Apologist Clinton Wilcox explores two fascinating rational justifications for believing in God that use the science and philosophy of the Universe

The Cosmological Argument is really a family of arguments which reason from the existence of the Universe, or some fact of the Universe, to God’s existence. The word is from the Greek words kosmos, meaning “world”, and logos, meaning “knowledge” or “science”. As the late apologist Norm Geisler explained, cosmological arguments come in two varieties: vertical cosmological arguments, which reason back from the beginning of the Universe to God’s existence, and horizontal cosmological arguments, which reason from the Universe as it now exists to God’s existence. [1] This article is only meant as a brief introduction, but I will include one of each kind of argument in this article.

Like the Moral Argument, the Teleological Argument, and the Ontological Argument, there are many formulations of the Cosmological Argument. William Lane Craig is probably the most well-known apologist associated with this approach, as well as one of the best known defenders of Christianity, at least among philosophers. The vertical version of the argument I’ll summarise here is the Kalam Cosmological Argument, which Craig defends but was first formulated by a Muslim philosopher. The horizontal version I’ll expound  was originally formulated by ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, but was defended and updated by medieval Christian philosopher Thomas Aquinas, and is defended by many modern philosophers such… (Register to read the rest of the article)