Kalam Cosmological Nonsense

[median]

The Kalam relies upon the fallacious assumption that there must be some "divine mind behind" the current state of our local universe. Did the universe have a beginning? Even if one agrees that it did, it is of no effect or assistance to the assertion that a disembodied mind (whatever that might mean) is the ultimate cause of our current phenomenal space/time continuance (or that our universe could not have derived from another universe). The apologist wants us to think about "possibilities" (as if entertaining what might be merely possible makes anything more likely or probable...but it doesn't). Mere possibilities have no bearing on whether or not something is actually true. At best, it is an argument from ignorance. "In my mind, it's just impossible that our universe came about any other way. Therefore it must have been the God I already assumed."

Just because something begins to exist doesn't mean (in any way) that such a thing began to exist ex-nihilo - for one because no one has ever had an experience with "ex-nihilo" and in no way could show that nothing could come out of it, and two because all of our experiences of things "coming to exist" derive from already existent physical things being rearranged (as the second law displays that matter can neither be created nor destroyed). Thus, KCA is a miserable failure of an argument for God.