|
|
|
|
|
[논문] THE ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD IN CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS (영문) (35)
|
|
|
PAUL
|
2023-12-22 13:43:20, 조회 : 181 |
|
|
Paul Jang
✝✝✝ A DEMONSTRATION OF GOD AND THE ARGUMENTS
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF CHRISTIAN GOD IN CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS (35)
by Dr. Paul B. Jang (Ph.D. Christian Apologetics) (영문) ✝✝✝
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURES:
PHILOSOPHICAL AND THEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK OF THE CONCEPTS AND EXISTENCE OF God
HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL SURVEY
THE ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
Rational Arguments:
The Cosmological Argument (4)
Thomas Aquinas justified the cosmological argument in the four ways of his five ways to prove God s existence (except for the fifth way) as follows:
I. The first argument from the concept of motion
(1) Things do move, (2) Change is a passing from potency, (3) Nothing passes from potency, (4) There can be an infinite regress, (5) Therefore, there must be a first unmoved mover, (6) Everyone understands this to be God.
II. The second argument from the efficient casualty
(1) There are efficient causes in the world, (2) Nothing can be the efficient cause of itself, (3) There cannot be an infinite regress of efficient causes, (4) Therefore, there must be a first uncaused efficient Cause of all efficient causality in the world, (5) Everyone gives to this the name of God.
III. The third argument from possibility and necessity
(1) There are beings that begin to exist and cease to exist, (2) Not all beings can be possible beings, (3) Therefore, there must be a Being whose existence is necessary, (4) There cannot be an infinite regress of necessary beings each of which has its necessity dependent on another, (5) Therefore, there must be a first Being that is necessary in itself.
IV. The fourth argument from gradation (perfection)
(1) There are different degrees of perfections among beings, (2) But things cannot be more or less perfect unless there is a wholly perfect, (3) Whatever is perfect is the cause of the less-than-perfect, (4) Therefore, there must be a perfect Being that is causing the perfections of the less-than-perfect beings, (5) This is God (Aquinas, 1947, 1.2.3).
But firstly, because there is no logical reason why one motion after another could not have been continued eternity past, Buswell says, if motion does not now exist, the either motion must have been eternally actual or potential, or on the other hand, motion must have arisen from nothing. Among the various hypotheses it is most probable that the God of the Bible existed eternally as the potential Originator of motion (Buswell, 1962, 79).
Secondly, the argument from efficient caseload, Buswell said, is clearly fallacy because to argue that since every event has a cause, therefore must be some event at the beginning which has no cause (Buswell, 1962, 49).
The argument from contingency, Buswell said, must be restated: because of no ground for saying that an infinite chain of contingent beings could not have existed. Therefore, it must be restated (Buswell, 1962, 50).
Thirdly, the argument from possibility and necessity is fallacy in the light of the Bible because it depends on the theory of relativity. The God of the Bible is not the first Being but the God, I AM THAT I AM having neither beginning of days nor end of life (Ex. 3:14; Heb. 7:3).
Fourthly, the argument from gradation also is wrong because Thomas says that the imperfect implies the perfect (Buswell, 1962, 52).
Descartes s Argument for the Existence of God
René Descartes (A.D. 1596-1650) had a posteriori proof for the existence of God like Anselm. This proof did not begin with one s certainty of sensations about the external world, but with one s mental certainty and doubt based on the great presupposition of his philosophy: I think, therefore I exist (Descartes, 1971. 53).
He stated that the a posteriori theistic argument as this: (1) I am doubting, (2) If I am doubting, I am thinking, (3) But doubt is an imperfect form of thinking, (4) But I know the imperfect, then I must be aware of the perfect, (5) But my imperfect mind cannot be the cause of the idea of perfection that I have, (6) Only a perfect Mind is an adequate cause for the idea of perfection, (7) Therefore, a perfect Mind must exist as the cause of this perfect idea (Descartes, trans. Lafleur, 1951, 3).
Descartes argument for the existence of God is similar to that of Augustine, that they move from there to the ultimate Truth that is the cause of this truth. The argument is based on not infinite existence, but finite one, of which movement is a posteriori. In this case, Descartes with Augustine falls more into Platonic method.
Hume s Argument for The Existence of God
David Hume (A.D. 1711-1776) rejected the cosmological argument in the standpoint of Pyrrhonist and Diogenes Laertius because it cannot be rationally proved. He, initially rejected it because he retrained the principle of meditation to his empiricism, and then excluded the idea of the existence more that an experience as it can be seen in the question what is the cause of the first cause? (Hume, I, 1928, 98).
But after that he believed in the cause on the basis of theory of intuition (Hume, 1928, I, 95). He called the law of causation itself in question (Berkhof, 1971, 26).
Hume s objections will be presented as follows: (1) Only a finite cause need to be inferred from finite effects, (2) No propositions about existence can be logically necessary, (3) The words necessary Being have no consistent meaning, (4) If necessary being means only imperishable then the universe may be the necessary Being, (5) An infinite series is possible, (6) There is no way to establish the principle of casualty, (7) The universe as a whole does not need a cause; on the parts do, (😎 Theistic arguments convince only those who like abstract reasoning (Hume, ed. Smith, 1955).
Hume had two objections to the cosmological argument in his philosophy of experience: the one is directed to the principle on which it (cosmological argument) is founded, and the other is directed to the conclusion drawn from its procedure for the proof of God s existence.
Kant s Argument for the Existence of God
Immanuel Kant (A.D. 1724-1804) rejected the cosmological argument on the basis of his theory of the critique of pure reason that the concept of the cause and effect could not be forced beyond the sphere of sensual existence (Shedd, 1889, 242; Pure Reason, Meikle John, 374).
This argument contains, at least, the outlines of all arguments, at the same time, employed in natural theology--arguments which always have been, and still will be, in use and authority (Kant, ed. Benton, 182). This proof, termed by Leibnitz the argumentum a cintingentia mundi.
Kant stated It is framed in the following manner: If some thing exists, an absolutely necessary being must likewise exists. Now I at least, exist. Consequently, there exists an absolutely necessary being (Kant, ed. Benton, 182). Kant point out that, if every existing thing has an adequate cause, this also applies to God, and that we are thus led to an endless chain (Berkhof, 1971, 26).
They have presented the criticisms of cosmological argument in the writings of Kant as this: (1) The cosmological argument depends on the invalid ontological argument, (2) Existential statements are not necessary, (3) A noumenal (real) cause cannot be derived from a phenomenal effect, (4) What is logically necessary is not ontologically necessary, (5) the cosmological argument leads to metaphysical contradictions, (6) The concept of a necessary being is not self-clarifying, (7) An infinite regress is logically possible (Kant, trans. Beck, 1956, 507).
Hackett s Argument for the Existence of God
Stuart C. Hackett has presented two types of cosmological arguments: the one is a conceptual argument, and the other a casual argument. These arguments have derived from the tradition of Leibnitz.
The conceptual argument is this: (1) The world order is possible only on the basis of several necessary conditions, (2) These realities show all of the properties that are associated with the things in the world, (3) Therefore, these realities can be understood as the workings of an absolute Mind, (4) Therefore, there exists an absolute Mind as necessary condition to the logical possibility of this world, God is actually a reasonable explanation of the possibility of the world order (Hackett, 1983, 96).
Hackett also summarizes his second argument with three short statements as this: (1) If anything exists, an absolutely necessary and transcendent Being exists, (2) Something exists, (3) Therefore, an absolutely necessary and transcendent Being exists (Hacket). ❤️❤️❤️
- To be Continued -
. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
선교운동소개
동역자실 