Jeanell A.

Dela Tina October 05, 2016

BSN - 2A
Philo 106 W (12:25 to 3:25) T401

The Kalam Cosmological Argument and Big Bang Theory

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is a modern detail of the cosmological argument

for the presence of God rooted in medieval Islam. Like other arguments, it proceeds in the
idea of the existence of the world or rather, the universe to existence of God. The existence
of the universe stands that needs clarification. The only adequate and valid explanation, the
arguments suggest, is that it was created by God.

The argument shows that the universe has a beginning in the past. The argument
fights against the existence of an infinite past which implies universe has infinitely existed.
The kalam cosmological argument rests on the controversial claim that the universe has a
beginning in time. The first premise of the argument is the claim that everything that begins
to exist has a cause of its existence. The crucial premise of the kalam cosmological
argument, then, is the second which stated that the universe has a beginning of its existence.

In support, the argument often appeal to the modern science, specifically to the Big
Bang theory. Modern science, has established that the universe began with the Big Bang.
The argument for premise 2 invokes recent cosmology and the Big Bang theory of cosmic
origins. Big Bang initiates the very laws of physics, one cannot expect any physical
explanation of this singularity; physical laws used to explain the expansion of the universe
no longer hold at any time before t>0. Since the universe and all its material elements
originate in the Big Bang, the universe is temporally finite and thus had a beginning.

The response to this argument from the Big Bang is that, given the Grand Theory of
Relativity, the Big Bang is not an event at all. An event takes place within a space-time
context. But the Big Bang has no space-time context, there is neither time prior to the Big
Bang nor a space in which the Big Bang happens. Hence, the Big Bang cannot be
considered as a physical event occurring at a moment of time. As Hawking notes, the finite
universe has no space-time boundaries and lacks singularity and a beginning. Time might
be multi-dimensional or imaginary, in which case one asymptotically approaches a
beginning but never reaches it. And without a beginning the universe requires no cause.
The best one can say is that the universe is finite with respect to the past, not that it was an
event with a beginning.

Furthermore, suppose that the Big Bang singularity is not an event. Then, by this
same reasoning, events only arise from other events, subsequent so-called events cannot
be the effect of that singularity. If they were, they would not be events either. This result that
there are no events is absurd. In short, there seems to be no reason not to think of the Big
Bang as an event.

Now that we have supported each dilemma, we can draw this conclusion: the universe was
brought into existence. Many of us believe that the existence of God cannot be proven or
cannot be proven with any strong certainty. But if the three main premises of the KCA are
sound and adequately supported, then the conclusion is true regardless of the remarkable
and startling implications of such a conclusion.