Meaning of 'Universe' in the Kalam Cosmological Argument - William Lane Craig & James Sinclair

[firstcauseargument]

So you admit that you're commenting to a video that has absolutely nothing to do with the video anyway? Go troll some place else. And FYI Craig does define "begins to exist" as "coming into being."

He's not only a TV actor, but an actor who did NOT get what a syllogism is - let alone he thinks nothing begins to exist. (Most actors are smarter than that.) Please have better reading comprehension.

[firstcauseargument]

This videos isn't about the definition of "begins to exist" but about the definition of "universe", so you're deliberately changing the subject and strawmaning.

TheoreticalBullshit - A TV actor who thinks that nothing begins to exist and misstated what a syllogism is. Hardly an intellectual. Craig's response to him was hilarious.

watch?v=rgwGMe5yxHE - Misquotes the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Fail.

watch?v=baZUCc5m8sE - Lied about Vilenkin's view of the universe. Fail.

[strangestdudehsp]

"This videos isn't about the definition of "begins to exist" but about the definition of "universe", so you're deliberately changing the subject and strawmaning." I wasn't responding to this video, that should be clear because it youtube shows what I'm responding to. So what if the dude is a TV actor?! I can't stand pretentious people who think they're better than others because of their job. I'd bet money if he was a christian making videos supporting craig you'd be praising him.

[strangestdudehsp]

Wow that's alot of replies. "To be blunt I think this is about you." Fair enough. I've had an anti-theist youtube channel for a year and debate theists practically daily. I know from experience that if a theist believes that your atheism is purely due emotional reasons, then there is nothing you can do to change it. I know that from ALOT of experience. Like I said I'm not interested in turning this channel into anti-theism. You might be interested in checking out my other channel; strangestdude

[strangestdudehsp]

Wow that's alot of replies. "To be blunt I think this is about you." Fair enough. I've had an anti-theist youtube channel for a year and debate theists practically daily. I know from experience that if a theist believes that your atheism is purely due emotional reasons, then there is nothing you can do to change it. I know that from ALOT of experience. Like I said I'm not interested in turning this channel into anti-theism. You might be interested in checking out my other channel; strangestdude

[strangestdudehsp]

Sorry, my dislike of craig motivated me to start debating you. I didn't want this channel to be about anti-theism, I have another channel for that. Judging by your channel I think you're decent person who doesn't endorse literalist interpretations of religion, so I don't have a problem with you. I'll change my sub options to you so I that don't have to see Craig's genocide endorsing face whenever I log in.

[strangestdudehsp]

Changing what subject? Please define what 'begins to exist' means, Craig doesn't give a clear defintion. The dude who owns this channel said that he defines it as 'coming into being' which is simply changing one collection of words with another. It's not a specific demarcation. How can craig's cause, which is the void of the timeless, spaceless and immaterial - which is what the term non-existence refers to - influence anything? Did you check out Dan Barker's article?

[strangestdudehsp]

"So you admit that you're commenting to a video that has absolutely nothing to do with the video anyway?"

I admit to replying to another youtuber yes. I don't know why you have a problem with that. I wasn't replying to this video, as youtube clearly shows underneath my post.

'Coming into being' mean what exactly? That's no different from saying 'begins to exist', it's just a different collection of words.

Why did you bring up his job in the first place?

[strangestdudehsp]

Skip to 8:25 /watch?v=rgwGMe5yxHE The everyday demarcation of beginning is subjective or inter-subjective - reality is interconnected and has no actual boundaries. Google; Cosmological Kalamity by Dan Barker. Another major critique of mine is; Craig says that this cause has to be timeless, spaceless and immaterial. The term 'cause' in craig's argument and the term non-existence are interchangable. And literal nothing can't create something.

[strangestdudehsp]

I admitted that it was motivated by my dislike of Craig. You're not a literalist christian so I don't care if you're a theist or not. Disagreement isn't trolling.

[strangestdudehsp]

I can't stand Craig, and I'm subscribed to you so it shows up on my feed. a) it's not clearly defined what it means to 'begin to exist' b) we've never witnessed anything begin to exist ex nihilo. If you want to see some good arguments against the Kalam by youtube anti-theists check out these videos; /watch?v=aD9MtIma5YU (Craig actually replied to theoretical bullshit's criticism) /watch?v=rgwGMe5yxHE /watch?v=baZUCc5m8sE