An Analytical Study of Logical Validity and Authenticity of the Cumulative Argument in Proving Religious Beliefs

Religious beliefs must be based on knowledge that is logically obtained in a valid way and that also attains certainty in terms of the degree of knowledge. The logical validity and authenticity of the knowledge derived from the accumulative argument, which is being increasingly used in ideological discussions in this period, has not been carefully studied so far, and those who use this argument have assumed its validity and authority. Also, so far, no criteria have been proposed for the expression of a valid and conclusive cumulative argument. Using the analytical method and based on traditional logic, in this research we will first present a description of this argument as a logical conclusive syllogism, and then by determining three conditions, we will prove the premise of syllogism and will show that this argument can result in the minimum knowledge necessary for the benefit of authenticity in religious beliefs i.e. psychological certainty.