Get Full Essay Get access to this section to get all help you need with your essay and educational issues. This sentence is come from the bible, but I am not a christian, so I do not really understand what this means. I guess it was talking about if people believe in god, and trust his words, and in the end the will get the freedom. For many of christians, they believes in god, but many of the treatises of theologians and Christian philosophers can shed much light on the existence of God, the problem of evil and other objections raised by modern unbelievers.
From here, you can skip directly to the list of linked sites. Alternatively, you can go to the bibliographic note first. On the Existence of the First Cause This is the easy part.
A world void of dynamic punch is a world in which nothing happens. Since things do happen, there is dynamic punch in the world. But why is this so, or how does this work? Nothing can cause itself to happen or activate itself to work, for nothing can be prior to itself.
At least, this is so except insofar as something is already activated or energized in some way. Only someone who is already partly awake, and not too sick or exhausted, can force himself to come fully awake.
Again, nothing can be prior to itself, and so what nothing can do is to "fire itself up" from point zero. Nor can anything really give to itself any powers or capabilities that it does not already have in some way.
Even so, things happen even apart from the exercise of pure spontaneity. Yet a thing that is more or less inert can still convey dynamic punch by way of reacting to what happens to itself.
For example, a domino can knock over another domino in reacting to having itself been knocked. But any series of reactions, however long, is purely derivative and refers back to some exercise of genuine spontaneity to initiate the series.
To say there was never any such exercise is to deny the basis for what is happening here and now. As Thomas said, it is like saying there is only the series of instrumental causes, with no principal agent.
For that is what it means to say something works only because it is itself reacting. Of course, there could be various exercises of partial spontaneity on the part of lesser agents who are themselves reacting.
For example, living beings may be said to be this way. Again, given that there is free choice of the will, a human agent who engaged in such choice would be doing exactly this. But since these agents are themselves reacting, the same problem exists concerning the causal impacts upon those agents to which they are reacting.
Therefore, one must finally come to an agent whose action is absolutely primary and who thus acts with full spontaneity, free from any conditions or prompting. This agent, then, is the uncaused cause, which turns out to be God. In that case, the world of lesser things as a whole taken as a total system might be sufficient unto itself.
Perhaps the need for a transcendent deity can be eliminated on that basis. The ability to act purely spontaneously, in the sense of exercising primary initiative, cannot be built up from the ability to react.
To be sure, there are cases in which a whole may be truly said to have attributes that its parts lack, but this is not one of those cases. For here, the total system is a system of reactions and interactions, not something on a higher level.
The basic weakness remains in what the system as a whole is and how it works. Alternatively, if the world as a whole were to be on the higher level required, then it would itself have to have the character and status of the First Cause.
But this proposal is clearly false, as will be explored further later on. On the Most Popular Objection to this Argument People imagine that, by making the chain of causes reach back to infinity, they can somehow evade the force of this argument.
But Saint Thomas was fully aware of this consideration and found it to be beside the point. For Aquinas argued, specifically and explicitly, that the world could in principle have existed forever. In fact, the world began to exist, but that need not have been so.Aquinas’ Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God St.
Thomas Aquinas () was a Dominican priest, theologian, and philosopher. Called the Doctor Angelicus (the Angelic Doctor,) Aquinas is considered one the greatest Christian philosophers to have ever lived.
Cosmological argument Essay The cosmological argument has many variations of which only one will be explored in the following paragraphs - Cosmological argument Essay introduction. The argument is stated thus: the world (or universe) exists, and since it exists, there must have been a cause for its existence; therefore, some being, namely God, must have created it.
The Evidential Problem of Evil. The evidential problem of evil is the problem of determining whether and, if so, to what extent the existence of evil (or certain instances, kinds, quantities, or distributions of evil) constitutes evidence against the existence of God, that is to say, a being perfect in power, knowledge and caninariojana.comtial arguments from evil attempt to show that, once we.
Aquinas’ first way was the argument of motion, this form of the cosmological argument sprung from the observation that everything is acted upon by something else.
Aquinas argued that there cannot be an infinite chain of regression otherwise the universe would not be here, but it is (reducto ad absurdum) and so there must be a primary mover. The Quest for Eternity: An Outline of the Philosophy of Religion (Pelican S.) [John C.
A. Gaskin] on caninariojana.com *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. In natural theology and philosophy, a cosmological argument is an argument in which the existence of a unique being, generally seen as some kind of god, is deduced or inferred from facts or alleged facts concerning causation, change, motion, contingency, or finitude in respect of the universe as a whole or processes within it.