Ep. #229 – Is the Kalam sound? Jimmy Akin vs. Jordan Carstensen
Summary
Is the Kalam cosmological argument sound? In particular, is there a successful philosophical argument for the finitude of the past? Jordan Carstensen (grad student at Holy Apostles College) argues in the affirmative. Jimmy Akin, who affirms the scientific evidence supporting the Kalam, argues that philosophical arguments for a finite past do not work. This episode consists of a dialogue between Jimmy and Jordan, moderated by John.
Video Version
Resources
Jimmy Akin’s Collected Blog Articles on the Kalam Cosmological Argument
Jimmy Akin’s Dialogue with Dr. William Lane Craig on the Kalam Cosmological Argument
Jordan Carstensen’s Google Slides (Opening Statement)
Related Episodes
Ep. #145 – What do you think about the Kalam? w/ Jimmy Akin
Ep. #89 – The Kalam Argument & the B-theory of Time w/ Curtis Metcalfe
CORE #05 – Good Reasons to Believe in God (part 3)
Human experience of infinitude is understandable in the future direction but not in the past direction. It is like an infinite line of fallen dominoes going backward/into the past. Human experience can’t understand such a line without there being one domino to fall over first or a finger/cause to start the falling. I think the debate shows how logical possibilities (for God!) seem absurd/impossible based on human experience (esp. of causation), though there is no way to logically show them to be impossible with the most precise of language.
Again, from the human perspective within time, an infinite past seems incomprehensible, because we can’t help imagining someone or something progressing from a beginning and thus think we could never reach the present allegedly from an infinite past. But from the perspective of God outside of time, like a mathematician outside of the number scale, an infinite past is very much logically possible and can be comprehended theoretically.