The Kalam Cosmological argument.

[Astreja]

Even if the Kalam were a sound deductive argument - which it isn't, because premise #1 is not verifiable and therefore cannot be said to be true - the most it could say is that at least one "causeless cause" exists. There is nothing inherent in the argument that supports the concept of a sentient cause, let alone a "divine" one.

[Nay_Sayer]

jjoesph is on a time-out until staff can discuss him.

[Silver]

>__>

<__<

[Thumpalumpacus]

That is true. But many theorems are not immediately evident as true, e.g. Pythagoras' Theorem, but become evident once some axioms are laid down, and the proof is derived from them.

Knowing you've been banned, I'll still point out that this is an irrelevancy, because while Pythagoras not only put his theorem into formal analytical terms that could be checked against reality, your claims have no relation to reality and there's no way to check them.

[The Valkyrie]

If all things need a creator, so does your creator god.

Also, if the source of your argument is Craig, your entire premise is suspect and can be rejected.

[Simon Moon]

I know I am very late to the party, and the OP has been banned, but I will still respond.

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.

Kalam is flawed in both its validity and its soundness.

Right from the start, the argument is guilty of committing the fallacy of equivocation.

It is using the same term, "begins to exist" with 2 different definitions. And the sad thing is, the OP even perfectly describes those 2 different meanings.

In their first premis, the give examples of things beginning to exist from already existing stuff: Houses, Trees, Planets etc begin to exist from matter and energy that already exists. This is existence ex materia.

But in their next premise, they are using the term "begins to exist" for their god creating the universe from nothing, this is existence ex nihilo.

This is not the same meaning as in premise 1.

Kalam is also guilting of committing the fallacy of composition. This is assuming, that just because something is true of part of the universe, it must be true of the entire thing.

[Simon Moon]

Duplicate post.

[Pat Mustard]

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.

1) Prove that the universe "began to exist", 2) prove that your version of god is eternal.

The Kalam is self defeating because it assumes firstly that everything must have a beginning but then posits a thing which cannot have a beginning (otherwise how would there be an ultimate cause) to solve the initial problem.

[Pat Mustard]

I don't believe the universe began to exist.

Ok, then. Question to you: What existed 100 BN years ago?

a) Nothing. And if so, then everything came from nothing.
b) Nothing material, i.e. an Immaterial Spiritual Being.

Atheism is forced to hold on to a. Defenders of Kalam say b.

We know the Universe began to exist because we know its finite age.

Whereas the God of Christian Revelation has always declared Himself Eternal.

It is not obvious that premises 1 and 2 true are correct, therefore conclusions 3 and 4 are invalid.

Insufficient. It's insufficient for Atheists to claim "it's not obvious". They must show that the negation of 1 or 2 are more probably true, and then construct a logical argument of their own, if they want us to believe the Universe either did not begin to exist, or that what begins to exist pops into being uncaused.

Dr. Craig, the Athanasius of this age against the Arianism that is Atheism, has a put a lot of thought into this argument he popularized, and it stands imho.

OK, so what caused the "Eternal Creator of the Universe" to exist? and if he/it "always existed why can't the universe have always existed?

Premise 1 of Kalam is, What begins to exist has a Cause. The Converse of it is, whatever was uncaused exists eternally. Therefore, it is only creatures, that began to exist, that have a Cause. The Eternal Creator does not need to, and there is no circularity in Kalam, but the mere converse of it applies to God.

We don't know (yet) what created the universe

Well, maybe in 20 or 25 years you will know that God created it, but speed it up already; we know, God is waiting, and life is passing you by. Everyone who wants to go to Heaven must get this Question right and live accordingly so that he or she may indeed go to that Father's House with many Mansions and live eternally there happily forever and ever. Amen. In Jesus' Name.

We have no valid frame of reference for "100BN years ago". As far as the evidence we have tells us time "began" c. 14BN years ago. There is no before then that we can interrogate, because if it existed it existed outside our frame of reference, or any frame of reference we could interrogate. Your question is meaningless.

Atheism does not have to hold onto your posited a, because atheism has nothing to say about the beginning of our universe, it is simply a lack of belief in god(s).

Actually no we don't. What we do know is that the universe as it's currently constituted began to exist. The Big Bang theory posits that what makes up the vast majority of the universe (there are a few spontaneously created particles) existed as an infinitely hot and dense singularity prior to the beginning of its current nature.

PS it is very rude to quote somebody without a) using their full handle and b) stripping out the part of the quotation code which allows others to link back to the quoted post. It is also often a sign of somebody altering others' posts to lie that they said something other than they actually said.

[Pat Mustard]

Sophism and Strawman.

4000 years ago, to the amazement of a world steeped in pagan polytheism, idolatry, infanticide and child sacrifice, the Lord God Jehovah informed His beloved Patriarch Abraham, that there was Only One Almighty Eternal and Supreme God. Mankind had known this Truth at first, but then fallen into grave error on the subject, misled by false teachers who did not love humanity, or indeed ignorant souls who did not know the way back to God.

Therefore, the Lord Himself had to intervene, and intervene He did, by telling humanity the Truth there was One God Almighty, while others thought there were many gods. Today, after the time of Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas, with Dr. Craig and others developing Arguments that show there is One Supreme Creator God of the Whole Universe, we know only the Monotheistic Religions can be right: basically, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Further arguments, like the Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, can eliminate both Judaism and Islam, and show Jesus Christ is the Truth.

Time is running out and the clock is ticking. What if, God forbid, death overtakes one of you? Then, for all eternity, it will be too late to reverse your decision. Recognize the Precious and Priceless Grace God has given you, and is giving you Hour and Hour every day, that you decide for Him and be saved.

Amazing then that 2,800 years ago that the people who became the jews were still polytheists. You can still read the remnants of their polytheism in the bible, especially the older passages of genesis where it explicitly talks about the gods (yes gods plural) creating the world together.