Agnosticism, Atheism, and Theism
Agnosticism, Atheism, and TheismDoes a God exist? To many people, the answer is yes. They arrive at this conclusion based on their experiences, the existence of a Bible and church, and so on. This is a personal belief. Nowhere has it been published (except the Bible or other religious texts) that it is a definite fact that a God exists. We must not discount the fact that it has not been proven anywhere that a God does not exist, however.Theism is defined as “the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe.” Theism can be summarized by simply stating that theism is the belief in a God. What, then, is atheism? Since theism is the belief in a God, and the prefix ‘a’ means “without” or “absence of,” the correct definition of atheism is “without belief in a God.” Atheism is not a belief, for it is the
absence of belief in a God. The purpose of this is not to argue in favour of one or the other. Instead, we must focus on analysing the issue. The issue is this: Is there a God? Another question that should arise from that is this: If there is (or is not) a God, how can it be proven?The answer to these derivative questions is a simple no, under the traditional form of proof. Proof requires indisputable evidence to support the claim. The answer to our original question-is there a God-cannot be proven in a factual sense. It cannot be ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
absence of belief in a God. The purpose of this is not to argue in favour of one or the other. Instead, we must focus on analysing the issue. The issue is this: Is there a God? Another question that should arise from that is this: If there is (or is not) a God, how can it be proven?The answer to these derivative questions is a simple no, under the traditional form of proof. Proof requires indisputable evidence to support the claim. The answer to our original question-is there a God-cannot be proven in a factual sense. It cannot be experimented on and published in a scientific media; the nature of this question is not of the physical world.So, then, how can we prove there is (or is not) a God? It is a purely personal matter. There is no right or wrong answer to this question. It is a matter of personal belief. A belief does not have to be based in solid fact; a racist may believe his race is superior to others—but is this true? Depending on a person’s perception, it may or may not be. A personal belief is proven only to one’s self. It does not have to be rooted in fact, which limits the effectiveness of a particular argument. There is not sufficient factual proof to convince anyone not already leaning towards a particular disposition.If one feels they have sufficient evidence to claim there is a God, let them have their say. If one feels they have sufficient evidence to claim there is no God, let them have their say. If one brings forth the unspeakable argument that you cannot factually prove one argument or the other, let them have their say. All corners of the issue must be carefully considered and are equally valuable. How would we determine, then, a factual proof of a God’s existence or non-existence? There is only one way to find out.The answer lies in death. According to theistic belief, one would go to heaven or hell upon their death. A God lives a form of heaven, and a devil lives in a hell. We cannot have one without the other, apparently, so if a God exists, a devil exists and vice versa. Upon death, one enters heaven or hell. They would likely meet the masters of these domains-a God or devil-and the existence of a God would be proven, in an indisputable, factual sense. Let us then suppose theistic belief is wrong. There is no heaven; there is no hell. Death is the absolute end. No Gods or devils would be met in either of these places, because they do not exist. Upon death, one of these two scenarios could happen, according to theists and atheists respectively. Death is a personal experience, although its experiences are factual. Let us suppose a person has died. They have met God, thus proving God exists. But, they have no way (as yet discovered) to contact the living. Their belief in God has been proven to be fact, but there is no way to impart this knowledge to the living. This brings their proof to irrelevance, as if it never even happened. Whether a God exists or not is a matter of perception. There is no physical proof to be brought on by either side in this issue. Personal belief is the proof of this question. There is belief, or the absence of belief. Some reserve judgment because they want factual proof. This concrete truth cannot be presented to a living person, so they feel justified (and are) in their belief. Others, who based on experience have either belief or the absence of belief on the matter, are equally justified in their belief. I encourage each person to present all arguments—for, against, and in-between—about God to themselves. Everyone must examine all sides of the issue to fully understand it. Only then can a person justifiably decide what to do—to hold belief, the absence of belief, or to reserve judgment on the issue
