Can the existence and essence of God be demonstrated by showing how we are created in God's image?

John Locke said, “...from the consideration of ourselves, and what we infallibly find in our constitution, our reason leads us to the knowledge of this certain and evident truth -- That there is an eternal, most powerful, and most knowing being.”

The following evidence comes from THE GREAT BOOKS OF THE WESTERN WORLD vol. 2 & 19. St. Thomas Aquinas said:

ARTICLE 2. Whether It Can Be Demonstrated That God Exists?

I Answer that, Demonstration can be made in two ways. One is through the cause, and... The other is through the effect... When an effect is better known to us than its cause, from the effect we proceed to the knowledge of the cause. And from every effect the existence of its proper cause can be demonstrated, so long as its effects are better known to us, because since every effect depends upon its cause, if the effect exists, the cause must pre-exist. Hence the existence of God, in so far as it is not self-evident to us, can be demonstrated from those of His effects which


are known to us.

Angels and demons are intellectual creatures without a body; plants and animals do not have an intellect but a body and mortal soul. IT IS ONLY LIVING, HUMAN, BEINGS, that have a MIND, BODY, and SOUL. Only human beings have all three. Now, living, human, being is the existence of man. Those words describe the essence of man's mind, body, and soul. The Body is living, the Mind makes us human and distinguishing us from animals, and our Soul makes us the being that we become (good or evil).

Now, if you think about the existence of a person they have a triple existence: physical (body), mental (mind), and spiritual (eternal soul). In fact, whenever we create something it has all three of these parts. When we cook we have a recipe (in our mind), we gather all the raw ingredients, and we cook (don't burn it, ha ha) what it is we are making. Cooking has the physical, mental, and spiritual parts. Same with engineering or technology it has three parts: the blueprints

Update 2:

(to convey an idea), the raw materials (physical), and the workmanship (spiritual). If something goes wrong investigators will look for a design flaw, material flaw, or faulty workmanship. THIS DEMONSTRATES CREATION HAS THREE PARTS LIKE THE CREATOR.

Now, in the Bible it says Jesus is the visible likeness of the invisible God. (Colossians 1:15) The ESSENCE OF GOD IS: Father (mental), Son (physical), Holy Ghost (spiritual). ONE TRUE GOD IN THREE JUST LIKE A PERSON. THREE PARTS ONE PERSON. When you are sick you send for a doctor; when you are mentally troubled, a psychiatrist; when spiritually seeking you seek out a holy person.

13 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Yes. Try this - In Short

    Mankind was born with an innate belief that there is a God. It is "us" who choose to believe or not to believe for some reason or another.

    I believe, God has revealed himself to us in the Bible.

    Even the ancient religions believe in some type or existence of god's or God. And most falsehoods of Christianity, within and without, take a hold of the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob.

    And even some believe we humans are "gods."

    Which is a fulfillment of the Serpents prophecy to Eve in the Garden. Where he says to her... For God doeth know that in the day ye eat thereof, your eyes will be opened and ye shall be as "gods" knowing good and evil.

    Today, most of mankind determines what is good and what is evil or bad. Instead of God.

    Now, lets look at "Trinity" in Creation.

    However, I myself use the word "Triunity" instead of Trinity, because most see "Trinity" as 3.

    For everything in the world created, points to the Triunity, of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost.

    Paul says that the invisible things of him we can see in creation, even his eternal power and God-head.

    The God-head is where the concept of Trinity or Triunity of God comes from its the 3 in One.

    In Creation we have Space, Matter and Time, in "One" Creation.

    In Space we have Height, Length and Breath, in "One" Space.

    In Matter we have Energy, Motion and Phenomena, in "One" Substance.

    In Time we have Past, Present and Future, in "One" Time.

    In Man we have Body, Soul and Spirit, in "One" Man.

    In Trinity, we have Father, Word and The Holy Spirit, in "One" God.

  • Well, this is hard to respond to in any reasonable ammount of time because the multiple flaws in logic, and the arguments themselves take way too long to go into. I've written a 7 page paper on the flawed logic of Aquinas's 5 arguments for God, in short, he claims some sort of unmoved mover is evident because he rejects the idea of infinity. The idea that an inifinite series can't exist isn't evident in the world. There's also other logical errors, that, as implied, take a while to get into, so I'll stay lazy and simply claim they exist.

    While logical arguments can be made for God, there are only a few, (largely Aquinas was more or less reiterating Plato and Aristotle, Decartes had his own, but that's about all the creativity that occured). Of these few, none lacks any assumptions that can be seen as flawed logic.

    Further, there is no logical way to prove the existance of the soul, and even the mind as a unique entity can be disputed as an illusion we perceive due to chemical interactions which will occur in the same manner every time they occur.

  • 1 decade ago

    If we were made in the image of god, we can assume that god looks like a man. But, god is also omnipresent. This means that god is everywhere and everything. Thus, one could assume that either nothing was created in the image of god, or that everything was created in the image of god because god is everything.

    Also, animals are intellectual. They must reason and solve problems just as we do. Humans cannot say that we are the most intelligent race on the planet and the average IQ of Americans proves it. It is only a few of the human race that can truly surpass the rest. Those are the ones who we can consider real intellectuals. Also, what makes man so special? Just because we are the only ones capable of pondering the great mysteries of the universe? Or is it instinct that we're the only ones who care? Humans are not superior to animals any more than one animal is to another. To say we have an immortal soul while the rest of the animal kingdom is a sin in itself, and in my books the only unforgivable sin.

  • nebtet
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    well, Aquinas apparently doesn't answer who or what created "God". what effect caused God? and what effect caused the effect that caused "God" infinity.

    and as to whether humans have souls while other animals do not. sorry but since any and all "demonstrations" concerning this theological concept would be conceived and written by humans i can't help but question the obvious bias in the reasoning. humans don't know how or what other animals think. we can't speak their languages. for all we know Whales might have religion in which they worship a creator that looks like a super Whale who swims eternally in a celestial sea and who will some day send a messiah Whale to save the Whales from the oppression of the evil humans.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    None of the so called "proofs of the existence of God" hold water.

    They are all fatally flawed.

    John Locke was great at his analysis of the underpinnings of modern democracies. But his commentary on religion was a waste of time.

    St. Thomas Aquinas had a vested interest that biased his argument. He was attempting to put Christianity upon a framework of categories as demonstrated by Aristotle. Well, Aristotle was not much of a scientist and didn't understand the scientific method of the development of a testable hypothesis and then testing it. Likewise, Aquinas failed to demonstrate anything beyond the idea of a prime mover, which is not necessarily a God.

  • 1 decade ago

    I reject your reality and substitute one of my own. (Mythbusters)

    I don't understand the preoccupation of Christians to find a NEED to Prove the existence of God.

    If you believe, then do so. You say you need no convincing. You say that God put it in your heart to believe. Fine... Do so!

    If your God had wanted everyone to believe, why would he have put it in the hearts of some to NOT BELIEVE?

    No logical arguments can prove the existence of a being that is beyond logic. ALL of them suppose that something that is beyond reason can be demonstrated by reason alone. This is a logical fallacy. These arguments assume that one can make a logical leap; that in seeing order, one can assume that some external thing is responsible for that order. Modern physics shows that order may be found in chaos, that a certain amount of order is a result of the fundamental way that particles interact with each other.

    There is no God necessary to create order, anymore than a God being necessary to produce gravity or light or electricity. In a universe where we find matter (and antimatter) springing into existence, where objects can occupy two distinct places at the same time... magic seems quite real.

    Christianity will not prove itself with arguments, and if it attempts to, perhaps then it is those posing such arguments; hanging on them, that are trying more to convince themselves than others. Those who do not believe will not be compelled to do so with flawed rhetoric. Nor will they find lacking arguments compelling.

    The only ones who will believe in Christ are those who wish already to do so. They are either inclined or questioning, and will not base their decisions on pseudo-science. They are more likely to be compelled by personal experience.

    I pose that if you find a need to convince others that God and Science are reconcilable, it is most likely you that needs the convincing.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Obviously not, since there is no way of knowing what God's image might be (if there is an image at all). As for the Aquinas arguments, it has been known for centuries that they are fallacious; see reference for details.

    Source(s): Dawkins, The God Delusion
  • 1 decade ago

    I don't think most people would accept those premises, today, even if it does have some power to explain our attributes that other advanced animals lack.

    And these are not "demonstrations." Rather, they suggest that God is sufficient to explain these attributes, but they do not show how God is "necessary." There are advanced naturalistic explanations as well.

  • 1 decade ago

    If you are using the word "demonstrate" to mean explain or describe then it's possible that you could.

    If you are using the word "demonstrate" to mean prove then I believe your analysis contains some flaws.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    That theory assumes we have a soul. We don't.

    It's like saying "if there's some magical, god-made element of our existence then it must have been made by god who must therefore exist". Until you can prove that there is a soul, you can't prove that God made it.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.