The Best Argument for the Existence of God: The Kalam Cosmological Argument

Many people are skeptics when it comes to the existence of God. However, there is one strong argument that supports the existence of God. This argument is based on the idea of cause and effect.

The Argument from Cause and Effect The argument from cause and effect states that everything must have a cause. Nothing can come into existence without being caused by something else. Therefore, if we trace back all of the causes, we will eventually come to a First Cause. This First Cause is what we call God.

Many skeptics will argue that this First Cause could just be the Universe itself. However, the Universe cannot be its own cause. Something must have caused the Universe to come into existence. This something is what we call God.

The argument from cause and effect is a strong argument for the existence of God. It is an argument that has been used by many great thinkers throughout history.

A variation of this is the Kalam Cosmological Argument. This argument is based on the fact that everything that exists has a cause. Therefore, since the universe exists, it must have a cause. The cause of the universe cannot be part of the universe, since then it would have had a cause itself. Therefore, the cause of the universe must be outside of it. This cause is what we call “God.”

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is based on two premises:

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

2. The Universe began to exist.

From these two premises, it follows logically that: 3) Therefore, the Universe has a cause.

The first premise is something that we have good reason to believe is true. We know from experience that everything that begins to exist has a cause. For example, every time we see a building being constructed, we know that there was an architect who designed it and contractors who built it. We also know from experience that things don’t just pop into existence without a cause. If they did, we would see things appearing in our living rooms all the time! The second premise is also something we have good reason to believe is true. The evidence from science points overwhelmingly to the fact that the Universe did indeed have a beginning. So, if the two premises are true, then it follows logically that the conclusion must be true as well – namely, that the Universe has a cause and that this Cause is what we call “God.”

In conclusion, the Kalam Cosmological Argument is the best argument for the existence of God. This argument is based on two premises which we have good reason to believe are true: 1) Everything that begins to exist has a cause and 2) The Universe began to exist. From these premises, it follows logically that 3) Therefore, the Universe has a cause and this Cause is what we call “God.”

William Lane Craig is the most outspoken apologetic who makes use of this argument. On his website, reasonablefaith.org, he outlines the history of this argument and his own version.

Craig dubbed the argument “the kalam cosmological argument” because of its historical roots in medieval Islamic theology (“kalam” is the Arabic word for medieval theology). Today, after being largely forgotten since Kant’s time, this argument has resurfaced. According to the Cambridge Companion to Atheism (2007), “a count of the articles in the philosophy journals shows that more articles have been published about… the Kalam argument than any other… contemporary formulation of an argument for God’s existence… theists and atheists alike ‘cannot leave [the] Kalam argument alone.”

What is the argument that has piqued our interest? Let one of the most important medieval protagonists in this debate speak for himself. Al-Ghazali was a Muslim theologian from Persia, or modern-day Iran, who lived in the twelfth century. He was concerned that ancient Greek philosophy was influencing Muslim philosophers of the time to deny God’s creation of the universe. After thoroughly researching these philosophers’ teachings, Ghazali wrote The Incoherence of the Philosophers, a scathing critique of their ideas. He argues in this fascinating book that the concept of a beginningless universe is absurd. The universe must have a beginning, and since nothing comes into being without a cause, the universe must have a transcendent Creator.

Ghazali formulates his argument very simply: “Every being which begins has a cause for its beginning; now the world is a being which begins; therefore, it possesses a cause for its beginning.”

Ghazali’s reasoning involves three simple steps:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its beginning.

2. The universe began to exist.

3. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its beginning.

Source:

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/existence-nature-of-god/the-kalam-cosmological-argument

YARPP List

Related posts:

1. Law 17: Seize the Historical Moment (The Laws of Human Nature)
2. Part 2: Isolate the Victim (The Art of Seduction)
3. Chapter 16: The Capitalist Creed (Sapiens)
4. On Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra Summary (8.4/10)