How can one logically prove the presence of God?
Answer Outline: The four proofs are: 1. The Cosmological Argument, 2. The Design Argument, 3. The Teleological Argument and 4. The Moral Argument
Hare Krishna Prabhu – attached is a transcription that is i would say 95% accurate and will be useful for anyone wanting to read or print. Kindly feel free to publish. Thank you.
1. The Cosmological Argument
In brief everything that exists in the Cosmos and the Cosmos itself has to come from something. So when we look at the Origin of everything, we have two choices. Everything comes out of something or Everything comes out of nothing.
As far as our everyday experience and our Scientific observation goes, we dont see any example of something coming out of nothing. So, if something can’t come out of nothing then how can EVERYTHING come out of nothing?
Now, if among these two alternatives – we conclude and accept the second alternative (everthing has to come out of something) then what is that SOMETHING?
So, materialistic people and materialistic scientists claim that SOMETHING is matter. And from Matter everything comes. But of we imagine a huge stock of construction material lying near a construction site, we dont see ever that the pile organizing itself into a building. But if we have a Conscious, intelligent person with a desire to construct a building, he can arrange the conversion of the stock of construction material into a building.
So, therefore we see that Matter hasn no Organizing capacity where as Consciousness or Conscious individual has Organizing capacity. Since we see the world around us as Organized, the starting point from which this world originated should have Consciousness. Once we understand that there has to be a starting point and that starting point is Conscious, essentially we have come to the definition of God that is given in the Scriptures all over the World that God is Sarva Karana Karanam (The Cause of all Causes). Anadir Adi Govind (The Beginningless Beginning of everything).
2. The Design Argument
Cosmological argument primarily talks about Origin. Design argument talks about things as we see them presently. We see around us that everything from the Microscropic to Macroscopic realm there seems to be some design.Within an Atom, electrons are not running around in a wild, messy and chaotic way but they are orbiting at extremely high speeds in well defined orbits.
The planets are revolving around the Sun and the Galaxies comprising of Stars are organized in a Grape like cluster. So, to a large extent we see design from the microscopic to the macroscopic level.
Design in general requires a Designer. Can Design come by Chance or by Natural Selection as modern Scientists like us to believe through the Theory of Evolution. ToL has not largely demonstrated change across species. It has not demonstrated the ability to produce new Species. What we have observed in Nature and what man has replicated through experiments is that we can have change within Species.
By Genetic Breeding, Cross Fertilization we can change a small apple and a big apple; we can make a small dog and a big dog. But, we cannot convert a mango to an apple or a dog into a Lion. ToE can explain Micro Evolution but not Macro evolution. Macro evolution is variation across Species and Micro evolution is variation within the same Species.
So, basically the variation within a Species is like the pulling of a Rubber band. When we pull the rubber band it can become bigger than the normal size and when you leave it will come back to normal length. So similarly changes can be induced in Nature. But the ability to pull and stretch a rubber band does not explain the origin of the Rubber band.
Similarly the Survival of the Species or the Survival of the Fittest does not explain the arrival of the Fittest. ToE has not demonstrated through either Natural observation or through Laboratory experimentation nor explained with a reasonable degree of theoritical clarity How By Naturual Selection alone Species can Originate. How all the Variety in the Universe can be seen. Design has no adequate explanation in terms of chance or in terms of Natural Selection.
3. The Teleological Argument
Refers to things having a Ultimate purpose. The Design argument refers to things as they exist now where as Teleological argument things as they are designed for a future purpose (Ref: Made just for you).
Imagine if a young boy John comes into a room on a Freezing cold nights and finds that his room is Warm because the Heater is turned on and his room as been Covered with Insulation material to keep heat within. He feels warm and cozy. He thinks that has all this come by itself but then realizes that no, his father must have made all these arrangement.
Aquatics when they live under water. Water especially in the Frigid parts (Artic for example) fall to extremely low levels and cover the water with big blocks of ice. But we see that the Aquatics dont freeze to death because among all the substances in the World, Water has a peculiar behavior which we call Anomlous Behavior. Normally substances become heavier when they are Solid but ICE becomes lighter than Water when Water becomes ICE.
We have features that facilitate our existence. For example, the Anamolous properties of water faciliate the existence of Aquatics.
4. The Moral Argument
Darwins ToE and subsequent Evolutionary Synthesis proposes the driving principle to be Survival of the Fittest. But we see that we human beings have a moral sense. Because of the Moral sense we dont facilitate the Survival of the Fittest but Facilitate the Survival of the Unfit.
If a person is blind, if all of us were creatures guided by Survival of the Fittest, the blind person would be left to die. But we help a blind person cross the road. Similarly if a man is drowning, we would let him drown instead of Saving him. But most people will risk their lives to save the drowning man. Everyone else would appreciate them.
Where does this Moral Sense of what is right and wrong come from? If we just go by SoF then there would be no moral sense. That which favors us for Survival is right and that which does not is wrong. But we have a Moral Sense that is beyond our Biological sense. Pure Materialistic Science can never explaint this.
What does this have to the existence of God?
The Moral Argument posists that because God has created all of us, God has given to each and everyone of us What is right and What is wrong. And it is that sense which we can dull or we can sharpen. We have that Freedom. Some people may by repeated wrong doing may dull there Moral sense and others can decide to make it more promiment by their correct choices. But moral sense exists in practically all human beings atleast. Biology or Genetics or Evolution cannot explain how we have the Moral Sense. But our everyday experience cannot deny the existence of Moral experience.
Thanks a lot for transcription Prabhu 😀
CAPTCHA Code *