The Argument From Motion:
Everything in the universe is made up of essentially 2 things: matter and energy. Matter describes the physical things around us: the earth, the air you breathe, your pencil. Matter is made up of particles called atoms and molecules. Energy is the ability to cause change or do work. Some forms of energy include light, heat, electrical energy and mechanical energy, such as movement.
There is motion (locomotion) in the universe. Something cannot move itself: an external agent or force is required. An infinite regress of forces is meaningless. Hence, there must be a force that is the ultimate source of all motion, personal and non-personal.
"A personal being" means a being having 3 things :
1) a creative thought,
2) a free will
3) and feelings.
Animals have only two of above attributes:
1) only a thought (but not a creative one because any animal can't develop itself)
2) and feelings,
Plants have only one attribute which is feelings.
The only creature that is a personal being and has the 3 attributes is Man. Plants and animals are non personal beings.
That's why what differs the man than any other creature as a personal being is having creative thought and free will. Animals for example can't resist their instincts but Man does because he has free will.
If we use the evolutionist's estimated time since the split between ape and man of 6 million years, we get 720,000 bad mutations, or about 9 mutations per gene! We would more resemble a snail than a human!. Based on the given definition of "person" mentioned above, If the human has a personality, Then whoever created man must have a personality as well otherwise man having personal attributes loses its meaning. That what proves that God must have a personality.
The Ontological Argument (an argument from being):
Major premise: Man has an idea of an infinite and perfect being.
Minor premise: Existence is a necessary part of perfection.
Conclusion: An infinite and perfect being exists, since the very concept of perfection requires existence.
The Teleological Argument (The Argument From Design):
There is an observable order or design in the world that cannot be attributed to the object itself (e.g., inanimate objects). This observable order argues for an intelligent being who established this order. This being is God.
The Moral (or Anthropological) Argument:
All people possess a moral impulse or categorical imperative. Since this morality is not always rewarded in this life, there must be some basis or reason for moral behavior that is beyond this life. This implies the existence of immortality, ultimate judgment, and a God who establishes and supports morality by rewarding good and punishing evil.
The Cosmological Argument (The Argument From Cause):
Every effect has a cause. There cannot be an infinite regress of finite causes. Therefore, there must be an uncaused cause or necessary being. This being is God.
The Cosmological Argument (The Argument From Necessity):
Why is there something rather than nothing? If something exists now, then something exists necessarily: if anything is, (even if it is only illusion), then something must have the power of being within itself (i.e., God). One datum is sufficient to show the point: a single molecule, atom, subatomic particle, or idea is enough to show the existence of God. Whatever exists is either self-created, self-existent, or created ultimately by something that is self-existent. To say it is self-created is illogical, violating the law of causality by postulating an effect without a cause, and violating the law of non-contradiction by postulating that it can exist and not exist at the same time and in the same relationship. Therefore, something exists necessarily. Something has the power of being within itself and is self-existent: it is not dependent on another. Created things are just that, created, and obviously, as contingent things, do not posses that power, but even as a whole group show their dependency on a necessary being. There must be "a" one and only one necessary being, because to be self-existent and not dependent is to be unlimited and infinite in independence. There cannot be two infinitely all powerfuls. For if there is more than one, then each lacks what the other has, each is not infinitely all-powerful nor infinitely independent.
There is only one infinity in mathematics which represent God !!.
This is an example of reasoning from the parts to the whole, and though this type of argument can sometimes be erroneous, it is not always so. Anyone who claims that all reasoning from the parts to the whole is fallacious is committing the fallacy of hasty generalization by claiming such here.
The Argument From Perfection:
It can be observed in the universe that there is a pyramid of beings (e.g., from insects to man), in an ever-increasing degree of perfection and complexity. There must be a final being who is absolutely perfect, infinitely complex, and the source of all perfection. This being is God.
The Argument From Possibility and Necessity:
Things exist in a network of relationships to other things. They can exist only within this network. Therefore, each is a dependent thing. However, an infinite regress of dependencies is contradictory. There must, then, be a being who is absolutely independent, not contingent on anything else. This being is God.
The Argument From Perception:
Man is able to perceive (sense) things around him and/or inside himself. This cannot be caused either by physical events (perception as a mental act) or by man himself. Therefore, the existence of perception implies God's existence as the only rational explanation for man's perceptions.
The Argument From Man's Finitude:
Man is aware of his finitude. What makes man aware of this? God is continually impressing man with God's infinitude. Therefore the sense of finitude itself shows that an infinite being, God, exists
The Argument that God is an Innate Idea:
Every person is born with the idea of God implanted in their mind, though it is suppressed in unrighteousness. As the child grows into adulthood, this idea becomes clearer, though more suppressed.
1. There must be a Creator. Things do not make themselves. No animate or inanimate thing can logically create its own existence when it doesn't exist in the first place; no thing can logically spontaneously self-generate from nothing. Some things do form from other things, but the formation is accompanied by a loss. Creation contains both singular and plural things as essential, intrinsic qualities. In some sense, this can show us a Creator that is both singular and plural.
2. The Creator must have incredible Wisdom and Power. The quantity of information and power within the universe is amazing! The information and intricacy of any living organism is beyond our ability to truly comprehend. And if this is only what we as limited beings can see about life, how much more can the God of nature see? Studies in science have revealed a great deal of information about the creation, some in incredible detail, which helps us to see more about the mighty power and Creator behind the whole of creation.
3. The Creator must be logically loving and logically hateful. The capacity and desire to nurture, protect, play, grieve, become enraged, violent, destructive, and more, seen in so many creatures, only makes consistent sense if their good Creator possesses these same attributes. The overall creativity for preservation and the continuance of life seen in nature show more answers about our Creator.
4. The Creator must be Just and require justice. Creation abounds with evidence for the Creator's balanced justice. The laws in creation exist in both simple and complex levels. The laws throughout the whole design of nature (even the laws that govern one's own existence) are not just a bunch of nonsense. Actions have reactions: everything has consequences, beneficial or not. With everything being the way it is in the whole system, and since there is great injustice in this life, this life can't be all there is. A final summation has been stated that since justice is often not done in life on earth, either 1., justice is done in life after earth, in which case there must be an afterlife, or else 2., this demand we make for any sort of moral meaning and justice is not intertwined with life and reality, but is a mere subjective, relative, meaningless concept that is filled with meaning as an apparent part of nature, yet has no meaning. On the contrary, reflection on inward natural instincts and outward investigation affirm that there are rights and wrongs. Human beings have a conscience and justice exists.
