Skip to content

Course 26 · Lesson 4.2

Exercises: cosmological, moral, evil and hiddenness arguments

9 minute read

Lessons in this course

Course 26 outline

Module 1: Comprehensive Biblical Knowledge Examination

  1. Preparing: a review plan for the whole Bible
  2. The examination: books, story, genres and key passages
  3. Sample questions and what a good answer contains
  4. Evaluating your answers and planning review

Module 2: Historical Theology Examination

  1. Preparing: a timeline, key figures and key councils
  2. The examination: periods, controversies and primary texts
  3. Sample questions and what a good answer contains
  4. Evaluating your answers and planning review

Module 3: Systematic Theology Examination

  1. Preparing: an outline of the doctrines
  2. The examination: God, Christ, humanity, salvation, church and last things
  3. Sample questions and what a good answer contains
  4. Evaluating your answers, especially on fairness across traditions

Module 4: Philosophical Argument Evaluation and Historical Apologetics Assessment

  1. Evaluating a philosophical argument: premises, validity and objections
  2. Exercises: cosmological, moral, evil and hiddenness arguments
  3. Assessing historical evidence: sources, dating, witnesses and bias
  4. Exercises: the resurrection, the reliability of the New Testament and the canon

Module 5: Written Defense of Three Christian Propositions

  1. Choosing three propositions and defining the terms
  2. Building the case: arguments, evidence and sources
  3. Stating and answering the strongest objections
  4. Evaluating your defenses against the criteria

Module 6: Statement of Faith and Rule of Life

  1. Writing a personal statement of faith
  2. Relating the statement to the creeds and the traditions
  3. Writing a personal Christian rule of life
  4. Making the rule concrete and reviewable

Module 7: Reflection on Theological Development

  1. Mapping your development: beliefs held at the start and now
  2. Changes of mind: what changed and what caused the change
  3. Writing the reflection

Module 8: Strengths, Uncertainties and Continued Study

  1. Scoring the results of the components
  2. Naming your uncertainties without shame or evasion
  3. A plan for continued study, with dates for review

All courses

Program / Course 26: Comprehensive Assessment / Lesson 4.2

What you will learn

  • Set out a cosmological, a moral, an evil and a hiddenness argument in standard form.
  • Name the main objection to each and the main reply.
  • Choose two arguments for and two against a Christian claim for your own examination.
  • Write each evaluation fairly, as defenders and critics would recognize.

The big idea

Four arguments suit the exercise well. The cosmological argument and the moral argument are offered for belief in God. The argument from evil and the argument from divine hiddenness are offered against it. For each, the student sets out the premises, finds the weakest one, and states the best objection and reply. The plan asks for four arguments in all, two for and two against. The work is private, self-marked and uncertified, and the suggested standard is 80 percent on your own rating against the criteria.

Key terms

Cosmological argument
An argument from the existence or the beginning of the universe to a first cause or a necessary being.
Moral argument
An argument from the existence of objective moral values or duties to God as their best explanation.
Problem of evil
The argument that the existence and extent of evil and suffering count against, or are inconsistent with, a God who is all good and all powerful.
Theodicy
An attempt to explain why God allows evil. A defense is a more modest claim that evil is not shown to be inconsistent with God.
Divine hiddenness
The argument that if a loving God existed, nonbelief of the sincere kind would not occur, and it does, so God does not exist.
Contingent
Something that exists but might not have. A necessary being is one that could not fail to exist.

Background

These exercises are modeled on the assessment plan, which asks for four arguments: two for Christian claims and two against. The student may choose others, but these four are well documented in the library, and the Stanford Encyclopedia entries on each give fair maps of the debate. None of them is a proof in the sense of mathematics. Philosophers on both sides differ on how much each argument shows.

The cosmological argument has several versions. Aquinas’s second way argues from causes in an ordered series to a first cause. Leibniz’s version argues from the contingency of things to a necessary being as the sufficient reason. The kalam version argues that the universe began to exist and so has a cause. Critics reply that the premises are disputed, that the physics of the beginning of the universe is uncertain, and that the argument does not establish the God of Christianity.

The moral argument holds that if objective moral values exist, God is the best explanation. Critics reply that moral values may rest on human nature, on reason or on a necessary moral order without God. The argument from evil, in its logical form, claims an inconsistency, which Plantinga’s free will defense widely answered. The evidential form claims that the amount and kind of evil make God’s existence improbable, and this remains debated. The hiddenness argument claims that reasonable nonbelief is evidence against God. Replies include that God’s purposes may need freedom, that knowledge of God involves more than belief, and that the claim about nonbelief is disputable.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: Write a cosmological argument

Choose Leibniz or the kalam form. Write premises and conclusion. Find the weakest premise: for the kalam form, perhaps the claim that the universe began to exist, or that everything that begins has a cause in the relevant sense. State the strongest objection and the reply.

Step 2: Write a moral argument

Set out: if God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist; objective moral values do exist; therefore God exists. Examine the first premise. Ask what the defender means by objective, and what a nonreligious moral realist would say.

Step 3: Write the argument from evil

Use the evidential form: the amount and kind of evil in the world is more likely if there is no God than if there is. Test it. Ask what the defenses say, such as free will, the value of soul-making, and the limits of human understanding. Ask what a critic says about those replies, such as the suffering of animals or of children.

Step 4: Write the argument from hiddenness

Set out: a loving God would make himself available to all who are open to him; some people are sincerely open and do not believe; therefore no such God exists. Test the second premise and the definition of availability. Note the replies in the Christian tradition about relationship and freedom.

Step 5: Rate your four evaluations

Rate each against the criteria: accurate statement, validity checked, weakest premise named, best objection and reply given, fair tone. Give a score from zero to five on each and total. The suggested standard of 80 percent is a personal option.

  1. Which of the four arguments do I find most persuasive, and is that bias showing in my evaluation?
  2. Did I give the best objection to the argument I favor?
  3. Did I give the best reply to the argument I resist?
  4. Does the argument aim at the God of Christianity or at a more general conclusion?
  5. Which premise depends on science, and could science change it?
  6. Would a defender and a critic both accept my account?

Examples

A weak premise in the kalam form

The premise that the universe began to exist is supported by many cosmologists by reference to the Big Bang, but others point out that the Big Bang may be a beginning of the observable universe only. A student should say what the evidence supports and what is uncertain. (A summary.)

A reply on evil

Plantinga’s free will defense argues that it is possible that God could not create free creatures who always choose rightly, so that the existence of evil is not logically inconsistent with God. Critics reply that this does not address the amount of evil. (A summary of a well known argument.)

A reply on hiddenness

A Christian reply holds that knowledge of God is relational and that God may not coerce a response. A critic replies that this does not explain why some who seek God find nothing. (A summary of the debate.)

Different perspectives

Catholic

Catholic philosophers such as those in the Thomist tradition defend cosmological arguments and natural law, and treat evil as privation, a lack of good. They also affirm that God’s ways exceed human understanding.

Orthodox

Orthodox writers often stress that evil is not a thing made by God, that death is an enemy, and that the answer to suffering is found in the cross and resurrection and not in a philosophical theory.

Protestant

Protestant philosophers such as Plantinga, Swinburne and Craig have developed defenses and arguments for God. Others, such as Calvin’s heirs, hold that the knowledge of God is given and need not rest on argument.

Secular and skeptical

Philosophers such as Mackie and Rowe have pressed arguments from evil, and Schellenberg has developed the argument from hiddenness. Others, from a secular standpoint, regard the moral and cosmological arguments as unpersuasive but as worthy of serious reply.

Why it matters

These four arguments touch the main questions: why anything exists, why moral claims bind, why suffering occurs, and why God seems at times silent. Working through them fairly shows how much depends on premises that reasonable people weigh differently.

Common misunderstandings

Misunderstanding: The argument from evil has been refuted.

Correction: The logical form is widely held to have been answered, but the evidential form remains debated.

Misunderstanding: The cosmological argument proves the Christian God.

Correction: At most it argues for a first cause or a necessary being. Further steps are needed to reach the God of the Bible, and those rest on other grounds.

Misunderstanding: Belief in God can only be justified by argument.

Correction: Some traditions deny this. Others use arguments as one support among several. A student should state both positions.

Knowledge check

Name two arguments for and two against, as used in this module.

For: the cosmological argument and the moral argument. Against: the argument from evil and the argument from divine hiddenness. Each is set out in standard form, with its weakest premise, its best objection and the best reply.

What is the difference between a defense and a theodicy?

A theodicy claims to explain why God allows evil. A defense claims only that it is possible that God has a good reason, enough to show that evil is not inconsistent with God. A defense is a more modest claim and so easier to maintain.

What does the cosmological argument leave open even if it succeeds?

It leaves open whether the first cause is personal, good or the God of the Bible. Further arguments or revelation would be needed. A fair evaluation says what the argument would establish and what it would not.

How is the work rated?

By the student, on a short list of criteria such as accurate statement, validity checked, weakest premise named, best objection and reply, and fair tone. The suggested standard of 80 percent is a personal option. Nothing is submitted or graded by the site.

Think it through

  1. Which argument against Christianity do you find most serious, and why?
  2. Is there an argument for Christianity that you think is weaker than its defenders do?
  3. How does the experience of suffering shape what you find persuasive?
  4. What kind of evidence could change your mind?

Independent assignment

Four evaluations

In your own notebook, write four half page evaluations of about 200 words each: two for and two against Christian claims, chosen from the four types in this lesson or others of your own. Set each out in standard form. Rate each against the criteria and total your score. Do not send this to anyone or post it anywhere.

Further study