Philosophical arguments for the existence of God, particularly the Kalam Cosmological and Teleological arguments, demonstrate through rigorous logical reasoning and empirical evidence that the universe's beginning and its exquisite fine-tuning point unmistakably to an intelligent, transcendent Creator.
The Kalam Cosmological Argument
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is a classical and rational proof for the existence of God, with deep roots in early Islamic philosophy. It was most clearly formulated by Imam al-Ghazali, who challenged the philosophers of his time who believed the universe was eternal. In his Tahafut al-Falasifah (The Incoherence of the Philosophers), al-Ghazali wrote:
“The philosophers maintain that the world is eternal. But this is false, for everything that begins to exist must have a cause that brings it into being. The world did not exist, and then it did — therefore, it has a cause.” (1)
Al-Ghazali argued that the past cannot be infinite, because an infinite number of moments could never be traversed to reach the present and thus concluded that the universe had a beginning and was brought into existence by a transcendent Creator. He reasoned, “The denial of a beginning for the universe leads to absurdities: for if the series of past events were infinite, the present could never have been reached.”
The argument is commonly expressed in a simple syllogism:
- Whatever begins to exist has a cause
- The universe began to exist
- Therefore, the universe has a cause
In modern times, this argument was revived by Dr. William Lane Craig, who described it as simple yet profound. He writes:
“Whatever begins to exist has a cause; the universe began to exist; therefore, the universe has a cause. From this it follows necessarily that the universe has a transcendent cause beyond space and time.” (2)
Craig further notes:
“The argument is compelling because it rests on two premises that are intuitively obvious and empirically supported by contemporary cosmology.” (3)
A Finite Universe: The Scientific Corroboration
Modern scientific discoveries have provided striking evidence for the Kalam’s central claim that the universe began to exist. As physicists Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose concluded:
“Almost everyone now believes that the universe, and time itself, had a beginning at the Big Bang.” (4)
Similarly, cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University - one of the world’s leading authorities on the origins of the universe - writes:
“It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men, and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe; there is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.” (5)
The strength of the Kalam Cosmological Argument lies in its clear logical structure, philosophical coherence, and empirical support to affirm a simple yet powerful truth: the universe had a beginning, and whatever begins to exist must have a cause. That cause must be timeless, immaterial, and immensely powerful - transcending space and time itself. In other words, the very existence of the universe points inevitably to the existence of God, the eternal Creator and First Cause of all that exists.
Teleological Argument
Having established that the universe must have a cause, we now turn to the question of whether that cause exhibits intention and design. The Teleological Argument, or the Argument from Design, demonstrates that the remarkable order, precision, and purpose observed in the universe point unmistakably to the existence of God. The term teleology comes from the Greek telos, meaning “end” or “purpose,” reflecting the view that nature is directed toward purposeful ends rather than just as the result of blind chance. God tells us in the Qur’an:
These verses expresses what philosophers have long recognised, that the world exhibits such exquisite order that its origin cannot rationally be attributed to mere coincidence.
The English philosopher, William Paley, famously illustrated the argument for design in his Natural Theology. He wrote: Suppose I found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place. The inference, we think, is inevitable, that the watch must have had a maker. (8)
Paley argued that just as the intricate mechanisms of a watch imply a watchmaker, so too the complex structures of the universe, from the motion of the planets to the biological systems of life, all require a designer. “Every manifestation of design,” he wrote, “exists not only in human contrivances, but in the natural world on a scale of grandeur which humbles the imagination.” If a smartphone implies a designer, how much more so the cosmos itself?
Umar al-Ashqar illustrates this point further: A few years ago, the sands in the Rub’ al-Khaali desert (the Empty Quarter) were blown away by a windstorm to reveal the ruins of a city that had been covered by the sands. Scientists began to examine the contents of the city to try to determine the period in which it had been built. Nobody among the archaeologists or others even suggested that this city could have appeared as a result of the natural actions of the wind, rain, heat and cold, and not by the actions of man. If anyone had suggested such a thing, people would have regarded him crazy and would have taken pity on him. So how about if someone had said that this city was formed by the air from nothing in the far distant past, then it settled on the earth? This suggestion is no less strange than the previous, in fact it is far stranger. Why? Because nothing cannot create something, which is simply the matter of common sense, and a thing cannot create itself. According to the way we know the city, there has to be someone who brought it into existence. What we see tells us something about the people who made it. The city must have been made by intelligent people who were skilled in construction and planning. If we see a person going from the bottom of a building to the top, we see nothing strange in that, because a person has the ability to do that. But if we see that a rock which was in the courtyard of the building has moved to the top of the building, we will be certain that it did not move by itself. There has to have been someone who picked it up and moved it, because a rock does not have the ability to move or climb. It is strange that people are certain that the city could not have come into existence without a creator, and that it could not have built itself, and they are certain that the rock must have had someone who would take it up to the top of the building, but there are those among them who insist that this universe came into being without a creator, even though the structure of the universe is far more complex. (9)
In essence, the argument is simple yet profound:
- Wherever there is design, there must be a designer
- The universe exhibits order and design
- Therefore, the universe must have a designer
Scientists have discovered that the fundamental constants of nature are all finely balanced and tuned with astonishing precision. Even the smallest deviation in any of these constants would render the universe incapable of supporting life (refer to Chapter: Scientific Evidence). Cosmologist Martin Rees, in Just Six Numbers, noted that six fundamental constants determine the structure of the universe, and even the slightest change in any one of them would make life impossible: “These six numbers constitute a recipe for a universe. If any one of them were different, even to a small degree, there would be no stars, no complex chemistry, no life, and no people.” (10)
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi reflecting on the verse 51:20–21 (“And on the earth are signs for those who are certain, and within yourselves. Do you not see?”), wrote: “The harmony of the universe is so wondrous that it indicates the knowledge and will of a Wise Creator. The one who ponders this order will find that every particle bears witness to His oneness.” (11)
The strength of the Teleological Argument lies in its universality - it appeals not only to philosophers but to every human being who looks upon the stars, the oceans, or the intricacy of a single cell and senses that such order cannot arise without intent. As Isaac Newton wrote:
“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an Intelligent and powerful Being.” (12)
(Taken from the book: ‘God: There is No Doubt!’)
(1) Al-Ghazali, The Incoherence of the Philosophers, trans. Michael E. Marmura. Brigham Young University Press.
(2) William Lane Craig, The Kalam Cosmological Argument, Macmillan, p. 63.
(3) William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith, Crossway.
(4) Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose, The Nature of Space and Time, Princeton University Press, p. 20.
(5) Alexander Vilenken, Many Worlds in One: The Search for Other Universes.
(6) Surah al-Mu’minun 23:115.
(7) Surah ale-Imran 3:190.
(8) William Paley, Natural Theology, Ch. 1.
(9) Umar al-Ashqar, Belief in Allah.
(10) Martin J. Rees, Just Six Numbers: The Deep Forces That Shape the Universe. Basic Books, p. 4.
(11) Ar-Razi, Al-Tafsir al-Kabir, vol. 27, p. 143.
(12) Isaac Newton, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica.
Leave a Review