(January 6, 2024 at 4:23 am)JJoseph Wrote: Hi all. I'm curious if any of you can refute the Kalam cosmological argument for God's existence
Step 1: Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
E.g. Houses, Trees, Planets etc begin to exist and have a cause. So does the Universe, which brings us to Step 2.
Step 2: The Universe began to exist.
This step is also proven by mathematical logic, has empirical confirmation in the Big Bang Theory etc.
Step 3: Therefore, the Universe has a cause.
The conclusion logically follows from the preceding premises. Dr. Craig occasionally goes for a further step.
Step 4: Therefore, an Eternal Creator of the Universe exists, that brought the Universe into existence from nothing.
This sounds very much like the traditional Creator God of classical Judeo-Christian Revelation? Any thoughts on the subject?
Regards,
Joseph.
It is not obvious that premises 1 and 2 true are correct, therefore conclusions 3 and 4 are invalid.
Next boring, tired argument, please.
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson