The Moral Argument

The Teleological Argument

The Cosmological Argument

It has been exactly a month since the last time I posted anything. I apologize for the delay. Not only had I been sick for a while with an annoying flu once again, but I also had to tie up some loose ends. First of all I wanted to say that I have recently bowed out of Christianity. Am I still a theist though. I just put two and two together after reading the bible more carefully, among other things. After finding out about some disturbing bible passages, I just realized the god I worship is not the same as the Abrahamic god.

Anyway, this time around, I am going to talk about three arguments discussed at the last retreat I attended. These three arguments are part the study of apologetics and try to disprove the disbelief in God.

First of all, let us discuss the "Cosmological argument". The best explanation for it was posited by Italian priest and philosopher Thomas Aquinas in the 11th century. In his best work called the "Summa Theologica", Aquinas, gives us five ways so as to explain the belief in God: Motion, Causes, Contingency, Quality and design. Albeit, we are going to discount the last two due to them being inconsequential to the main explanation. A simple description of the three ways in one sentence would be as follows; There are things in this worlds that are "In motion", "Caused", and, "contingent (their existence depends on something else)". In other words, there is a sentient being (God) which made something to start moving, caused it to exist, and thus created it. If there had not been a creator, there would have been an infinite regression of events. Be that as it may, the aforesaid statement does not make sense.

The teleological argument, also proposed by Aquinas suggests as follows: In order for a complex being or object to exist, there must have been something that created it in the first place. In other words "intelligent design" implies "intelligent designer". In order to elucidate this idea, let us take a look at English philosopher William Paley's analogy. A case in point would be as follows: if we were to find a watch on the ground, we would not just imagine it randomly popped into existence. By looking at the complexity of it and seeing how its parts had to be put together for it to function. We can thus conclude that it was crafted by an intelligent being (watchmaker).

Last but not least, let us take into account the Moral argument. It suggests that God is needed to provide a coherent foundation for the existence of objective moral. In other words, our human nature

prevents us from being unable to differentiate between good and evil. For instance, the following syllogism explains this point further: 1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

2.Objective moral values do exist. 3. Consequently, God exists.  Lastly, I would say that even though the aforesaid arguments are not 100% tenable per se, logic suggests they should be trusted.