Developing a New Kalam Argument: Insights From the Craig-Morriston Debate

Abstract

This thesis delves into the philosophical issues of the kalam cosmological argument, particularly focusing on the debates between William Lane Craig and Wes Morriston concerning the personhood of the First Cause, causal principles, and infinity arguments. Its primary aim is to enrich the discourse by introducing fresh perspectives that refine traditional formulations of the kalam argument. Specifically, it advocates for a version of the kalam’s stage one that does not necessitate the denial of an actual infinite or a commitment to a dynamic conception of time and creatio ex nihilo. It proposes a modified causal principle where its negation clearly entails the emergence of something from nonexistence, as well as an infinite regress argument against an infinite past, thereby strengthening the argument’s foundational assertions. Additionally, this thesis emphasizes what is referred to as stage two of the kalam argument – the transition from identifying the cause of the universe with an entity possessing divine attributes such as agency, encompassing the capacity for conscious decision-making and the ability to will or cause events. This stage, often overlooked in scholarly discussions, is explored in detail at the outset of both chapters 2 and 3. Ultimately, the thesis advocates for a novel interpretation of the kalam argument, suggesting that the universe’s cause is not only material and spatial but also personal, aligning with the concept of creatio ex Deo (“creation out of God”) and a panentheistic (“all in God”) concept of God. This approach challenges the conventional God/universe dualism inviting a reevaluation of the divine attributes traditionally associated with the First Cause.