The Kalam and other cosmological arguments do not prove the existence of God. They are philosophical arguments illustrating that it is not irrational to believe in the existence of a god. The philosophers that work on these things will be the first to say that they do not prove the existence of God.
You keep demanding proof. You know all the common logical arguments: cosmological, fine tuning, contingency, teleological, moral absolutes, mathematics, etc. If you add in bio-genesis, complexity of life, gaps in the fossil record, and human consciousness, you get a cumulative case that makes it entirely rational to believe in a god.
Now, some of you ask what god? Christians will say that the case for the God of the OT and his incarnation in the person of Jesus and the body of theology that goes along with that is convincing.
You say that if God existed, it would be a simple thing for him to show himself. Well, he has. The OT is full of exactly that. It culminated in God incarnate in the NT where a body of theology is presented that allows for a personal relationship with God. This personal relationship has been experienced by billions. Your demand for a personal physical miracle isn't coming, because a spiritual one is available for the asking.
I know what's coming. You will say that the OT is nonsense, that Jesus never existed, where is the proof that the Jews were in Egypt, the NT is some genius plan to pull people into an insidious system of what...peace, love, character, self-sacrifice. You will make arguments about God allowing moral and natural evil is proof there is no God. You will claim that the OT God is harsh.
The body of proof you desire does not meet your standards because of your naturalistic worldview and scientism. Reality consistent of more than you can test in a lab. There have been a million books written on Christianity alone. Do you think that people haven't asked the questions or raised the objections that you bring up? Yet, Christianity continues to grow. Why do you think that is?
You keep demanding proof. You know all the common logical arguments: cosmological, fine tuning, contingency, teleological, moral absolutes, mathematics, etc. If you add in bio-genesis, complexity of life, gaps in the fossil record, and human consciousness, you get a cumulative case that makes it entirely rational to believe in a god.
Now, some of you ask what god? Christians will say that the case for the God of the OT and his incarnation in the person of Jesus and the body of theology that goes along with that is convincing.
You say that if God existed, it would be a simple thing for him to show himself. Well, he has. The OT is full of exactly that. It culminated in God incarnate in the NT where a body of theology is presented that allows for a personal relationship with God. This personal relationship has been experienced by billions. Your demand for a personal physical miracle isn't coming, because a spiritual one is available for the asking.
I know what's coming. You will say that the OT is nonsense, that Jesus never existed, where is the proof that the Jews were in Egypt, the NT is some genius plan to pull people into an insidious system of what...peace, love, character, self-sacrifice. You will make arguments about God allowing moral and natural evil is proof there is no God. You will claim that the OT God is harsh.
The body of proof you desire does not meet your standards because of your naturalistic worldview and scientism. Reality consistent of more than you can test in a lab. There have been a million books written on Christianity alone. Do you think that people haven't asked the questions or raised the objections that you bring up? Yet, Christianity continues to grow. Why do you think that is?
