Entry: Part the first: How do you know that God exists? Monday, April 19, 2004



Anything that is to be said in debate of the true existence of a God unseen, is to be based upon a universal fact known as the law of casualty: “Anything which begins to exist, must have been brought into existence by something distinct from itself.” This is just as evident a fact as is 2+2=4. All, without the help of philosophical argumentation, know and understand this law.
What about a man, who claims to see no evidence of the existence of God? The first thing that one should realize of such a man, is pity, rather than anger; hope, rather than impossibility. Those that know not God, know not also that God knows them; not only knows, but also created and loves them! And not only loves, but loves unconditionally, and eternally! This, when it is realized to it’s full extremity, (which is not at all possible), is, very understandably, incredibly unbelievable to many people. This is the chief reason that one doubts the existence of God, denial.

So it follows that the various arguments by which our reason proves conclusively the existence of God may be divided into two groups: Those which are derived from the contemplation of the visible world; and those which are derived from the contemplation of the human soul. These two arguments in turn are divided up into two more arguments per group: the Teleological, Cosmological, Historical, and Moral Arguments.

First Group
The Teleological Argument is the argument, which is brought about by the contemplation of the wonderful orderliness, and purpose arrangement of the universe.
From the very existence of the world, from the movement of life in the world, we infer the existence of some Cause different from it and superior to it, of some original giver of life and motion. This is called the Cosmological Argument, from the Greek word kosmos meaning world.

Second Group
Man is by nature both a religious and a moral being. From the examination of the religious nature of man, we drive what is known as the Historical Argument; and from the consideration of his moral nature, the Moral Argument for the existence of God.” –Fr. John Laux(On whose book this argument is based)

And so it begins:

Consider life. We have stated the law of casualty, in which all agree that everything must come from something distinct from itself. If this is true, when did life begin? What caused ‘life’? These are questions that are posed to the Cosmological Argument, the argument concerning God and the Origin of the Universe.

Of the three main systems of beliefs, Materialism, Pantheism, and Theism; only Theism is capable of explaining the ‘origin of the universe’.

Pantheists believe that “We ourselves and all around us are merely the manifestation of one and the same Substance, one original Force that thinks in man, seizes its prey in a wild beast, unfolds bud and leaf in an oak, darts through the clouds in lightning, strikes the cliff in a storm wave.” According to the Pantheist, we are all God, or a part of God.

Materialism is believed that “We ourselves and all around us, earth and all the stars, are due to chance, the product of whirling Atoms, how arisen, how ending, known to none.”

Both Materialism, and Pantheism agree in rejecting the reality of a personal God, and therefore both are irreconcilably opposed to Theism, which says, “All has arisen from the fiat of an intelligent Creator, and all exists in consequence with a definite purpose”.


Pantheism does not answer our question about the origin of life, because in order for it to be true, Pantheism must contradict itself. You see, if everything that is, must have a cause, then there are, and always will be an infinite number of smaller causes; but an infinite series with no beginning is where we run into a contradiction. Because, the beginning has to have a cause; but the cause has to have been before the beginning. If Pantheism is true, then there was no greater ‘cause’ to create a beginning, because we are all a manifestation of the ‘Cause’; and being human, we physically cannot be our own creators, because we are finite, and have not always been. The ‘cause’ of humanity, has to have been, before mankind was; this ‘cause’ is infinite and, obviously, this is not we.

Materialism, answers the question of our existence, like a pair of spectacles answers a hearing problem. Materialism cancels itself out, for many of the same reasons that Pantheism is false. They, the materialists, believe that life was brought into existence by random whirling of atoms that suddenly came together and created life. This makes obvious the reason why life might seem so insignificant to many people; for if you believe that life was brought about by ‘eternal’ random airborne atoms, what is life worth living for? Furthermore, Matter, cannot be self-existent of it self from all eternity. This is the contradiction. According to law of casualty, everything that is, had to have a beginning, or had to become of something else; so where did the matter come from? Here, there is no explanation, except that matter has always existed, which of course is absurd. Matter cannot set itself in motion, cannot produce organic life, sensitive life, consciousness, reason, thought, speech, moral goodness, order, beauty. It was well said by Fr. Laux, “It is surely the strangest aberration of the human mind, to use the words of a modern philosopher, when Materialism placed the Atom on the throne of God.

The preceding are only a few arguments on the reasonableness of the existence of a Supreme Being, Who is Eternal, and self-existent. (Theism) God is the reason for all things! “In His own image and likeness He created them, Man and Woman…” We are His most wonderful creations, and yet we are the only of His creations that has the nerve to defy His existence! This is because we, as human beings, are the only of His creations, that have been given free will, thought capability, and most importantly, an immortal soul!!! God Exists. Strange how so many people are offended by this fact. This is such good news!!! One would think they would be more shocked to hear that He didn’t exist. But so many are tone deaf to that fact, that they don’t even bother taking time to think about the impact of such a statement! He lives. …

   8 comments

Alex
April 28, 2004   05:36 PM PDT
 
Yup, I never thought it was possible to get confused reading my own thoughts; I suppose I understand the paper alright, I just didn't have the brain power left after thinking and writing to read and understand no? Ha ha!

That's outstanding that your premonissions(sp?) worked for ya though. So that must have been you that put all of those pencils markings in that book telling me where all the answers were eh?
Hannah
April 26, 2004   12:06 PM PDT
 
ALEX!!! I am shocked at your language...

Actually, I had an advantage too because I read that book and did that assignment and I've read other articles stating the same arguments and listened to Catholic radio which goes over these arguments once in a while as well... In other words, I already knew what you were going to say before you said it. Therefore, I just read my anticipations into your writing and was able to make sense of it all...

Actually, between you and me and the bloggo-sphere, Fr. Laux is one of the most difficult authors to understand. I wrote MANY papers on his writings that didn't make sense to me after I'd written them. So, you're not alone. :)
Alex
April 25, 2004   01:50 PM PDT
 
Oh, well suppose you could do that... you cheater!!

Who does that stinkin' author think he is?!?! Playin' favorites like that!!! Well I'll be grr-ed and shot down! What the darn is this world comin' to!!

Hrm, pardon my French.
The Cow
April 24, 2004   10:13 PM PDT
 
I've met with the author, and talked about this type of thing, so I had an advantage in understanding it. ;)

(Sorry, yo.)
Alex
April 24, 2004   08:52 PM PDT
 
Now, be honest. How many of you were actually a little bit confused when you read this?

Honestly, I was when I got done reading it, and I'm the one who wrote. That's pretty sad...
Hannah
April 20, 2004   08:00 PM PDT
 
That was really deep, Alex, but you have a really good grasp of it and did an excellent job of explaining it! Was that a paper for school? Deep... man... spiritual... :)
Mother Hen
April 19, 2004   11:30 PM PDT
 
Great assignment! Kind of long, but still worth reading. ;) Keep up the great work!
Megiddo
April 19, 2004   10:08 PM PDT
 
Wow.... WOW!

That's awesome...

I take it atheism falls under Materialism... which gives me an idea for an article...

Anyways, this is a truely amazing post. And... I can't think of anything to add...

Leave a Comment:

Name


Homepage (optional)


Comments