And the Spirit & the bride say, come.... Reveaaltion 22:17

And the Spirit & the bride say, come.... Reveaaltion 22:17
And the Spirit & the bride say, come...Revelation 22:17 - May We One Day Bow Down In The DUST At HIS FEET ...... {click on blog TITLE at top to refresh page}---QUESTION: ...when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth? LUKE 18:8

Monday, July 16, 2018

Creation Moment 7/16/2018 - Kalam Argument

All things were made by him;
 and without him was not any thing made that was made.
John 1:3
"Reed C. from the United States writes:
I recently engaged an atheist in a discussion that revolved around the cosmological argument. In short, he proposed an entity who had all the requirements needed to act as the cause of the universe except, instead of being sentient he claimed it would be a non-sentient. This non-sentient cause would not choose to create but simply perpetually create new universes. He claims that this cause is just as good an explanation as God and can function as a substitute.

First, point out that their objection already accepts the Kalam argument (the argument for God from the beginning of the universe).

In positing a cause of the universe’s beginning other than God, they’ve accepted that things that began to exist have causes, that the universe began, and that therefore the universe had a cause.


This already means that they’re committed to the existence of something outside of this universe’s physics. That’s a pretty big concession for your typical skeptic to make! It’s important to drive this point home, because that can help reveal if the objection is a real one, or if it’s just a smokescreen they have no vested interest in.

Second, this is no argument against God being able to cause the beginning of the universe. Even if something else could have, it doesn’t mean God didn’t.

For instance, let’s say that God and a non-sentient cause are equally good explanations for the beginning of the universe.
--Then let’s say that Plato’s Form of the Good is as good an explanation as God for the grounding of objective morals.
--Then, let’s say an impersonal necessary being is as good an explanation as God for why there’s something rather than nothing.
--And let’s also say that a special computer-like entity is as good an explanation for the design of the cosmos as God.
But when we consider them all together, we have four different entities competing with God as the best explanation for these different things." CMI