Thinking to Believe

Here is my most concise summary of the contingency argument for God’s existence: Things that don’t have to exist, but do, can only be explained by something that does have to exist.

Here is a version that is more fleshed out:

Things that did not have to exist, but do exist (contingent beings), require an explanation for why they exist, and that explanation must be found in some external cause. If everything that exists had an external cause, however, then there would have to be an infinite number of beings and an infinite regress of causes, and ultimately there would be no explanation for why anything that exists, exists. To explain why things that did not have to exist do exist, there must be at least one being that must exist and cannot not exist. This necessary being has being in Himself, and gives being to all other contingent beings.

(more…)

Here is a very concise version of the Kalam Cosmological Argument:

Things that begin to exist require an external cause. The universe began to exist, so it requires an external cause. As the cause of all physical reality, the first cause cannot itself be part of physical reality, but must be immaterial, non-spatial, eternal, powerful, and personal, which is a basic description of the theistic God.

Here is another way of presenting the gist of the argument without the technical-sounding language:

(more…)

Now that I have concluded my podcast discussion of six major arguments for God’s existence, I’m going to post short summations of each argument. Today’s summation is for the argument from the impossibility of nothingness:

If there was ever a time when nothing existed, there would still be nothing because nothing has no potential to become something. Something exists, however, so we know that something must have always existed. The universe is not that something since it originated at the Big Bang, so the eternal “something” must transcend the universe. The eternal something must be immaterial, spaceless, personal, and eternal, which is the basic description of a theistic God.

Here is another, more conversational way of putting it:

(more…)

The fourth argument I offer for God’s existence in my “Does God Exist?” podcast series is the Contingency Argument.

The contingency argument for God’s existence is a cosmological argument, but unlike the kalam argument, it does not require a temporally finite universe. The contingency argument holds that even an eternal universe requires a cause, and that cause is God.

(more…)

The third argument I offer for God’s existence in my “Does God Exist?” podcast series is the Kalam Cosmological Argument. This is my favorite argument for God’s existence.

The argument reasons to God based on the temporal finitude of the universe. The essence of the argument is that temporally finite things require a cause for their existence. Since the universe began to exist in the finite past, it also requires a cause. An examination of the properties required of such a cause match the properties of the theistic God.

(more…)

If there was ever a time when nothing existed then there would be nothing still, because nothing has no potential to become something. Out of nothing, nothing comes. And yet there is something, so we know there has never been a time when nothing existed. Something has always existed. What is that something?

Could the universe be eternal? No, as evidenced by the thermodynamic properties of the universe. The energy in the universe is finite and increasing toward entropy. If the universe were infinitely old, we would have reached a state of entropy an infinite time ago. And yet we have not reached a state of entropy, therefore the universe is not infinitely old. It began to exist a finite time ago.

(more…)

William Lane Craig’s ministry, Reasonable Faith, has released another excellent video illustrating a major argument for God’s existence.  This time it’s the argument from contingency.  Of the four released thus far (kalam, moral, cosmic fine-tuning), this is probably the most difficult to follow, but it also has the best graphics.  Take a look:

Reasonable Faith, the ministry of William Lane Craig, recently released a great new visual depiction of the kalam cosmological argument.

You can view the video above (from YouTube), as well as on the kalam cosmological argument page at Reasonable Faith.

All of the scientific evidence points to the temporal finitude of physical reality, even if physical reality extends beyond the Big Bang (see here and here).  And yet, scientists continue to come up with mathematical models that permit an eternal universe/multiverse, and atheists continue to promote them because both are under the mistaken presumption that if physical reality is eternal, then there is no need for a transcendent cause, and thus no need for God.  As David Berlinski observed, “While an eternal universe makes it meaningless to ask when the universe began to exist, since its existence is not necessary it is still meaningful to ask why it exists.”  The fact that physical reality is contingent means that even if the universe/multiverse is eternal, it still needs a cause.

(more…)