Philosophers Arguments for Proof of God

It is inexcusable to not seek for knowledge about what it eternal, specifically the knowledge within general revelation; now that it is clear that there is something eternal, it is important to determine if and how this is the theistic God. Since having a religious experience is not valid enough for proof of the existence of God, we must, while using the knowledge from general revelation, study how to determine that this something that is eternal is the God of theism. It is clear that many people forget that having knowledge of God, or what is eternal, is not beyond man’s concepts. Now that we have a clear understanding that something must be eternal, our next step is to identify if this is proof for the existence of God, particularly in theism. I have already stated two philosophers who attempted to show the existence of God, René Descartes, and Blaise Pascal. There are in fact many different concepts, from many different philosophers and theologians, who make an effort to do this.

Famous for his ontological argument, Anselm of Canterbury “sought to prove the existence of God with a single proof rather than with several” (6). Anselm believed that there was one supreme good, and there was one supreme being higher than all others. In Anselm’s second chapter of his book, Proslogion, he states:

“Even the fool is convinced that there is something, at any rate in the understanding, than which nothing greater can be conceived, for when he hears this, he understands it, and whatever is understood is in the understanding. And certainly that than which a greater cannot be conceived cannot exist in the understanding alone. For if it be in the understanding alone, it is possible to conceive it as existing in reality, which is greater. If, therefore, that than which a greater cannot be conceived is in the understanding alone, that very thing than which a greater cannot be conceived is one than which a greater can be conceived. But this assuredly cannot be. Without any doubt, therefore, there exists something both in the understanding and in reality than which a greater cannot be conceived” (6).

In other words, Anselm believes that something exists that which nothing greater can be conceived in both the understanding and in reality. Critics of Anselm’s argument, such as Immanuel Kant don’t think this idea of a God is enough to prove it is actually God. Is Anselm’s argument proof for the God of theism? For Anselm, “God is absolutely simple; therefore, the divine attributed are not accidents but rather the very essence of God. God is present in every place and time and is not in any place or time, for all times and places are in God” (6). His attempts to prove the existence of God by rational means are worthy to take note of. More often than not, people already assume the existence of God, either because of certain scriptures, such as the Bible or the Koran for example, or more commonly because of lack of critical thought. What we have now discovered is that we must have knowledge and understanding of the eternal, through general revelation before we accept sacred scripture.

Another well known philosopher, of the thirteenth century, was Thomas Aquinas, who disagreed with Anselm’s argument that the idea of God was a necessary thought. Aquinas believed that “God can be proved by arguments drawn from the universe, from creation” (6). Aquinas gives five arguments for the proof of God’s existence, though his “way of “proving” God’s existence presupposes at least some kind of idea of god” (6). For Aquinas, “God is not a non-being but the supreme being, an ever active power” (6). He attributes properties to God for the being of God and his relation to the world, quite similar to the concepts of general revelation.

Both Anselm and Aquinas use similar arguments from the perception of general revelation. From the general knowledge within human nature we can derive how the eternal, or God, is to act, according to the nature of things. What we have established is the need and importance of coming to understand general revelation. This is vital because the good for humans is to find meaning of the world, while meaning of the world reveals the nature of the creator, this found through general revelation. All persons have the ability and responsibility to have this knowledge because it is general; however, we are then responsible for being able to take that knowledge and apply it to understanding sacred scripture properly.