William Lane Craig is fond of the Kalām philosophical argument for the existence for god. It is sometimes known as the cosmological argument. It was devised in the 19th century by an Islamic theologian Sayyid Ahmad Khan who called it jadid ’ilm al-kalam. It goes like this: Why do we have something rather than nothing? If the universe began in a Big Bang, then what caused the Big Bang? Something must have started the ball rolling. That something could only have been God, in particular Yahweh.
I see several problems with the Kalām argument:
~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:69)
- The Kalām argument ignores the century old findings of Quantum Mechanics that most events do not have a cause and that particles pop and out of existence all the time without cause. Further, the universe was smaller than an atom at its birth. Quantum effects at the birth of the universe must be considered.
- The Kalām argument uses the word cause without giving it a precise definition. There is far too much slop in the ordinary English definition to use the word mathematically. It is primarily a word of the legal profession, not physics.
- The Kalām argument ignores the possibility of multiverses spawning new universes.
- The Kalām argument is inconsistent. It claims the universe appearing from nothing is impossible, but a god appearing from nothing is obvious. It claims the universe appearing from nothing is impossible, but a universe appearing from nothing if a deity waves a magic wand is obvious. This is an argument from ignorance. What Craig means is his intuition feels overwhelmed by considering such big questions. He has no evidence one way or the other what is truly possible.
- Even you accept the necessity for a creator of the universe, that puts no constraints on the properties of that creator. It need not be even remotely like the way Yahweh/Jesus is depicted. It may have created the universe, then retired from interaction with it. It may have no interest at all in humans. It may have allowed life to evolve without interference. It may have been as abstract as a principle without anything remotely like a personality. Craig tries to fool you into thinking Kalām necessitates Jesus, the virgin birth and the resurrection. It could just as easily have been Star Trek’s Q and the Continuum by his argument.