In Aquinas second way he noted that nothing could be the cause of itself, because it would have to exist before it existed which is a logical impossibility. Things are caused by an external influence in a succession of events, however these events cannot go back to the beginning of time, there must have been a first cause and this was God. The third way identified the contingency of matter in the universe. Aquinas based this argument on the fact that things exist and later seize to exist. Thus, there must have been a time when noting existed. Therefore the cause of the universe must have been external and to bring everything into existence he must have always existed. Therefore there must have been a necessary being who brought everything into existence, which was God. If God didn’t exist then nothing would exist.
William Lee Craig developed a modern formation of the Kalam argument, a branch of the cosmological argument. Craig refute infinite regress because it would mean that past events, would form a collection of events, in which for example, there would be just as many wars as other events. Therefore the finite universe had a beginning and whatever caused the universe into being could not have caused themselves. Therefore the universe has to have a first cause which Craig argues is God. Once Craig had established God as creator of the universe he attempted to prove God as personal creator. Craig argues that if the universe has a beginning it was either caused or uncaused, either it was a natural occurrence or a deliberate action of God. Supporters of the Kalam argument argue that it was a deliberate action of God because the rules of nature have existed since the beginning of time, it could not have possibly been the result of a spontaneous event, and it must be because of God.
Therefore the cosmological argument tries to prove Gods existence based on the belief that God created the world ‘ex-nihilo’. If the universe was created out of nothing, the beginning of time began with the creation of the universe. Therefore there must have been an external personal agent who existed out of time to will the universe into creation. Aquinas, Craig and supporters of the Kalam argument propagate the first cause of the universe was God.
What are the problems with the cosmological argument? (17)
There have been a number of objections raised against the cosmological argument, which the supporters of the argument have had to combat.
One of the major objections is that infinity is impossible and the universe never has a beginning. Philosophers point out that Craig and Aquinas contradict themselves when they state that infinity does not exist and yet argue that God is infinite. However supporters of the argument, state that God is unique and therefore the rules of the contingent universe do not apply to him.
Kenny stated that Aquinas principle that nothing moves itself ignores the fact that humans and animals move themselves. Newton’s first law of motion, in which the bodies own inertia from previous motion, disproves Aquinas argument. It is possible for an object to be both stationery and have uniform motion. Therefore destroys Aquinas first way.
Hume questioned why objects had to have a beginning; “How can anything that exists from eternity have a cause, since that relation implies a priority in time and in a beginning of existence.” Russell supported Hume’s view and argued that just because humans have mothers does not mean that the universe has a mother. The same argument can be applied to the universe; it could have just been there. In a 1948 radio debate against Copelston continued to argue that the world had no explanation and it is a mistake to presume that it does.
Lebiniz accepted the cosmological argument because he believed that it had ‘sufficient reason’ for the universe to exist and that God was the first cause upon which everything depends. However he did not accept the universe was uncaused, rejecting an infinite universe because it did not have a satisfactory explanation. Recently Smith has used quantum mechanics to demonstrate the ability of things existing without a direct cause. Even if the universe had a beginning there is no suggestion that is God.
Kant argued that the idea that something had a first cause could only be applied to the world of the sense experience. It cannot be applied to a world that we know nothing about. Therefore Kant did not accept any conclusion that God caused the world to begin, because as humans we do not possess the question to transcend our experience. If God is a casual being outside of time and space it is impossible for people to know what God created or God himself.
The big bang provides a scientific explanation about the beginning of the universe. Scientific explanation has observed that there was a beginning to the universe and it developed an early structure very early in its development. The debate rests upon whether it was the cause of natural or the divine? A random spontaneous event or a deliberate action caused by God.
Many philosophers have argued that if there is a first cause there is no evidence to suggest that it is any God let alone the God of classical theism, it could have been anything. The cosmological argument has to many faults for it to alone prove the existence of God. To judge adequately whether God exists one would have to take into account other arguments such as the design argument.
