The Existence of God (Part 1) Flashcards
What is the cosmological argument?
Proposed by Thomas Aquinas.
Everything in the universe is subject to ‘cause and effect’. Something can not come from nothing, like domino’s everything is part of a chain.
But something must have pushed the first domino (a first cause).
It must be eternal and Aquinas calls it the ‘uncauterised cause’ which is God.
Arguments for the cosmological argument
It is consistent with the teaching that God created to universe out of nothing, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now earth was formless and empty”.
Modern Christians who accept the Big Bang try to reconcile religious and scientific beliefs.
It’s a simple and logical argument and many people claim a simple one is the right one.
Arguments against the cosmological argument
Just because other things have causes doesn’t mean the universe must have one to.
Just because we can’t be certain what caused the Big Bang doesn’t mean that God must have been the cause.
How can the first cause (God) be unique and be exempt from needing a prior cause?
What is the teleological argument?
Proposed by Rev. William Paley.
A watch has certain complex features and anything that has these features must have been designed.
Therefore the watch has been designed by a designer and the universe is like the watch as it possesses similar features on a larger scale.
Therefore, the universe has been designed by a creator and the only logical conclusion for who is God.
Arguments for the teleological argument
Consistent with the message from Genesis that God designed humans ‘in his own image’.
Issac Newton used the fact we have opposable thumbs as evidence of ‘design’ which must come from God. Each individual human has a unique fingerprint and that was enough for him.
Arguments against the teleological argument
Evolution suggest design is unnecessary as complex system can be achieved through a slow process of random mutations based on evolutions. Supported by Natural Selection.
Incompatible with scripture as a ‘perfect designer’ is illogical due to imperfections in the world which cannot be accounted for a omnibenevolent God.
What is a public experience of God?
Discussed by Richard Swinburne.
A believer sees God’s hand at work.
An unusual event that breaches natural law e.g. walking on water
What is a private experience of God?
Also discussed by Swinburne.
Praying, reading Bible, vision and near death experiences.
A general non-specific feeling of God working in one’s life.
What is the Principle of Credulity?
Refers to our ability to believe that something is real or true.
If we normally trust our senses when judging if something is real or not in our everyday experiences, then we should also trust our senses if we have a religious experience and accept that it’s real.
What is the principle of testimony?
Relates to trusting the testimony of other people in relation to religious experiences they have claimed to have had.
Arguments against religions experience
Many examples have been investigated thoroughly and have been found credible.
If a religious experience proves the existence of God to that person, surely, they are real and act as a credible argument to prove God’s existence.
Arguments against religious experience
Why has God selected particular people to communicate with and has ignored the needs of the majority of ordinary people who have faith yet don’t benefit from religious experiences.
Without evidence, who is to say that it isn’t all in the mind or a coincidence or are under the influence or drugs.
Arguments for the moral argument
It is easy to observe, therefore we can conclude that there is a common approach to morality. There are universal moral values and it appears logical to assume these morals do have a source.
People claim that the fact we have a sense of guilt when we behave in a certain way is evidence that we have an inbuilt moral compass in us.
Arguments against the moral argument
Morality is a social convention learned through experience and upbringing.
Not everyone believes in God yet atheists and agnostics understand the difference between right and wrong.
Richard Dawkins argues that morals are a product of the evolutionary process.
