By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JWeinCom said:
WolfpackN64 said:

I'm sorry, what was your initial point. Got a bit confused responding to different people.

The Kalam cosmological argument is not an argument for god.  It's an argument for a cause, but cannot demonstrate any particular qualities for that cause even if you grant that the premises are valid (which I don't think they are).

That's just because of the nature of the argument. They're trying only to prove the existance of a God, not what the qualities of that God are. For that, Thomas Aquinas' arguments are of more use.