The Cosmological Argument is associated with the great Catholic scholar St Thomas Aquinas, who lived in the Middle Ages, which was a time of great religious unrest. Aquinas wrote the ‘Summa Theologica’, in which he explained his famous Five Ways to prove the existence of God. The first three ways are forms of the cosmological argument. However, science has replaced the need for God as the explanation. The Big Bang explains everything about how the universe came into being. Quantum theory has also shown us that atoms can come into existence without a cause, so the universe also needs no explanation. Indeed, Hume was correct when he argued that infinite regress was possible and we cannot know anything about causes as they are empirically unverifiable. The universe requires a necessary being to account for contingent beings but it doesn’t have to be God. So therefore science is the explanation and there is no need for God. Russell was right –“It’s just there and requires no explanation.”
Apart from the irrelevant start to the answer and lack of any paragraphs, the answer consists of just a series of isolated statements. None are wrong in themselves but they do not form a coherent reasoned argument. There is no evaluating the strengths or weaknesses of the views. It is not clear that the student actually understands the arguments since some appear contradictory.