Here's another I posted on reasonablefaith.org. Again, I doubt it will be approved. What do you all think?
I have several objections to the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA). Perhaps I will post the others later. The most damning and obvious is that the KCA does not in any way advance Christian theology (much less Catholic), or any theology for that matter. It certainly advances Deism, or at least scientific Deism.. Specifically, WLC claim that the resultant cause is 'enormously powerful' is direct admission that the cause is finite. But the Christian God is infinitely powerful, not "enormously" or "immensely" powerful. WLC qualifies the term. Heck, I'm "immensely powerful" compared to an ant. A whisper is can start an avalanche. A butterfly (according to chaos theory) could start a hurricane. Are they "immensely powerful"? Further, the aspects WLC applies to the 'cause' are relative ONLY to this universe. I can go on and on, but I'll give this basic analogy: But the point is that WLC himself admits that the KCA doesn't in the slightest advance Christian theology. The argument is over right there. Consider:
Last night, I had a DREAM that I was at a WLC seminar where he proposed the KCA. When I awoke, I realized that EVERYTHING he claimed about the cause applied to me. My dream had a beginning and I was the cause. But I am not spaceless, or timeless. Perhaps in the context of my dream (THAT universe) I was, but I am clearly not in reality. And of course, I am not "immensely powerful". You could of course say that I have only 'kicked the can down the road', eventually I must end with a 'spaceless/timeless' cause. But that is why the KCA advances SCIENTIFIC DEISM - even if I concede that point (which I do not), there are MANY more reasonable interpretations. For example, why can't the laws of quantum mechanics and a multiverse fabric of reality (universes being created all the 'time', just like Hawking radiation) be 'timeless'? Why can't mathematics (the efficient cause) be timeless? If you want to say 'math' and 'God' are equivalent? Go for it. But myself? I will not be worshiping the number line. And of course, in such an interpretation. the 'cause' is not personal. In fact, how is a timeless cause "personal" at all? It is an oxymoron. A personal being must be able to make a decision (let's create a universe today), right? But how can a 'timeless' being make a decision? To make a decision you must be a different state BEFORE and AFTER the decision.
I could go on and on. But I will conclude with the following. WLC himself admits the above is correct in a recent video (top ten bad objections to the KCA (a very despicable and disingenuous title - imagine if I made a similar video - top ten 'bad' beliefs about Catholicism - #1, human sacrifice #2 Drink blood, and so on and so on.). In that video, his response to the above is "SO WHAT! I never claimed the KCA advances Christian theology." Well, then, my response is "THEN WHY???" If all you have done is push SCIENTIFIC reasoning to the point that perhaps there is a multiverse or some other fabric of reality beyond what we can observe, and there is some set of efficient causes that perhaps exists outside our universe's context - fantastic - I'm all for it. But you do NOT need to appeal to any theological interpretation whatsoever. In the end, it's STILL science.
I have several objections to the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA). Perhaps I will post the others later. The most damning and obvious is that the KCA does not in any way advance Christian theology (much less Catholic), or any theology for that matter. It certainly advances Deism, or at least scientific Deism.. Specifically, WLC claim that the resultant cause is 'enormously powerful' is direct admission that the cause is finite. But the Christian God is infinitely powerful, not "enormously" or "immensely" powerful. WLC qualifies the term. Heck, I'm "immensely powerful" compared to an ant. A whisper is can start an avalanche. A butterfly (according to chaos theory) could start a hurricane. Are they "immensely powerful"? Further, the aspects WLC applies to the 'cause' are relative ONLY to this universe. I can go on and on, but I'll give this basic analogy: But the point is that WLC himself admits that the KCA doesn't in the slightest advance Christian theology. The argument is over right there. Consider:
Last night, I had a DREAM that I was at a WLC seminar where he proposed the KCA. When I awoke, I realized that EVERYTHING he claimed about the cause applied to me. My dream had a beginning and I was the cause. But I am not spaceless, or timeless. Perhaps in the context of my dream (THAT universe) I was, but I am clearly not in reality. And of course, I am not "immensely powerful". You could of course say that I have only 'kicked the can down the road', eventually I must end with a 'spaceless/timeless' cause. But that is why the KCA advances SCIENTIFIC DEISM - even if I concede that point (which I do not), there are MANY more reasonable interpretations. For example, why can't the laws of quantum mechanics and a multiverse fabric of reality (universes being created all the 'time', just like Hawking radiation) be 'timeless'? Why can't mathematics (the efficient cause) be timeless? If you want to say 'math' and 'God' are equivalent? Go for it. But myself? I will not be worshiping the number line. And of course, in such an interpretation. the 'cause' is not personal. In fact, how is a timeless cause "personal" at all? It is an oxymoron. A personal being must be able to make a decision (let's create a universe today), right? But how can a 'timeless' being make a decision? To make a decision you must be a different state BEFORE and AFTER the decision.
I could go on and on. But I will conclude with the following. WLC himself admits the above is correct in a recent video (top ten bad objections to the KCA (a very despicable and disingenuous title - imagine if I made a similar video - top ten 'bad' beliefs about Catholicism - #1, human sacrifice #2 Drink blood, and so on and so on.). In that video, his response to the above is "SO WHAT! I never claimed the KCA advances Christian theology." Well, then, my response is "THEN WHY???" If all you have done is push SCIENTIFIC reasoning to the point that perhaps there is a multiverse or some other fabric of reality beyond what we can observe, and there is some set of efficient causes that perhaps exists outside our universe's context - fantastic - I'm all for it. But you do NOT need to appeal to any theological interpretation whatsoever. In the end, it's STILL science.
