I see you point, and it’s a good one, but I actually think there’s more to the idea of a “spiritual” causation than just a “gap,” and Willard would say it’s a logical necessity (though, I’m not sure if he’s right).

Thanks again Alex!

The point of the evolution bit is that even if we falsify the cosmological argument by finding a cause/explanation for the universe, then the prime mover just gets pushed back to explaining the explanation. this is not a disproof, but it does make the argument seem useless.

Thanks for the thoughtful response!

1) It’s true I haven’t outlined Willard’s logical arguments here. There’s was no room for that with the kind of basic overview I’m attempting with this series. Plus, like I said, I’d rather you buy the book : )

2) It’s true that the cosmological argument is a God of the gaps in a sense. Although, I might disagree with you somewhat by saying that historically it has never been based (ultimately) on the diversity of life. Such arguments have always gone “all the way back” to the prime mover, or origins argument. Nestled there, evolution has never been a threat, because evolution is a natural internal system which still, logically, depends on internal natural causes. Also, the cosmological argument doesn’t lead to dualism, it just doesn’t eliminate it. Willard will argue next, and I would agree, that it’s the other dominant stream of theistic thought grounded in religious experience that leads one from the logical acceptance of a God to openness toward a theistic God. From there the nature of knowledge takes on a very different, personal, character.

Which is where the shouting matches really begin : )

Thanks for your comments! You’ve added much to this thread.

“If you’re familiar with the Cosmological argument for the existence of God, what do you think are it’s strengths or weaknesses?”
2 weaknesses that i see. Firstly, that it is a god of the gaps argument; if we could prove a non-divine cause then the cosmological argument would just push god further back to something we cannot explain. This happened when the evolutionary theory was formulated, with the cosmological argument going from using the diversity of life on earth to an origin of the universe.
Secondly; if you accept the cosmological argument it leads to dualism, not the theism that many people use the argument to justify. The cosmological argument does not argue that god intervenes in the world, or that it even cares about the universe it created, just that it made it.