Thursday, April 28, 2011

Reverse Kalam Cosmological Argument -UPDATED

Theists often use the Kalam Cosmological Argument in an attempt to confuse atheists.

They state:

(1) Everything that began to exist has a cause.
(2) The universe has a beginning.
(3) The universe has a cause.
(4) If the universe has a cause, we call that cause God.
(5) God exists.

Then, when atheists ask: "What is the cause of God?" Theists will answer : "God does not have a cause because God is eternal and timeless, and existed prior to the existence of time, therefore God is not limited by time" ... which is pretty much nonsense, because 'prior to the existence of time' is a chronological statement in and of itself.

Therefore, I propose the "Reverse Kalam Cosmological Argument":

(1)Everything that began to exist has a cause.
(2)God, being eternal, does not have a beginning.
(3) God does not have a cause.
(4) If God does not have a cause, then God never began to exist.
(5) God does not exist.

*UPDATE (2011-05-03): reworded the statements to be less convoluted. 


  1. It does not follow logically that, if A never began to exist, A does not exist.

    1. How does something that never began to exist exist at all?

    2. I think Jeremy is right. Kalam is bullshit, but... substitute "God" for "the Universe" in 3, 4, 5 and you'll see that this rebuttal only works as a reductio ad absurdum, because we already know of something that falsifies the conclusion. As Carl Sagan has pointed out, the naturalistic worldview is based on the assumption that the universe always existed in some state and that it doesn’t make sense to ask indefinitely for a “cause”. In the end, we know “something” exists and, therefore, we must assume that “something” either has existed indefinitely in the past or somehow exists beyond time. There’s no way around it. So, something that never began to exist, can, indeed, exist.

    3. Also, I think that we, human beings, cannot yet understand certain things like time and existence properly, so we get confused when we talk about causation, infinities, etc. A better question for me is: what is the nature of what exists? What are his properties and potentialities? Yes, Science is the best way we know for answering those questions… “:0)