Posted: Apr 07, 2011 6:12 pm
by colubridae
Shrunk wrote:William Lane Craig seems to be one of the most frequently discussed apolgists for theism on this board. His reputation largely rests on a series of five arguments for the existence of God, which feature regularly in his writings, public speeches and debates. Since these arguments so often arise in discussion on this board, I thought it would be a good idea to have separate threads devoted to each of these to allow discussion of these by those who support Craig, and those who would refute his arguments.

A full discussion of these arguments can be found in Craig's article here. What follows is the introductory paragraph from that article.

2. The Kalam Cosmological Argument Based on the Beginning of the UniverseHere’s a different version of the cosmological argument, which I have called the kalam cosmological argument in honor of its medieval Muslim proponents (kalam is the Arabic word for theology):

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Once we reach the conclusion that the universe has a cause, we can then analyze what properties such a cause must have and assess its theological significance.
Now again the argument is logically ironclad. So the only question is whether the two premises are more plausibly true than their denials.

in addition:-
The red bit is a nasty little attempt at shifting the onus.
No-one has to provide evidence for a denial of 1,2 or 3.
The onus is on the claimant to provide evidence.