Cosmological argument for the existence of God?

Question

It has been said that every effect has a cause and there cannot be an infinite regress of finite causes. Therefore, there must be an uncaused cause or necessary being that created the universe. Is this being God?

Note: Thanks everyone for your responses! My professor gave us this question as part of our discussion on the exsistence of God. I will pass on your input to our class which should add an interesting element to our discussion.

Answer 1

Yes. As to the Universe well we are at an exact place in the solar system that allows us to live in some comfort. ( Air, Water, Heat, Food, Ect.) 3rd planet from the Star Sol. Our solar system is located in a part of the spiral galaxy Milky Way in-between two spiral arms allowing us to be observant of the universe and ask questions unobstructed by dust from other stars clouding the spiral arms. We are in a galaxy that is among many, some 750 billion in the known universe, which is not colliding with another, or expanding at a rate that it is cooling off faster than the time we humans have live on this earth. Yes, there is an intellegent means at hand here for life to live out it's existance. Preciseness is the key here in the work of the creator. I would say yes, there is a God and he sent a son to keep us from Death everlasting that we may have the chance to become a Child of God and live forever. The Universe is a very big Playground for so many children and I truly will enjoy playing there. Eternal is the key to journeying to the other side of the Universe. A Child of God is Eternal just like his Father.

Answer 2

Understanding the concept of "time" is critical for understanding the concept of infinity that your argument cannot wrap. Consider the following:

1. Time is relative meaning that there is not a universal clock that everything everywhere looks at as absolute time. Consider the classic example of the twins, one of whom goes on a space journey at the speed of light only to come back to Earth to find the other one aged more. (I.e. travelling at or close to the speed of light slows time in your frame of reference).

2. Consider a ruler sitting on your desk. It has a well defined beginning (say 0") and a well defined end (say 10"). This finite distance on the ruler representing its length, i.e. the 10 inches separating its beginning from its end, is made up of an infinite number of points: Point 0, Point 0 + 1/2, Point 0 + 1/3, Point 0 + 1/4 ... etc etc to infinity.

The above two observations can help you look at time differently if you think about it (and legitimitely so) as a dimension like the length of that ruler you see on your desk. Time can be infinite (much like the number of points on a ruler), but can have beginning and end (just like the ruler does). How can you reconcile the infinity of time with the proposition that it might also have a beginning and an end? Think about travelling at the speed of light and how that slows down time (never to a stand-still though) so you can travel forever but never reach your destination, althoug it exists ... Mind boggling eh? Wait till you get into the quantum world.

Bottom line is proving or disproving the existence of an uncaused cause or necessary being is like proving that you are going to reach the end of that ruler you are constantly moving forward on but never reaching the end of ... futile.

Answer 3

There may actually be infinite regress of finite causes. Physicists spend their entire lives trying to prove or disprove this.

Therefore, no, this is not an argument for the existence of a god.

Answer 4

In the definitive sense, "god" or "God" (or any other name and/or title ascribed to or otherwise used to designate a deity) is a philosophical construct.

In essence, whomever/whatever you believe is "God" IS "God to you." Many theologies would suggest that a superbeing is that precipitating cause; however, perspective is very much at issue.

For instance, if you trace this universe to its origin, you might find that it was spawned from the collision of multiverses or that it had some other cosmological beginning. What then? Do you trace the respective origins of each of those multiverses, which might not have arisen from similar precipitating events?

We don't yet understand either gravity or time: we are incompetent to speculate regarding the age of this universe or the features contained within it, and yet such things are regularly pronounced with absolute certitude by the proselytes of the faith commonly usurping the name of science.

It is not even universally accepted among "scientists" that cause and effect are not at some level ultimately cyclical, with randomization accounting for infinte variations within a COMPARATIVELY tightly-constrained (but nevertheless imaginary and unproven) model.

Being so ignorant, it is certainly true that, to any rational person, any being having set into motion this universe would by contrast against humans qualify as a god -- and if that being sad that it was "the one and only God," we would be in no position to argue.

-----------------

BoredBookwork would do well to read the Bible "he" frivolously claims commands against the reasonable testing of God: abundant examples in Scripture admonish individuals specifically to test God.

While it is to some degree true that the seeking of "signs and wonders" is in austere terms discouraged in the New Testament.

Consider Romans 12:2 ("Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.")

Consider I Thessalonians 5:20-21 ("do not treat prophecies with contempt. Test everything. Hold on to the good."); "contempt" obviously from the context indicates prejudicial disregard. Were not the prophecies to be considered for their evidentiary value in proving or disproving (among other things) the truthfulness of God, the admonition would be nonsensical.

Consider I John 4:1 ("Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world."); clearly regarding God, the "believer" is to exercise due diligence in determining what to believe and what to disbelieve.

Thus the believer's God is defined by what the believer thinks is true or false regarding that God; whether those beliefs are accurate is irrelevant [within the scope of this discussion] to the extent they define God for that person.

Answer 5

You have re-stated a very old -- and rather unpersuasive -- line of "reasoning" that was popular among medieval scholastics and monks. The fallacy in your idea is that you impose the rule that "there cannot be an infinite regress of infinite causes." That is an unprovable opinion, not a demonstrable fact. Therefore, your conclusion is invalid.

This might seem difficult for you to grasp, or it might be semantically troubling, but there is absolutely no reason at all that the universe (or whatever matrix our universe exists in) is prohibited from being infinite. That is a condition that you have arbitrarily stated, not a provable fact.

Also, contrary to your implied premise, there is legitimate criticism of our understanding of cause and effect, given what we have learned of quantum physics, but I'd hate to knock all the legs off your table at once.

Has it occurred to you that trying to prove God as a fact violates the Biblical teaching that "through faith alone" may one approach Him? Your efforts seem misguided both from a scientific and a religious perspective.

Answer 6

Instead of a linear infinite regress, think of a circle of regress. This rather in itself eliminates your argument. Then again, your argument is from ignorance, or " a god of the gap " argument. You close this causal gap with god. What evidence that?

Answer 7

That is, of course, unless the universe has an age of infinity and, as such, has no beginning or end; in this way, all causes would be effects and vice-versa.

I can do the philosophy thing too :P

Answer 8

I would say YES to that. But if your real question is the existence of GOD as such, I find and justify the existence of God in one word.- JUSTICE.. Do NOT begin to give me crap about how life is unfair...blah blah blah. Life is the fairest thing. It has to be. God created it. It's people who are unfair . So, going back to my point, try to find God in life itself.

Answer 9

Every effect has mutiple causes which do regress to the beginning of time.

Answer 10

But then you have to ask, 'what is God?' The cause/ effect does not suggest the nature of God, but mereley suggests that there is something that did not have a cause. It answers one question, but opens up another