Knowledge of God's existence

Question 1

Argument: Humans Have an Innate Sense of the Divine

Answer 1

1. All humans are made in God’s image (P).
2. If all humans are made in God’s image (P), then they have an innate capacity to recognize God’s existence
3. ∴ They have an innate capacity to recognise God’s existence (Q).

Question 2

Argument: Knowledge of God Seen in the Order of Creation

Answer 2

1. The apparent design and purpose in nature reflect God’s existence (P).
2. If the apparent design and purpose in nature (P) reflect God’s existence (Q), then natural knowledge of God is possible through observation (R).
3. So, 2

Question 3

Argument: Knowledge of God Through Faith and Grace

Answer 3

1. Humans are sinful and finite beings (P).
2. If humans are sinful and finite beings (P), then natural knowledge of God is insufficient, and knowledge is possible only through grace and faith (Q).
3. ∴ Natural knowledge of God is insufficient, and knowledge is possible only through grace and faith (Q).

Question 4

Argument: Revelation of God in Jesus Christ

Answer 4

1. Full and perfect knowledge of God is revealed in Jesus Christ (P).
2. If full and perfect knowledge of God is revealed in Jesus Christ (P), then faith in Christ provides the clearest understanding of God’s nature (Q).
3. ∴ Faith in Christ provides the clearest understanding of God’s nature (Q).

Question 5

Objection 1: Reason Alone Cannot Prove God’s Existence

Answer 5

Scholarly Source: Karl Barth (Church Dogmatics, I.1)
Epistemic Gap.

1. Humans are sinful and finite (P).
2. If humans are sinful and finite (P), then reason is insufficient to recognize God without grace (Q).
3. ∴ Reason is insufficient to recognize God without grace (Q).

Reply:
Scholarly Source: Aquinas (Summa Theologica, I.Q2.A3)
Aquinas argues that natural reason is sufficient to demonstrate God’s existence through the Five Ways (e.g., the argument from motion, causation, and design). While faith complements reason, natural knowledge can provide valid insights into God’s nature.

Question 6

Objection 2: Faith Alone Is Not Sufficient for Knowledge of God

Answer 6

Scholarly Source: Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion, 2006)
1. Faith is subjective and lacks empirical evidence (P).
2. If faith is subjective and lacks empirical evidence (P), then it is insufficient to serve as a basis for knowledge of God (Q).
3. SO, 2

Reply:
Scholarly Source: John Calvin (Institutes of the Christian Religion, I.1)
Calvin asserts that faith is rooted in the internal witness of the Holy Spirit, which confirms divine truths beyond what reason alone can achieve. Faith is a divine gift that provides assurance of God’s existence.

Question 7

Objection 3: The Fall Has Completely Removed Natural Knowledge of God

Answer 7

1. The Fall has completely corrupted human nature (P).
2. If the Fall has completely corrupted human nature (P), then natural knowledge of God is impossible without divine intervention (Q).
3. So, 2

Reply:
Scholarly Source: Romans 1:18–21
Paul argues that humans still retain the capacity to perceive God through creation, as God’s attributes are clearly visible in the natural world. The problem lies in humanity’s rejection of this knowledge, not in its absence.

Question 8

Objection 4: Revelation in Christ Is Not Necessary

Answer 8

Scholarly Source: John Hick (Philosophy of Religion, 1973)
1. God is known through various religious experiences (P).
2.If God is known through various religious experiences (P), then revelation in Christ is not uniquely necessary for understanding God (Q).
3. SO, 2

Reply:
Scholarly Source: Alister McGrath (Theology: The Basics, 2011)
McGrath defends the uniqueness of Christ’s revelation, arguing that Jesus provides the definitive and complete self-disclosure of God’s nature, which is unmatched in other religious traditions.

Question 9

Objection 5: Belief in God’s Existence Does Not Require Evidence

Answer 9

Scholarly Source: Søren Kierkegaard (Philosophical Fragments, 1844)
1. Belief in God is a subjective leap of faith (P).
2. If belief in God is a subjective leap of faith (P), then it does not require evidence or rational proof (Q).
3. it does not require evidence or rational proof (Q).

Reply:
Scholarly Source: Blaise Pascal (Pensées, 1670)
Pascal argues that belief in God is rationally justifiable through a “wager,” which considers the infinite benefits of belief and the risks of disbelief. While faith is ultimately personal, rational arguments can strengthen one’s commitment.

Question 10

3. Summary of Scholars Referenced

Answer 10

Karl Barth (20th Century) – Emphasizes the insufficiency of reason due to human sinfulness.
Thomas Aquinas (13th Century) – Defends natural reason’s ability to demonstrate God’s existence through logical arguments.
Richard Dawkins (21st Century) – Critiques faith as inadequate for knowledge of God.
John Calvin (16th Century) – Defends faith as a divine gift enabled by the Holy Spirit.
Martin Luther (16th Century) – Asserts that the Fall has corrupted human nature, making natural knowledge of God impossible.
Paul (Romans 1:18–21) – Maintains that God’s existence is evident in creation despite humanity’s sinfulness.
John Hick (20th Century) – Argues for a pluralistic view of religious experience.
Alister McGrath (21st Century) – Defends the uniqueness of Christ’s revelation as definitive.
Søren Kierkegaard (19th Century) – Frames belief as a subjective leap of faith.
Blaise Pascal (17th Century) – Supports faith through rational argumentation, like Pascal’s Wager.

Question 11

Descartes Trademark argument

Answer 11

1. I have an idea of a perfect, infinite God (a being with all perfections).
2. If I have an idea of something, then its cause must have at least as much reality as the idea itself (principle of causality).
3. Only a perfect, infinite being could be the cause of the idea of a perfect, infinite God (because nothing less perfect could cause such an idea).
4. Therefore, a perfect, infinite God must exist (God is the only sufficient cause of the idea).