I need help writing 4 or 5-page evualuation of the Kalam cosmological argument in Islam?

Kalam cosmological argument in Islam research paper 

Introduction

The Kalam cosmological argument originated from Islamic theologians. The discussion brings the understanding of God’s existence as the first reason for the world creation. The Christian, Muslim, and medieval Jewish thinkers and theologians have contributed profoundly to these arguments. Some of the proponents are Saadia Gaon, Al-Ghazali, Al-Kindi, William Lane Craig, and St. Bonaventure. William Lane Craig is the recent contributor to the Kalam cosmological argument where he publicized a book on this topic in 1979. The argument claims that the universe exists from a more significant cause which must be God. This research focuses on an evaluation of the Kalam cosmological argument in its historical perspective, contemporary inputs, refusal arguments, and its challenges.

articulateprowriters.com is your solution to any assignment on religious topics, theological concepts, research papers, discussions, and exam help. ORDER NOW. 

Historical perspective

The argument as seen in history is named after a tradition in the Islam called Kalam, where the diverse philosophy was formulated. The evidence that the first cause of the universe is God and everything that exists in the world. This argument supports the Islamic and Christianity belief of a supernatural being who spoke, and the world was created. This understanding has been used by the Christian apologetics to defend their faith in an invisible God, the creator of heaven and earth (Copan & Craig, 2017).

John Philoponus is a theologian who contributed to the Kalam cosmological argument. He argues against the concept displayed by Aristotle of an eternal world where he raises his thinking on the creation from nothing. Saadia, a Jewish philosopher, supported the argument that nothing can travel in an infinite series of the moment to form the present universe. This argument shows that an endless time cannot make a stop at the present moment to create a world. The medieval theologians took this argument to prove the Islamic belief of creation who formed the term Kalam. Another school of the falsafa contributed to the claims that all materials are dependent on a higher being for their existence (Copan & Craig, 2017). They had a strong view that the universe was created by God and not infinitely old.

According to Copan & Craig, (2017), Al-Ghazali is influential to the Kalam tradition and Aristotelian synthesis that created a foundation for most Islamic philosophers. Al-Ghazali influenced a group of philosophers who sustained claims against several thoughts of the falsafa traditions. He contributes to the understanding that the universe cannot be infinitely old and cannot exist by its own. He argues that another causes a single phenomenon and the process continues to infinite. He believes that a procession of temporal events cannot go backward because of an eternal cause. He gives an example of earth rotation from the infinity that progresses without reaching actual infinite.

Contemporary formulations

William Lane Craig has been discussed in several journals and books on God’s existence, and he contributed to the contemporary philosophy of God’s presence. He makes his arguments in a modern setting in a simple form using three syllogisms. First, Craig claims that all things that exist have a cause. Second, he argues concerning the existence of the universe, and lastly, the world exists with a purpose (Loke, 2017). Craig’s contributions have mainly focused on the second syllogism. His defence of the arguments is based on both scientific and philosophical grounds.

Loke (2017) claims that Craig illustrates that universe exists as God’s cause. This claim concludes in supporting the belief of a God who is the creator of the universe. The claims cannot be refused by the natural aspect of the world that is founded on the cause, which is God. He says that the purpose of the creation is beyond the universe itself. Craig says that people have not experienced the existence of physical things without reason. Several people have accepted these empirical generalizations. The metaphysical principle of nothing comes from nothing is imposable to refute. Craig thinks that the creating moment has already passed with tenseless events. Craig does not give attention to the first premise because it can fail in its provisions. The first premise may fail in empirical or scientific reasoning. People cannot prove that everything that exists has a cause because not all things are known to men.

Refuting arguments of the Kalam Cosmological

John Taylor is one of the philosophical proponents that criticizes the Kalam Cosmological argument. The argument supports the reasoning does not shows major premise of whether the universe had a beginning. Also, the first claim is not backed by its credibility. People do not know of all things that exist, making it hard to conclude that all items that are created have a cause. Craig, as the major proponent of the Kalam argument, does not prove or show that the universe had a beginning (Terrab, 2019). The discussion of universe creation is based on a classical assumption that it began which is believed to be false.

The case against Kalam cosmological argument illustrates that Craig borrows the idea of the beginning of the universe from Vilenkin who negates the existence of God. Terrab (2019) claims that Vilenkin argument shows that the beginning of time but not the creation of the universe. He claims that the argument is erroneous because the conclusion has a flaw. Also, the idea that its God who made the world is not logical. The Kalam argument shows that God did not need a creator, but he created the universe. In the same context, the universe existed without needing a creator. In refuting the claims, God, who is timeless, uncaused, and all-powerful is a plausible hypothesis without evidence. The Kalam cosmological argument conclusion of the world having a cause without an explanation makes it unconfirmed claim.

The contemporary physics illustrates that the world exists because some random particles came together without a cause for the argument basis its illustration on free subatomic particles that have no reason in existence. The vacuum theory shows that the universe exists in an ample space that came due to the conversion of energies, causing the movement of particles. The scientific argument refuses the Kalam cosmology argument tracing its ideas from the significant bang occurrence claiming that the universe will shrink back to a single point (Terrab, 2019). The scope is enormous on the various arguments against the Kalam cosmology argument.

Challenges with the Kalam cosmology argument

The use of the concept “necessary being” is ambiguous leading to several misunderstanding. Terrab (2019) illustrates that other thinkers have used the idea to explain their understanding of the argument as a being whose existence is impossible, inconceivable being, a perfection being, a logically necessary being, and a being that cannot exist. All these interpretations of the concept are misleading and missing the actual meaning of its use. The real purpose in the cosmological argument is a being that exists without coming into existence, and if it doesn’t live, it can’t begin to live. A necessary person is used to mean a self-existing God and self-sustaining who exists definitely.

The assumption that everything that exists contingently requires an explanation is not always correct. The logical description of universe existence is not needed because it’s true the way it naturally lives. Also, the consideration that the world is contingent is an assumption that can have an open challenge. Not all unexpected things require an explanation because they are metaphysically natural in understanding. Also, the answer may fail because not all contingent beings can be understood logically. The fact that God, who is the cause exists without cause and as contingent being does not require an explanation (Doko, 2018). Thus, it’s unrealistic to conclude that all existing things have a reason while one of them does not have one, and its existence is unexplained.

Conclusion

Kalam cosmology argument basis its thoughts on the religious background of the Jews, Christians, and Islam on the presence of a supernatural God creator of the world. However, the various arguments, counterargument, and contemporary views, and the challenges of the theories leading to several conclusion. If the existence of God cannot be explained, it’s also good to argue that not all contingent things require an explanation. People may not understand the presence of the universe, which can be left as contingent. This argument gives up on the chains of accounts that are accorded on every contingent object as logic. More so, a variation on this topic continues to expand over time.

 

 

 

 

 

Looking for a similar assignment? Our writers will offer you original work free from plagiarism. We follow the assignment instructions to the letter and always deliver on time. Be assured of a quality paper that will raise your grade. Order now and Get a 15% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"