Uploaded May 2012 | Updated September 2026, 1 day ago
It has been suggested by skeptics and atheists that virtual particles prove that something can come from nothing. Supposedly the quantum vacuum (from which virtual particles come from) is nothingness. William Lane Craig explains that virtual particles do not literally come from nothing because the quantum vacuum is actually energy. So, it cannot be nothing! Unfortunately, in the popular sciences people have suggested that the quantum vacuum is nothing. Also, critics often point to the quantum vacuum and virtual particles as a refutation of the first premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. To suggest that something (ie the quantum vacuum) is nothing is absurd, let alone the idea that something can pop into existence uncaused out of nothing!
It has been suggested by skeptics and atheists that virtual particles prove that something can come from nothing. Supposedly the quantum vacuum (from which virtual particles come from) is nothingness. William Lane Craig explains that virtual particles do not literally come from nothing because the quantum vacuum is actually energy. So, it cannot be nothing! Unfortunately, in the popular sciences people have suggested that the quantum vacuum is nothing. Also, critics often point to the quantum vacuum and virtual particles as a refutation of the first premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. To suggest that something (ie the quantum vacuum) is nothing is absurd, let alone the idea that something can pop into existence uncaused out of nothing!









![Kalam Cosmological Argument - Douglas Groothuis, PhD
Doug Groothuis gives a lecture on the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Whats interesting about this lecture is that Groothuis did not accept the Kalam Cosmological Argument at first but was later convinced by it.
Notes:
http://www.relyonchrist.com/Lecture/13.htm
http://www.relyonchrist.com/Lecture/14.htm
Kalam Cosmological Argument
(Moreland, Scaling the Secular City; see also William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith [Crossway, 1994]; Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, Creation from Nothing [Baker, 2004]; William Lane Craig and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, God: A Debate Between a Christian and an Atheist [Oxford, 2004])
Preliminary: concepts of (a) the actual infinite and (b) the potential infinite
1. The universe had a beginning
2. The impossibility of the actual infinite (distinguish from potential infinite)
3. The impossibility of traversing an actual infinite (even if it exists); forming an actual infinite through successive addition, piece by piece...
4. Scientific confirmation from Big Bang cosmology (absolute origination). See also John Jefferson Davis, Genesis 1:1 and Big Bang Cosmology, in The Frontiers of Science and Faith (InterVarsity, 2002), 11 36; and Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers (revised ed., 1992).
5. Scientific confirmation from second law of thermodynamics.
6. Astronomer Fred Hoyle (who once advanced the steady state cosmology) argues against the universe being infinitely old in virtue of its hydrogen consumption. The argument can be stated as a modus tolens deduction (denying the consequent).
7. Can everything come from nothing without a cause? The pop theory (biting the metaphysical bullet)
8. Philosophical critique of everything from nothing...
9. God and time (see Greg Gansell, editor, God and Time: Four Views [InterVarsity, 2001])
10. Argument against an impersonal cause
11. Argument against God needing a cause (Bertrand Russell)
12. Quentin Smiths acceptance of Big Bang cosmology and denial of Gods existence.
13. Unitary: Ockhams razor
14. Incorrigible, inextinguishable (having existed, God cannot fail to exist)
15. Personal, volitional (personal explanation—R. Swinburne)
16. Omnipotent: nothing is a greater expenditure of power than exnihilating the entire cosmos. This is rational to hold, given the argument.
17. Supplies the necessary conditions for impeccable and omnipotent goodness: (1) - (4). Need (5) moral argument and (6) the Incarnation for the final necessary condition, which, with (1) - (4), make for necessary and sufficient conditions. Kalam Cosmological Argument - Douglas Groothuis, PhD](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/AsqEznikq6c/mqdefault.jpg)
