LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Arguments for the existence of God
Focus: Cosmological
Submitted to Professor Norman Matters, in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the completion of the course
Apologetics 520
Spring D03
By
Rhonda Wright
5/8/2020
2
Contents
Introduction… ............................................................................................................................ 3
The Beginning…........................................................................................................................ 4
Is God in the Disasters? ............................................................................................................. 5
Cosmological Arguments .......................................................................................................... 7
God’s Existence .......................................................................................................................... 8
God and Mankind… ................................................................................................................... 9
Conclusion… ............................................................................................................................ 10
Bibliography… .........................................................................................................................12
3
Introduction
Psalm 14:1“The fool says in his heart there is no God.”1 Some have asked specific
questions about the existence of God, and where did He come from. Some may ask if God
created all things who created Him. Also, if God is a loving and caring God, why does He allow
suffering? Some will just outright say “I do not believe in God.” A question one should ask if
you do not believe in something how can you acknowledge it? When a servant of God is
confronted with these types of question they should be able to answer with confidence, and
assurance of why they believe God, and that Jesus Christ died at Mount Calvary upon a Cross.
This paper has argued the existence of God, and why there is not a need to try and prove
God does truly exist. Starting at the point of creation of the Earth, Epistemology, the
Cosmological Arguments. It will conclude with Jesus Christ who sits at the right hand of the
Father with all power and authority. The Bible states Isaiah 1:18 reads “Come now let us reason
together, saith the Lord: though your sins are as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow: though
they are red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” (NIV) The keywords are “come let us” To
prove the existence of God causes a lot of debate this paper will argue the objections also, and
prove that “Christ cannot be proven only apprehended.”2 Through this apprehension of Jesus
Christ, this is where the relationship between Mankind and God begins.
The Beginning
1 All scripture is from the NIV Bible Gateway. Version 42, Bible Gateway/Zondervan, 2016.
2 Steve Wilkins, Faith and Reason: Three Views (Downers Grove IL.: InterVarsity Press, 2016), 74-75
4
When discussing the existence of God, it would be an injustice not to start where God is
and where He started, which is at the beginning. Scripture reads “at the beginning God created
the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form, and void, and darkness was on the face of
the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.” (KJV) This is what the
Creationist teaches, others teach differently they teach what science calls the “Big Bang Theory”
Almost every person has wondered where they come from. Several views can be distorted and
misunderstood which can leave an individual very confused and left to decided what it is are to
believe. One needs to understand that this is not an inappropriate question, it is a valid one of
course. “The question of where we come from can be answered in many ways. We need to keep
this fact in mind when we turn our attention to the account given by contemporary cosmology of
the origins of the universe.”3 In the natural, this is where the Big Bang began the past two
hundred years have brought some cosmologists to give their opinion that account for what they
call the big explosion of fluctuation of a primal vacuum.4
As these professionals worked within their laboratories they discovered that
hypothetically how the Universe was formed. Take for instance Steven Hawking who “contends
that the notion of an initial singularity that seems to require a temporal beginning to the universe
needs to be rejected. The universe according to Hawking does not have a boundary: it is
completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself. He thinks that the only way
to have a scientific theory is if the laws of physics hold everywhere, including at the beginning of
the universe.”5 For those who have looked into this theory of Stephen Hawking, they have
3 William E. Carroll, “Aquinas and the Big Bang,” First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life 1
(1999): 1-18.
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid.
5
rejected this notion of how the universe had begun. For others, they are excited because they are
waiting for a big scientific breakthrough.
The argument begins with this breakthrough that scientists will not acknowledge but
those who are open to this will see it where it begins. With the acknowledgment of God, some
have taken science and religion and separated it when instead they should have combined it just
as Albertus Magus and Thomas Aquinas. They may have wrestled with this for some time, but it
was “Thomas Aquinas who developed an analysis of the doctrine of creation ex nihilo that
remains one of the enduring accomplishments of Western culture. His analysis provides
refreshing clarity for our often confused contemporary discussion of the relationship between
science and religion.”6 The result was that many of his contemporaries felt that his discovery was
invalid because they seem to think that “something cannot come from nothing.”7 Although they
felt that “for the vacuum of modern particle physics whose fluctuation some see as bringing our
universe into existence, is absolutely nothing.”8 “Creation is the radical causing the existence of
whatever exists.”9 God is the agent that gave existence to all things that are present, thus so all
things are dependent upon God for their existence. “Creation is not some distance event; it is the
continuing, complete causing of the existence of everything that is. Creation is subject to
metaphysics and theology, not for the natural sciences.”10 Thomas Aquinas believed that even if
the Universe did not have a temporal beginning it would still depend on God. This writer
believes that it takes something unmovable to move those things outside of its self. God is a
never-changing God, He not moved by anything that is surrounded by Him. It is when He speaks
that things begin to change and move in the direction of His choosing.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid.
10Ibid.
6
Is God in the Disasters?
After the Fall of Adam and Eve, the earth and all of Mankind were affected by the
choices of God’s first-formed human beings. The earth did not yield her fruit without Adam
tilling the ground and purging it from its thorns. The mist did not come from the ground, rain fell
from the sky. With the reversal of nature, the world was subject to decay, and disaster. The first
natural disaster that is noted in the Bible is that of Noah. What is called in today’s contemporary
Church as the “Flood” in the Genesis. Within other religions, they look to their false gods when a
natural disaster occurs “many ancient religions, from Greek and Roman mythology to various
tribal religions, are thought to have arisen in response to various natural phenomena, including
disasters. The view was that disasters occurred because the gods were angry and sent the disaster
to punish guilty humans.”11 Let’s not forget why God caused the flood he did not do it as a false
God, His act was that out of mercy for Noah and his family. Genesis 6-9 describes the reason
why the flood was sent. It was because of the wickedness of Mankind; the human race and their
hearts and thoughts were evil all the time. God regretted making human beings and put them on
the earth. God decided to wipe out the whole human race with an exception of Noah and all who
would enter into the ark with him and the animals that God called. Noticed that this writer said
all that would enter? All of the human race had an opportunity to enter into the ark, but the ones
who went with Noah was his wife, his two sons along with their wives. “When it comes to
religion and disasters the theological ideas about disasters are common in English metaphors.”12
As mention earlier is the “Flood” Most theologians will respond with that those who are affected
11 Donal P. O'Mathuna, “Christian Theology and Disasters: Where Is God in All of This?,” Advancing Global
Bioethics 11 (October 2018).
12Ibid.
7
have sinned, or why is this happening when a disaster has devastated a city, a town, a nation, or
even the world. We within our current state are suffering from what is called the Covid-19
pandemic. This is not just a local disaster, but it is a world-known disaster where many as over
3,641,204 people have been confirmed positive with the virus, 251,947 deaths have occurred,
and 1,192,959 people have recovered. These numbers are astounding, and they are still rising.
One might question is God in this?
When it comes to knowing if God has allowed bad things to happen to His creation the
answer is yes. It is not that God is uncaring, or He is a punishing God. Humans must remember
that scripture states that we are to love Him with all of heart, mind, and strength. Humans are not
serving any other god, because the Lord our God is a jealous God, and will not have any other
gods before Him. In the Book of Judges when the children of Israel sinned God would allow
them to go astray and become subject to their enemies. It was when they cried out to God He
would hear them and send a deliver a Judge to lead the people. God wanted one thing and that
was to be their King. He is the same God today; He wants to be Mankind’s priority in every
situation and all events. He is the Father who wants what’s best for His children, and even if that
means correcting them at times.
So, the answer to the question “is God in the disasters?” Yes, He is. He is not only in the
disaster He watches over every facet of the event that is happening in the lives of all people. He
has allowed it to happen, He knows the purpose of the events that happen, and He has a plan for
the outcome. The Bible says that God rains on the just and the unjust, He is no respecter of
persons.
Cosmological Arguments
8
Thomas Aquinas was influenced by John Philoponus these “theologians used reason and
argumentation to support their revealed Islamic beliefs they developed the temporal version of
the argument from the impossibility of an infinite regress, now referred to as the kalam
argument. They argued that everything that begins to exist requires a cause of its beginning.” 13
This writer goes on to say that the theist and nontheist have concluded that they do not agree,
“Alvin Plantinga believes theology about the cosmos is ineffective, Richard Gale believes in
Kantian fashion, that since the conclusion of all versions of the cosmological argument invokes
an impossibility, no cosmological arguments can provide examples of sound reasoning.”14 Some
may think that “if there is a God He will make something of finitude and complexity of the
universe.”15 God is not that difficult to understand when humans are open to know Him for who
He is as He is, and where He is. It is a lack of belief that interferes with what God will allow a
man to know about Him. Scripture Matthew 7:7-8 clearly states “ask and you shall receive, seek
and you shall find, knock and the door will be open.” (KJV) God of the Universe does not need a
lawyer, He does not need an advocate, He is God, and there is no need to try and prove He exists.
For the believer, the proof is surrounded by them from the time they wake up in the morning
until they close their eyes in faith trusting God that He will put them on His wake-up list. Jeff
Miller asks a great question about cause and effect, “ If everything had to have a beginning, why
does the same concept not apply to God? Doesn’t God need a cause? Who caused God?”16 He
claims that there is a misunderstanding about the Law of Cause and Effect. The Law claims to
that which is material, and anything material needs an antecedent or another cause. Science is
13 Bruce Reichenbach, “Cosmological Argument,” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2017).
14 Ibid.
15 Ibid.
16 Jeff Miller, “The Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God,” Apologetics Press, accessed May 5,
2020, www.apologeticspress.org.
9
observed through nature, and not the supernatural. “Since they cannot observe the supernatural
realm, a scientist cannot apply the scientific Law of Causality to it.”17 When humans cannot
understand something they tend to add information that is not applicable so that they will have an
answer to a question that is unexplainable. The Law of nature is connected to the Law of
Relativity is the same for all who observe albeit scientist, or just a normal observer. When it
comes to observing how nature came about there are two different views. Those who believe
what they can acknowledge with their senses, and those who believe what they cannot see and
have had a supernatural experience. Who is right, and who should one believe? There is no
denying that there is a source that is greater than any human entity. Among those who oppose are
the reformers, who may have thought they were making changes for the improvement due to
their research.
God’s Existence
How does one defend the coherence of theism? “The first is to defend against anti-
theologians who argue that the concept of God is internally incoherent; that the divine
perfections are not compossible or that some putative perfection is such at that it cannot be had
by anything.”18 The best way to discuss this would be through the “ontological argument” it is as
follows. God is great and is defined as perfect, He must exist because He is greater than a God
who does not. There is an argument called “The Compossibility Argument”19 It is a bit confusing
for the new apologist, but it does hold some substance. “ 1.Two properties J and K are
compossible 2. The complement P of a property is P is the property of being not p. For any object
17 Ibid.
18 C'Zar Bernstein, “Is God's Existence Possible?,” The Heythrop Journal 59, no. 3 (May 2018): 424-32.
19 Ibid.
10
x, x has p just in case it is false that x has P. Hence if J entails the complement of K, where a
property J entails the complement of K. Perfections are as follows “ (PER) A property P is
perfection just in case P in no way detracts from the greatness of any being in which it inheres
and P, it complements.”20 Put it plainly, God is greater than man, and man needs something
greater than they are to depend on to sustain their lives. Man cannot create their breath, they can
know how the brain with all of its integrated parts, and how it works. The Bible reads “in him we
live and move and have our being, like some of your poets have said we are his workmanship.”
(KJV) Paul the apostle stated that to the people at Athens.
“The demonstration of God’s existence is a crucial problem in early modern theology and
philosophy. In contrast to the medieval period, in the seventeenth-century atheism became not
only an individual standpoint but a truly philosophical and epistemological position.”21
God and Mankind
The only way one can understand the existence of God is through reason and revelation,
God is all-knowing, and He knows those who are truly interested in knowing of His existence.
He will and has provided Mankind with knowledge, understanding, wisdom, on who He is. It is
only through revelation that Mankind will see that God does exist. Karl Barth speaks on this as a
divine word to humans. Although it has been criticized there are those who seek to understand
his way of being direct with taking up and speaking on the word of God. In a lecture he writes; “
As theologians, we ought to speak of God. But we are humans, and such cannot speak of God.
20 Ibid.
21 Igor Agostini, “Descartes's Proofs of God and the Crisis of Thomas Aquinas's Five Ways in Early Modern
Thomas: Scholastic and Cartesian Debates',” Harvard Theological 108, no. 2 (2015): 235 +.
11
We ought to do both, to know they ought to and the not-able-to, and precisely in this way give
God the glory.”22
His efforts of practical reason have been criticized among those ethicists. He goes on to
say for one to even entertain the idea of questioning the sovereignty of the divine is outright sin,
and insubordination to God’s divinity “Barth insists it does not need any interpretation, for even
the smallest details it is self-interpreting.”23 Although some may think that Barth’s moral
theology and think he is lacking anyone who knows to ask about the existence of God goes
against all the commandments will understand that reason and revelation go together. “God is
defined as a conscious being that is the first cause of reality. In its simplified initial form, the
argument has to premises 1. All possible truth is knowable and 2. It is impossible to know that
the proposition that God does not exist is true. From the proposition that God exists is
necessarily true.”24 The atheist denies that God exists, and this is not true due to the fact they
believe in a god, but not the true and living God. If they were to acknowledge that God does
exist then they would have to make changes to the way they live and acknowledge that the world
that they have created is false.
To ask an atheist about God they will deny it, but ask them about mythical beliefs, such
as astrology, Wicca, Buddhism, or some other religion they will engage in the topic. Ask an
atheist about going to a palm reader and listen to the answer they give. They will study tarot
cards and argue that what this witch has said is real. Ask about speaking to the dead and they will
declare that aunt Margie did come and spend time with them. So, for an atheist to say they do not
22 Derek Alan Woodard-Lehman, “Reason After Revelation: Karl Barth On Divine Word and Human
Words,” Modern Theology-Wiley Online Library 33, no. 1 (2017): 92-115.
23 Ibid.
24 Emanuel Rutten, “A Model-Epistemic Argument for the Existence of God,” Faith and Philosophy 31, no. 4
(2014): 386-400.
12
believe is a lie. They believe, it is just that they do not want to change from living in the darkness
and come and live in the light of Jesus Christ. 25 “A theological realist such as Richard
Swinburne believes that God terms refer to an extramental reality. An atheist may well accept
this but deny that theist claims are true. Non-realist, like Don Cupitt deny such extramental
reference. But as Schilbrack argues even Continental postmodern and social constructivist
philosophers usually take theism as the central theme.”26 It cannot be ignored that nature is where
God’s glory also rests need to be addressed, some worship nature and will not acknowledge the
creator of this beautiful sight that God Almighty has placed for Mankind to enjoy. They remove
from their minds and “cast aside the conception of an order which claims ultimate supremacy,
lest it should set some limit to the exercise of his own sweet will in the proposed recognition of
its creator.”27
Conclusion
“The Jew said to the Gentile that there were many conclusive arguments by which he
could prove the existence of only one God. But in actuality there are four; the first is the flowers
25 Bruce Reichenbach, “Cosmological Argument,” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2017).
26 llkka Pyysiäinen, “Theism Reconsidered: Belief in God and the Existence of God,” Journal of Religion and
Science 50, no. 1 (2015): 138-50.
27 Fred M. Taylor, “The Law of Nature,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 1
(April 1891): 558-85.
13
and the trees, second is God’s greatness, and infinite in essence. Third; God is in one place at all
times, and fourth; is that hope can develop by trusting in one God, Lord of all things.”28
This paper has argued the existence of God, in all of His Majesty. It is fair to say it is
inappropriate to question if God is among us. He is the true and living God, Ezekiel 18:4
“Behold, all souls are mine: as the soul of the father, so the soul of the son is Mine; the soul that
sins shall die.” (KJV) Mankind does not belong to himself, he belongs to God who waits for all
creation to acknowledge Him. There will come a day when every knee will bow, and every
tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. The Bible states that God rains on the just and the
unjust. Matthew 5:45 “That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven; for He
makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the just and the unjust.”(KJV)
The topics speak for themselves how it all began when God decided to create the loves of
His heart, who is Mankind. The first disaster and His presence during that time, and His presence
during the present time as the World face Covid-19. The question of God’s existence and the
inappropriateness of that seeking His presence in a wrong manner. The mind of Mankind and the
sin behind their thoughts. It is fair to say God is a God of love, peace, hope, and most of all He is
a God who is just. Mankind must remember He is a jealous God and will not have any God
before Him. The atheist can say they do not believe in God, but they have set-up a false god
within their minds, and the God of heaven will not allow that He will make Himself known and
already has through His Son Jesus Christ, and upon His return, those who have lived as if God
did not exist will regret the decision of not believing.
28 William Edgar and K. Scott Oliphint, Christian Apologetics Past and Present, Vol.1 (Wheaton IL.: Wheaton:
Crossway Books, 2009), 365-95.
14
Bibliography
Agostini, Igor. “Descartes's Proofs of God and the Crisis of Thomas Aquinas's Five Ways in
Early Modern Thomas: Scholastic and Cartesian Debates'.” Harvard Theological 108, no. 2
(2015): 235 +.
Bernstein, C'Zar. “Is God's Existence Possible?” The Heythrop Journal 59, no. 3 (May 2018):
424-32.
Carroll, William E. “Aquinas, and the Big Bang.” First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion
and Public Life 1 (1999): 1-18.
Dulles, Avery Cardinal. A history of Apologetics. 2nd ed. San Fransisco CA: Ignatius Press,
2005.
Edgar, William, and K. Scott Oliphint. Christian Apologetics Past and Present, Vol.1. Wheaton
IL.: Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2009.
Friedman, Jane. “Teleological Epistemology.” Springer Link (2020): 673-91.
Hewer, Darren. The Historical Reliability of the New Testament. 2nd ed. N.p.: Apologetics Press,
2010.
Milem, Bruce. “Defining Atheism, Theism, and God.” Springer link 85 (Jan. 2019): 335-46.
Miller, Jeff. “The Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God.” Apologetics Press.
Accessed May 5, 2020. www.apologeticspress.org.
O'Mathuna, Donal P. “Christian Theology, and Disasters: Where Is God in All of
This?” Advancing Global Bioethics 11 (October 2018).
Pyysiäinen, Ilkka. “Theism Reconsidered: Belief in God and the Existence of God.” Journal of
Religion and Science 50, no. 1 (2015): 138-50.
Reichenbach, Bruce. “Cosmological Argument.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (2017).
Rutten, Emanuel. “A Model-Epistemic Argument for the Existence of God.” Faith and
Philosophy 31, no. 4 (2014): 386-400.
Taylor, Fred M. “The Law of Nature.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and
Social Sciences 1 (April 1891): 558-85.
15
Wilkins, Steve. Faith and Reason: Three Views. Downers Grove IL.: InterVarsity Press, 2016.
Woodard-Lehman, Derek Alan. “Reason After Revelation: Karl Barth On Divine Word and
Human Words.” Modern Theology-Wiley Online Library 33, no. 1 (2017): 92-115.
