Does Kalam Equivocate on the Phrase Begins to Exist? - Kalam Cosmological Argument @firstcauseargument
Does Kalam Equivocate on the Phrase Begins to Exist? - Kalam Cosmological Argument  @firstcauseargument
Uploaded June 2012 | Updated September 2026, 16 hours ago
Some skeptics and atheists have tried to refute the Kalam Cosmological Argument with the following rebuttal: "The argument equivocates on 'begins to exist.' In (1) it means to begin 'from a previous material state,' but in (2) it means 'not from a material state.'"

William Lane Craig responds to this so-called refutation.
Does Kalam Equivocate on the Phrase Begins to Exist? - Kalam Cosmological ArgumentThe Cosmos Just Is?: Carl Sagan vs William Lane CraigSequential Infinity in the Trinity? - William Lane Craig, PhDThe Law of Causality and Miracles - John Lennox, PhDThe Cosmos: Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse Tyson - William Lane Craig, PhDScientific Evidence for the Kalam Cosmological ArgumentKalam Cosmological Argument (Christian Apologetics) - Doug PotterDoes Quantum Physics Provide an Exception to Premise 1 of the Kalam Cosmological Argument?Lawrence Krauss Lied About Alexander Vilenkin and the BVG TheoremThe Kalam Cosmological Argument for GodNothing Ever Begins to Exist Because Were Just Rearranged Matter? - Kalam Cosmological ArgumentEternal Inflation Is Not Eternal in the Past (Stephen M. Barr, PhD)
firstcauseargument |

Does Kalam Equivocate on the Phrase 'Begins to Exist'? - Kalam Cosmological Argument

SHARE TO X SHARE TO REDDIT SHARE TO FACEBOOK WALLPAPER