The Argument from Contingency - Refuted

These are the standard objections to argument #7 on the list provided here...

http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm

The argument is presented as follows:

1 If something exists, there must exist what it takes for that thing to exist.
2 The universe—the collection of beings in space and time—exists.
3 Therefore, there must exist what it takes for the universe to exist.
4 What it takes for the universe to exist cannot exist within the universe or be bounded by space and time.
5 Therefore, what it takes for the universe to exist must transcend both space and time.

The argument is easily shown to be fallacious by replacing "universe" with something else...

1. If something exists, there must exist what it takes for that thing to exist. 
2. God exists 
3. Therefore, there must exist what it takes for God to exist. 
4. What it takes for God to exist cannot exist within God or be bounded by God. 
5. Therefore, what it takes for God to exist must transcend God.

If it is argued that it is not logical for God to be included in this way, then what the argument is really saying is this... 

1.0 If something exists, there must exist what it takes for that thing to exist.
1.1 Except for God.

This is the fallacious argument of Special Pleading