Aquinas Cosmological Argument Essay

St. Thomas Aquinas’s first cosmological argument, the prime mover, defines things in the world as being either in a state of potentiality or in a state of actuality. Those things that are in potentiality are things that have the capability of being reduced to another form. Such as a boy is potentially a man, or tree is potentially a house. Things that are in a state of actuality are things that are currently reaching their potential; such as that boy becoming a man, or that tree becoming that house. Aquinas observed that all things in a state of actuality had to have been put into that state by something that was already in actuality. In thinking about this he concluded that there would have to be an infinite regress of actual things making potential things actual. He concluded that this would be impossible because given that, there would be no first mover. He instead, postulated that there must be a first mover. A being that never had potential but only has existed in a state of infinite actuality. That what we call God.

The first cause argument can also be known as The Proof from Efficient Cause. For everything to exist there must be a cause or a creator because we know that nothing can create itself. For instance, if the house was made by the builder, the builder was made by the builders parents, the builders parents made by their parents and so on. So if everything needs a creator then who was the initial creator that began our world as we know it today and does not need a creator.

In an attempt to justify the existence of God, Christian Philosopher, St Thomas Aquinas, has developed an argument which derived from his observation of the physical world. He evidently observed that everything in the universe is moving and that which is moving is certain that it must have been moved by something else which has also been moved by something else. However, he realizes that by tracing back who has caused the very first movement, he believes that there must

A third objection to the cosmological argument as a whole is that Aquinas insists that everything has a cause; if that is true, then what caused God? There being an uncaused cause would be a contradiction to Aquinas whole argument that everything has a cause yet God has no cause. But Aquinas defends his argument by saying that only everything in our universe has a cause because everything in our universe is a limited, dependent being. That still would require an uncaused, neither finite, nor dependent being unlike anything in our universe, God. Critics also object that the cosmological argument does not prove a loving and personal God, but Aquinas would probably respond by stating that this wouldn’t prove his argument is wrong, only that it has a limited purpose.

     Aquinas’ third way argument states that there has to be something that must exist, which is most likely God. He starts his argument by saying not everything must exist, because things are born and die every single day. By stating this we can jump to the conclusion that if everything need not exist then there would have been a time where there was nothing. But, he goes on, if there was a time when there was nothing, then nothing would exist even today, because something cannot come from nothing. However, our observations tell us that something does exist, therefore there is something that must exist, and Aquinas says that something is God.

After reading Article 1, Aquinas for Armchair Theologians by Timothy M. Renick most can automatically acquire that Thomas Aquinas was a very influential thinker amongst others when explaining his theological views. His religious views may have differed from others during his time, however, it did influence and encourage others on the different topics of God vs. Satan, and why God has not all the answers, and powers when making sure every human being should not face evil. Aquinas believed that Christians needed to view their basic beliefs in another way to make sense of their own faith when questioning all that God did for each individual. The real question to all this, which a lot of people even question today is “Why is their evil in the World?”

Aquinas’ second argument is about efficient cause. Aquinas states “We do not, and cannot, find that something is

They believe that it is possible to trace back through the causal chain infinitely. They think that non-existence of infinite causal chain is just dependent on our common sense or experience, but common sense does not always present the truth. Nevertheless, Aquinas points out the relationship among first, intermediate and ultimate causes and argues, “In the world of sense, there is an order of efficient causes, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause.” (Aquinas, Question 2, Article 3). So there is a transmission among causes, and Aquinas claims, “If it is possible to go on infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate nor intermediate causes.” (Aquinas, Question 2, Article 3). But taking away the cause is to take away the effect, so we cannot break the connection among causes. As a result, I think although human being has limited knowledge and experience, Aquinas uses the rational demonstration to prove that the causal chain must have a beginning rather than infinity.

Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica represents one of the most famous attempts to prove God's existence. Aquinas wrote at a time in which people began to develop skepticism concerning the existence of God. In this regard, it is instructive to position Aquinas

Aquinas thinks there has to be something that caused this- a first cause. Lastly, Aquinas tells us the only possible thing that caused all of this is God. In this paper, I will be defending Aquinas’ Cosmological Argument. Aquinas’ first premise is everything, every person, plant, or object, that exist in this universe needs an explanation for why it exist. I believe there is a logical reason for why everything exist and everything that happens has an explanation.

Aquinas arguments are strong cases in the existence of God. His work helped me appreciate and made me want to explore his philosophical skill in exploring Gods nature, and also defending Christian teaching. Being Christian is one of the main reasons why I picked Aquinas arguments, also because the work he provided for us is true in my eyes. I’m going to defend and state some reasons in why I believe him and his role should be played in Religion today. “Motion” an argument he tries to prove in God existence.

Aquinas’ Cosmological Argument is a method for proving God’s existence and its foundation is based on the fact and observation that the universe exists. Aquinas states that in order for the universe to exist (an idea that we know to be true), there must also exist a cause that caused the existence of the universe. He concludes his argument by saying that God, an unperceivable image, is the cause of the universe, which further verifies His existence. This argument proves that in order to accept the factual, former claim that the universe exists, it is necessary to accept the latter claim that God exists as well.

Catholic Church: St. Thomas Aquinas (Cosmological Argument) In St. Thomas Aquinas’s cosmological argument claims the following that the universe exist and its very existence has a cause and that cause is God. In his unfinished book Summa Theologiae, Aquinas put forward five ways for the existence of God. His first way is the argument from motion and by studying the works of Aristotle, the Greek Philosopher, he concluded from common observation that the planets, rolling stone or any object that is in motion is put in motion by other forces or object.

Aquinas' second proof is similar to his first in that it relates to cause and effect. St. Thomas reasoned that in a world of order there is an order to all cause and effect. And , since there is a cause for the existence of all things there must be a cause that caused all things and had no cause itself. He points out that nothing in creation existed prior to itself and the causality cannot be traced back infinitely. If the efficient or first cause did not exist then nothing would exist. That first or efficient cause is God.

Here Aquinas argues that everything that happens is the cause of something, but nothing can cause itself. If we trace back a cause all the way back to the beginning of the world, it could not have caused itself. Therefore, God must have been the first cause. Aquinas’ third proof is the Argument from Contingency. We see that everything here on earth is finite. People die, empires fall. All things must come to an end. That means things had to have a beginning where nothing was in existence yet. How did things come into existence? God. Aquinas’s 4th argument is the Argument of Degrees. Here we judge things to be a certain degree of good or bad. But what are we comparing that to? If they have a certain degree of good and bad, then what is the greatest degree of good? And that must be God. Aquinas’s final argument is his Argument from Design. Perhaps one of his strongest arguments Aquinas says that there must be an intelligent designer behind everything. Random objects don’t have any brains to act the way they do. But they are directed in the way they act by God.