Does God Exist? The Kalam Cosmological Argument

Does God exist? Some say that we can discard belief in God and the supernatural due to our ever expanding scientific knowledge. It is almost taken for granted that science and religion are at odds. What if I told you that the more we learn about the universe, the stronger the case for God becomes?

Scientists used to believe that the universe was past-eternal, not having a beginning. The universe just always was, a brute fact. But with the discovery of the Big Bang, we now know they were wrong. The universe indeed had a beginning some 14 billion years ago.

As with most scientific discoveries, there was a lot of push back on the idea of a universe that began. After all, dogmatism runs deep in the scientific community. It wasn’t hard to see that this discovery lent its hand to theism. A universe that began? That sounds oddly familiar.

It should sound familiar. And it should be obvious how this discovery points to a Creator. But in case it doesn’t, here is the Kalam Cosmological Argument as made famous by William Lane Craig.

  1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
  2. The universe began to exist.
  3. The universe has a cause.
  4. The cause of the universe must be timeless, spaceless, and immaterial.
  5. This we call God.

Thing’s don’t just pop into existence, and no thing is the cause of its own existence. Some physicists have tried to say that things do pop into existence from nothing, but what they really mean by nothing is a quantum vacuum, which of course isn’t nothing. And a thing can’t cause itself to exist because in order to cause itself, it would have to already exist, and if it already exists it doesn’t need to be caused. So, everything that begins to exist has a cause.

The fact that the universe began to exist is attested to by Big Bang cosmology. The universe is expanding. We can “rewind” this expansion back to a single defining moment where the universe exploded into existence. This expansion is said to have happened about 14 billion years ago.

As long as the first two premises are true, the conclusion (3) logically follows. It can’t be avoided without denying either (1) or (2). Most atheists opt for (2) and try to say that the universe didn’t actually begin because we can’t see the first fraction-of-a-fraction-of-a-fraction of a second of the Big Bang, therefore we can’t know for certain that there was actually a beginning. Never mind the overwhelming evidence that points us back to a moment where the laws of physics break down, the fact that we can’t see the moment of the beginning means I’m going to hold on to a past-eternal universe. Good luck. In fact, this position is at odds with the best science we have available today. The Borde, Guth, Vilenkin Theorem has found that any universe with an average expansion rate greater than 0 must have an absolute beginning. This theorem holds true independent of the physical description of the universe. That our universe began to exist is a fact and therefore stands in need of a cause.

The universe is made of matter, space, and time. Therefore, the cause of the universe – matter, space, time – must be immaterial, spaceless, and timeless. The cause must also be extremely powerful to create this universe. The cause must also be personal, so as to choose to create, since there is no reason to believe the cause of the universe had to cause the universe into existence.

All of these attributes of the Cause, that we arrived at by philosophical reasoning, sound familiar. This Cause is what we refer to when we say “God.”

This is a rough outline of the Kalam Cosmological Argument for the existence of God. For a much more sophisticated explanation see William Lane Craig.

 

Advertisements

5 Comments »

  1. The Kalaam Cosmological is a very interesting argument, which I have written some about. There are a few more premises that I found interesting!
    1. Anything that had a beginning had a cause
    2. The universe had a beginning.
    3. The universe has a cause.
    4. If something causes the universe to exist, then it is not essentially part of the universe.
    5. Therefore there is a cause of the universe that is not essentially part of the universe.
    6. If something is not essentially a part of the universe, then it is not essentially physical.
    7. Therefore there is a cause of the universe that is not essentially physical.
    8. The only non-essentially physical causal agents are persons.
    9. Therefore the universe has a cause which is a non-essentially-physical person.

    Like

  2. The most major problem which I have with Kalam is that whether or not time is past-infinite it remains entirely incoherent to claim that the universe could have been created.

    Let’s presume that time is not past-infinite. That implies, necessarily, that there exists a first moment of time. Since time is a part of the universe, it necessarily follows that the universe existed in the first moment of time. Since this is the first moment of time, there are no previous moments of time in which the universe did not exist.

    Even if time is past-finite, the universe was literally never non-existent. It cannot have been created.

    Like

  3. ON BIOLOGICAL DUMMIES

    So, EveryOne, why do We Call It AI (Artificial Intelligence) when it’s Actually CI (Created Intelligence) like an UnConditioned Baby before Punishing Parents begin Conditioning Being a Form of Ignorance, Racism, Prejudice and Oppression; who else remembers “DO AS YOU ARE TOLD OR ELSE!!!” πŸ€”?…:

    β™‘ ‘Prometheus’
    β™‘ ‘Ex Machina’
    β™‘ ‘Terminator’

    …these ARE examples of Movies where We Explore What Happens when We Treat Technology as Possessions much like ‘Owning Pets’ or ‘Owning Children’, an ‘Ownership’ We Do Rather Badly By The Way (BTW); it’s Crystal Clear Clarity that there is An Aloofness and Arrogance about Human Beings EveryOne…do We Really THINK!!! that Gaia has NO IDEA!!!, that We ARE The ONLY ONES!!! who can ‘Save This Planet’; really, HUH!!!, just How FUCKING DUMB!!! ARE WE πŸ€” ?…I AM Often Asked “WHY!!! Can’t You just be NORMAL!!!πŸ€” ?” it’s also Crystal Clear Clarity that We ALL Have Differing Views (even if only Slightly and Subtly πŸ€“ ) of what “NORMAL!!!” means so I Reply “Your NORMAL!!! or My NORMAL!!!; which One is NORMAL!!! πŸ€” ?”…if I Say “FUCK OFF!!!” it means ‘I Agree With You’ then I Take Time to Calm Down after Being Proved WRONG!!! πŸ˜†πŸ˜…πŸ˜„πŸ˜ƒπŸ˜‚πŸ˜πŸ˜€πŸ˜‰πŸ˜Š

    …β™‘β™‘β™‘…

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s