I believe in an all mighty, all knowing creator. It is easiest to comprehend this being as a man or other human like form, but I do not believe this to be the case. God is perfect. God is perfect because he created perfection. This leaves only two options; 1. Everything is perfect because God created it. 2. Every thing is imperfect in comparison to God.
Man is far from perfect, and is in fact the most imperfect being in Gods kingdom. Man is the only living creature capable of intentional sin, by this I mean no other creature on the earth is capable of committing acts and understanding that they are wrong, but rather they commit them as an act of instinct rather than reason like the sins of man. When man commits an act of evil ( in the majority of cases ) he knows very well that he is acting against Gods wishes, and since we are the most intelligent of species ( in a rational sense ) it can be said that these sins are of an intentional type, and that we are the least Godliness of all creatures, yet we are the only species that comprehend a God. So how can it be true that a God exists? Man is only a small percentage of all the creatures or “gods children” that exist on this earth and yet we are the only ones that understand the idea of an all knowing creator. By all laws of democracy God does not exist, it is a good thing he does not have to run for office every 4 years. All though God is not comprehended rationally by the majority of his creations (all non humans), the majority of his creations are those who act in the most pious of fashions. Can it be that these actions are led by the truest of all faiths, allthough this faith in God is not even recognized by those who the acts belong to?
If all those who believe and understand rationally that a God exists even though they are the least Godly in their actions (all humans), and those who fail to comprehend the
Throughout the world, most people believe in some type of god or gods, and the majority of them understand God as all-good, all-knowing (omniscient), and all-powerful (omnipotent). However, there is a major objection to the latter belief: the “problem of evil” (P.O.E.) argument. According to this theory, God’s existence is unlikely, if not illogical, because a good, omniscient, and omnipotent being would not allow unnecessary suffering, of which there are enormous amounts.
Humans can think, feel, and reason which differentiate them from the rest of God’s creation. The ability to reason enables human beings to think and reflect on their own nature and the nature of God. The bible teaches us that God created man in his image and likeness. In the beginning of creation human nature was perfect because we were created by God. Genesis 1:31 describes Human beings were created very good by a loving God”. God created humans to operate their lives according to wisdom under God’s kingly reign (Diffey, 2014). God’s purpose in creating mankind was to work and serve (Genesis 2:15), and have dominion over earth (Genesis 1:26-28) The fall of Adam and Eve separated humanity from God and wisdom. This act plunged all of humanity into a history characterized by idolatry (Diffey, 2014), and is the root cause of all human
There is evil. 3. So, God does not exist”. Since there is evil, then that means God does not exist. So there is no loving and powerful God. However, if there is a God then he is not all loving and powerful. Daniel Howard-Snyder states in his article “God, Evil, And Suffering,”: “We would have to say God lacks power and knowledge to such an extent that He can 't prevent evil. And there lies the trouble. For how could God have enough power and knowledge to create and sustain the physical universe if He can 't even prevent evil? How could He be the providential governor of the world if He is unable to do what even we frequently do, namely prevent evil?” (5). This statement argues that God is not all powerful because he is unable to prevent evil in the world. Daniel Howard-Snyder then argues that: “Would a perfectly good being always prevent evil as far as he can? Suppose he had a reason to permit evil, a reason that was compatible with his never doing wrong and his being perfect in love, what I 'll call a justifying reason. For example, suppose that if he prevented evil completely, then we would miss out on a greater good, a good whose goodness was so great that it far surpassed the badness of evil. In that case, he might not prevent evil as far as he can, for he would have a justifying reason to permit it” (5). Even if God had a reason to allow evil, he who is all loving and powerful would want the least amount of people to suffer and feel pain. Since God knows
The first possible outcome is that a person chooses to believe in God and God does exist. If this is true then the believer will suffer some harm in this life but they will be rewarded with salvation in the afterlife. The second possible outcome is that a person chooses to believe in God and God does not exist. If this true then the believer will suffer some harm in this life and they will not be rewarded with anything when they die but they will not be punished either. The third possible outcome is that a person chooses not to believe in God and God does exist. If this is true then while the non-theist will be rewarded in this life they wil...
Descartes explains that, “For in the case of trickery or deception some imperfection is to be found; and although the ability to deceive appears to be an indication of cleverness or power, the will to deceive is undoubtedly evidence of malice or weakness, and so cannot apply to God” (Descartes 43). I agree that if God is a perfect being that truly exists, he would not have any reason to deceive humans, and that humans are imperfect because of our own volitions and poor judgement. However this still does not make clear and distinct perceptions true. Again, even if God is not deceiving us, our minds still can. Additionally, this point only makes sense in Descartes’ definition of God, which, again, is merely an assumption. Descartes gives a sound explanation on why God is not a deceiver, however that does not immediately make it true that everything should not be doubted just because we can perceive it clearly.
There is a distinction, a type of separation that exists between God and all other beings. God is unlimited and infinite, where as all other things are limited and finite. Man exists somewhere in between a state of creatureliness and Godliness. Similar to the way that God has given commands to other creatures, he tells man that he should be "fruitful and multiply," (Pagels, xii). Man's purpose is to procreate, according to Genesis. Yet man's function is uniq...
After creating a pure and perfect world which he declared “good,” God experienced His first disappointment in humans. When He placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and instructed them not to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, Adam and Eve made the decision to disobey God and eat from it. According to the Old Testament, this decision gave Adam and Eve’s descendants (all humans) their sinful human nature, which as a result separated those who did not repent from God’s grace. Eventually the world was full of wickedness and a new side of YHWH came out. The God of unconditional love who is often thought of tended to be a God ...
If nothing greater than God can be conceived in anyone’s understanding, God is said to be humanly perfect. Since to be perfect, in part, is to exist; something that does not exist cannot be perf...
For instance, deception only relies on imperfection, while that is not God, which makes God a non-deceiver. The idea of God is something that would not just come naturally. It is not ordinary living and just thinking of God. The idea of God as a whole must be created by God. If humans are finite, and God is infinite, how could one possibly have the thought of such an infinite being?
God is the man that has no match he perfect and he big enough that we could never find to describe him. God id perfect because God is different in
...ip with God we are still built with infirmities that are temptations for sin, and with that we are no longer perfect.
The problem of reconciling an omnipotent, perfectly just, perfectly benevolent god with a world full of evil and suffering has plagued believers since the beginning of religious thought. Atheists often site this paradox in order to demonstrate that such a god cannot exist and, therefore, that theism is an invalid position. Theodicy is a branch of philosophy that seeks to defend religion by reconciling the supposed existence of an omnipotent, perfectly just God with the presence of evil and suffering in the world. In fact, the word “theodicy” consists of the Greek words “theos,” or God, and “dike,” or justice (Knox 1981, 1). Thus, theodicy seeks to find a sense of divine justice in a world filled with suffering.
The concept of God can be a difficult one to grasp especially in today's world - a world in which anyone that believes in God is trying to define exactly what God is. To even attempt to grasp such a concept, one must first recognize his own beliefs in respect to the following questions: Is God our creator? Is God omnipotent (all-powerful) or omniscient (all-knowing) or both? Does God care? Is God with us? Does God interfere with life on earth? These questions should be asked and carefully answered if one should truly wish to identify his specific beliefs in God's existence and persistence.
Descartes views God in a similar way to St. Anselm. Descartes sees God as the perfectbeing while St. Anselm describes God as “that than which nothing greater can be thought.” In Descartes “the Argument from Perfection” he reasons that if existence is one of the perfections and God has all the perfections, then God must exist. Along with these arguments others in the Jewish, Christian, and Islamic communities have similar views.
The nature of God differs in every religion. Some religions have one, many, or even no God that they worship. However, no matter who or what they worship, there is always a spiritual aspect to their belief system. These spirits play a key role in influencing their actions in their everyday life.