Atheist Debates - The END of the Kalam Cosmological Argument

The KCA is one of the go-to standards of many top apologists. How can this argument that never addresses a god be used as an argument for a god's existence? Is this just smoke and mirrors? Should we be paying ANY attention to this argument?

My answer is a firm, "no". Here's why....

[nerdysister]

Kalam is the special pleading argument with more steps

[chuckgaydos]

Let's see, the creator of the universe...
...created time, so it must be timeless.
...created space, so it must spaceless.
...created matter, so it must be immaterial.
...and created minds, so it must be mindless, right?

[lordkizzle]

Everything that exists has a cause.
God has no cause.
Therefore, God does not exist.

[jebemi]

Seems like all arguments are basically arguments from ignorance it always comes back idk where spce moral etc comes from therefore skydady

[TalesZuliani]

"it's Craig's favorite argument"

And that's why I know the argument is crap

[Grim_Beard]

03:30 "We can't really tell if the Kalam is in fact sound." Err... yes we can, and it isn't. It fails at the first premise: "Everything that begins to exist has a cause for its existence." That is unsound for two reasons, one philosophical and one empirical:

1) Philosophically, we can't accept the 'everything' statement in Premise 1 because we haven't observed 'everything' - not even close - and if we accept it, we run into the Black Swan problem. In fact, the amount of 'everything' that we have observed is minuscule. Hypothetically, it could be true (although see my second point below), but we still could never accept it because we could never demonstrate that we _should_ accept it.

2) Empirically, we have never yet observed _anything_ 'begin to exist', let alone 'everything'. We have only ever observed changes of state in things that already existed. This alone kills the Kalam. [Edit: this is the point you get to at around 04:00]

Perhaps an alternative to the Kalam could be salvaged, with a first premise along the lines of "Every change of state has a cause", which would really just be describing the general principle of cause and effect. It still wouldn't get you anywhere near to a god, or any other kind of supernatural cause, but at least it would allow you to get past the first premise.

Also, how the fuck did William Lane Craig get not only a doctorate but also an entire career out of an argument this transparently dreadful?

[rickwitten]

The set of "things that did not begin to exists" is: [god]. So the set of "things that begin to exist" includes everything except god. Therefore, the statement "everything that begins to exist" can be re-written as, "everything but god", placing the supposed conclusion (god) into the premises, which is the definition of question begging. Kalam is a turducken of fallacies. Or, to be brief, a turd.

[Dantalisman]

I have an argument:
1) Everything we have ever observed to exist, exists in our universe and obeys the laws of the universe.
2) God has not been observed and does not obey the laws of the universe.
3) Therefore God cannot be said to exist.

[spoddie]

It's not dead, it's just resting.

[alexhetherington]

I've never seen Matt with a full beard but i like it. It suits him.

[VCXZ]

My favorite description of cosmological arguments is "trying to prove God with word games."

[Ploskkky]

Theists are always the last ones who realize that their arguments are ridiculous. Perhaps in a decade or so they see the folly of the useless Kalam Cosmological Argument.

[percenthealth]

I find that apologists have a very hard time avoiding contradictions when discussing this topic. For instance, WLC describes "begins to exist" as follows: "if there was a point in time that it didn't exist, and a later point in time that it did exist, then it began to exist". But if we apply this to time itself, the absurdity becomes clear: If there was a point in time that time didn't exist...

I recently heard Frank Turek make a similar assumption, stating "once there was no time, space, matter, or energy". But what can "once" possibly mean if time doesn't exist?

I don't know if I've ever seen an atheist press an apologist on this question, and I wonder what they would say.

[JohnSmith-fzih]

The Kalam reminds me of the South Park episode with the underpants thief’s (gnomes I think). They had a plan:
1) Steal underpants
2) ???
3) Profit!

Theists use the Kalam in a similar way:
1) The universe had a cause
2) ???
3) God!

[jursamaj]

I don't care what WLC's favorite argument is. He has amply demonstrated that he doesn't do philosophy, he does apologetic sophistry.

[matthewalan]

I am always a bit uncomfortable whenever anyone starts talking about time. Sean Carroll has suggested that time is "what clocks measure." I kind of like this definition because it tells us that we really have no idea what time is. I used to teach a unit on Special Relativity to my physics students. Special Relativity is more than sufficient to blow away intuitive notions about both time and space. So, anytime I am presented with arguments that presuppose an authoritative understanding of time, I become very skeptical.

[angelikaskoroszyn]

For the full experience I recommend watching it with Neon Genesis Evangelion opening playing in the background

[ferociousfeind]

"Everything that isn't my god has a cause"
"Therefore everything was created by my god who is real and exists"

[littlebitofhope]

Here is what I don't understand. In the Kalam, they say that "Everything that begins to exist has a cause, and since the Universe began to exist it has to have a cause". Ok, I understand that. Then they immediately claim an "uncaused" Creator. How do they know it is "uncaused"? It seems this is very easy to debunk. First you have to prove there is a Creator, and then you have to prove they are uncaused. How can ANYONE think this is a good argument? It just seems so simple to me. Prove an uncaused creator or STFU.

[michaelbrickley]

There is evidence for God and Christ and there is no evidence for lack of God or no god. Atheism is a faith without evidence or hope. I don’t ever hear of millions of lives changed because of their atheist faith.