JWeinCom said:
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.