Is there a God for a modern Western man?

In a dispute, as is known, truth is born. Until the era of total control of the Roman Catholic Church over the thoughts and statements of people, in Western European society, there were discussions on whether there is a God. Since the time of Ancient Greece, the main evidence for the existence of some higher power has been formulated. These are metaphysical and logical arguments. Naturally, they were not brought by philosophers to prove the existence of any Zeus or Osiris, but they presupposed the existence of a different world and, most importantly, a single Creator of our Universe, in which we live.

As we can see, from the very beginning, thinkers in their logical calculations about whether there is a God, went somewhat erroneously. Their reasoning was based on a not quite obvious axiom, that if another life exists, then its organizer must inevitably be the creator of this one. Most of the world's religions are based on what is "the Creator of the universe, the world of the visible and invisible." But if someone built a building, it does not follow from this that he also erected a perfect other structure. Moreover, the second structure revealed many "architectural flaws".

The imperfection of the material world is too obvious to consider it perfectly equipped. Therefore, those who tried to prove that God exists inevitably faced the problems of theodicy, that is, with the justification of the Creator for the existence of evil. A well-known theologian of the Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas, developed five basic proofs of the being of the higher mind and gave his reasons for why there is evil in life. Being the All-good God, whose existence is proved by five rather weak logic reasons, given by Aquinas, he wants the good in the world to triumph. However, the creation is separated from the Creator, hence, it is no longer perfect. Where there is light, there is also a shadow (although the shadow actually creates an object that absorbs the energy of radiation). Where there is health, there is also a disease (an even weaker thesis, because the disease here is regarded as a "lack of health", and not actually an ailment).

The conclusions of the "Sum of theology" of Aquinas, striving to give an exhaustive answer to the question of whether God exists, was broken by the German philosopher I. Kant. The proof of the existence of one who is outside the world should not be based on the laws of formal logic. It is applicable only to explain the cause-effect relationships between material objects. And indeed, as soon as the times came, when the criticism of the theological premises of the Roman Catholic Church did not entail a painful execution at the stake, arguments were heard and "contra".

Scoffers did not skimp on bright images. For example, the ethologist Richard Dawkins in a work devoted to the illusory nature of faith, trying to prove that God does not exist, so challenges the proof "according to the degree of perfection". Suppose someone claims that when we see some disparate objects, we can imagine the most perfect object in its qualities, that is, an infallible and all-good being. "However, we also observe that people exude different smells. Therefore, there must exist a stinker, superior to all by smells, whom we shall call God ... ".

All the arguments of the Church, trying to impose faith in the All-good creator of the material world, have reached a dead end. Scientists have proved that the origin of the universe was the "Big Bang", and not the Great Creator. In addition, the theory of natural selection partially explains the progressive development of life from simple organisms to complex ones. Freed from the yoke of church dogma and fully relying on the science of Europe, is likely to answer the question of whether there is a God, negative. Religion has become a cultural phenomenon and nothing more. But thirst is the best evidence that water is. And if our soul yearns for eternal life, then perhaps this other world exists. Belief in God is, rather, a moral requirement, which does not need to be proved.