The Kalam Cosmological argument.

[Nay_Sayer]

Hi op. I'm curious if you can refute the Pastalogical argument for FSM'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.

Step 4: Therefore, an Eternal Creator of the Universe exists, that brought the Universe into existence from nothing.

This sounds very much like FSM. Any thoughts on the subject?

Regards,
Nay Sayer