It is important to define "God" first since we cannot prove the

It is important to define "God" first, since we cannot prove the existence of something if we don't know exactly what it is. Are we referring to an all-powerful being who controls nature? Or are we referring to some kind of energy that can explain things that we cannot explain with modern science? I'll assume that "God" is a force, or energy, that created everything. Scientists believe the universe is around 13.7 billion years old. Given the way we perceive time and the physical world, it is unimaginable what could have existed 14 billion years ago.

You might think "nothing," but how can all of this come from nothing? God is the answer to those questions to state it simply. To say "God did not create the universe" raises the question: what did create the universe? The summed up answer is that nobody knows. To say "God created the universe" may raise the question of how it happened, but the answer to that is God.

Get quality help now

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

Proficient in: God

4.7 (235)

“ Amazing writer! I am really satisfied with her work. An excellent price as well. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

God is an explanation for the unexplainable. It's interesting how today's atheists attribute of few qualities of God to the universe that atheists a century ago would sound like you were talking about God. There is no beginning to creation, it has simply always existed, and created this universe, all knowledge is contained within it, and isn't limited to seeing things as we do in the "present." The best argument for the existence of god, in my understanding, is that he is universal. He's the creator of the minds of men and the product of minds of men.

He put those minds there, and those thoughts there that let men know that there is a god. He is of the mind. He resides in men's minds. Men created god, so he exists as much as god created men. I think that God is all life, and any living thing is a part of that God. We all split off from the cells of our ancestors. We're all essentially one organism that does a real good job of convincing itself that it's separate from itself. We are the universe experiencing itself, "I am he, as you are he, as you are me, and we are all together.I have considered becoming catholic and have met weekly with a nun because I had a lot of questions and some skepticism about the belief of god. She told me that the church believes god is existence itself that god isn't some kind of magical sky-santa, but is the thing that gives everything else existence. Something like that. I was pretty surprised to hear that because it's not what most people imagine christians believe (and certainly not the answer I was expecting from a catholic nun). Maybe not all christians do believe that exactly but I was pleasantly surprised by that answer. I grew up in a Christian household. However, why can't existence itself also be a spiritual being bigger than our entire universe? My view is that God is existence in its purest, most ideal form. Therefore, the attributes of God should be the attributes we all seek to emulate, in order to have life as it was meant to be experienced.The Bible attests to god being life itself in many places, and the church most certainly acknowledges these. In Genesis, god breathed the breath of life into all living beings. He calls himself "I am." It says in him we live and breathe and have our being, and he holds everything that exists together. These all sound, to me, a lot like what has been said before and what I've been told by more than one very knowledgeable Catholic: God is existence itself, in the purest, fullest, and most ideal form. He truly is life itself (as in, the thing that enables everything else to be alive). Yes, the church gives direction about how we should live in light of what we know about god, and some religious people can be way too legalistic about things, but in general the rules of catholicism are there because they believe it's the way for us to be connected to the life of God and to take part in that pure, ideal, full way of living that we were intended to have. I think God is part of us, but not all of us. He is what gives us existence/life, but we are not wholly made up of God. When I say God is existence itself I don't mean God is everything that exists. I mean he's the core thing that allows everything else to exist. What the Bible calls "the breath of life." Soul, spirit, life force, whatever you want to call it.It's a bit like our human parents (although I'm sure this analogy fails in a lot of ways) . They contributed (physically) what was necessary for our body to exist. Their DNA is part of us but it doesn't completely determine who we become. We have that part of us that gave us life in the first place and which influences us, but ultimately we choose what to do with what was given to us. In a similar way, God gives us existence, so in that sense there's a bit of God in all of us. However, he put the life in us and then set us free to do as we choose.Jesus, son of god, might have died on the cross physically, but not his soul. Actually Christianity would say the same of every human. Our bodies die but our souls live on. So that's actually still basically human, from a Christian perspective, and doesn't really make his death somehow less real than an average human death which is interesting because some assume that he will return one day, but why would we assume that but not assume that we will return back one day if our souls live on the same way his did? Just because our brain can't comprehend something existing without having to be brought into existence doesn't mean it's not possible. If you go all the way back to the big bang, or creationism or whatever you believe, there must be a starting point right? What was before that? Nothing? I think just the notion that something had to have come before everything is the best argument that there is something bigger than us. I'm not sure that means fate, divine justice, intervention or afterlife naturally follows and must be true, but where did this all come from, if not from something bigger? Even that is a shitty argument since all it does is point out something we do not know and states that since we don't know where it all started, it must be God. An Atheist might prefer an afterlife, but that should not influence their beliefs. Beliefs influence how we live. If you believe in an afterlife you believe death is not the end. This means you will live differently. You may delay telling your loved ones how you feel, you may not worry too much about what happens in this life because the next one will be perfect (so long as you don't sin), etc. There is no evidence for an afterlife so we should not let it affect our beliefs and our lives. Would you prefer to win the lottery tomorrow? Or would you prefer not to win it? (and let's assume you live somewhere where you are allowed to remain anonymous) There is no evidence either way. Of course you would prefer to win, but to believe this just because you would prefer it sounds crazy. If you earnestly believed tomorrow you would win the lottery perhaps you would quit your job, start spending on your credit card recklessly, etc.There is no evidence you will win the lottery tomorrow and there is no evidence for the afterlife. Wishful believing my lead to comfort, but comfort is not what all humans are after. Plus wishful living/comfort can be dangerous. You may say "i can believe in either without acting on it" but I would ask what is the point of belief if it doesn't affect your life? At that point the believer would actually be living their life as an atheist in practice. So, I'd say, there is no good evidence of God. All "evidence" we have is pretty easily argued against. I don't really see why God being a distinct spiritual being has to mean he isn't also, for us and our universe, also the thing that gives everything else life and existence and that's why they call it faith.