Explain the different understandings of the role of God which are found in Aquinas’ cosmological argument The cosmological argument was not set about to prove the existence or the role of God. The initial purpose of the cosmological argument was to answer the question ‘How did the universe come into existence?’ The role of God isn’t totally explained within the cosmological argument, but characteristics about the role of God are found in various variations of the cosmological argument. Aquinas’s three ways establish many of these codes and characteristics. The God mentioned in each of the cosmological arguments is the God of classical theism. Each of Aquinas’s three ways established a different role of God.
They say that God does not exist in an objective and real sense; they do not think he is a real human entity existing in the world. For the Deist, God is the creator of the universe. God really exists but he does not and cannot intervene within the world. And lastly, for the Atheist, there is no God to bring about any kind of miracle. I myself am an Atheist, and therefore in my opinion believe miracles are impossible as all miracles are by, definition impossible if they claim to be the action of a deity.
The rational mind states otherwise. It is what we say in our hearts that allow us to think that God does exist. In Samuel Clarke’s Cosmological Argument it is clearly argued that something has existed for all of eternity. Nothing was ever created without a cause therefore this is a contradiction. Yet if anything is made and there is no cause at all for it, is to say that something is affected when it is affected by nothing or at all affected.
Assess the claim that the universe provides no evidence for the existence of an omnipotent god’ 35 marks It is often claimed by philosophers that the universe provides no evidence for the existence of an omnipotent god due to the fact there are flaws in this argument. Firstly, the idea of god being omnipotent, simply means that god would be ‘all-powerful to do anything that is possibly logical to do’, which is an idea explored by Aquinas. This idea would solve problems created by Dawkins who suggested the idea that god being omnipotent is incoherent. Yet by suggesting that god is all powerful in things that is logical would mean that he would not do illogical such as change the past of change what humans believe is fact such as 2+2=4. Therefore both Aquinas and Dawkins would suggest that the God could in fact be an omnipotent being as it is still logical for him to be so.
For example, planets could not have put themselves into orbit, yet they are in perfect order and placement so therefore there must be a designer, an intelligent being, that did so. This argument suggests that everything has been designed to have a purpose, even if it is unaware of this itself. Aquinas believed that this designer is God. One of the earliest forms of the teleological argument was formed by Aristotle in the 4th century BC. Aquinas’ design argument was influenced by Aristotle’s ideas presented in his work Metaphysics.
Critically assess the Cosmological argument for the existence of God. The Cosmological argument infers an existence of a God from looking at the cosmos and the phenomena within it. Many philosophers and prominent thinkers have either rejected the claim that the creator of the universe is God, or have refuted St Thomas Aquinas’ thinking and reasoning in his 3 ways of proving Gods existence which constitutes the cosmological argument; as outlined in ‘Summa Theologica’. These criticisms are what I am going to be examining throughout this essay. One of Aquinas’ ways of proving God’s existence; ‘the uncaused causer’, states that every cause in the universe has an effect, the chain of cause and effect must have a terminus to avoid infinite regress.
Examine the cosmological argument for the existence of God. – 25Marks The cosmological argument is an argument which proves the existence of the first cause; the first cause is ’motion’. In which everything that exists is in motion or has the potential to change. Meaning all change is caused by something, as nothing can more by itself therefore there must be a necessary being, like a God. The cosmological argument is a posteriori argument and also a deductive argument; this is because it is based on logical thinking about the existence of God.
For example, St. Anselm of Canterbury proposed the first, and best-known Ontological argument in the 11th. Century A.D. In his Proslogion, St. Anselm claims to derive the existence of God from the concept of a being, which no greater can be conceived. St. Anselm reasoned that, “if such a being fails to exist, then a greater being, namely, a being than which no greater can be conceived, and which exists, can be conceived” (Philosophy Encyclopedia). However, this would be absurd, seeing as that nothing greater than God can be conceived in anyway.
Therefore, man is obligated to repent and put his faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation and bear good fruit or face the righteous judgement of God. In Romans 1:20, Paul reveals that the natural world testifies to a supernatural cause. According to the scientific evidence, nature itself had a beginning. As Dr. Frank Turek points out, the supernatural cause that created nature must be spaceless (Because it created space), timeless (Because it created time), immaterial (Because it created matter), powerful (Because it created out of nothing), intelligent (Because the creation event and the universe was precisely designed), and personal (Because it made a choice to convert a state of nothing into something; impersonal forces don’t make choices). This evidence is consistent with Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Paul eluded to this when he said that God’s invisible qualities, eternal power, and divine nature is clearly seen, being understood by what has been made, so that men are without excuse (Rom.1:20).
There are no tests or actual empirical evidence for God’s existence. Anthony Flew stated that claims of God’s existence are empirically empty; this is because for the person who makes them, they cannot be falsified as there is also no empirical evidence disproving God’s existence. Yet some people may argue that God’s existence can be proven through the order and design of the universe. For example William Paley believed that every contrivance found in a watch is also found in nature; a watch has several complex features which work together perfectly to function, anything that has such features must have a designed; ergo it must have a designer. The universe is like the watch in the sense that it has complex features that work together perfectly; therefore the universe like the watch must have been designed.