For and against
Read the statements and then decide whether they are for or against the cosmological argument by dragging them to a side of the scale.
The cosmological argument – Page 1
You have 0 answers correct.
- God is the initiator of change and motion in all things.
- The reasoning leading to the existence of God uses scientific principles of cause and effect.
- It is a centuries-old argument supported by many philosophers.
- It is a posteriori and therefore based on empirical evidence.
- It supports the scientific notion of the ‘Big Bang’.
- God is not one more in series but something outside of sequence.
- God is the explanation that requires no further explanation.
- Composition is not always a fallacy.
- We distinguish between cause and coincidence.
- Explanation is sought in every other area of enquiry.
- No physical laws can provide a causal explanation of the origin of the universe.
- It says everything has a cause, then says God does not have a cause.
- It does not follow that the ‘first cause’ must be God.
- The ‘Big Bang’ theory of the origin of the universe does not require God.
- How can God be both timeless and live in time?
- Infinite regress is possible.
- Rejection of the principle of sufficient reason.
- It draws a conclusion that goes beyond the empirical evidence.
- Knowledge of concepts such as cause and necessary beings is not open to the empirical approach.
- The identity of the necessary being need not equate to God.
- An actual infinity can exist in reality.