God’s Existence

Proofs – For and Against

Introduction

This section tries to answer the following questions: Does God Exist? Can this claim
be supported by one proof each for and against the existence of God? What about the Indian
perspective?

Does God Exist?

This is a question that has invited a lot of philosophical thought around the very idea
of God. The idea of God is either a fact like sand or a fantasy like Santa. When we talk of
fantasy we talk about a human invention. We call it a man made thing. But there is another
side to the argument too. It is about a being that is actual, absolute, perfect, eternal, one and
personal, all-knowing, all-just, all-merciful and all-powerful, one who is undying, un-
compromising and unchangeable; a cosmic creator, redeemer, designer and provider, a pure
being; an ‘I’. It is disputable that if it is a fantasy, it is by far the greatest fantasy in history. If
it is a human invention then it is a masterpiece.1

The question about God should be articulated in the words of Gabriel Marcel. It is a
mystery and not a problem.2 A problem is out there and can be solved externally, without us
having to be affected by it. While on the other hand, the question about God is a mystery to
be lived. It has to be experienced in one’s personal life and convictions to be drawn out of it.

As a matter of faith right from my childhood when I looked at God, I thought of him
as a Supreme Being, as a person who should be adored and worshiped rather than questioned
and torn apart. This was at the beginning of my philosophy some years ago. I did not want
God to be part of any intellectual discussion. But then I realized about the whole
philosophical tradition that has come about ever since and well, I must admit it hasn’t shaken
my belief rather it has strengthened it.

In the next section we will look at the proofs for and against God’s existence in some
detail. I will also bring in what the Indian philosophical school of Nyāya says on the
existence of God. Thereafter I will reflect upon the similarities then attempt a closure.

1
J P Moreland and Kai Neilson, Introduction to Does God Exist? : The Debate between Theist and Atheist (New
York: Promethus Books, 1993), 1, http://www.pdf.org (accessed 10 June 2020).
2
“The Most Holy Trinity: Not a Problem but a Mystery,” Tabor Kirana, May 2016, 14,
https://www.bangalorearchdiocese.org (accessed 10 June 2020).

1
 Proof ‘For’ God’s Existence

According to Aquinas there are five ways in which we can prove the existence of
God. They are movement, causality, contingency, grades of perfection and teleological
order.3 For our purpose we shall take up the argument from ‘Causality.’ This is also known as
the Cosmological argument. It is stated as follows:

‘A cause is anything that contributes to the producing of a thing. That which is

produced by cause is effect. God alone can be attributed as creator because He creates
everything out of nothing. Thus, if there is an effect, there should be a cause and ultimately
the First Cause; as we know already, the creation of the world itself is an effect. Therefore,
there is a cause, ultimately the First Cause whom we call God.’4

This can also be explained as follows:

1. Some events cause other events.

2. If an event happens, then it must be caused by something other than or outside of itself.
3. This would lead to an infinite series of cause and effect chains.
4. There has to therefore finally be an uncaused cause, the ‘First’ cause.
5. Therefore God exists.5

As a critique to the above argument, we can agree that there is a First cause like the
Big Bang. But to what extent we can call it as God is debatable. It is clearly a theistic
perspective. In moving from point 4 to point 5 above there seems to be a presupposition by
Aquinas and hence this cannot be taken as a fully valid argument for the existence of God in
the strict sense of the word. We can agree that the cosmological argument shows that there is
the existence of at-least one First cause and it need not be only one.6

Proof ‘Against’ God’s existence

In order to prove that God does not exist we take the problem of evil in the world.
This is proposed by Kant and Hume among many other philosophers. The statement can be
articulated as follows:

3
V John Peter, ed., Introduction to Western Philosophy (New Delhi: IGNOU, 2011), 135, http://www.ignou.ac
(accessed on 04 July 2020).
4
Ibid.
5
Michael Aristidu, “Arguments For and Against the Existence of God: Analysis and Discussion”,
http://files.meetup.com/12962/Arguments%20For%20and%20Against%20the%20Existence%20of%20God.pdf
(accessed on 04 July 2020).
6
Ibid.

2
 ‘It seems obvious as a matter of contingent fact that there is evil in the actual world.
However, if God is omniscient, omnibenevolent and omnipotent there must be no evil. If God
is omniscient then he must know that there is evil. If he is omnipotent then he must be able to
eliminate the evil from the actual world. If he is omnibenevolent, then he must have the good
will to do away with evil from the world. There is existence of evil in the actual world and
hence from the arguments above we see and conclude that there is no god.’7

God is either willing to remove evil and cannot; or he can and is unwilling; or he is
neither willing nor able to do so; or else he is both willing and able. If he is willing and not
able, he must then be weak, which cannot be affirmed of God. If he is able and not willing, he
must be envious, which is also contrary to the nature of God. If he is neither willing nor able,
he must be both envious and weak, and consequently not be God. If he is both willing and
able – the only possibility that agrees with the nature of God – then where does evil come
from? Or why does he not eliminate it?8

As a critique to this we can make use of the argument of the ‘Greater Good.’  “Greater
good” responses to the problem make use of this insight by arguing for the existence of goods
of great value which God cannot actualize without also permitting evil, and thus that there are
evils he cannot be expected to prevent despite being omnipotent. Among the most popular
versions of the “greater good” response are appeals to the apologetics of free will.
Theologians will argue that since no one can fully understand God’s ultimate plan, no one
can assume that evil actions do not have some sort of greater purpose. Therefore, the nature
of evil has a necessary role to play in God’s plan for a better world.9

Nyāya concept of God

The Nyāya school of Indian Philosophy gives nine arguments for the existence of
God. We shall take the first as it has some common ground with its western counter parts. It
states:

7
Yugin Nagasawa, The Existence of God: A Philosophical Introduction (Oxon: Routledge, 2011), 159,
http://www.pdf.org (accessed 10 June 2020).
8
Andrew Pyle, Hume’s Dialogue Concerning Natural Religion: A Readers Guide (New York: Continuum
International Publishing Group, 2006), 90, http://www.pdf.org (accessed 06 July 2020).
9
Chapter 6: Philosophy of Religion, “Problem of Evil: (Responses),” Lumen Introduction to Philosophy,
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/sanjacinto-philosophy/chapter/problem-of-evil-responses (accessed 06 July,
2020).

3
 “The world is an effect and hence it must have an efficient cause. This intelligent
agent is God. The order, design, co-ordination between different phenomena comes from
God.”10

This argument from the Nyāya School combines the cosmological argument that is
stated above and the argument from intelligent design. It calls God as the efficient cause just
as Aquinas would regard him as the ‘First cause.’ It calls it as the intelligent agent as we see
there are so many things that take place in an orderly fashion in our world, right from the
rising of the sun to its setting there is a natural order that is there in the world, there is some
logic that even at times may be called fuzzy. This all presupposes that there is some
intelligent being behind all this and hence their proposal of this ‘Being’ as ‘God’. We also see
that the world is made up of atoms according to this school but it is God who gives motion to
these atoms.11 This is also accepted by theists from the western tradition, especially the
scientists. They agree that there was a Big Bang. But the question remains who created the
Big Bang and some trace it back to God.

Summing Up

We have reflected on the perennial question of whether God exists or not. There has
been numerous debates that have taken place in order to grapple with this soul searching
question. It has resulted in different groups of persons based on their position on this issue.
There are agnostics who are undecided. There are atheists who have reached unbelief. There
are among theists, believers in one God, in many God’s, with perspectives from the East and
from the West. There is a Trinitarian belief as well as a Uniterian belief as that of Christians
v/s Jews and Muslims.12 There are many more. Hence the debate goes on. We see that there
are arguments and critiques that are for and against the existence of God, clearly mentioned
to some extent in this paper. I however agree from one powerful insight that I have drawn
based on the distinction made by Gabriel Marcel. The idea of God is not merely a problem to
be solved but a mystery to be lived and experienced. On this note, I conclude this section.

10
V John Peter, ed., Introduction to Indian Philosophy (New Delhi: IGNOU, 2011), 111, http://www.ignou.ac
(accessed on 04 July 2020).
11
Ibid.
12
Moreland, Introduction to Does God Exist? : The Debate between Theist and Atheist, 18-19.

4
Bibliography

PDF Books

Moreland, J P and Neilson, Kai. Does God Exist? : The Debate between Theist and Atheist.
New York: Promethus Books, 1993. http://www.pdf.org (accessed 10 June 2020).

Nagasawa Yugin. The Existence of God: A Philosophical Introduction. Oxon: Routledge,

2011. http://www.pdf.org (accessed 10 June 2020).

Peter, V John. ed.

Introduction to Indian Philosophy. New Delhi: IGNOU, 2011. http://www.ignou.ac

(accessed on 04 July 2020).

Introduction to Western Philosophy. New Delhi: IGNOU, 2011. http://www.ignou.ac

(accessed on 04 July 2020).

Pyle, Andrew. Hume’s Dialogue Concerning Natural Religion: A Readers Guide. New York:
Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006. http://www.pdf.org (accessed 06 July
2020).

Journal Article

“The Most Holy Trinity: Not a Problem but a Mystery.” Tabor Kirana . Vol 6. (May 2016):
14-15. https://www.bangalorearchdiocese.org (accessed 10 June 2020).

Presentation

Aristidu, Michael. “Arguments For and Against the Existence of God: Analysis and
Discussion.” http://files.meetup.com/12962/Arguments%20For%20and%20Against%20the
%20Existence%20of%20God.pdf (accessed on 04 July 2020).

World Wide Web Site

Chapter 6: Philosophy of Religion. “Problem of Evil: (Responses).” Lumen: Introduction to

Philosophy. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/sanjacinto-philosophy/chapter/problem-of-
evil-responses (accessed 06 July, 2020).