What is wrong with the Kalam Cosmological Argument?

[leroy]

I don't understand why you think that the KCA matters. It doesn't even demonstrate that God exists.
Why did you start this thread?

Maybe you can answer that, at least?
Tom

Ok from the text in red letters, it seems to me that you are referring to my own personal opinion.


If the universe had a cause, I would argue, that the cause is necesairly something timeless, spaceless, inmaterial, powerful, and personal .

To me this has theological significance. Postulating the existance of something timeless, spaceless, inmaterial, powerful, and personal .would strongly suggest heard that God exists.

 

[columbus]

If the universe had a cause, I would argue, that the cause is necesairly something timeless, spaceless, inmaterial, powerful, and personal .

KCA doesn't even support the premise that God exists.

Feel free to respond to post #16. Or just keep dodging and dancing, with yet more vague questions and unsupported assertions.
Tom

 

[leroy]

I see nothing in any reference that refers to a .Quantum Era' The only definition I find for the 'Quantum Era' is the following"

From: Quantum Era

The Quantum Era represented the pinnacle of the Technical Age, with maturing nano, bio and data technologies providing the opportunity for a comfortable, robust interplanetary society. Challenges posed by the development of potentially dominant artificially created sentient beings and blended realities were matched by opportunities arising from inexpensive fabrication and early quantum hyper-string technology that heralded the potential of society to evolve into an Interstellar Age civilization."

With quantum era I simply mean the "quantum world" from Wich the universe emerged.

This "quantum world" could have not been past eternal as the paper that I quoted shows.

The " quantum world" would be part of the finite history of the universe.......agree?

 

[shunyadragon]

With quantum era I simply mean the "quantum world" from Wich the universe emerged.

This "quantum world" could have not been past eternal as the paper that I quoted shows.

Please cite, I know of no paper that describes the Quantum world as finite.

The " quantum world" would be part of the finite history of the universe.......agree?

No the universe is emergent, from the Quantum World. The Quantum World would exist before, during, throughout, and after the universe existed.

 

[leroy]

KCA doesn't even support the premise that God exists.

Feel free to respond to post #16. Or just keep dodging and dancing, with yet more vague questions and unsupported assertions.
Tom

Well it seems to me that you where just asking for my opinion.

In my opinion the KCA supports the existance of something timeless, spaceless, inmaterial, powerful, and personal .and in my opinion only God has those atributes

 

[columbus]

In my opinion the KCA supports the existance of something timeless, spaceless, inmaterial, powerful, and personal .and in my opinion only God has those atributes

Why do you hold this opinion?
Obviously the KCA doesn't support any such thing.
Tom

 

[leroy]

Why do you hold this opinion?
Obviously the KCA doesn't support any such thing.
Tom

Well that would be a whole other discussion

In this thread I am interested in showing that the universe had a beginning and a cause

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If the universe had a cause, I would argue, that the cause is necesairly something timeless, spaceless, inmaterial, powerful, and personal .

Ha! Of course you would.

And since I'm guessing you're getting your argument straight from William Lane Craig, I'd bet that your justification is just as ridiculous and full of holes as his is.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well that would be a whole other discussion

In this thread I am interested in showing that the universe had a beginning and a cause

And we're all waiting with baited breath for you to actually do it.

 

[leroy]

Please cite, I know of no paper that describes the Quantum world as finite.



No the universe is emergent, from the Quantum World. The Quantum World would exist before, during, throughout, and after the universe existed.

The quantum world could have not lasted for an infinite amount of time, as the paper that I quoted shows

The third, (emergent universe) although it is stable with respect to classical perturbations, can collapse quantum mechanically, and therefore cannot have an eternal past.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAEegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw1jpaw41G741V0BqWKa2gpA

The article explains why can't the quantum world last from infinity past.

 

[leroy]

Ha! Of course you would.

And since I'm guessing you're getting your argument straight from William Lane Craig, I'd bet that your justification is just as ridiculous and full of holes as his is.

Well that is why I made this thread. Where are the holes in the KCA? Why is Wiliam lane Creig wrong?

 

[leroy]

And we're all waiting with baited breath for you to actually do it.

Well I have been providing arguments for a beginning. Feel free to address those arguments

 

[columbus]

In this thread I am interested in showing that the universe had a beginning and a cause

Which you have quite failed to do.

Well that would be a whole other discussion

Why is the possibility that KCA might be important a whole other discussion?

You have made a bunch of assertions about The Creator in a thread about KCA, dodged answering questions with a batch of vague questions and unsupported assertions

And now you don't want to discuss any of that? Seriously?

This wouldn't have as much schadenfreude if you hadn't kept complaining that you don't get clear and direct answers.
But you did.
Tom

 

[shunyadragon]

The quantum world could have not lasted for an infinite amount of time, as the paper that I quoted shows



https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAEegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw1jpaw41G741V0BqWKa2gpA

The article explains why can't the quantum world last from infinity past.

The paper does not mention the 'Quantum World'any where in the text.

English lesson - Quantum World would be noun,and not referred to in the text. The paper did say:

"The third, although it is stable with respect to classical perturbations, can collapse quantum mechanically, and therefore cannot have an eternal past."

Referred to an adjective quantum mechanically which describes the nature of Quantum Mechanics in the processes the emergent universe,

 

[columbus]

@leroy
Let me rephrase my answer, yet more clearly and directly.
Your OP title is "What is wrong with the Kalam Cosmological Argument?"
My answer is "It's meaningless. Yet people like yourself make lots of unsupported assertions because they don't realize that it is meaningless."

Is that clear and direct enough? Will I get a clear and direct response from you, or just another batch of vague questions and unsupported assertions?
Tom

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well that is why I made this thread. Where are the holes in the KCA?

You just had 11 pages of holes in the Kalasm argument itself. I'm not going to re-hash all of that. I was talking about Craig's tremendous leap from "the universe has a cause" to "that cause is the Christian God."

Why is Wiliam lane Creig wrong?

Ha! Where to begin?

William Lane Craig - RationalWiki

Maybe just make your arguments for your new basketful of assertions and we can deal with them one at a time.

 

[leroy]

You just had 11 pages of holes in the Kalasm argument itself. I'm not going to re-hash all of that. I was talking about Craig's tremendous leap from "the universe has a cause" to "that cause is the Christian God."

Really, care to provide a single quote where wlc makes such a leap ?

I have seen WLC claiming clearly and unabigously that the KCA by itself does not lead you to the Christian God

 

[leroy]

The paper does not mention the 'Quantum World'any where in the text.

English lesson - Quantum World would be noun,and not referred to in the text. The paper did say:

"The third, although it is stable with respect to classical perturbations, can collapse quantum mechanically, and therefore cannot have an eternal past."

Referred to an adjective quantum mechanically which describes the nature of Quantum Mechanics in the processes the emergent universe,

Ok the article doest use the terms "quantum world" but it explains why can't a universe be in a quantum state for an infinite amount of time.

 

[leroy]

@leroy
Let me rephrase my answer, yet more clearly and directly.
Your OP title is "What is wrong with the Kalam Cosmological Argument?"
My answer is "It's meaningless. Yet people like yourself make lots of unsupported assertions because they don't realize that it is meaningless."

Is that clear and direct enough? Will I get a clear and direct response from you, or just another batch of vague questions and unsupported assertions?
Tom

I told you before

Whether if the universe had a cause or not has philosophical and theological implications that I personally find meaningful.

That is my answer , I honestly don't understand what type of answer are you expecting.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ok the article doest use the terms "quantum world" but it explains why can't a universe be in a quantum state for an infinite amount of time.

Quantum state is simply descriptive again of a property of energy at the Quantum level, and not remotely a synonym for the Quantum World, and actually does not relate directly to why the authors consider universes as not past complete, and have a beginning.

Again, no problem with universes have a beginning, and that is not the problem with your argument.