There are four primary arguments offered as proofs of God's existence. These are categorized as the: 1) Cosmological argument; 2) Teleological argument; 3) Ontological argument; and, 4) Moral Law argument (Vlach, 2011, pp. 1-2). The cosmological argument maintains that the "cosmos," or world, could not exist by itself, so something - a "first cause" - must have made it (Vlach, 2011, p. 1). This cause is God. A main argument against this logic is that if everything must be created to exist, what created God? Another argument of the logic in this argument is that, even if something did make the cosmos, this is not evidence of the existence of the "Christian God" (Vlach, 2011, p. 1). The teleological argument for God's existence is also known as the "argument from design" (Vlach, 2011, p. 1). This argument posits the theory that since the universe shows evidence of great complexity; it had to have been designed by a "great designer," which is God (Vlach, 2011, p. 1). Arguments against this evidence for God include those that maintain the Big Bang or evolution are theories that better explain the complexity of the cosmos.
The ontological argument for God's existence argues that if we can "conceive of a God then He must exist" (Vlach, 2011, p. 2). The main flaw in this logic is that it does not really offer evidence of God's existence. We can imagine a perfect city or a unicorn but that does not mean either exists. Finally, the moral law argument for God's existence maintains that without God morality would be impossible. As the argument goes: "A universal moral law cannot exist accidentally. There must be a basis behind it-God" (Vlach, 2011, p. 2). One flaw in the above logic is the fact that many people believe there is no universal morality, and that all morality or truth is subjective and relative.
Where God's omnipotence and omniscience are concerned; the first replies to God's all
...