Essay on Arguments for the Existence for God

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

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.

The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God The cosmological argument seeks to prove the existence of God by looking at the universe. It is an A posteriori proof based on experience and the observation of the world not logic so the outcome is probable or possible not definite. The argument is in three forms; motion, causation and being. These are also the first three ways in the five ways presented by Aquinas through which he believed the existence of God could be shown.

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.

The Cosmological Argument attempts to prove that God exists by showing that there cannot be an infinite number of regressions of causes to things that exist. It states that there must be a final uncaused-cause of all things. This uncaused-cause is asserted to be God. Arguments like this are thought up to recognize why we and the universe exist.

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:

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.

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

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.

The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God The ontological argument is an a priori argument. The arguments attempt to prove God's existence from the meaning of the word God. The ontological argument was introduced by Anselm of Canterbury in his book Proslogion. Anselm's classical argument was based on two principals and the two most involved in this is St Anselm of Canterbury as previously mentioned and Rene Descartes.

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

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

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

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.