PHIL/RS335 Fall 2017

Hart explains that God is not an actual being at all. He states that God is an existence but doesn't exactly exist Hart focuses more on the definition of God. We have no real proof of God as a being so I could understand Harts claim. God does the impossible however we don't know what made God himself have a possible existence, which is something we may never understand Hart provides a reasonable argument for the existence of God. He breaks down his explanation of God without excluding the emphasis on what God truly is.

In this chapter, Hart talks about how God is not at all a being. We has humans are beings because we came from something and we have limitations. God does not exist, but is existence in itself. I don't know how I feel about Hart's point of view when it comes to his argument over the existence of God. I understand how Hart could see God as a non being, because it is assumed that God is responsible for miracles and all things unknown. However, I don't really understand how God is existence in himself. The way Hart explain God is in such a simple and plain way. However, he does not eliminate the importance of what God was, what God is, snd what God will be in the future. Hart never took any glory away from God, and he never took away all the wonderful things that God has bestowed upon this Earth and universe. All in all, Hart makes a reasonable and logical argument on the existence of God. In my opinion, this chapter was pretty straight forward and it isn't really that m...

Hart makes his point clear about his belief in God. He basically views no other way of being able to understand the universe we live in than to believe that there is a God. Hart takes a stance against atheist because he thinks that there beliefs couldn't be more wrong. He also discredits naturalism because of its inconsistent explanation. Everyone should have a clear explanation of their beliefs, what and why do they believe? Even though atheists don't believe in God they still have their own beliefs.

The Teleological Argument is based off a premise and that the world has a purpose and that it must be created by someone or something of a higher power however, since we cannot prove that there is a higher being could one say the existence of God is based solely on faith or other reasons because the world is supposedly created with a purpose? My personal belief is that it is based on faith, we don't actually know that the world was created by a higher being it's really just a belief. Nor do we know that the world was created for a purpose and even if it was the argument does not prove what that purpose was for, whether it was good, bad, or just for no reason at all. But also one can say the existence of God is based on purpose as well, for example even though we cannot prove the universe was created for a purpose we can say that certain things that exist in the universe were created for a purpose such as clothes to put on our backs, or food to nourish ourselves, or our house fo...

The Seven Ways was written by Udayana to answer the question, "Is there really a God?" Udayana then gives seven argument effects which he uses the explanation for them to prove God's existence and that God is all knowing.  Most answers to this question tend to be biased because there are some religious people with their beliefs and there are nonreligious people with their beliefs as well.  According to this argument, if you are religious then your belief that God exists is sole1y based on faith, but if you are not your belief would be based of of factual evidence and information. People who believe God exists can get the message of this argument and end up being swayed into believing he doesn't exist at all.

In chapter three, Hart's argument is in favor of the existence of God. The beginning of the book was setting up his philosophical  approach to his argument. Hart explains the existence of God through experience, which will be denoted into the phrase "experience of being."  This is vital because it reminds us that God is the deity that created every being, which is why there is a possible reason to his existence. He does not take the naturalism approach but instead defends God in the actuality an fullness of being. God is also seen as a perfect being which catches the reader's eye because we are groomed to think that God is perfect including everything that he made. Hart writes, "God is not composite and so is indissoluble, he is infinite and unconditioned and so is not dependent on anything else, he is eternal and so does not come into being." Of course we all know that an actual "being" can not live forever so he is not an actual being, but he is ...

In the third chapter of The Experience of God , Hart explains how at times we can become aware of the  world and start to question its existence and how it came to be. He also focuses of how we can find ourselves stuck in trying to figure this certain situation out. Hart says, "The world is unable to provide its account of its own actuality, and yet there it is all the same" (88-89). This is true. This is a question that I ask myself all of the time. How can the world not have any type of origin, or an origin that we can go in depth of learning about, and still exist. If we think about it the world seems to not even need us to stay "alive" because it seems to be of its self. "How is it that any reality so obviously fortuitous- so lacking in any mark of inherent necessity of explanatory self-sufficiency- can exist?"(90) This question answers itself in the sense that the world does not seem to need us for anything because as far as we know it has been exis...

In the third chapter of Hart’s Experience of God , he focuses on the experience of wonder. He describes the feeling of awareness one may feel that seems to be coming from nowhere, but in fact it is a familiar feeling that we have knowledge about. “Not, that is, a simple twinge of curiosity or bafflement regarding some fact out there not yet in one’s possession: if anything, it is the sudden awareness that no mere fact can possibly be an adequate explanation of the mystery in which one finds oneself immersed at every moment.” (87)                 This statement that Hart makes sticks out to me because it is something that some Christians, or at least myself go through from time to time. Sometimes I found myself losing sight of my faith and focusing on other things around me such as work and school, and I forget about the blessings that God has given me in my life. The everyday things that I take for granted ...

In this chapter Hart focuses a lot on the definition of God. He attempts to explain what God is and what God is not. He says, "God is not composite and so is indissoluble, he is infinite and unconditioned and so is not dependent on anything else, he is eternal and so does not come into being, he is the source of his own being and hence in him there is no division between what he is and that he is, and so on" (114). Basically, this defines God as a necessary non-contingent entity. Hart points out that referring to God as a "being" is incorrect. A "being" suggests existence but also limitations. We as humans are beings, objects that exist from other human existence. We were brought into existence by something or someone else, and that existence has boundaries and limitations. God was not brought into existence but is existence itself. Since God is non-contingent, he is not an object nor does he have limitations. Hart says that God is actuality and consists o...