Skip to content

Scaling the Secular City 1: Cosmological Argument


Moreland briefly mentions the Thomist and Leibnizian forms of the cosmological argument, then goes on to develop the Kalam form. I think there are some serious weak points in this argument, but I do have unanswered questions about some claims. For example:

  1. Is an actual infinite impossible?
  2. If not, how to B-theory of time people defend themselves?
  3. What does modern cosmology say about the big bang now?

Now I do think there may be good objections since most physicists seem to adopt the B-theory of time, but why do they? I tend to object to the leap from caused universe to personal cause. The chapter is about 27 pages long, and Moreland spends literally a single paragraph on the last page making the case that the cause is personal. I think this an a very apparent weak point. Moreland claims that only a free action can explain the universe coming into existence, since only that could be timeless. But how can an action be timeless? Seems like we have no reason to believe that an action can even occur outside of time. There are also challenges to freedom (since Moreland defends libertarianism, then that means that ultimately, the cause of the universe was literally nothing).

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: