Descartes Ontological Argument
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth". Genesis 1:1 That is how the Bible starts. But what or who is this God mentioned in this verse? Does God exist? Is the universe the product of a fortuitous event or it was created by a "superior being"? These questions and many others have been asked by men, thinkers and philosophers for thousands of years and to try to answer these questions we need to begin by defining God.
It is important to mention that, by trying to define God, we are putting limits to what God is. In fact, the word "define" sets the limits of anything that we are trying to explain. Additionally, we are also trying to attribute certain characteristics that could help us identify or understand the concept of God. …show more content…
Certainly, the idea of God, or a supremely perfect being, is one that I find within me just as surely as the idea of any shape or number. And my understanding that it belongs to his nature that he always exists is no less clear and distinct than is the case when I prove of any shape or number that some property belongs to its nature”. To put it in simple words, if we have a clear idea of a perfect being, that “clear idea” belongs to a perfect being and that perfect being is …show more content…
One of those arguments include The Paradox of the Stone which ask the question if God can create a stone so heavy that he can’t lift it. If he can’t, then there is something that he cannot do, namely create the stone, and therefore he is not omnipotent. If he can, then there is also something that he cannot do, namely lift the stone, and therefore he is not omnipotent. Therefore, God does not exist.
Other argument that it is considered one of the most significant is the one called “The Problem of Evil”. This argument invalidates the existence of God by saying that if God is an all good being, how come He does not prevent all the suffering that it is certainly common in the world? However, by “asking” God to prevent all evils and sufferings, are we not asking Him to take our free will? We can’t deny that a good portion of what we consider sufferings or evil is caused by ourselves or by another
It is important to mention that, by trying to define God, we are putting limits to what God is. In fact, the word "define" sets the limits of anything that we are trying to explain. Additionally, we are also trying to attribute certain characteristics that could help us identify or understand the concept of God. …show more content…
Certainly, the idea of God, or a supremely perfect being, is one that I find within me just as surely as the idea of any shape or number. And my understanding that it belongs to his nature that he always exists is no less clear and distinct than is the case when I prove of any shape or number that some property belongs to its nature”. To put it in simple words, if we have a clear idea of a perfect being, that “clear idea” belongs to a perfect being and that perfect being is …show more content…
One of those arguments include The Paradox of the Stone which ask the question if God can create a stone so heavy that he can’t lift it. If he can’t, then there is something that he cannot do, namely create the stone, and therefore he is not omnipotent. If he can, then there is also something that he cannot do, namely lift the stone, and therefore he is not omnipotent. Therefore, God does not exist.
Other argument that it is considered one of the most significant is the one called “The Problem of Evil”. This argument invalidates the existence of God by saying that if God is an all good being, how come He does not prevent all the suffering that it is certainly common in the world? However, by “asking” God to prevent all evils and sufferings, are we not asking Him to take our free will? We can’t deny that a good portion of what we consider sufferings or evil is caused by ourselves or by another