Why the Kalam Cosmological Argument Succeeds
About | Information | History | Online | Facts | Discovery
Frank Turek (PhD, author of I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist) gives scientific and philosophical evidence for the Kalam Cosmological Argument for the existence of God via his "SURGE" argument - The Second Law of Thermodynamics, the Expanding Universe, the Radiation Afterglow from the Big Bang Explosion, the Great galaxy seeds in the Radiation Afterglow, and Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. Turek also deals with varioius refutations made by Richard Dawkins (author of The God Delusion) and Christopher Hitchens (author of God is Not Great).
Comments
-
PhD in apologetics... hmm... If three people have PhD's on their specific religious ideologies... Like Frank Turek and his PhD in Christian apologetics, compared with another person with PhD in Muslim apologetics and a the third with a PhD in Hindu apologetics... what does that say about a PhD in apologetics? Doesn't Turek, have a degree in conniving people to believe his version of a story without evidence? ... Just like people with a PhD in a counter belief.
-
I totally agree that the argument is not valid. But if I were to just agree that the Universe was created by something that existed outside of cause and effect and time. What in the argument proves that this "something" was sentience, or a God, or the Christian God. Even if I did agree it was caused by a sentient being, why would it be the Christian God?
-
is this a stand up comedy? maaaan i had a blast laughing my ass off
-
Why the KCA fully fails in it's begging the question assertions.......
(P1) Everything that is sentient has a cause.
(P2) The Abrahamic god is (said to be) sentient.
(C) Therefore the Abrahamic god has a cause.
KCA, refuted. -
The argument fails because it assumes the need for a cause. It's simply a god of the gaps fallacy. No one's been able to prove it yet.
-
One of the main flaws in most versions of the KCA is in the first premise.
"All things that begins to exist, has a cause"
This is in contradiction with the christian belief of libertarian free will; which states that agent causation can begin a new chain of events. So it should be someting like:
"Everything that begins to exist, has a cause; except ideas of agents."
This exception would be essential to the argument.. and offcourse would be needed to be demonstrated as well.
So for the KCA you also need to demonstrate libertarian free will.. good luck.
(another things assumed in the argument: - A-theory of lineair time at the scale of space-time) -
Awesome informative lecture,where is the full video plz ?
-
The issue I have with a god of this universe is this. If God is infinite, has existed infinitely why then did he create mankind in only the past 5000 years?? What was he doing the last trillion trillion trillion etc years?
-
atheists-"There is no God and I Hate HIM !!!!! lolllllll 😁
-
if God is space less then how can he be "outside" of bigbang. space started at bigbang and "outside" is word which is an attribute of space.
-
If there ara nothing, then there are no law of thermodynamics, so then the 2 law of thermodynamics has no mening for it did not exist.
-
Kalam Cosmological Argument logic:
All cats meow.
My parrot can meow.
My parrot is a cat.
All pedophiles hurt children.
The god of the bible hurt children.
God is a pedophile.
All vampires rise from the grave.
Jesus rose from the grave.
Jesus is a vampire.
All creationists are idiots.
Intelligent design is creationism in a labcoat.
Proponents of intelligent design are idiots.
-
Even if the KCA would stand, that would'nt be proof of the christian god at all...
-
I have no "proof" that this universe actually "exists" (ref: The Matrix). But I have a "gut feeling" that the universe exists. Since the universe does exist (my premise) then that means "there are things which exist". In my personal experience everything which begins to exist has a cause. God (if there is a god) is the only "thing" which never "began to exist" (again my premise). Therefore god is the only "thing" that could have "started the ball rolling".
-
The Kalam Cosmological argument is only supported by a tensed A-theory universe. Under a tense-less B-theory universe(which some scientist support),the first premise of the Kalam Cosmological argument fails because nothing comes in to or goes out of existence. There is no distinction between past, present, and future. I don't know if Dr. Turek made that distinction because I didn't watch the whole video but Dr. William Craig states this in his championing the Kalam Cosmological argument.
-
I was watching this again and I have to say it's funny to me that internet atheists, who for the majority are not educated in philosophy and/or science make the biggest claims to the KCA being false for this reason or that reason. As if the proponents of the argument haven't thought about it very well. I pray that God may open your eyes to His truth one day.
-
Atheists like to think that if God revealed Himself in an "undeniable" way, that they would without a doubt believe in Him. But this is not true. The Israelites experienced God in a way most of us don't and they still doubted Him. It's our sin nature to suppress the truth.
-
the problem with atheist is that even if God himself appear in front of them, they will never accept they are wrong...
-
lol @ a Christian stealing the Islamic knowledge of Kalam Cosmological Argument. Ridiculous.
Hey Christians, let the real people of God speak on behalf of KCA, you perverts. -
And furthermore, if he's arguing that the universe began with the second law of thermodynamics then he must admit that the pre-fall utopian existence would have been impossible
31m 25sLenght
163Rating