Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Kalam Cosmological Argument

Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2011 3:28:18 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
William Craig at the end of the response to a letter of the week says... "So I agree with and wholeheartedly endorse "the bizarre but not necessarily self-contradictory conclusion that the universe had a beginning and yet there was no time at which the universe did not exist." http://www.reasonablefaith.org...

So allow me to throw something out there.......

If it is the case there has never being a time where the universe has not existed, is that equal to saying that the universe has always existed ? If so.........

1) Something that has always existed does not have a cause
2) The universe has always existed
3) Therefore the universe does not have a cause

I would add in support of premise 1, that a common reason given that God does not need a cause is because God has always existed.

Thoughts, replies, insults ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2011 1:15:36 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/22/2011 12:42:19 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
It always existed and began (had a cause) to exist.

"1) Something that has always existed does not have a cause"

I would put to you, its more reasonable to believe that if something has always existed, then it does not have a cause. ( Again this is used to support that God does not have a cause).

Isn't saying that God has always existed and thus doesn't have a cause, but the universe has always existed but has a cause special pleading for God ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2011 5:57:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/21/2011 3:28:18 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
William Craig at the end of the response to a letter of the week says... "So I agree with and wholeheartedly endorse "the bizarre but not necessarily self-contradictory conclusion that the universe had a beginning and yet there was no time at which the universe did not exist."

The only way I could rationalize this would be if he is claiming that time was created after the universe.
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2011 6:54:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/22/2011 5:57:19 AM, Thaddeus wrote:

The only way I could rationalize this would be if he is claiming that time was created after the universe.

That is the way it is currently defined in the scientific community so this isn't an argument Craig is creating.
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2011 6:55:43 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/22/2011 1:15:36 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:

Isn't saying that God has always existed and thus doesn't have a cause, but the universe has always existed but has a cause special pleading for God ?

It is not special pleading as God and the Universe are defined differently in relates to time.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2011 7:12:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/22/2011 6:54:37 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
At 6/22/2011 5:57:19 AM, Thaddeus wrote:

The only way I could rationalize this would be if he is claiming that time was created after the universe.

That is the way it is currently defined in the scientific community so this isn't an argument Craig is creating.

Fair enough. Then what he is saying is obvious.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2011 8:20:47 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/22/2011 6:55:43 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
At 6/22/2011 1:15:36 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:

Isn't saying that God has always existed and thus doesn't have a cause, but the universe has always existed but has a cause special pleading for God ?

It is not special pleading as God and the Universe are defined differently in relates to time.

Elaborate.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2011 8:27:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/22/2011 8:20:47 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 6/22/2011 6:55:43 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
At 6/22/2011 1:15:36 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:

Isn't saying that God has always existed and thus doesn't have a cause, but the universe has always existed but has a cause special pleading for God ?

It is not special pleading as God and the Universe are defined differently in relates to time.

Elaborate.

God does not function within time. He is outside of it. Nothing can begin to exist without being inside of time. They either are, or aren't.
The Cosmological argument assumes causality. Outside of the universe, and time for that matter, causality does not need to be assumed.
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2011 8:29:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/22/2011 8:20:47 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:

It is not special pleading as God and the Universe are defined differently in relates to time.

Elaborate.

Time is currently defined to be one of the dimensions of the universe, specifically it is the component of the 4-vector through which mass acts to produce gravity.

In this manner there was no time before the universe was created, it is like asking what is the area of a line segment, the question has no meaning.

God is defined as that which is outside of time and space, omni-max, etc. . The Christian God anyway that WLC is arguing for.

There is a fairly involved argument for why the agent which created the universe has to be personal, timeless, etc. PCP has argued it in a debate quite well.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2011 9:32:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/22/2011 8:29:26 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
At 6/22/2011 8:20:47 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:

It is not special pleading as God and the Universe are defined differently in relates to time.

Elaborate.

Time is currently defined to be one of the dimensions of the universe, specifically it is the component of the 4-vector through which mass acts to produce gravity.

In this manner there was no time before the universe was created, it is like asking what is the area of a line segment, the question has no meaning.

God is defined as that which is outside of time and space, omni-max, etc. . The Christian God anyway that WLC is arguing for.

There is a fairly involved argument for why the agent which created the universe has to be personal, timeless, etc. PCP has argued it in a debate quite well.

That's quite thought provoking and it is possible that a deity could exist outside time and space, though, equally, there is no reason to suppose that is possible, and even it were the case, then such a deity would not be able to interact in any way with the universe or it's inhabitants such as ourselves.

Furthermore, there is no reason to suppose that the universe hasn't always existed – it is currently expanding as it has since the Big Bang but when the matter and energy it contains reaches an equilibrium, it should contract into an almost infinitely small size once again and thus provoke another Big Bang.

We humans find it very difficult to reconcile this concept because we are familiar with things on Earth having a beginning and end, but there is no logical reason why the universe, in one form or another, hasn't always existed and will continue to exist ad infinitum.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2011 11:16:48 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/23/2011 9:32:14 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:

That's quite thought provoking and it is possible that a deity could exist outside time and space, though, equally, there is no reason to suppose that is possible, and even it were the case, then such a deity would not be able to interact in any way with the universe or it's inhabitants such as ourselves.

Consider that virtual particles exist outside of time and space but they interact with the universe.

Furthermore, there is no reason to suppose that the universe hasn't always existed – it is currently expanding as it has since the Big Bang but when the matter and energy it contains reaches an equilibrium, it should contract into an almost infinitely small size once again and thus provoke another Big Bang.

That is one of the hypothesis which can be invoked to refute the true origin argument.

We humans find it very difficult to reconcile this concept because we are familiar with things on Earth having a beginning and end, but there is no logical reason why the universe, in one form or another, hasn't always existed and will continue to exist ad infinitum.

We are not there yet scientifically to say that this is or is not so but it can indeed be argued that way and in fact some Religions do. The Brahman in Hinduism for example is an example of the model of creation as you have described.
mgage
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 8:58:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I just thought I'd point out a potential area of confusion. Craig completely rejects time as a dimensionlike space. That idea, which most say follows from relativity, is a B-theory of time, but the KCA requires an A-theory. Presentism, which is Craig's position is an A-theory. Statements about something beginning to exist don't really make sense in B-theories. It's a bit like saying the Sun is north of Earth.