Belief in God Essay Example
Every day, people question the truth about God's existence. Some believe that planet earth came into existence out of nowhere and could not have seen the hand of a principal character in control of it. Others think that the universe's creation came into existence by a supreme and organized deity and not the fallacy of mysterious presence. I am in a full agreement with the latter and have convincing proofs as to why I attest and believe in God Almighty.
I believe that Theism or belief in God supersedes any other forms of other faiths. Unfortunately, most people rate the non-belief in God's existence or Atheism as the most reasonable and real version than the belief in God. It is for this reason that I am giving three fool-proof scenarios of the undeniable presence of God. These are the Scientific Scenario, the Moral Scenario, and the Practical Scenario.
The Scientific Scenario
Many explanations are putting God's presence and intervention in favor of the rest of beliefs. A good example is the architecture and development of forms of life on planet Earth. Atheists explain these forms of life as the random combination of many different molecules from different inorganic elements to form the many cells making up a living organism. Their understanding of life and origin is directed from the mysterious and unexplained co-existence of particulates, adding up and bombarding to give life.
I think this is a vague explanation of life’s existence putting in mind the sterling coordination from the smallest unit forming entity; molecules, to the most significant group of life; the general systems of a living being. Moving closer to an organelle, it performs very many different functions. A ribosome, for example, does translation and formation of the various cell proteins leading to the build-up and usual routine of life. It is a small unit of life yet the whole organism, and the cell, in particular, dies in its absence. The same argument goes to the cells, no tissue, no organ, organ system, and the general operation can comfortably co-exist in their lack. They both rely on organized and controlled co-ordination to drive the standard routine functions in a living organism.
Admittedly, it does not beat logic to rely on the mysterious bombardment of different particulates to come up with a very complicated, organized and controlled architecture of the various components of life. The inorganic matter giving life is a ridiculous argument on the explanation of the origin of life.
The Big Bang theory is another piece of argument proving God’s existence. It has many deficiencies that can only be intervened by the supreme interaction of God’s actions. It attributes the origin of the earth to a chaotic state that was very minute, compact and hypothermic. The chaotic state that existed as a singularity began to undergo metamorphosis into the universe that we habit today rapidly.
The theory narrates two possibilities that explain the origin of the earth. The first possibility is the sheer existence of land and its immediate volatile expansion. This scenario is the point of departure; there is no law of physics explaining originality of something from nothingness. I mean, life could not have originated from something related to science as it does not obey the foundations of physics. The mystery brings God's hand into the picture. God is the creator of physics. He is not tied down to observe the law of physics when creating anything he so desires because he is the author.
The second possibility is the mysterious singularity of the planet earth and its sudden expansion. The potential is a glaring deficiency, why exist as a singularity for all those millennia and then all of a sudden, set off unexplained events of development. These events require external stimuli to stimulate these events. It is not possible for a planet that has been in existence for all those years showing no signs of events or life to begin rapid contraction, expansion, and specific processes autonomously. The author of this theory is tongue-tied on giving a credible explanation of this open criticism. The only person who could have influenced these interruptions is a supernatural being; The Almighty God. The two possibilities of the Big Bang theory have openly given in to the mighty ways of God's planning. God has won at the end of this battle.
Vast numbers of Atheists have not thrown in the towel. In their retaliatory battles to overcome the deficiencies, they have further taken solace to the Multiverse theory to disapprove God's involvement in Earth's creation. This theory narrates the presence of many other tiny universes that no one can see from our world. It proposes that out of the many universes in existence, ours was fortunate to have the highest probability to produce life from the rigorous interaction with inorganic substances. It further correlates their examples by posing a food for thought scenario. This argument raised is a rhetorical question of if. If one is engaged in a puzzle with many outcomes, but only one specific issue is the correct result, chances of missing the point are high compared to the minimal possibility of getting the right result. If you take a million people to engage in a puzzle of a million outcomes, at the end of the game, one is guaranteed to come out with a correct answer.
In a nutshell, the theory demystifies other deficiencies by alleging to the many universes that sought life in the few possibilities and only earth become the victor. It was granted the go-ahead to accommodate life forms. It still does not answer the blurred originality that comes from organic materials. Further yet, there are many questions raised about the origin these many universes. Even if we agree that these many universes came into existence through the intervention of many other worlds, it is vague. In reality, there is no actual proof giving information on the presence of other universes other than our own. The existence of a supreme being is most likely to occur than the hypothesis of the other many worlds of imagination.
The Moral Scenario
Look at the presence of the standards of morality set universally to which everyone subscribes. These standards define goodness from wrongdoings. Everybody knows when they are on the wrong even though these standards are not written anywhere, they are absorbed in mind. People have different versions of what morality is. It is impossible to say that one could have set the standards of decency that everyone agrees to. If one interprets morality utterly different from one another, it is impossible for the same person to design a universal outlook of morality approved by everyone. Many questions are left unanswered. No one has the right to define what good is or distinguish better from best, to say that one action is excellent and the other step is terrible. People unanimously cannot approve a universal code set by one person. Everyone would want to dialogue and give their own opinions. The discussions will create an endless battle of dialogue. Morality was a program of creation. The only person who could have created and defined morality is a supreme being. The only person I know to fit on such a magnitude task is God. His mere presence determines goodness.
Those in a question of creation of morality should not think about it too much. I know that morality is not an object but an idea. People are justified to reason out how an opinion can be created. The answer is straightforward. Morality is as old as planet earth itself, yet we still conform to the same virtue. The righteousness that was from the beginning of the world is the same morality used today. If it were someone's invention, no one would agree to it. Many debates would ensue, many people would try to outdo the real morality and change it over time. Even baboons conform to morality that human beings observe. No one can come up with the idea that even other forms of life follow without questioning. The monkeys do not understand the law of gravity invented by Sir Isaac Newton, yet it knows what morality is. A child is born and not for so long develops the conscience of morality without attending any learning institution or apprenticeship. Contrary to the theory of Charles Darwin of 'survival of the fittest,' people observe the law of helping one another. The rule is the moral law. Admittedly, it is imaginable to conclude that we can blindly have a conscience of morality and deny the existence of the author of morality. The only person who holds such a high power to put the conscience of morality in our mind is God.
Other atheists reject the presence of morality. They agree that morality does not exist. To them, there is no right or bad. They pretend to be living according to how they feel. How then is it possible to differentiate the actions of Mahatma Gandhi and Saddam Hussein? Even the atheists agree that Mahatma Gandhi was a great person who did good to the lives of millions in India. They will all in agreement say that Saddam Hussein was evil causing loss of life to the millions of the inhabitants of Iraq. It only means that everyone knows the existence of good and evil.
People can unanimously differentiate right from evil. If atheists say morality is not in reality, then why are they concerned so much about how they live their lives. They should not care what they do, how they live and how they will harmoniously stay with other people. Contrary to this, everyone including the atheists cares for their wellbeing, are concerned on how they live and relate with one another. Without morality, there is no meaning and purpose of life. The author of morality is God.
The Practical Scenario
The arguments given are compelling, yet I have no idea, if you ask me, where you can go and physically meet God. The examples that I have given are the physical and social scenarios that are proof of his existence. The choice is now yours to decide whether to believe and have faith in God or be an atheist. You have the autonomy to choose to take a risk and join either side. Whether to live in God's way or live as you like depends on you. You have many options to choose from. One is to follow God's way and then wait to see whether he exists or not. Another is to be an atheist and prove that there is no afterlife and prove your existence after death. Both options have definite results.
Following God’s ways then you realize that he does not exist, considerably wasting all those years of being faithful and no afterlife to go to is also a dilemma for some. Practicing atheism for the better part of your life then at the end you find that God exists is another difficulty for some people. You lose to go to the afterlife lamenting why you lived in the first place. These are the confusions that people face daily. It is wise to try something after a thorough analysis and examination of the many possible options. Making a final decision gives you the scenarios of probability.
This life is critical, deciding to gamble with it always give painful results. Take your precious time and select wisely. We have all the time to scrutinize the possibilities and come up with a proper conclusion. Get rid of peer pressure, bodily desires and make a long-term decision giving you a safe passage of eternity with God. One must exist in both dilemmas, either the actual existence of atheism or the truth about the presence of a supreme deity. I am sure that atheism is wrong and choosing God's side is the best.
Choosing to live according to your terms bears negativity at the end. Life always loses a meaning that not even the vast wealth that one acquires can satisfy. The purpose of life according to this lifestyle is still vague, and someone always feels a missing link. We should not solely follow God because of the gift of living with God for eternity and joy. Eternity is among the rewards of living according to God's way. Our allegiance to God should be pure. Let us set aside our selfish desires and with lots of love and honesty, dedicate our lives to the mighty control of God. I have never experienced a supreme being so selfless and ready to welcome with open hearts those who continuously wrong him. It does not matter what the wrong one did in the past; the door is always open.
The existence of God is absolute. The proof is with you, your life explains it, and the universe that you inhabit continually reminds you of his presence. The various authors of The Big Bang theory, Multiverse theory, and evolution of life have all been unable to explain the deficiencies in their opinions. No matter the arguments, the many deviations and many excuses that they give, one thing is sure; God's existence. Morality further confirms to those in doubt that God's controls protect and care for us. I agree that we all have choices to make but personally, the truth is glaring. God exists.