No.379
The Trimūrti is a concept in Hinduism "in which the cosmic functions of creation, maintenance, and destruction are personified by the forms of Brahma the creator, Vishnu the maintainer or preserver and Shiva the destroyer or transformer."[1][2] These three gods have been called "the Hindu triad"[3] or the "Great Trinity." They are different forms of the One person called the Supreme Being or Svayam Bhagavan/Lord Krishna/Parabrahman.
I. Brahma argument courtesy of KCA
1 Everything that has a beginning of its existence, has a cause (creator) of its existence.
2 The universe has a creation of its existence (Big Bang)
3 Therefore, the universe has a creator(Brahma)
II. Shiva argument
1 Everything that has an ending of its existence, has a cause (destroyer) of its existence.
2 The universe has an ending of its existence (heat death)
3 Therefore, the universe has a destroyer (Shiva)
III. Vishnu argument (my own but I've read an article by feser a while ago defending the principle of divine conservation. So this argument shouldn't be controversial among the classical theist camp)
1. Everything that presently exists, has a sustaining cause (maintainer) of its existence.
2. The universe presently exists.
3. Therefore the universe has a maintainer(Vishnu)
1. If arguments 1-3 are valid, the Hindu triumvirate exists.
2. Arguments 1-3 are valid.
3. Conclusion, the Hindu triumvirate exists
No.380
First thing: The Trimurti never took off as a widely accepted belief. It was a failed attempt at creating unity in the different factions of Hinduism. Most people ended up opting for believing that if more than one god was real, all gods other than their main god were mere lower manifestations of the main god.
Also, lol at using an image of the buddha.
Second, interesting parallel of Aquinas' cosmological arguments, but these are weaker (and Aquinas’ own arguments are already weak imo).
All your arguments are valid, however you fail to make a convincing argument that they cogent, let alone sound.
Your arguments are weak in that you have already assumed the type of cause, a creator, and your conclusion directly leaps to said creator being a specific deity of your choice, no argument as to why is given. You do this in every one of your arguments.
Good try for a basic attempt at theology, but these arguments need a lot more work. Pretty much all your arguments can be restated to conclude Brahman, except the case for Brahman is immensely stronger in my opinion.