Cosmological arguments are given as proofs that God exist. The theory reflects the relationship between contingent and necessary objects and processes. Contingent objects and processes are those that possibly could not have existed. For example, a sculptor may create a figure from a clump of clay. The figure exist but it also may not have existed. It is contingent.

Simply stated, the argument proposes that contingent objects and processes proceed from other contingent objects and processes, which themselves are produced from the same process. This chain of causation cannot have eternally existed. There must have been a cause that was not itself caused, a necessary cause, and this cause is God.

The cosmological argument dates back to ancient Greece and the philosopher Aristotle. He argued that everything that moves must have a mover. The term mover, however, was defined differently in his time. Movement meant change from potentiality to actuality. Potentiality is what something is capable of being. Actuality is what something is. For example, consider a bucket of water. It sits there unmoving. Now suppose you pick the bucket up and empty it. The water flows out. The potential of flow was always there, but you were the cause of the flow. And there was a cause for you, the mover. You were given birth by your parents. You were created by biological and other actions, which can be traced back to other causes. And these causes arose from other causes. The same is true of all processes. A car moves because of the engine, and the engine moves because of combustion, and combustion is caused by the reaction of ignited fuel and air, and air is available because of, etc. Aristotle argued that this chain of causation cannot extend backwards forever. There must be, at some point, that which moves but was not itself moved.

Weather Aristotle believed in God or in gods is a hard question to answer. The Greek beliefs concerning deities was quite different from our modern conceptions and would take a separate essay to explain. The best answer I can briefly give is that, it seems, Aristotle was formulating a conception of God, but not a complete conception. His philosophy, however, was later adapted as a Christian apologetic.

Saint Thomas Aquinas was a Dominican monk and Christian philosopher of the thirteen century. In his book, Summa Theologica, he presents his arguments for the existence of God. Aquinas reaffirms Aristotle’s argument but clearly states that the first cause is God. He also expands the argument to include matter as well as potentials. Physical objects are said to have a regression of contingent causes which leads to a necessary cause. While a belief in God is debatable when discussing Aristotle, this is not the case with Aquinas.

One objection often raised to the Cosmological Argument is that the universe could have indeed always existed. The Kalam Cosmological Argument refutes this by stating, as a premise, that the universe began. Modern science has provided sound backing for this belief. Many cosmologist agree that the universe began and offer empirical evidence in support. For example, it is known that the universe is constantly expanding. This expansion is explained to be the result of an initial thrust. Many cosmologist believe this thrust was caused by the Big Bang, an primal explosion of energy that began the universe. There are also other proofs of a beginning that I intend to discuss in detail in another post to be written soon.

The cosmological line of reasoning in itself does not prove the existence of the Christian God. It would be more accurate to say that the argument expresses a characteristic of God in general and therefore helps to form a definition. When combined, however, with other arguments a very strong case is created.

Ben Frasca

Please visit my website at:

christianphilosophyblog.com