Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
pros and cons creation theory
existentialist theology
what is christian existentialism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: pros and cons creation theory
Craig/Kalam’s Cosmological Argument
One of the most argued topics throughout human history is whether or not God exists. It is argued frequently because there are several different reasonings and sub arguments in this main argument. People who believe God exists argue how God acts and whether there is one or several. People who do not believe God exists argue how the universe became into existence or if it has just always existed. In this paper, I will describe Craig's argument for the existence of God and defend Craig's argument. William Lane Craig is not the original creator of this argument. It was originally created by Ilm al-Kalam, but Craig is a modern philosopher that has restored this argument. In this argument,
…show more content…
If infinity did exist in the physical world, then logic would break down. For example, if you had an infinite amount of toys in a store, it would be impossible because an infinite amount of an object cannot be contained in a finite space. However, infinity can be useful in the mathematical field. In calculus, infinity is used for limits. In other words, how a function behaves as one or more variables approach infinity. Also, the function itself can approach infinity which means it is increasing dramatically but will not ever get to …show more content…
Since he is a modern philosopher, he would be understand the concept of infinity with limits. He understands that even though infinity does not physically exist, its concept can still be of good use. Most philosophers would not understand it since calculus was not invented until the 17th century. If I were to speak to Craig directly, I think he would have thought that I am on the right track of God being in the fourth dimension. He might question why God is in the 4th dimension and not a higher dimension if there is one higher that exists. Overall, Craig would be pleased with my
...cartes would have said according to Pascal, all God did, was put a fillip in things to get them going. Look at all that came of it; it is amazing. Before humans had an understanding of how the universe arrived at its current state, they could see that it was divinely inspired and turned to God for explanation.
It is evident that McCloskey’s arguments in an attempt to disprove the existence of God lacks evidence. He disputes the existence of God based on a lack of undisputable evidence, but he provides no undisputable evidence to counter this existence. He dismisses the idea of a creator by theory of evolution. Although he may have a valid argument for evolution he still does not account for the start of the world. Everything must come from something. The cause cannot be unlimited, there was a cause that had to be free of all other causes, and this points us to creation.
Since the beginning of time, society has been plagued by questions stemming past the grasp of human understanding. In attempt to explain such bewilderment, mankind formed a principle belief regarding their presence as the workings of a more capable being, God. As time has progressed, distinguished and scholarly members of society have come forward with ideas regarding some distinct understanding into the complex subject that is god. To this day, students are taught theories that have managed to stand the test of time and interpretation, theories that are highly respected by the top scholars of this century. Throughout this paper, I will thoroughly outline, discuss, and analyze Paley’s argument on the existence of God. Paley’s use of earthly inferences to explain the existence of a higher being has been challenged by many, but his emphasis on purpose and goal-orientation is both well-conceived and logical.
Humans can never know for the certain why the universe was created or what caused it but, we can still create arguments and theories to best explain what might have created the universe. The cosmological argument is another idea to prove the existence of god. Many philosophers debate wheatear the cosmological argument is valid. The cosmological argument starts off quite simply: whatever exists must come from something else. Nothing is the source of its own existences, nothing is self-creating []. The cosmological argument states at some point, the cause and effect sequence must have a beginning. This unexpected phenomenal being is god. According to the argument, god is the initial start of the universe as we know it. Though nothing is self-creating cosmological believers say god is the only being the is self –created. Aquinas, an Italian philosopher, defended the argument and developed the five philosophical proofs for the existence of god knows as, the “Five Ways”.[]. In each “way” he describes his proof how god fills in the blanks of the unexplainable. The first way simply states that, things in motion must be put in motion by something. The second was is efficient because, nothing brings its self into existence. The third is, possibility and necessity [!]. Aqunhias’ has two more ‘ways’ but for the purpose of this essay I won’t be focusing on them heavily. These ways have started philosophers to debate and question his arguments ultimately made the cosmological argument debatable. The cosmological argument is however not a valid argument in explaining the existence of god because the conclusions do not logically follow the premises.
In 2004 at Perdue University was a debate between Christian theist William Lane Craig and Austin Dacey about the existence of God. Craig stated that the universe has a cause and explained that the cause would never exist if effect would not exist. Craig said if the universe has, an explanation of its existence would be an external transcendent personal cause. Afterwards, Austin makes a point that it makes no sense for God existing since there is no justification towards human suffering.
In conclusion, there must have been a necessary being which served as the first cause of the Universe. This necessary being can be referred to as God. I make this conclusion due to my understanding of the evidence given above and the fact that there are no reasonable arguments that beyond reasonable doubt can prove otherwise. In addition, it is my finding that the roots of the Cosmological Argument are firmly cemented in a posteriori observation (induction), as opposed to purely rational thought which is deductive. Knowing how this argument is classified is imperative because it is essential to understanding the structure of the argument and how it arrives at its conclusion.
In this universe everything has a cause of its existence, so this universe might have a cause, but no is sure who created, so we as humans think that God created this universe, but unless if you’re an atheist who doesn’t believe in God. The reason time exist because of this universe, which mean that time has a cause and time didn’t exist before if the universe wasn’t existed. At the end of the day, as opposed to surmise that God exists, we may think there is only an interminable relapse of causes. Something has dependably existed. God's presence isn't coherently demonstrated, yet it is likely, given the premises. Considered without anyone else, the claim God exists is exceptionally implausible, says Swinburne. However, in light of the cosmological contention, it turns out to be more plausible, on the grounds that God's presence is the best clarification for why the universe exists. God is the real reason why orders and purpose of things that we find on this universe, according to design, viz. We can include the contention from religious experience and a contention from supernatural occurrences. Each work a similar way, “The presence of God is the best clarification for these wonders”. When we set up every one of these contentions together, he asserts, it turns out to be more likely that God exists than that God doesn't. the premises are conceivable, and the inductions are natural. So, in spite of the fact that it isn't an explanatory
Dr. William Lane Craig believes for the existence of God. The existence of God is the best explanation of the origin of the universe, as well as the fine tuning of the universe for intelligent life. God is the explanation of the existence of our moral values and our responsibilities. God explains a wide range of the information of human understanding. God can be personally known if you believe and put your faith in God. Dr. Craig believes in order to create the universe, the creator must be uncaused, nonphysical, immaterial and powerful. If the universe began to exist, then the universe has a cause to its beginning. The universe began exist. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its beginning. The enhancement of the universe is due to design.
Dr. William Lane Craig supports the idea of existence of God. He gives six major arguments, in order to defend his position. The first argument is quite fare, Craig says that God is the best reason of existence of everything. He gives the idea, that the debates between all the people, cannot reach the compromise, because the best explanation of the reasons of existence of everything is God, and nothing can be explained without taking Him into consideration. The second argument of Craig is from a cosmological point of view: he says that the existence of the universe is the best proof of the existence of God. Because, the process of the creation of the universe is so ideally harmonious, that it seems impossible to appear accidentally. The third argument is about the fine tuning of the universe. The universe is designed in such a way that people always have aim of life, and the life of people and the nature are interconnected. The fourth argument of Dr. Craig is about the morality: God is the best explanation of the existence of the morality and moral values in people’s lives. The...
... it cannot be explained scientifically, as this would imply the existence of antecedent determining conditions. Because there are no prior determining conditions, the cause of the universe must be personal and uncaused, for how else could a timeless cause give rise to a temporal effect? Moreover, the cause must transcend both matter and time to create matter and time. Finally, in order to create the universe ex nihilo, this cause must be enormously powerful, if not omnipotent. One is warranted in concluding that therefore, God exists.
This theory is Aristotle’s belief that something can not come out of nothing. Aristotle says, “How will there be movement, if there is no actually existing cause?…The seeds must act on the earth and the semen on the menstrual blood”. What he is saying is that something must be set into motion by something else. There is always a cause to an effect. One relies on the other. Therefore, before origin there must have been an “immovable mover”, that being God.
...even correlate on the earliest time, the creation of the universe. Most people argue between the creation of universe by a powerful creator or is it from a huge explosion of materials, big bang? (Taylor). However, let’s try to observe this argument in another point of view; Professor John Polkinghorne, a scientist and a priest in the Church of England, said: “Genesis is not there to give short, technical answers about how the universe began. It gives us the big answer that things exist because of God's will. One can perfectly well believe in the Big Bang, but believe in it as the will of God the creator” (Christianity: Beliefs about Creation and Evolution); from that statement, the existence of a creator is proven but the presence of big bang is also proven. That neutral view addresses the idea by stating that big bang is part of God’s ways in molding the universe.
This paper's purpose is to prove the existence of God. There are ten main reasons that are presented in this paper that show the actuality of God. It also shows counter-arguments to the competing positions (the presence of evil). It also gives anticipatory responses to possible objections to the thesis.
...argument that the universe is eternal, the first Cause must have knowledge on how to keep the universe in motion. In the argument that the universe is created, the first Cause must be knowledgeable on how to create the universe. The Creator must also be knowledgeable about the creators in the universe in which he created. He must know how to create each creature in a way that they will survive in the universe. The final characteristic that the first Cause must have is goodness. In either argument, the first Cause must be good in order to give parts of himself to a universe that is not necessary for his own survival.
From the discussion, it can be concluded that existence of God can be proved and developed by logical reasoning. They can be proved by seeking answers to our everyday questions like what can be bigger than our reason, who dictates solar system to act like an animate body. The evidence may not have physical existence but it is supported by the physical elements of nature.