The Argument from Contingency and why it is wrong

The Argument from Contingency is a cosmological argument that basically asserts that the universe must have a reason, and that reason is God.

"Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence (either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external cause). 2. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God" -reasonablefaith.org

The argument follows like this:

1. Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence (either in the necessity of its own       nature or in an external cause).

2. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.

3. The universe exists.

To logically debate this argument you have to find that one of the premises are false. No one would argue 3 is false. Since the Universe could, under different circumstances, conceivably not exist (that is the contingency part). It's existence must be explained by an event that preceded it.

Premise 1 states there are two kinds of things. The first are things which exist by necessity and second are things which exist contingently. Things which exist necessarily exist by a necessity of their own nature. Many mathematicians think that numbers, sets, and other mathematical entities exist in this way. They’re not caused to exist by something else; they just exist by the necessity of their own nature. On the other hand are contingent things which are caused to exist by something else. They exist because something else has produced them. Familiar physical objects like people, planets and galaxies belong in this category. -Dr. William Lane Craig argues this in his and J. P. Moreland’s book Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview. (link to Amazon)

Premise 2 is where the argument fails. We can assume the universe does have an explanation of its existence. However, to say that explanation is any of a number of deities is an unsubstantiated leap until you have reasonable evidence of a deity. Then to assume the universe was created by a deity is merely an assumption. 

However this argument does provide something I have found to be interesting. The universe does most likely have an explanation of its existence. What that is we don't know, but just to think one day we might is remarkable.


If you have enjoyed this rebuttal to the Argument from Contingency and would like me to do some more please drop a comment in the commenty place. Subscribe by email to follow my blog and keep up with all the latest content.