Existence of Supernatural Beings

Are there supernatural beings? Is there a supreme being?

Contents

An explanatory argument for supernatural beings is an argument that the existence of supernatural beings is the only plausible explanation of certain facts.
Facts such as:
- Origin of Functional Organs
  - Teleological Argument
- Universe Coming into Being
  - Kalam Cosmological Argument
- Religious Experience and Visions
- Occurrence of Miracles
- Emergence of Life
- Efficacy of Prayer
- Existence of something rather than nothing
- Cosmic Fine-Tuning

Argument from Pain and Suffering against the existence of a supreme being:
- The existence of an all-loving, all-powerful, all-knowing God is incompatible, or at least inexplicable, with a universe in which:
  - Natural disasters happen resulting in the pain, suffering and death of innocent children
  - Animals die in agony every day as they are hunted down, ripped apart, and eaten by predators
A typical reply is that “we can’t know the mind of God” or that “God works in mysterious ways”
But this a non-explanation. Granting for the sake of argument that God exists, there’s an alternative, real explanation of the existence of pain and suffering: that God, though all-powerful and all-knowing, is an amoral being indifferent to the pain and suffering of animals and human beings.

Atheism is the view that there are no supernatural beings.
- That is, it’s rational to believe supernatural beings don’t exist.
Agnosticism is the view that the existence of supernatural beings as an open question.
- That is, it’s not rational to believe that supernatural beings exist and it’s not rational to believe that supernatural beings don’t exist.
Argument against Atheism:
- It’s rational to believe supernatural beings don’t exist only if it’s been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But it hasn’t been.
Argument for Atheism:
- It’s reasonable to believe that mermaids don’t exist on the grounds that
  - there’s no credible arguments for their existence, and
  - how the idea of a mermaid developed is explained without postulating their existence.
- In the same way it’s reasonable to believe that supernatural beings don’t exist on the grounds that
  - there’s no credible arguments for their existence, and
  - how the idea of supernatural beings developed is explained without postulating their existence.

The Argument:
- If you believe in God and you’re right, you get to enjoy eternal happiness; whereas if you believe in God and you’re wrong, no big deal. However, if you don’t believe in God and He exists, you lose big time, damned for eternity; whereas if you don’t believe in God and He doesn’t exist, you’ve neither gained nor lost. Considering the possibilities and weighing the consequences, it’s more rational to believe in God than not.
Options and Consequences
Objection #1
- The argument appeals to the desirable consequences of believing in God rather than to evidence that God exists. It’s thus irrelevant to the question of God’s existence. It’s like arguing that you should believe your spouse has been faithful because you’ll be happier if you do.
Objection #2
- It doesn’t seem that belief is in a person’s direct control. Suppose your’e offered a million dollars to believe there’s a live rattlesnake under the couch. It doesn’t seem you can simply make yourself believe that such a snake exists the way can bend your finger. If you want the million dollars, your best course of action is to go get a rattlesnake and put it under the couch.