason lies on the logical inconsistency that the argument or method will bump. It is impossible for our current past to came from an infinite past. By counting, we cannot arrive to zero (zero means the present) from counting from infinity. It is not just possible. This will lead us to the necessity of a finite past of the universe rather than the infinite past.

After establishing this fact, we can then move on in strengthening the second conclusion (i.e. the necessity of the first cause). To be the first cause, there are some characteristics that is necessary for it. Primarily, the first cause is not caused by anything or anyone. By failure to do or be so, it will be illegitimate for it to be referred as the first cause. Therefore, the first cause is uncreated. No one created or caused the first cause. The first cause must also be eternal. Being an eternal entity, it will exclude the first cause in the framework or rules of time and space. It is an entity  that exists outside space and time, without any start or end. Reviewing these necessary characteristics of the first cause, which is the creator that is eternal, we are simply referring to God. Therefore, God exists because He is necessary for the world to exists. God is the first unmoved cause.

Conclusion
We had stated above three strong arguments that can prove the existence of an eternal being that created the universe (i.e. God). These arguments are the responses in the age old question of Gods existence. Since time and memorial, people are still debating whether God exists or not. Numerous claims and evidences are cited to provide whether He is or He is not. In case, our arguments above are not enough to prove the existence of a diving being that created us, it is understandable. This is because the belief on an unseen being that is the root of our lives can only be made possible by a leap of faith, moving past any evidences or arguments.