Cosmological Argument

The Cosmological Argument - Revision The cosmological Argument seeks to prove the existence of God based on the fact that the universe is here. It seeks to prove WHY there is a universe and world in which we live rather than nothingness.

The classical Argument The cosmological argument also known as the first cause argument derives that God exists from an a posteriori premise. A posteriori argument is based on the idea that things can be proved based on experience. It is the opposite of an a prior argument, where things are knowable independently of experience.

A Posteriori and observation The argument is a posteriori as it is based on what we can already see in the world and the universe. The starting point is the observation of the world. These observations show that things change and move. Things are caused to happen as the result of how actions affect them. From our observations we can see that things come into existence and then cease to exist.

The God of classical theism The cosmological argument is said to support the existence of The God of Classical Theism: The God of Classical Theism is eternal and separate from the universe. God created and is outside of time and space. It is believed that there is only one God.

St Thomas Aquinas St Thomas Aquinas’s argument supports the cosmological argument in three main ways: 1.Motion of change 2.Cause 3.Contingency

St Thomas Aquinas Motion

St Thomas Aquinas Cause

St Thomas Aquinas Contingency

Bertrand Russell Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) rejects the idea that the world is contingent or dependent. He argues that the universe simply is and there is no need to ask for an explanation-after all Christians do not feel the need to make God self-explanatory.

Continued Russell agrees with David Hume’s criticism-just because every human has a mother does not mean to say that the human race has a mother. The world is just here and it is a brute fact and does not need an explanation

continued Russell has three main arguments: 1.There is no intelligible form of necessity other than logical truth 2.There is no reason to suppose that any such thing as the universe exists 3.Even if there is a universe our knowledge gives us no good reason to assume that it has a cause.

Why is he so against it? In short Russell is not a Christian and therefore does not believe in God. He is the author of “Why I am not a Christian”.

Quote “To speak of chance for a universe which presents such a complex organization in its elements, and such a marvellous finality in its life would be equivalent to giving up the search for an explanation of the world as it appears to us. In fact, this would be equivalent to admitting effects without a cause” (Pope John Paul II)