Review Of Samuel Clark's Argument For The Existence Of God

1137 Words5 Pages

According to Samuel Clark’s argument, things exist the way they are in order to show the existence of God. All things need an explanation for their existence according to Aristotle. For instance, why the earth is spherical, why different places experience different climatic patters, why different geographical areas have different time zones and why do creatures that are in found in different places have features that enable them survive in such conditions. These considerations lead to a belief that there must be a cause for the universe (Rowe 67). At the same time, this cause needs to be extremely perfect for the universe to align itself in its current manner. Something has to come from something. This is because nothing produces nothing; hence …show more content…

For the earth to revolve around the sun and rotate on its own axis there must have been an external force applied on it, which is likely to be God. For things to happen in the manner that they do, there has to be a Higher power that is above to “govern” us and our actions. Everything that exists does and always will have a cause whether we take the time to believe it or not. The universe exists, but how does it exist? By the grace of God. If we are able to take things and apply what we know with the other information that we are able to ascertain, then we will begin to understand that Clark’s argument is necessary and true. Clark’s Cosmological Argument is often called the first cause argument seeks to prove the existence of God from the fact that the universe exists. The universe came into existence at a point in the distant past. Nothing can come into existence, though, unless there is something to bring it into existence; nothing comes from nothing. There must therefore be some being outside of the universe that caused the universe to exist. This argument, if it is successful, demonstrates the existence of a Creator that transcends time, which has neither beginning nor