Essay on Arguments for the Existence for God

1. Examine the strengths and weaknesses of the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience. (18) 2. ‘The argument merely indicates the probability of God and this is of little value to a religious believer.’ Discuss. (12)

proposed, and all think that theirs proves beyond a doubt on whether or not God

The cosmological argument is an a posteriori argument which intends to prove that there is an intelligent being that exists; the being is distinct from the universe, explains the existence of the universe, and is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent and omnibenevolent. The basic notion of cosmological arguments is that the world and everything in it is dependent on something other than itself for its existence. It explains that everything has a cause, that there must have been a first cause, and that this first cause was itself uncaused.

The goal of the cosmological argument is to support the claim that God exists as the first cause of the universe. According to Nagel, the argument runs as following:

An Ontological argument is one that uses reason to prove the existence of God instead of using observations. Similarly a cosmological argument makes conclusions from facts about the world to prove the existence of God. (Oppy) Dr. William Lane Craig’s cosmological argument of Kalam has many supporter and opponents on his argument of God existence. Dr. William Lane Craig is a Christian man born in 1949 in Illinois. He has studied philosophy and theology at many universities, holds a doctorate in both philosophy and theology, and has taught the subjects.

“All versions of the cosmological argument begin with the a posteriori assumptions that the universe exists and something outside the universe is required to explain its existence. That is, it is contingent, depending on something outside of itself for its existence.”(Pojman, p.20). The temporal or first cause argument by Kalam who discussed that the universe has a beginning, and it has a cause of its existence; therefore, there should be an uncaused at beginning in time which is God. As Aristotle and other thinkers support this by discussing a bout an infinite regress is not possible, and we cannot explain the existence of the universe by chain of contingent. There should be another type of being that is self –existent and he is the one who created all contingent being. Cosmological argument argues about the existence of God as the first and ultimate cause of the universe .This is a fact that universe did not created itself, it depend on a first caused or uncaused being who itself is the first cause and independent of anything else. When I think deeply about the universe and everything in that I cannot think that they have been created by themselves and there should be an infinite and powerful

The cosmological argument begins with a general claim about the physical universe e.g. that some events have causes and that there must be a supernatural agent to somehow explain this fact. The argument seems to say that there cannot be an infinite series of causes, they have to stop somewhere. One scholar who supports this idea is St. Thomas Aquinas.

The third premise is crucial. Proponents of the design argument for rationality of belief in God argue that—

The question of the existence of God has troubled mankind for thousands of years. Many philosophers and theologians have always searched for prove whether God exists. Many of them constructed valid arguments which support theist believes. The existence of God was once never denied, as His presence, His existence was evident in miracles and the people 's faith. But time and the advancement of modern science have called God and His very nature into question. The Perfect Being has become the source of much doubt and controversy. The faithful, believing people have become unsure. It seems that we will never find the answer to this question, but I think that we should take a look at one of the most famous arguments that prove the existence of God: Ontological Argument. It was made in the eleventh century by Anselm who was one of the most important Christian thinkers of his time. He proved that God exists by relying only on a priori reasoning. We do not need any physical evidence of God to prove that he exist. We can prove it just by our ability to thinking about it.

A cosmological argument is defined as “an argument for the existence of God which claims that all things in nature depend on something else for their existence (i.e. are contingent), and that the whole cosmos must therefore itself depend on a being which exists independently or necessarily.” (Davies, 1982)This argument can be first traced back to Plato and Aristotle around 400BC – 300BC. (Cornman, Lehrer, & Pappas, 1992)Thomas Aquinas adapted the argument of Aristotle to form one of the most influential versions of the cosmological argument. His conception of First Cause was the idea that the Universe must have been caused by something that was itself uncaused, which he believed to be God. (Aquinas, 1274) He begins the argument with two objections

This argument is subject to a simple objection, introduced by asking, “Does God have a cause of his existence?”If, on the one hand, God is thought to have a cause of his existence, then positing the existence of God in order to explain the existence of the universe doesn’t get us anywhere. Without God there is one entity the existence of which we cannot explain, namely the universe; with God there is one entity the existence of which we cannot explain, namely God. Positing the existence of God, then, raises as many problems as it solves, and so the cosmological argument leaves us in no better position than it found us, with one entity the existence of which we cannot explain. If, on the other hand, God is thought not to have a cause of his existence, i.e. if God is thought to be an uncaused being, then this too raises difficulties for the simple cosmological argument. For if God were an uncaused being then his existence would

I found Aquinas’ theory to prove the existence of God very interesting one. It is easy to understand and it is logical. Summa Theologiae was one of the best works of Aquinas. St. Thomas was a writer too and wrote many commentaries on Aristotle and other theological and philosophical topics. Aquinas categorized his arguments to prove the existence of god into five ways. The first way is the argument from motion. There are many things which are moving, it is not that all of a sudden everything started moving. The first mover caused the others to move and so on. This motion cannot be infinity because there would be no first mover then. Therefore, the first move is caused by what is said to be god. The second way is argument from efficient cause. The first efficient cause is god which led to other causes. It is not possible that everything exists by itself. In this argument also, efficient causes cannot go to infinity. The third way is the argument from possibility and necessity. Either things exist or they don’t. If they don’t exist, nothing would have existed by now. There must exist something the existence of which is necessary which caused the others to exist that is God. Others beings are dependent on each other while God is independent. The fourth way is argument from gradation of being. The fifth way is argument from design. All natural things act for an end to achieve some goal. It is not possible that they are doing these things by themselves. They are directed by

The cosmological argument, according to Kant, "is too well known for it to be necessary to expound it in detail here" (P570), so if you don't know it, you can join me in feeling like an idiot… However, he then goes on to quickly explain the argument. I also took the liberty of finding out where this argument came from and it seems to have started with Aristotle and also used by Aquinas. Aristotle said that the fact that there is movement could prove the existence of an "unmoved mover" (God). In other words

I believe that that the Cosmological argument gives good reason to believe in the existence of God. The Cosmological argument focuses on everything having a cause except one thing that started it all, this starter is known as the “Prime Mover”. The Prime Mover is the one that starts everything without anything having a previous effect on it. With that people have assumed that the logical answer to who the prime mover is, is God. This to me seems the most logical of arguments because although there is the idea of eternity and an eternal cycle there has to be a starting point. I do not believe the argument is successful.

Cosmological arguments are one of the oldest types of arguments for the existence of god beginning in the world of the ancient Greek philosophers such as Plato………………. These types of arguments can be a priori or a posterori. Many great philosophers since have tackled this argument. Many theists have used this the cosmological argument to justify their beliefs in God some include Aquinas, Leibniz, Swinburne or Spinoza while many famous atheists challenge this view such as Hume, Kant, Russell.