(March 18, 2015 at 1:09 pm)Esquilax Wrote:(March 18, 2015 at 11:28 am)GriffinHunter Wrote: How do you guys refute the "Kalaam" argument? (some kind of supernatural, transcendent force or "god" must exist because of the necessity for a First Cause which is beyond matter, space, and time)
The problem with Kalam, the really big, fatal structural flaw with it, is that it doesn't conclude with the answer that the claimant is trying to defend. It literally doesn't answer the question it is posed as an answer to.
Yeah, is there a way I can set up an automatic "Kudos" for all Esq's deconstructing apologetics responses? Can we make that happen mods? I think that needs to happen.
(March 18, 2015 at 1:48 pm)robvalue Wrote: As far as rationalizations go, I think the Kalam is one of the very worst. Flawed premises, special pleading and an irrelevant conclusion.
If anyone was ever converted to any kind of theism on the strength of the Kalam, I'd be extremely surprised.
To be fair, the purpose of apologetics doesn't seem to be to convert people, it's to make people who question the bullshit they believe stop questioning the bullshit because, oo hey! An answer!!
Even WLC admits he wasn't converted through the use of apologetics.
You've gotten a lot of more qualified offers for PMs so unless you have some burning desire to PM me I'll hang out in your thread and see if there's anything of substance I can contribute.
In the mean time, take a cruise around IronChariots.org and see if that site helps to answer some of the questions about the apologetics issues you might have.
Here's a link specifically to the KCA page:
http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?t...l_Argument
Teenaged X-Files obsession + Bermuda Triangle episode + Self-led school research project = Atheist.
