Home » Existence » Kalam Cosmological Argument Analysis Essay

Kalam Cosmological Argument Analysis Essay

Who is responsible for creating all of mankind and all that surrounds it? God is responsible for the creation of the universe and the existence of that personal God is proven by a plethora of scientific evidence and logically probable reasons. Ironically, some of the opposing arguments originating from the atheistic worldview contribute to the constructing of theistic truths. While using the multiple competing hypotheses method of finding the most probable cause to the universe and the existence of all mankind, a personal creator fits better than the probability of creation just happening by chance.

This universe is very complex and the existence of the personal creator can be explained in two arguments out of the many existing arguments for God and more to come. These two arguments are the Kalam cosmological argument and the transcendental argument. Both of these explain the existence of God through the study of Cosmology and the many findings by astrologists like Edwin Hubble, and simply what exists around society. Starting off, the atheistic view of the beginning of the universe occurring by chance is irrational and irreverent in many ways.

The thought of the universe just existing from no cause, let alone not a personal cause is just illogical. This universe has a contingency for God and the Kalam cosmological argument proves this. The Kalam cosmological argument is a wellorganized argument for God that has been developed from Muslim philosophers al-Kindi and al-Ghazali, and has been reinvented by philosopher William Lane Craig. The Kalam argument is very simple and straightforward. It is dealt with as a series of dilemmas.

Those dilemmas starts with since the universe exists, is there a beginning or no beginning, is that eginning caused or uncaused, and is that cause personal or impersonal. The first premise states that whatever begins to exist as a cause. This premise if very logical and denying it is only possible to have things come from a cause is counterintuitive. The second premise of the Kalam cosmological argument states that universe began to exist, which is correct because it is impossible for an infinite to exist. This can be proven with the steady state theory, which states that the universe is expanding from singularity.

The last premise in this argument states that therefore, the universe has a cause, and that cause is God. The first premise discussing the need for a cause for the existence of the universe is backed up from the Big Bang theory and the second law of thermodynamics. The Big Bang theory helps prove both the idea of something came from nothing and the idea that the universe is finite. Amazing philosophers Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking do their best and show that it originated from an infinite point of density, which is nothing.

With this information, it is proven that there is a beginning to the universe. The idea of the universe being finite is easily proven. Back before the Big Bang theory was discovered and the findings of the universe outside of earth were limited, it was believed that the universe was infinite in time and space. Seeing how the sun has been predicted to die out in 5 billion years from now, it is simply illogical for the idea of an infinite universe to exist with limited resources such as the sun.

The Second law of Thermodynamics addresses the point that “The universe is moving toward heat death. ” This is the idea that it is expanding and will soon be all the same temperature. Since this has not yet happened, it shows that the universe is finite, not infinite. The second premise, dealing with the idea that the universe began to exist, is also proven by the Big Bang theory’s idea of a starting point and the idea of limited resources dying out millions of years ago.

The third premise covering the idea of the universe has a cause and that cause is God, is proven by the way the universe is created. Since the universe has a cause and is finite, it would have to be created from a timeless agent, which is God. Following the Kalam cosmological argument comes the transcendental argument. Both of these arguments can prove the existence of God, but the transcendental argument explains how both physical and non-physical things exist. According to an atheist, “only things in the physical world exist,” excluding the belief of soul, mind, or morality.

On the opposition, the theistic Christian worldview is a more broad belief within reason and logic, consisting of both physical and nonphysical things, like the existence of a soul, mind and morality, and numbers. However, the view of an atheist is simply ignorant to everything that is non-physical or supernatural. For example, look at numbers. Numbers are used so much today that they have become a vital part to how everything works. The problem is that numbers do not exist; no one can physically look at numbers, or touch numbers.

There are millions of atheists today who use numbers in their day-to-day lives. These important tools go against their beliefs. In order to say that numbers exist, which they do, an atheist would have to believe that the world consists of both physical and non-physical things. Not only numbers can disprove the beliefs of atheism, but other ideas like love, importance, and many other things that point to a personal God that designed a suitable universe for Him to do his will. Proceeding, One of the most important attributes in society is morality.

This subject of morality fits in with the transcendental argument, but it does start to branch off into its own argument. Morality is what makes us human; it is what separates us from animals. Because of morality that God has bestowed upon us, we are able to know good from evil. Most people today have a basic understanding for what is considered right and wrong. But where did that come from? Certainly not from Darwinism, the most accepted belief among the field of science and evolution.

Darwinism teaches that we are evolved species who share a common ancestor with every life form on the earth; the plants animals today survived through natural selection: an idea believed by Charles Darwin that is most commonly known as, “Survival of the fittest. ” This goes against any sense of morality that humans have. According to Darwinism, humans should not support those who struggle in life and should only act to protect themselves. This resulted in the belief of Eugenics, an idea of only supporting the top-tier of mankind by getting rid of the “flaws” in humanity.

Many Darwinists negatively look at this that follows Darwinism, today. If Darwinism cannot give an answer to where good and evil comes from, then science cannot answer this. According to the bible, God gave us morality and He is away from all that is evil. There is no sense of good and evil without a God who is all good. “Evil only makes sense if there is an objective good. ” This statement from philosopher Frank Beckwith is true, as seen in society with chivalry, coexisting, and other lifestyles that support giving people purpose and not stealing valuables or lives.

In summation, the atheistic view of the world is not well supported compared to the theistic view of God. When believing in a creator in blind chance, there is a possibility for thoughts to be true with assurance of knowledge existing. With contradicting the possibility of the universe beginning with the creation from a personal God, it is illogical and irreverent to state that the universe just happened on its own. With these arguments explained, it is best to conclude that God is responsible for creating all of mankind and what surrounds it.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this essay please select a referencing style below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.