Religious Studies - Research Paper Example

?The report you sent showed 2 parts of sentences that could be removed. Otherwise I don’t understand the complaint. Course name Date Does God Exist? Does God exist? To all that believe God exists, He indeed does because a person’s perception of reality becomes reality for them. Therefore, if God is perceived to exist then He is indeed real. To those that have questioned God’s existence, and surely everyone has at least to some extent, proof is necessary to satisfy the mind’s craving for logic so as to reaffirm the physiological desire to believe. However, a problem arises when God is thought of as a physical or metaphysical being because if this were true, God must have been created by something else, which is inconsistent with the belief that God created everything including time and space. The nature of God’s being cannot be imagined and certainly not positively identified; therefore the proof must be found in observing events that could occur only as the result of a creator. This paper will not rely on theological reasoning to supply an answer because this would rightfully be perceived as biased information. Rather, it addresses the concepts of open-mindedness and critical thinking. It will also draw from some of the great thinkers in history including John Hick, Immanuel Kant, David Hume, Isaac Newton, Karl Marx, Hildegard of Bingen, Descartes, Stephen Hawking and John Milton as well as the physical sciences and philosophical disciplines to provide evidence or disprove the existence of a higher power. John Milton argued that a restriction on the freedoms of thought also indicated an expectation that the citizens should allow someone else to do their thinking for them. This lack of use would lead to the same decay in form and ability that could be seen physically when muscles of the body were not used, creating people who were no longer able to determine morals and ethics on their own. This creation of automatons with no capacity for thinking on their own would serve only the devil’s work as it separates them from their natural spiritual path. He uses as support for his argument the idea that even God himself opted not to have automatons serving him on earth, but instead imbued mankind with the ability to think, and choose, for himself. Pointing to human reactions as proof, Milton said no one respects, loves or honors things that give love, obedience or devotion merely as a result of force or fear of the consequences. Instead, he says it is only through effort and experience that we are able to come to realize the depth of love freely given from one to another. In the same way, he says God places tests in front of people as a way of measuring them, testing their spirit and beliefs, allowing them to further define themselves in God’s own image if they so choose or to veer off in their own direction. “God therefore left him free, set before him a provoking object, ever almost in his eyes; herein consisted his merit, herein the right of his reward, the praise of his abstinence” (Milton, 1927). According to Milton, God intentionally places temptations and risks in front of us as a means of helping us to develop spiritually. By removing these tests and obstacles, the government is forsaking the intentions of God, standing in the way of the spiritual development of the nation and leaving it ripe for moral, ethical and social decay. As God himself entrusted the care, guidance and governance of each spirit each to itself, Milton argues that it is not the place of the state or the church to impose its will upon the choices of the individual. Thus, religious liberty is defined as being the ability to exercise the freedom of choice in relation to what a man does, reads, thinks, speaks and dreams. In his arguments regarding the nature and existence of God, Descartes said that it does not matter whether we are dreaming or not because whatever our intellect tells us is, in fact, true. One of the first things that he perceived in this line of thought was that he had a basic idea of the existence of God or some form of higher intelligence. Since that idea had to have had a cause of some kind, because he had already proven that nothing comes from nothing, Descartes reasoned that this cause must have at least as much reality as the idea itself. At the same time, since he did not consider himself infinitely perfect, Descartes reasoned he could not have been the cause of this idea, so there must be an outside cause that is infinitely perfect – in other words, God must exist. “Descartes assumes that we have an idea of God as an actually infinite being, not just a being that is as great as we can imagine by extending the finite perfections of a human being. For this reason, it is impossible for us to have constructed our idea of God through an extension of the idea we have of ourselves or any other finite creature” (Rutherford, 2006). Descartes’ second argument to prove God’s existence, and through this proof to illustrate that he is more than the body in which he is housed, lies in his ability to conceive of something perfect despite his own fallibilities. This second argument begins with the knowledge that he exists – “I think, therefore I am.” This existence must have a cause of some kind, which Descartes determines to be one of five possibilities. The first is that his existence stems from himself, but if he had created himself, he would have made himself perfect. Since he is not perfect, he could not have made himself. The second possibility is that he is merely a continuation of something that has always existed. However, scientific studies have shown, even in Descartes’ time that continued existence does not necessarily follow from present existence, such as in the case of death. The physical explanation is that his parents were the cause of his existence, but this line of reasoning was determined to lead to an infinite regress and therefore unproductive to follow. If he were made by something that was less perfect than God, as in the fourth possibility, Descartes would still be left searching for the concept of something supreme, which something less perfect than God would not provide. Having eliminated all but one of the five possibilities, Descartes is able to declare with confidence that God exists as he is the only being that meets all of the necessary requirements that have been established. “I know that I could not exist with my present nature – that is, I could not exist with the idea of God in me – unless there were really a God. This must be the very God whose idea is in me, the thing having all of the perfections that I can’t fully comprehend but can somehow reach with thought, who clearly cannot have any defects. From this it’s obvious He can’t deceive – for, as the natural light reveals, fraud and deception arise from defect” (Descartes, 1637, 1989). Autonomy is the right of the people according to Karl Marx and institutions should not be allowed to put limitations on their choices. The citizenry should be able to control their own destiny and the morality of others should not be legislated or otherwise controlled by an entity other than the citizenry themselves. Regulations in the name of morality restrict individual and societal sovereignty. “Neither god nor church, neither tradition nor past, can now authorize what should be, but only ‘the people’” (Marx & Engels, n.d.). Marxism teaches that economic law imprisons the populace but ‘theoretical enlightenment’ serves to free them. Thus, the concept of God cannot spring from a governmental or social construct but must instead come from within the individual him or herself. For Hildegard of Bingen, nature was the source of all supreme truth as it represented the most solid evidence of a Divine Being and it behaved according to the original laws set forth by this Being. As a result, imagery from nature and the natural world provide the foundations of her thoughts concerning the body and nature. While there were some differences between Hildegard’s theology and that of St. Bernard, one of the more vocal church leaders of the period, Hildegard’s ideas fell into line with that of the Benedictine order from which St. Bernard hailed and thus received a great deal of support from that luminary. Hildegard’s observations and opinions regarding the natural world form the foundation upon which all her texts rest, whether songs, visions or natural observations. Hildegard felt that all growing things were infused with the Divine energy of God, a concept she termed Viritidas. Thus, God was reflected in the rocks, trees, grass and rivers that flowed through her land. Humankind is made of the same substance as the rest of the world and is therefore not above it but instead of it. “Human beings cannot live without the rest of nature, they must care for all natural things” (Bowie, 755). God, then, made Creation and “saw that it was good.” It was so good, in fact, that he wanted someone capable of admiring and appreciating it. This is when he created Man and why he endowed him with reason. But the ability to reason made Man desire to be wiser than God; to improve his already perfect situation. Contemporary religious theorist John Hick argues that because the world has many orderly qualities this provides indisputable evidence that it was of intelligent design, but he conceded that “we neither can we prove nor disprove God’s existence” (Hick, 1990). According to Hick, in direct opposition to Hume, people can acknowledge the existence of God as a basic fact. The belief that a supreme being is factual does not need explanation in terms of anything more definitive than what is presently known. From this reasoning, it can be surmised that reality is simply a perception, defined by the individual. People can “rest in the thought of an eternal and infinite self-existent,” Hick hypothesizes. “Hence it is both logically permissible and a very natural view that if the existence of the universe, as an ordered cosmos, is ultimately explicable or intelligible it must be so in virtue of its dependence upon an eternal self-existent reality which is of the same order as conscious mind” (Hick, 1990). Hick concluded, after offering what he thought to be credible opposing opinions in an effort to find a kind of balance, “It seems, then, that the universe maintains its inscrutable ambiguity. Any realistic analysis of religious belief and experience, and any realistic defense of the rationality of religious conviction, must therefore start from this situation of systematic ambiguity” (Hick, 1990). In recent years, many have endeavored to prove God’s existence by means of scientific analysis which is a discipline built on the foundation of critical thought. According to the Big Bang Theory, the entire universe was born from a colossal explosion of matter around 12 billion years ago. If the elements or the reactions contained within the Big Bang occurred in a slightly different manner, life could not have existed. The chances of this cataclysmic event developing exactly as it did by mere accident in a way that life could exist is infinitesimally small, maybe ten billion to one which therefore suggests, by those same odds, that a creator exists. According to noted Cornell University physicist Stephen Hawking, “...the universe and the laws of physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any one of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist: Either atoms would not be stable, or they wouldn’t combine into molecules, or the stars wouldn’t form the heavier elements, or the universe would collapse before life could develop, and so on...” (Hawking, 1997). According to scientific theory, new forms of energy and matter cannot be created or destroyed and cells can only develop from pre-existing cells via the splitting and reassembly of DNA molecules. The known physical universe cannot create matter and it takes life to make life, both realities provide evidence of a supernatural involvement in the creation (Briney, 2007). Does scientific evidence prove God’s existence? No. It shows that God could exist but proof will have to wait for final conformation and until the physical make-up of God is known. Until then attempting to prove or disprove God is best accomplished by means of critical thought which is a good exercise that will enhance other aspects of life. It’s not only good to question one’s own convictions, it is essential if humans are to best use the brain that God gave us. Works Cited Briney, Patrick. “Evidence for the Existence of God.” University of Arkansas. (2007). May 8, 2011 Bowie, Fiona. “Hildegard of Bingen and Medieval Woman’s Sexuality.” Diskus. Vol. 2, N. 1, 1-14. (1994). May 8, 2011 < http://www.basr.ac.uk/diskus/diskus1-6/BOWIE.TXT > Descartes, Rene. “Meditations on First Philosophy.” Trans. John Veitch. New York: Prometheus Books. (1989). Hawking, Stephen. Austin American Statesman. (October 19, 1997). Hick, John. “Philosophy of Religion.” (4th Ed.). New York: Prentice Hall. (1990). Marx, K. & Engels, F. (n.d.). “The German Ideology.” W. Lough and C. P. Magill (Trans.). R. Pascal (Ed.). New York: International Publishers. Milton, John. “Areopagitica.” Publisher: Noel Douglas. (1927). Rutherford, Donald. “Descartes – Meditation III.” University of California – San Diego. (May 15, 2006). Read More