1. science

Cosmological Argument
Key Features
•
•
•
•
•
•
In all its forms A posteriori argument for existence of God of classical theism.
First propounded by Aquinas in Summa Theologica, 3 of 5 ways are cosmological. First
cause, prime mover.
Argument from contingency. It is equally possible for things to exist and not exist.
Therefore there must have been a time when nothing existed. Since something can’t come
from nothing something external needs to have “created” something. Copplestone’s slight
adjustment, says contingent things may or may not exist, so there may or may not have
been anything in the universe “There must be a thing that must and cannot not exist”.
Kalem. Fundamentally Islamic but westernised by William Lane Craig. Rejects an infinite
universe on the grounds that if time is being added to then it must have begun, otherwise
all time would exist simultaneously. Universe cannot be naturally occurring since without
the universe there is no “natural”. “If the universe began to exist, and if the universe is
caused then the cause of the universe must be a personal being who freely chooses to
create the world”
Sufficient Reason. Leibnizt. The natural state of being is for there to be nothing; nothing
can’t become something; therefore to get from nothing to something there must be an
external. In real life when something moves its reason is external to it, either an
external moved it or it had a reason (which must be external). Since nothing has no
reason, our creator must be external.
Swinburne and Oakham. “There could be no simpler explanation that one which
postulates only one cause. Theism is simpler than polytheism.”
Strengths and Weaknesses
•
•
•
•
•
•
A posteriori as strength testable. As a weakness, Hume Dialogues Concerning Natural
Religion. Cannot be certain, hopeful probabilities. Did causality exist then as it does now?
Why presume the need for a cause?
Simplest, Swinburne. Offers a complete explanation to satisfy our human desire for
knowledge. But famous debate with Bertrand Russell – if we could never be certain then
why bother? “The idea that things must have a beginning is really due to the poverty of
our imagination. Therefore, perhaps, I need not waste any more time upon the first cause
argument.” Simple does not mean right.
If God causes us, who caused God? Theists say we have to stop somewhere, but why not
just accept the universe is self causing? It may be simplest but that doesn’t make it right.
“the universe is a self sustaining mechanism with the capacity to self organise ad finitum”
(Paul Davies)
Science on the one hand says big bang suggests a moment of creation, and our knowledge
of causality suggests that things have caused. But; “a particle produced by a vacuum
fluctuation has no cause; God cannot be the only thing which is uncaused”. Steady state
theory – infinite loop of big bangs.
Strength in that infinite time is logically impossible, its being added to so it cant already
be infinite. This leads us to a moment of creation. But, “a set of real members has no first
member, but there is no member which does not have a predecessor. Logic doesn’t
demand a first cause any more than it demands a first number.” Kalem misinterprets
infinity.
Why God of classical theism? Hume “rude essay of an infant deity”. The leap from a
creator to classical God is inductive.
A Posteriori
Swinburne and
Oakham.
Aquinas 3 of 5
Features
Sufficient
Reason;
Leibnitz.
Contingency
Copplestone
Kalem & Lane
Craig; Infinity
A Posteriori
Hume.
Why Classical
Theism? Hume.
Simplest:
Swinburne and
Russell
Strengths &
Kalem
misinterprets
infinity.
Weakness
es
Science. Big
bang, steady
state, uncaused.
God’s cause?
The Design Argument
Key Features
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Design or Teleological is essentially an application of the Cosmological. Argues from
experience to the God of classical theism. A posteriori.
Design in our world is evidence of a creator, as seen in four key features.
o Order
o Benefit
o Purpose
o Suitability for Life.
Aquina’s 5th. “whatever lacks intelligence and knowledge cannot move to a directed
goal without being made to do so by an intelligent and knowledgeable being.” Arrow
and archer.
Paley. Watch analogy, modernised by David Hunt ‘In Defence of Faith’. Desert Island
come across a factory you assume it to be designed – it’s just sensible.
Probability. Swinburne and Science say life is unlikely, therefore God. “The world is
compatible with a single throw of the dice, and common sense is not foolish in
suspecting the dice to have been loaded.” (Vardy).
Aesthetic. Tennant why are things beautiful? “Nature is saturated with beauty”
(Tennant)
Provident. All we need is here, Swinburne. “The very success of science has been in
showing us how deeply ordered the natural world is”
Anthropic. God is needed to oversee evolution, Polkinghorne.
Strengths and Weaknesses
•
•
•
•
•
A posteriori. We can see design, “what could be more clear when we look up to the
sky and contemplate, that some divinity or superior intelligence is behind it?” But,
Hume. “empirical facts cannot support religious conclusions.” We cannot be 100%
sure.
Inductive leap. Why God? Religious ambiguity, problem of evil? It seems less likely
to be God. Is simple. Oakham.
Paley. You wouldn’t believe a watch to just be, “that thing is just a conglomeration of
atoms that happened to come together in that form by chance plus billions of years of
random selection” a totally absurd claim (David Hunt). Hume however has issues
with the analogy; he says the universe is non-comparable to a watch, and more like a
vegetable growing out of itself.
Natural sciences show design, but then evolution…. Evolution neither strengthens nor
weakens. Polkinghorne says anthropic principle means evolution requires God to
oversee. “The doctrine of evolution leaves the argument for an intelligent creator
stronger than it was before” (Temple).
Probability. On the one hand probability of existence is miniscule; the cosmological
constant requires a degree of accuracy 10-40. Someone wanted life to evolve? However
David Reece and multiverse theory negates that. But multiverse is just as great a leap
of faith as God…
Anthropic.
Polkinghorne.
Provident;
Swinburne.
Aesthetic;
Tennant.
A Posteriori
Teleological.
Features
Probability.
Swinburne.
Order, Benefit,
Purpose,
Suitability.
Aquinas 5th.
Arrow & archer.
Paley then
Hunt.
A posteriori.
Probability &
Multiverse.
Why classical
theism?
Oakham. Evil.
Strengths &
Weaknesses
Evolution and
anthropic.
Paley and Hume
Vegetable.
Science,
shows design.
The Problem of Evil
Features
•
•
•
•
•
•
The inconsistent triad. Surely God cannot be all loving, all powerful and allow evil and suffering.
We have both natural evil (natural disaster etc) and moral evil (humans doing bad things) which
need accounting for. If nothing is beyond God’s control (he is omnipotent) then he is responsible
for all evil – even that due to freewill since God allows freewill.
Hume uses the problem of evil as an argument for the non-existence of God… its known as the
“Rock of Atheism”.
It’s a problem for everyone, especially theologians and philosophers. It applies specifically to the
God of classical theism, as a different view of God (i.e. Hindu) explains evil.
“There is a problem about why God allows evil, and if the theist does not have a satisfactory
answer to it then his belief in God is less than rational” (Swinburne)
Flew argues we need to “face the full force of the conflict” and justify faith and explain evil
through theodicy.
Augustine
•
•
•
•
He says: God is perfect, he made a perfect world and there is no such thing as evil (it is a lacking
of good). Evil is just disobeying God and since only God is perfect there is always the chance for
sin.
Adam & Eve committed original sin, and since we were in his loins we deserve natural evil.
“Cursed is the ground because of you” (Genesis). “in this was deal came to all men, because all
sinned” (Romans). This means God is not justified in stopping evil, and God is really loving
because he sent Christ, and there is salvation for the faithful. All evil is merely punishment for our
own sins.
Strengths of this come from its use of freewill – and its understanding of evil. If we accept evil to
be a lack of good “a gap between what there is and what there should be” (Brian Davies) then god
cannot have made an absence of Good therefore God is not responsible for evil anyway. The
argument does not qualify God.
Criticism comes from logical error A perfect world cannot go wrong. How can creatures in a
perfect world be evil? Surely they cannot even conceive evil. Scientific error Evolution is the
opposite to this theodicy, we understand that life progresses from simple/uncultured to increasing
perfection. Biologically the idea that we are responsible for the actions of Adam is rubbish. Moral
error Why is there hell? Why did God make hell for a perfect world? If God saves some but not
others then he is being inconsistent and not all loving.
Iraneous
•
•
•
•
•
God wanted to make us perfect, in his own image. However perfection cannot be “made” it must
develop out of its own freewill. Therefore God gave us freewill for us to evolve into perfect beings
out of choice. With this came the ability to disobey him.
If God policed his world then there would be no potential to do anything but obey God, and
therefore no true freewill.
So God had to stand back and let the world develop itself, because it is for the best in the long run.
We have misused our freewill resulting in moral evil. God cannot compromise freewill by
correcting this evil. Reward comes for all with the afterlife.
Strengths come from it being more believable, it does not require belief in Genesis, it does not
qualify God and it is based on freewill. It is also compatible with evolution.
Criticisms come from three sources.
o The idea we all go to heaven seems unjust. Contradicts holy texts which speak of
retribution.
o The quantity of suffering we see is simply unacceptable, God could have intervened.
o Suffering can surely never really be an expression of Gods love, “No matter for what ends
evil and suffering cannot be good for us. How is the Holocaust possibly justified?” (DZ
Phillips)
Inconsistent
Triad
A problem that
needs
addressing.
Moral and
Natural Evil,
both from God.
Features
Diverse and
challenging
problem
Rock of
Atheism
God of Classical
Theism
Problem for
everyone
Perfect God made
a perfect world.
Only God is
perfect, so sin is
possible.
salvation for the
faithful shows
God is loving.
problem that
Augustine
Evil is merely a
lacking of Good.
God should not
intervene.
Adam’s
Loins
Original Sin.
The Fall.
God wants to
make us in his
own image.
Evil is misuse of
freewill
We can only
develop perfection
though freewill.
Irenaeus
Reward for all
with Heaven
Policing would
compromise
freewill.
God must stand
back.