This is my response to the objection that was raised concerning premise 4.
Once the finitude of the past is accepted, one realizes that the universe had to be created by something, it is not uncaused. In premise 4, I surmised this ‘thing’ to be God. Whether or not you want to call it God, a neccesary being must exist. Here’s the proof (from Peter Kreeft):
“God would be the only necessary being—if God existed. Does he? Does a necessary being exist? Here is the proof that it does. Dependent beings cannot cause themselves. They are dependent on their causes. If there is no independent being, then the whole chain of dependent beings is dependent on nothing and could not exist. But they do exist. Therefore there is an independent being.”
Let me illustrate this concept. (A) represents the universe, (B) the earth, and (C) you.
In the chain of cause from the Big Bang to today, (C) is dependent on (B) who is dependent on (A). But if there is no independent being, what is (A), the universe, dependent on? Since the finitude of the past has been established, (A) must have been created, it’s not uncaused; it did not pop into existence. Therefore, (A) is dependent on a being who only gives existence because that being is existence itself.
Another way to put this is this way:
There are only 2 ways to exist
Contingent - receiving existence
or
Necessary - being existence itself
A contingent being cannot be the ultimate cause of the existence of something else since it has only received existence, The only explanation for the contingent beings is a necessary being. The necessary being is given the name God
The Law of Causality states that : “Anything which begins to exist must have been brought into existence by something distinct from itself.”
If we consider all created things(called creatures for example) something caused the existence of every single one of them. It could be a plant, a giraffe human being etc.
so what caused the giraffe…its parents…and what caused them…its parents, this is an infinite cycle which cannot work. Something has to have started off the whole process for it to exist. for every receiver there has to be a giver. So for the 1st receiver there has to be a first giver who never received existence because he or God is existence itself.
(I got that from a poster on this very forum who’s name escapes me
)
Therefore, God exists.
Luke K:
I’m using temporal terms because, quite frankly, our language doesn’t have words to describe the era (a temporal word, I know) before the creation of the universe. I tried to use a time-neutral word when I used ‘point’, but I suppose even that’s not good enough.
I hope that answers your question.
