Cosmological Argument
The existence of God remains a contentious issue in the society. Does God exist? For many years, scholars and theologians have explored theories and arguments to disprove each other on the existence of God. In most cases, there has never been a conclusive consensus on whether God exists or if it is an illusion in the minds of believers. Religion largely supports the existence of God as the Supreme Being, who created the world and everything in it. Christians and Muslims strongly support the existence of God. Is the existence of the world good enough to conclude that God exists? This line of thought is called cosmological argument. Its proponents opine that the world is a proof that God exists and he created it. While there is need to expound on the existence of the universe, the only explanation is the existence of God, who created it.
It is important to note that the cosmological argument does not differ from other arguments, which seek to explain the existence of God. For example, it exists in various forms like the temporal kalam cosmological argument and the modal argument from contingency. The first argument is the cause argument. What distinguishes these two arguments is how they avoid the argument questioning if God has a cause for his existence. This is how the two forms of the argument evade the objection in the argument. Firstly, according to cosmological argument, everything exists on the universe because they have a cause to exist. In other words, whatever that exists, exists for a known reason by someone. Additionally, the argument holds that the universe exists. If this is the case, then there is a case for its existence. Since the universe has a cause for its existence, this argument deduces that God is the cause for its existence and therefore God exists.
Better still, is there a cause for the existence of God? For example if God has a cause for his existence, then using the existence of God to support the existence of the universe does not suffice to make a conclusion. However, if we eliminate God, it becomes hard to explain the existence of the universe. Equally, with God centered in the equation, we are unable to explain his existence. This means by agreeing on the existence of God, it raises as many problems as it offers solutions. On this basis, the cosmological argument does not offer better solutions. It leaves us with God, one entity that we cannot explain its existence.
In the Kalam cosmological argument, it is believed that the universe has a beginning in time. This gives its distinction with God. According to this form, everything that has a beginning in time like the universe always has a cause for existence. Thus since the universe has a beginning in time, it also has a cause for its existence, which is God. For the argument from contingency, the main difference between the universe and God is that the universe exists contingently. This means that the universe could not have existed.
We are confidential and secure editors in the world. When you come to us, we guarantee you 100% of your personal data. We shield you against any online threat by remaining the sole custodians of your private details. At www.essaysexperts.net, we value you. Thus, we prioritize your security by engaging every gear whenever you contact us. Visit us today and experience the difference.
Retrieved from:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cosmological-argument/
http://carm.org/cosmological-argument