ON THE KALAM COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
This paper examines the Kalam cosmological argument, as put forward by William Craig. Craig infers the existence of a personal God from the supposedly finite past of the universe. The temporal finiteness of the universe is based upon philosophical arguments for the presumed impossibility of an actual infinity of past events and is confirmed by two lines of scientific evidence. The arguments against an actual infinity if valid prove too much, placing undue limitations on God. Moreover, the arguments themselves are dubious. Although the concept of an actual infinity may lead to conclusions that are counter intuitive, the impossibility of the actual infinite has not been demonstrated. The scientific arguments for a finite past the big bang singularity and the second law of thermodynamics are examined. It is found that there are still various seemingly plausible alternatives to a finite past. Big bang cosmology contradicts Craig's philosophical conclusions at a few points. The status and value of scientifically based arguments for the existence of God are briefly discussed.