The Cosmological Argument
Apologetics is both philosophical and theological. In contending for and defending the faith, Apologetics engages in rational discourse to discuss the various themes of Christianity. In discussing the existence of God, a number of arguments have been raised. These include the Cosmological Argument, The Ontological Argument and the Moral Argument.
In this issue, I will discuss the Cosmological Argument. The central theme of the Cosmological Argument is that for something to exist, there must be something that brought it into existence.
This may also be cited as an argument from Natural Theology. The universe contains things that show evidence that they were caused to be, and that if they were not caused, they would have not existed.
As such for anything to exists there must be a God who brought it into existence.
The Cosmological Argument insists that it is possible for God to exist without the universe but it is impossible for the universe to exist without God. God is a necessary being. God is self existing. God is self sustaining. God is self preserving. Therefore, God is all-causing. All things that exist must have been caused by Him.
The universe is contingent. Everything in the universe is contingent. All creation depends on something to exist. The whole universe is sustained by God. Therefore, God is all sustaining. Nothing can be without Him. Since the universe is not necessary, it cannot account for its own existence. Therefore, it only makes sense that the universe was caused to exist. Whatever is contingent cannot be self-causing.
There are three types of the Cosmological Argument:
1. The Kalam Argument
2. The Thomist Argument
3. The Leibnizian Argument
The Kalam Argument
The Kalam Argument attempts to show that the universe is not eternal. If the universe is not eternal, then it has a beginning. If the universe has a beginning, then it was caused. Nothing that has a beginning can begin without an action of the causer. If the universe has beginning, then somebody must have caused it to be.
“Kalam” is an Arabic word that means “to talk” or “speech.” The Kalam argument uses abstract infinites and concrete infinites to demonstrate that the universe must have had a beginning. If the universe has a beginning, then somebody must have caused it. Consequently, the cause of the universe must be outside of and apart from the universe.
The one who caused the universe must himself rely on nothing for him to exist; he must have the power to create something from nothing, he must have the will to do it or not to do it and he must have the characteristic of existing outside of creation (Powell, 2006).
The conclusion is that the universe has a beginning that was caused by a personal, powerful, transcendent and intelligent being. That being is God. Christianity, Judaism and Islam, all advance the Kalam Argument for the existence of God.
The Thomist Argument
The second cosmological argument is the one advanced by Thomas Aquinas. In his Summa Theologia, Aquinas gave three forms of the cosmological argument as part of his five ways of proving the existence of God. According to Aquinas, “since nature works for a determinate end under the direction of a higher agent” (Powell, 2006: 35), whatever is done by nature must be traced back to its first cause.
This was the basis of Aquina’s Natural Theology. Consequently, the first cause of the universe must be God. In this argument, Aquinas attempted to demonstrate the existence of God from motion. Since motion is an effect, it must have a cause. Aquinas insisted that whatever is moved must be moved by another. The chain in this kind of movement cannot regress infinitely.
In summary, the universe shows evidence that everything that comes into existence owes its existence to something else.
Therefore, all things that exist by depending on other things must owe their ultimate existence to a necessary being – the ultimate one. That necessary being must be God.
The Leibnizian Argument
The last cosmological argument is the Leibnizian Argument. It was advanced by German Philosopher, Mathematician and Theologian named Gottfried.W.F. von Leibniz. Leibniz took a different approach from Aquinas. While Aquinas based his argument on cause, Leibniz stretched the thought further by insisting that there must be a sufficient reason for the existence of the universe.
The interest of Leibniz was to address the purpose of the cause. Things that are caused are not just caused for no reason. There is a purpose for everything that happens under the sun. The universe itself has a purpose. As such the universe itself cannot provide sufficient explanation for its own existence. The universe also lacks the ability to provide sufficient explanation for its state of affairs.
The reason for the existence of the universe can only be found in a being whose existence is both necessary and self explanatory – and that being is the one we call God.
The main emphasis of the Cosmological Argument is that the universe is itself testimony to the existence of a Necessary Being that caused it to be and who has a purpose for its existence – that being is God.
By JPC Ntuntu
