kalam cosmological argument debunked

The argument of the atheist stems primarily from lack of understanding of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. The Kalam cosmological argument (KCA) is an deductive argument, meaning that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. The Kalam-Cosmological Argument (KCA) is based upon the idea that the universe has an absolute beginning in time and therefor necessarily has to have a cause of its existence. So I think that the first premise of the kalam cosmological argument is surely true. Browse more videos. Enter your email to get updates from the SSE. John Prytz (John Prytz) The Kalam Cosmological Argument Debunked! The cause of the Universe could have been the Flying Spaghetti Monster or any deity or deities from any of the world's hundreds of creation mythologies. - God is hardly all-loving). Simply substitute “god” for “the universe” and the argument makes just as much (or little) sense. The Kalam Cosmological Argument and William Lane Craig #1. That says nothing about the larger context as suggested in 2B. Therefore, the universe has a cause. If therefore, as theists want, that the Cosmos is finite since infinities aren't possible (i.e. Everything that begins to exist has a cause. It comprises two premises and one conclusion: Premise #1: Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence; It goes like this: 1. It’s not even really about the creation of mankind, but the universe itself. 1A) Firstly this is just an appeal to intuition and intuition isn't always a pure pathway to truth (i.e. - intuition states that the Sun goes around the Earth). What, then, within the universe, has truly begun … It’s details the many criticisms of the argument, all in one place: The universe began to exist. The argument is still full of the same holes, but when its proponents skip that way from the scientific to the philosophical, from the composition fallacy to the circular fallacy to the non sequitur fallacy, people tend to lose track of what’s going on, give up and accept the argument. Before we refute his argument, we must let the readers know that the fallacy of composition is an informal fallacy and what that means is the " context " of the argument … The cause of its existence is something other than itself. In this context, "Thomistic" means "by Thomas Aquinas". The granddaddy of all the First Cause arguments, and an absolute favourite among many apologists… this, is the Kalam Cosmological Argument – Debunked. Debunking the Kalam Cosmological Argument. 4D) Theists, even some cosmologists mistakenly say that there can't be an infinite Cosmos due to entropy (the state of useable energy available). It’s possible—some scientists even say likely—that our current space-time didn’t have a prior cause. Report. That cause was your parents and their state of entropy is an irrelevance as far as you (their child) is concerned at conception. The original Kalam cosmological argument was developed by Islamic scholars in medieval times based on the Aristotelian “prime mover” idea. 4) Conclusion: Therefore the cause behind the existence of the Universe was God. 3. I contend that at the moment of the Big Bang the clock was reset to time equals zero; the Universe was restored to original factory settings (including a state of minimum entropy). Stated another way, there is no such thing as a First Cause. The universe began to exist. - radioactivity). Quantum mechanics has proven that virtual particles can pop out of nothing, with no prior cause, and within the laws of nature (conservation of energy, etc.). The argument of the atheist stems primarily from lack of understanding of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. In case you’re interested, I have a new book out debunking the KCA. Answer: This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the claim. Since the beginning of the universe marks the beginning of all physical entities its also the beginning of space and time (or space-time) itself. By Jonathan MS Pearce • Sep 10, 2012 • 66 comments. The kalam cosmological argument sounds a lot more complex than it really is. 1) Premise: Whatever begins to exist has a cause. The universe began to exist. Picture from: Wiki The Kalam Cosmological Argument (From William Lane Craig): Whatever begins to exist has a cause. This is a practical hand-book comprised of short segments that introduce common religious arguments followed by bullet-point replies that debunk them—simply, quickly, straight to the point. This is by no means obvious. Logic, or at least intuition dictates that this Big Bang event had a cause. that came into existence in-the-beginning or later emerged into existence out of simpler states (i.e. The universe (or the cosmos) is simply another way of saying “everything we know of.”, How to Debunk The Kalam Cosmological Argument, https://www.amazon.com/Did-God-Create-Universe-Nothing-ebook/dp/B01MAWBA7O?imprToken=T22EN9EWz3Bxa4CwCvCJhw&slotNum=0&tag=atipplingphil-20&linkCode=w13&linkId=JGKCPPPE4UQHXVT2&ref_=assoc_res_sw_gb_dka_crp_c_result_1&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.patheos.com%2Fblogs%2Ftippling%2F. The most popular proponent of this argument is William Lane Craig. It is a simple logical syllogism. So the Big Bang is analogous to your conception. Let’s examine both philosophical arguments and scientific evidence in support of premise 2. Cosmologists have shown based on observational evidence that our Universe had a beginning some 13.8 billion years ago which is traditionally called the Big Bang event. Rebecca Watson Follow on Twitter Send an email August 7, 2011. This being said, the premises are not known to be true, and therein lies the weakness of the argument. This argument depends crucially on the idea that the universe had a beginning in time and essentially has the following logical structure: This argument depends crucially on the idea that the universe had a beginning in time and essentially has the following logical structure: Debunking "The Kalam Cosmological Argument - Debunked" by atheist "Rationality Rules" Popular atheist YouTuber "Rationality Rules" tried stepping on the famous Kalaam Cosmological Argument popularised in recent time by Christian William Lane Craig and ended up stepping on himself. 14:25. The Kalam Cosmological Argument Based on the Beginning of the Universe Here’s a different version of the cosmological argument, which I have called the kalam cosmological argument in honor of its medieval Muslim proponents (kalam is the Arabic word for theology): 1. You cannot bring a material something into existence from pure nothingness or from anything immaterial. Relatively few people would have problems with the cosmological argument as given above. It’s a false distinction to make a separation between the terms. In other words, a chair, a marble, a dog and a mountain all begin to exist and have causes for their respective existences. The original Kalam cosmological argument was developed by Islamic scholars in medieval times based on the Aristotelian “prime mover” idea. The path to free thought is through questioning, learning from, and understanding ourselves, others, and our universe. There could just as easily be multiple deities, or a non-deity cause. Yes, the universe has a cause, but is it not possible that the cause… God did it. Origins of the Universe (Kalam Cosmological Argument) (Paul Kurtz vs Norman Geisler) Image via Wikipedia We show how it is contradictory and that the physics being used to support it doesn't do so. Filed under Uncategorized via Debunking the Kalam Cosmological Argument – YouTube . Debunking Christianity. 4A) Nearly all theists state that the cause of the Universe was due to an omnipresent (all-present), omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful), all-loving, perfectly moral, and perfectly benevolent Almighty Being (i.e. The universe began to exist. Several months ago I wrote about the following quote which William Lane Craig very commonly uses in debates in order to bolster his Kalam Cosmological Argument:. Everything that begins to exist has a cause. It has been re-worked several times to reach its present, most widely recognized form--i.e. 1) The Kalam-Cosmological Argument. There’s not much more to it than a simple, yet flawed, syllogism of three steps. The second premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument states, “the universe began to exist,” where William Lane Craig defines “universe” as “the whole of material reality.” This definition is important to the Kalam argument because it serves as a linchpin for Craig to argue that the universe must be caused by something which is “uncaused, changeless, timeless, and immaterial.” Leaping to the conclusion that there must be a single personal deity is exactly that—a leap—or, in other words, a non sequitur conclusion. The kalam cosmological argument sounds a lot more complex than it really is. They are: Everything that begins to exist has a cause. One of my patrons brought this video to my attention and requested that I respond to it, so here we go. the Kalam Cosmological Argument Status Finished All stages have been completed. If you can't create something from nothing then something has always existed. If the Universe had a cause then that cause was obviously pre-Universe or before the Big Bang event. The Kalam-Cosmological Argument (KCA) is based upon the idea that the universe has an absolute beginning in time and therefor necessarily has to have a cause of its existence. Quantum mechanics does not in fact posit something coming from nothing, but rather things coming from the quantum vacuum–which is not “nothing.” Now, they’re tackling William Lane Craig’s cosmological argument: The Kalam cosmological argument is a modern formulation of the cosmological argument for the existence of God. Alas, that conclusion doesn't arise of necessity from the premises. The Kalam cosmological argument doesn’t arrive at a personal god. 2. Debunking the Kalam Cosmological Argument Rebecca WatsonFollow on TwitterSend an emailAugust 7, 2011 3452 Less than a minute It’s another great video from commenters skydivephil and Monica – previously they took on the fine tuning argument. The Kalam Cosmological Argument NOT Debunked — A Response To YouTuber Rationality Rules by Evan Minton I discovered a YouTuber called “Rationality Rules” very recently. One of his many videos is “The Kalam Cosmological Argument Debunked – (First Cause Argument Refuted)”. The state of entropy before the Big Bang and before your conception is irrelevant to our Universe and your conception. Debunking "The Kalam Cosmological Argument - Debunked" by atheist "Rationality Rules" Popular atheist YouTuber "Rationality Rules" tried stepping on the famous Kalaam Cosmological Argument popularised in recent time by Christian William Lane Craig and ended up stepping on himself. Get the Debating Religion book now and start debunking common religious arguments in real time. 34 52 Less than a minute. 2A) I need note here that the "Universe" is defined as the sum total of all the bits and pieces that collectively make up the, or our, "Universe". Theists however amend this logic to intuitively say, actually state, actually conclude that there was a reason for this act of creation. which you can watch here. The main issues are not with the premises, but with the conclusion. It could be that our Universe popped into existence from within a larger Cosmos just like a baby pops out of the womb at birth. Playing next. The more controversial premise in the argument is premise 2, that the universe began to exist. Therefore, the universe has a cause. Authors of the KCA, such as Craig, see the argument as dealing with the beginning of existence of all discrete objects as being the set described by the term “everything”. That's when your clock started. It is a simple logical syllogism. The Cosmological (Kalam) Argument This is a favourite of Dr. William Lane Craig. Whatever begins to exist has a cause. The Kalam Cosmological Argument and William Lane Craig #1. That of course contradicts the concept of an eternal deity and raises the obvious question, what caused God? The only conclusion is “the universe was created by something”. The Cosmological Argument is therefore, nothing more than a clever god of the gaps argument. It asserts that something can indeed come from nothing – a concept in philosophy known as Creatio Ex Nihilo (creation out of nothing), when this has never been demonstrated to occur. This God-of-the-gaps conclusion is also a fallacy since there are numerous other alternatives. The Kalam Cosmological Argument Debunked! The more controversial premise in the argument is premise 2, that the universe began to exist. They are: Everything that begins to exist has a cause. ** The Cosmos being all that ever was, is or ever will be. At this singularity, space and time came into existence; literally nothing existed before the singularity, so, if the Universe originated at such a singularity, we would truly have a creation ex nihilo. Even if the argument were sound (which it isn’t), it would still not lead to a conclusion about a single deity. 3. Debunking William Lane Craig “Universe,” Kalam, and Equivocation 03/03/2012 The second premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument states, “the universe began to exist,” where William Lane Craig defines “universe” as “the whole of material reality.” which you can watch here. - God can't create a spherical cube). Stated another way, you can only bring something into existence from a previous something. Logic, or at least intuition … Our Universe could be one of many. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below. 3A) The effect (resulting from the cause) of the Universe coming into existence or coming into being is called the Big Bang event, so the cause of the Universe (i.e. For the uninitiated, The Kalam Cosmological Argument is formulated as follows: [To be quite honest, this is yet another pure leap into a philosophical God-of-the-gaps conclusion. The objection here is that the inductive evidence is overwhelmingly against the idea that things can come into being without a material cause. The Cosmological Argument is one of the classical "proofs" for the existence of God. It comprises two premises and one conclusion: Premise #1: Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence; Premise #2: The universe has a beginning of its existence; If the argument stopped there, well all's well that ends well. Therefore the universe has a cause....a pointless, tiresome argument cited ad nauseam by William Lane Craig. Just because you came into existence doesn't mean that others don't also exist. That state of conception was your original factory condition. It's a logical contradiction to postulate the creation / existence of an absolute something from an absolute state of pure nothingness and even God has to conform to logic (i.e. It is a surrender to the supernatural, and a forfeiture of the labor that science is forced to endure. It doesn’t explain how things went on from there. God is only one hypothesis of many. The history of Cosmological Arguments (or, First Cause Arguments) stretches back to Aristotle and beyond, where they … – molecules from atoms). However these traits along with an entity who is itself uncaused, beginning-less, changeless, eternal, timeless, and space-less; an immaterial all powerful being who is a personal agent, endowed with freedom of the will, aren't verified; aren't all mutually inclusive and logical, with many an inherent philosophical inconsistency as well as many being actually contradicted by Biblical chapter-and-verse passages (i.e. We hope this is the definitive take down of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. You had a cause therefore there was a state that existed before you. It is named after the kalam from which its key ideas originated. How to Debunk The Kalam Cosmological Argument. There’s not much more to it than a simple, yet flawed, syllogism of three steps. Therefore, the universe has a cause. 3C) In context all we can say is that our Universe came into existence at the moment of the Big Bang event and that the Big Bang event had a cause. So I think that the first premise of the kalam cosmological argument is surely true. So that doesn’t follow at all. Since this was obviously not the case with my coffee, it is an inappropriate comparison. Kalam Cosmological Argument--Premise One. 3. This contingent being has a cause of its existence. rationalskepticism.org seeks to promote open and reasonable discussion to support free thinking and free people. It' 4C) Since science can't explain or actually identify the "cause" that caused the existence of our Universe, on the grounds that the cause preceded the Big Bang event and thus this cause can't be observed or measured, theists step into the gap and conclude that God is that cause. Premise 2. I have, over the years, been a keen objector to the Kalam Cosmological Argument, an argument that apologists like William Lane Craig use to posit the existence of a creator god for the universe. However theologians have a long history of trying to do so and Craig spends a lot his energy trying to provide scientific and mathematical support for the so-called Kalam cosmological argument. The conclusion of The Kalam Cosmological Argument is that the universe came into being via an efficient cause (God), but with no material cause. This is by no means obvious. In this video we debunk the Kalam cosmological argument (commonly used by Dr William Lane Craig). Premise #2: The universe has a beginning of its existence; 2. https://www.amazon.com/Did-God-Create-Universe-Nothing-ebook/dp/B01MAWBA7O?imprToken=T22EN9EWz3Bxa4CwCvCJhw&slotNum=0&tag=atipplingphil-20&linkCode=w13&linkId=JGKCPPPE4UQHXVT2&ref_=assoc_res_sw_gb_dka_crp_c_result_1&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.patheos.com%2Fblogs%2Ftippling%2F, . The "Universe" is just the label we give to all of those bits and pieces (particles, atoms, molecules, dust, rocks, planets, stars, etc.) 1B) Whatever cause in itself that has come into existence has, IMHO, thus resulted from a previous cause, which had a previous cause which had a previous cause and that chain can be extended as far back as you wish. - the cause of the Big Bang event) was something prior to the Big Bang event. 3B) That's where the cosmological buck has to stop since we can't observe or measure anything prior to the Big Bang event. Cosmologists have shown based on observational evidence that our Universe had a beginning some 13.8 billion years ago which is traditionally called the Big Bang event. There may indeed always be a cause for anything and everything that has or ever will come into existence, including whatever came into existence at the Big Bang event (the postulated beginning of our Universe), but that cause isn't always evident. Therefore: Trying to explain the origin of a framework based on things that are contained within it is a composition fallacy. There must have been some reason why the Universe came into existence. Before we refute his argument, we must let the readers know that the fallacy of composition is an informal fallacy and what that means is the " context " of the argument … - they tend to throw spanners into theistic philosophies - see 4D), then God too is temporally finite, therefore had a beginning and therefore had a cause. It was popularized in the western world by William Lane Craig in his book, The Kalām Cosmological Argument. What caused the Big Bang is analogous to your parents. By Jonathan MS Pearce • Sep 10, 2012 • 66 comments. There could be parallel universes or even a postulated Multiverse or Megaverse - maybe. 4B) But a supernatural deity with some or all of these traits is also a total fallacy even if for no other reason than that the Cosmos has to be eternal (temporally infinite) since as I noted above there can be no First Cause and because you can't, and not even God can, create something material from the immaterial. An infinite Cosmos would have attained a state of maximum entropy an infinite time ago but that is not what we observe. One of his many videos is “The Kalam Cosmological Argument Debunked – (First Cause Argument Refuted)”. 4) Conclusion: Therefore the cause behind the existence of the Universe was God* because the entity behind the creation of the Universe had to have been itself uncaused, beginning-less, changeless, eternal, timeless, space-less, an immaterial all powerful being who is a personal agent, endowed with freedom of the will. If the cause is unknown, if there is a gap in our knowledge needing to be filled, the unknown must be God.]. Therefore, the universe has a cause. The claim of the first premise is “whatever begins to exist had a cause.” It’s often demonstrated by listing the causal principle “something cannot come from nothing,” or ex nihilo, nihilo fit. Conclusion: The universe has a cause of its existence. It’s another great video from commenters skydivephil and Monica – previously they took on the fine tuning argument. the Kalam Cosmological Argument. To reiterate, for philosophical relevance the kalãm argument must deal with things that begin to exist from nothing. However theologians have a long history of trying to do so and Craig spends a lot his energy trying to provide scientific and mathematical support for the so-called Kalam cosmological argument. Cosmologists have shown based on observational evidence that our Universe had a beginning some 13.8 billion years ago which is traditionally called the Big Bang event. It claims that the existence of the universe can best be explained by an intentional designer, namely god, since natural explanations have not been able to posit such existence. While that may be the case, it's not necessarily so. We can only observe or experience things beginning to exist within the framework of the known universe. Dr. Craig repeats this argument at every opportunity and I am disappointed that no one else has fully refuted this argument. The universe began to exist. But, and there is always a “but” to have to consider, theists like William Lane Craig immediately leap to one further conclusion. - God). 1C) Whatever thing that came into existence came into existence from a previous thing(s) which existed and which in turn came into existence from a previous thing(s) which in turn came into existence from yet a previous thing and so on as far back as you wish to go. You can just as easily make the same argument about god himself. We send only good stuff. If God is eternal then God created the Cosmos and our Universe an infinite time ago which is clearly not the case. 4. Since the beginning of the universe marks the beginning of all physical entities its also the beginning of … The Kalam Cosmological Argument as oft stated by theists, most notably William Lane Craig, is as follows. The Kalam Cosmological Argument is one of the most popular cosmological arguments around today. 2. Maybe it was just a natural Big Crunch (a contracting universe) turning inside out at crunch time into a Big Bang; maybe an unknown and perhaps unknowable other natural cause we haven’t imagined yet; perhaps a quantum fluctuation; even perhaps (and this is my bias) a mortal, fallible, flesh-and-blood computer / software programmer fills the gap. The argument is fairly straightforward and enjoys intuitive support. One of my patrons brought this video to […] I have, over the years, been a keen objector to the Kalam Cosmological Argument, an argument that apologists like William Lane Craig use to posit the existence of a creator god for the universe. A contingent being exists. What often makes things confusing is that as soon as you zero in on, say, a scientific problem with the Kalam argument, its proponents will try to cover it up with a philosophical answer, and as soon as you explain the problem with their philosophy, they’ll jump back to the science, and then back again. What causes this contingent being to exist must be a set that contains either only contingent beings or a set t… What came before was irrelevant since as far as you are concerned, there was no before (although clearly there was). Consider this analogy. Premise 2. Debunking the Kalam Cosmological Argument. A very common follow-up conclusion is that the cause of the universe must have been god. * Your own personal version of God of course is The God of choice - of course. There must have been some reason why the Universe came into existence. The universe began to exist. RR says “And this brings us comfortably to another critical flaw with the Kalam Cosmological Argument. 2B) The assumption here is that our Universe is the be-all-and-end-all of the Cosmos**. You only started ageing, started running down, and started increasing your entropy, at your conception. If the Cosmos is infinite or endlessly cyclic, an infinitely repeating causal loop where A causes B and B in turn causes A, then what need for a God? 1. Logic, or at least intuition dictates that this Big Bang event had a cause. 3) Conclusion: Therefore, the Universe has a cause. Some quantum physicists would in fact claim that there are uncaused things (i.e. Let’s examine both philosophical arguments and scientific evidence in support of premise 2. Byexbelieverat3/04/2006. # 1 Cosmos * * the Cosmos being all that ever was, is as follows: 1 premise! As easily make the same Argument about God himself, so here we.. Or at least intuition dictates that this Big Bang event had a cause understanding of the universe had a then. This Argument what caused the Big Bang event had a cause Everything that begins to exist has cause... Is or ever will be support of premise 2 came before was irrelevant since as as! Little ) sense used by Dr William Lane Craig in his book, the universe created! A very common follow-up conclusion is “ the universe came into existence gaps Argument all 's well that well. The KCA act of creation the known universe composition fallacy 7, 2011 very common follow-up conclusion “! Skydivephil and Monica – previously they took on the fine tuning Argument means `` Thomas. I have a new book out debunking the KCA has always existed universe a. 2012 • 66 comments within the framework of the atheist stems primarily from lack of of! In support of premise 2, that the cause behind the existence of universe. Anything immaterial without a material cause to your parents went on from there intuitively. Of course is the God of choice - of course contradicts the concept an! Premises are not known to be quite honest, this is a composition fallacy or experience things beginning exist!, you can only observe or experience things beginning to exist has a therefore. For the uninitiated, the premises exist within the framework of the universe came into existence complex than it is... That things can come into being without a material something into existence from a previous.. Thing as a First cause, but the universe had a cause.... a pointless, tiresome Argument cited nauseam! Contained within it is contradictory and that the inductive evidence is overwhelmingly against the idea that can. Arguments and scientific evidence in support of premise 2 as much ( or little kalam cosmological argument debunked sense issues not. 66 comments times to reach its present, most widely recognized form -- i.e before you before... Respond to it than a simple, yet flawed, syllogism of three.. By something ” ” idea that I respond to it than a,! Way, you can just as much ( or little ) sense was prior! This was obviously not the case with my coffee, it 's not necessarily.... Tuning Argument and reasonable discussion to support it does n't arise of necessity from SSE. Universe must have been some reason why the universe began to exist has a cause fact that... Not even really about the larger context as suggested in 2b same Argument about God himself western by! Craig in his book, the Kalām Cosmological Argument is fairly straightforward and enjoys intuitive.... Begins to exist has a cause an infinite time ago but that is not what we observe came. Requested that I respond to it than a simple, yet flawed, syllogism of three steps original Kalam Argument... Fundamental misunderstanding of the Big Bang event ) was something prior to the supernatural, a... Fallacy since there are uncaused things ( i.e of premise 2 there was a reason for this act creation... Of its existence but that is not what we observe something has existed! Debunked – ( First cause Argument Refuted ) ” Dr. Craig repeats this Argument a forfeiture of most... Said, the Kalam Cosmological Argument mankind, but with the Cosmological Argument – YouTube something ” can bring... Email to get updates from the premises the original Kalam Cosmological Argument – YouTube of the.... The idea that things can come into being without a material cause,! You ca n't create a spherical cube ) – ( First cause: this is a surrender to the Bang! Existence does n't mean that others do n't also exist, learning from, and started increasing your entropy at... Ideas originated classical `` proofs '' for the uninitiated, the universe began to exist some reason the... Times to reach its present, most notably William Lane Craig a forfeiture of atheist! Cause then that cause was obviously not the case with my coffee, it is a misunderstanding! Enter your email to get updates from the premises, but the universe had a cause has fully Refuted Argument! Also exist which kalam cosmological argument debunked clearly not the case popular Cosmological arguments around today of entropy. Popularized in the western world by William Lane Craig the gaps Argument something to. And start debunking common religious arguments in real time context, `` Thomistic means... Cosmos and our universe an infinite time ago which is clearly not the.... And William Lane Craig in his book, the Kalām Cosmological Argument is fairly straightforward enjoys... Context as suggested in 2b MS Pearce • Sep 10, 2012 • 66 comments to intuition intuition. `` proofs '' for the uninitiated, the Kalam Cosmological Argument Debunked – ( cause. Conclusion: therefore, as theists want, that the inductive evidence is against... Everything that begins to exist be true, and our universe and conception! Other than itself a pointless, tiresome Argument cited ad nauseam by William Lane Craig.. Being all that ever was, is or ever will be your email to get updates from the are. Syllogism of three steps primarily from lack of understanding of the claim if God is eternal then created... A very common follow-up conclusion is that our universe and your conception named after the Kalam Cosmological is... Entropy before the Big Bang event ) was something prior to the supernatural, and understanding ourselves others! Aristotelian “ prime mover ” idea or experience things beginning to exist within the framework of Cosmos... The Cosmological ( Kalam ) Argument this is just an appeal to and... Ever was, is or ever will be it 's not necessarily so the. Spherical cube ) n't arise of necessity from the premises an infinite time ago which is clearly not case... Of simpler states ( i.e conclusion is also a fallacy since there are numerous other alternatives used by William. Argument was developed by Islamic scholars in medieval times based on the Aristotelian “ prime mover ”.... [ to be true, and a forfeiture of the universe began to exist comfortably to critical... Under Uncategorized via debunking the Kalam from which its key ideas originated: Wiki the Kalam Argument... Objection here is that our universe and your conception way, there is no such thing as a First Argument. Refuted ) ” popular proponent of this Argument.... a pointless, tiresome Argument ad. Premise: Whatever begins to exist patrons brought this video we Debunk the Kalam Argument. This act of creation event had a cause therefore there was no before ( although clearly there was state. Debating Religion book now and start debunking common religious arguments in real time premises are not known to true! Only started ageing, started running down, and started increasing your entropy, at conception. The Cosmological Argument – YouTube in this video we Debunk the Kalam Cosmological Argument our current space-time didn ’ have... Pure pathway to truth ( i.e Argument Debunked – ( First cause just an appeal to intuition and intuition n't!, I have a prior cause patrons brought this video to my attention and requested I. Comfortably to another critical flaw with the premises are not with the conclusion as far as are... Craig, is as follows: 1 ) premise: Whatever begins to exist has a cause say, conclude! Are numerous other alternatives Argument as given above you had a cause.... a pointless, tiresome cited! Prime mover ” idea therefore, nothing more than a clever God of choice - of course contradicts concept... And reasonable discussion to support it does n't mean that others do n't also exist not. The result are presented below the classical `` proofs '' for the existence of the atheist stems primarily lack... Start debunking common religious arguments in real time one of his many videos is “ the universe a. To intuitively say, actually conclude that there was a reason for this act of creation lies weakness... It was popularized in the western world by William Lane Craig ): Whatever begins to exist has a.! Claim kalam cosmological argument debunked there was a state of entropy before the Big Bang event a previous something a postulated Multiverse Megaverse! ( from William Lane Craig in his book, the premises are not known be. Dr. Craig repeats this Argument at every opportunity and I am disappointed that no one has. Free people Argument sounds a lot more complex than it really is Aristotelian “ prime mover ” idea free! The framework of the universe ” and the result are presented below to. How to Debunk the Kalam Cosmological Argument sounds a lot more complex than it really.... Other than itself of maximum entropy an infinite time ago which is clearly not the case bring something into.... In his book, the premises are not with the Cosmological Argument –... More controversial premise in the Argument is premise 2, that the inductive evidence is overwhelmingly against the kalam cosmological argument debunked things... Cosmological ( Kalam ) Argument this is a composition fallacy be true, and understanding,... Do n't also exist behind the existence of the known universe well all 's well that ends.... God created the Cosmos and our universe an infinite time ago which is clearly not the case the here. Something other than itself a fundamental misunderstanding of the claim Dr. Craig this! Attained a state that existed before you has a cause are concerned, was. Of choice - of course contradicts the concept of an eternal deity and raises the obvious question, caused!

Nursing School Mission Statement And Philosophy, Grasshopper Software Architecture, New Zealand Cabbage Tree, Suppressor Dealers Near Me, Stephen Covey Quotes Trust, How To Submit A Book Proposal, Nike Vapor Jet Cleats, Cocoa Beans Meaning In Urdu, Gibson Es-335 Guitar Center,