Philosophy and the advances in cosmology, neurology, molecular biology, and the social sciences have made the convincing and converging arguments for God’s existence more probable than ever in history.On God’s Existence is concise summary of these arguments as well as new arguments inspired by the advances of the sciences.

The Clarity of God's Existence examines the need for theistic proofs within historic Christicanity, and the challenges to these since the Enlightenment. Historically (and scripturally), Christianity has maintained that unbelief is inexcusable. If failing to know God is a sin, the immplication is that humans can and should know God. Humans should know God because his eternal power and divine nature are clearly revealed in the things that are made. And yet, Anderson argues, more time is spent on avoiding the need for clarity to establish inexcusability than on actually providing an argument or proof. Proofs that rely on Aristotle or Plato and that establish a Prime Mover or designer are thought to be sufficient. But the adequacy of these, not only to prove the God of theism, but also to prove anything at all, has been called into question by Enlightenment thinkers like David Hume. After considering the traditional proofs, and tracing the history of challenges to theistic proofs (from Hume to Kant and down to the twentieth century) Anderson argues that the standard methods of apologetics have failed to sufficiently respojnd. Classical Apologetics, Evidentialism, Presuppositionalism, Reformed Epistemology, and others fail to adequately answer the challenges of the Enlighenment. If this is the case, what is the outcome for Christianity? Anderson offers an explanation as to why traditional proofs have failed, and for what is necessary to offer a proof that not only responds to Hume and Kant but also establishes the clarity of God's existence. The traditional proofs failed precisely in not aiming at the clarity of God's existence, and They failed in this because of a faulty view of the goal of Christian life. If the blessed life is to be attained in a direct vision of God in heaven, then there is little to no reason to ask for more than the bare minimum required to get into heaven (justification). Furthermore, if the highest blessing is this direct vision, then the glory of God revealed in his work is considered as less important and even set aside. By way of contrast, if God's eternal power and divine nature are clearly revealed in his works, and the blessing comes in knowing God, then it is of the almost importance for Christianity to demonstrate the clarity of God's existence. "This is an exciting book that advances the status of philosophy of religion by analyzing and probing some fundamental issues in contemmporary philosophy and theology. The emphasis on clarity is, to me, new and fresh and provocative. I'm really surprised that the constellation of clarity, responsiblity, and inexcusability has not been examined in detail before."---Stephen Webb Wabash College

When war, crimes, and calamities occur, the belief in God is shaken. The idea comes to mind. Does God Exist? If there is a God, then why is he not preventing deadly events comprising genocides, assassinations, crimes, and atrocities? On the contrary, He does not interfere. That means there is no God. Are people worshiping at various religious places Churches, Mosques, and Temples for various reasons wasting their time? If God does not exist, all these religious places should be closed and turned into cinemas, entertainment clubs, and sports stadiums. God is not any object that His existence can be proved. It can be felt by seeing His splendid creation. The act of creation reveals the creator. To know His existence is to know his magnificent creation and redemption. He is the transcendent designer and has not revealed Himself so far to anyone, No God, His prophet, deputy or beloved can interfere with any life on any planet. Each soul has its journey and is responsible for its actions. God is apathetic to the creation of the universe or any happening in the universe. The universe goes on as per its natural laws. So, let us not blame God for any catastrophe occurring in the world.

The endeavour to prove God’s existence through rational argumentation was an integral part of classical Islamic theology (kalām) and philosophy (falsafa), thus the frequently articulated assumption in the academic literature. The Islamic discourse in question is then often compared to the discourse on arguments for God’s existence in the western tradition, not only in terms of its objectives but also in terms of the arguments used: Islamic thinkers, too, put forward arguments that have been labelled as cosmological, teleological, and ontological. This book, however, argues that arguments for God’s existence are absent from the theological and philosophical works of the classical Islamic era. This is not to say that the arguments encountered there are flawed arguments for God’s existence. Rather, it means that the arguments under consideration serve a different purpose than to prove that God exists. Through a close reading of the works of several mutakallimūn and falāsifa from the 3rd‒7th/9th‒13th century, such as al-Bāqillānī and Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī as well as Ibn Sīnā and Ibn Rushd, this book proffers a re-evaluation of the discourse in question, and it suggests what its participants sought to prove if it is not that God exists.

This careful examination of properties commonly attributed to God is essential background to any arguments about the existence of God.

Proposes an innovative rethinking of Aristotle’s work as a system that integrates his theology with his doctrine of reproduction and life. In this deep rethinking of Aristotle’s work, Abraham P. Bos argues that scholarship on Aristotle’s philosophy has erred since antiquity in denying the connection between his theology and his doctrine of reproduction and life in the earthly sphere. Beginning with an analysis of God’s role in the Aristotelian system, Bos explores how this relates to other elements of his philosophy, especially to his theory of reproduction. The argument he develops is that in talking about the cosmos, Aristotle rejected Plato’s metaphor of artisanal production by a divine Demiurge in favor of a biotic metaphor based on the transmission of life in reproduction, in which pneuma—not breath as it is often interpreted but the life-bearing spirit in animals and plants—plays a key and sustaining role as the vital principle in all that lives. In making this case, he defends the authenticity of the treatises De Mundo and De Spiritu as Aristotle’s, and demonstrates Aristotle’s works as a unified system that sharply and comprehensively refutes Plato’s, and in particular replaces Plato’s doctrine of the soul with a theory in which the soul is clearly distinguished from the intellect. “Bos offers a fresh, interesting, and important perspective. His interpretation will be very controversial, but if he is right, the standard Anglo-American interpretation of Aristotle will have to change radically.” — Malcolm Wilson, author of Structure and Method in Aristotle’s Meteorologica: A More Disorderly Nature

Do people talking about God know what they are talking about? Are they all talking about the same thing? How do different religions approach the existence of God? Can God's existence be proved? And even if it can, is God necessarily good? Does God Exist? sets out to provide a lively and readable introduction to the main issues of theism and atheism. Taking care to avoid theological jargon, Mark Corner provides a fresh look at the question that has always been at the very root of philosophy. His arguments provoke further interest as a source of new ideas.