10 Worst Objections to the Kalam Cosmological Argument

William Lane Craig has responded to the 10 worst objections to the Kalam Cosmological argument for the existence of God. This has also been titled “Objections so bad I couldn’t have made them up.” For those who don’t know the Kalam cosmological argument is simply this:

1) Whatever begins to exist has a cause

2) The Universe began to exist

3) Therefore, the universe has a cause

Why does one of the premier Christian apologists take the time to respond to some of the worst arguments? I believe it is because the objections appear so often on the internet and they tend to trip up the average believer. Below are the first two objections.

The first objection is this: “Craig says that he believes in God on the basis of the self-authenticating witness of the Holy Spirit in his heart, not on the basis of the kalam cosmological argument. In fact he says that even if the argument were refuted, he would still believe in God. This is blatant hypocrisy on Craig’s part.”

The second objection is this: “The kalam cosmological argument is question-begging. For the truth of the premises presupposes the truth of the conclusion. Therefore, the argument is an example of reasoning in a circle.”


About Louis

I am a 1997 graduate of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.
This entry was posted in Apologetics, William Lane Craig. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to 10 Worst Objections to the Kalam Cosmological Argument

  1. Matt says:

    Funny how he tackles the ten worst and not the ten best.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s