The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument

In Part 12 of this Introduction to Apologetics we consider a version of the cosmological argument for God as formulated and influenced by G. W. Leibniz.

TIMESTAMPS
0:00 The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument
1:37 Sketch of the Leibniz's Argument
4:00 A Contemporary Version of the Argument
5:02 Defense of the First Premise and the Principle of Sufficient Reason
12:20 Contingent Beings vs. Necessary Being
14:07 Defense of the Second Premise
17:48 Objection One: Why can't Everything Be Contingent?
21:34 Objection Two: Why can't the Universe Itself Be Necessary?
25:39 Conclusion

[intelligentdesign]

Leibniz's argument can be illustrated in another way:

"Consider an illustration. Suppose that the series of contingent beings were merely a series of self-propagating robots, each one bringing the next into existence. No matter how far back in time you go,
there was just one of these robots functioning. Each robot functions
for, say, ten years, then, in the last few minutes of functioning, propagates a new robot. (Just as the new robot starts to function, the old
one ceases to function and disintegrates.) Now, in this scheme, we
have a cause for the existence and functioning of each of the robots.
But we have not identified a cause of the robot series as a whole. For
example, what causes (or caused) the series to be one of robots rather
than one of rocks, roses, rats, or reindeer? What is the cause of there
being any robots at all? That question has not been answered.
In the same way, even if we know that each contingent being is
caused to exist by some other contingent being, we still do not have
an explanation for the fact that there are contingent beings. There
might have been nothing at all or only necessary beings.
"
(Stephen Layman "Letters To Doubting Thomas")

[legendsplayground]

may i ask what about atoms or quarks that are fundamental blocks of everything? Are they contingent? It seems like we can't
explain these things with external cause.

[kravitzn]

All you would need for the PSR to be false is one inexplicable thing. I think it's impossible to give a meaningful explanation for why what exists exists as it does. That is a brute fact. Adding God doesn't fully solve this inasmuch as why is God such as to want to make precisely this and not something else or not create at all. "God" is a nice equivocation between YHWH the Y-donor of Jesus and the big unexplained (self-explaining?) explanans in the sky.

[kravitzn]

A simpler version: God is a necessary being, therefore God exists. A fortiori. Who needs the universe for the argument when you can just say God is a necessary being?