The cosmological argument can thus be shown to be logically invalid.
It is impossible to keep the tiological argument entirely separate either from the ontological or cosmological argument.
But the first stage of the cosmological argument, that by which it is distinguished from the ontological, is itself fallacious.
Only the transcendental freedom of the cosmological argument can be reckoned as among the open possibilities.
Upon this perfectly natural—but not on that account reliable—inference does the cosmological argument rest.
In common with the vast majority of mankind, we hold that the cosmological argument is complete in itself.
The cosmological argument contends that if anything exists, there must also exist an absolutely necessary being.
an argument for the existence of God because nature depends on something for its existence and the cosmos must therefore depend on a being for its existence