Smithereens Religious Tourney Rd.1 KCA is sound!

Thank you Phantom for your acceptance. This is the first round of Smithereens religious tournament. We are debating that the KCA argument is sound and I am Pro. The Kalam Cosmological argument as a basic argument is as follows: KCA The Basic Argument 1. Whatever begins to exist, has a cause of its existence. 2. The universe began to exist. i.e., the temporal regress of events is finite. 3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.[1] Deductive reasoning[2] is the process of reasoning from one or more general statements(premises) to reach a logically certain conclusion. This is what the KCA is, deductive reasoning. My Burden of proof here is to show that both premises are true and the third follows. I must show whatever begins to exist has a cause, the universe began to exist, things are finite and a first cause began the universe follows. The Kalam Cosmological Argument depends upon the A-Theory of time being true over the B-Theory of time so I must defend the A-Theory of time. Finite time A & B-Series of Time Philosophers have two views of time, which are the A & B series.[2] In the A-series of time there is a real difference between past, present, and future. To be temporal means you come into existence and go out of existence. This is the common sense view of time, almost everyone has this view. The B-series of time says that there is not really any difference in the past, present, and future. It says that the past, present, and future are all equally real. It further says that things in the past have not vanished into non-being and are still as real today as yesterday. The difference in these theories is that, B-series states, "there is no temporal beginnings." In this theory nothing comes in and out of being, they are just real. But we can add another consideration like Zeno's Paradox which supports finite time as supported by the A-series. Zeno's Paradox It is impossible to have an actually infinite number of things.[3] Zeno shows that in order to catch up to the future, one must first arrive at the point where the present and past is. If (t) is at 2 then (A) must traverse 1 to catch up. If (t) is at 3 then (A) must traverse 2 to catch up. If (t) is at 4 then (A) must traverse 3 to catch up......... Zeno's paradox shows that there cannot really be an actual infinite. These considerations rationally force us to suppose that an actual infinite is just an idea in the mind and not something that exists as a property in reality. We can consider another paradox that shows things are not finite called the Grim Reaper paradox. Grim Reaper paradox The Grim Reaper paradox[4] suggests not only that no finite time period can be divided into infinitely many sub-periods but also that it is impossible that there should exist infinitely many time periods, all of which are earlier than some event. We can reconstruct the argument, assuming H2 -- Possible Infinite Past with Infinitely Many Parts -- as the hypothesis for reductio. This argument proves the negation of H2, namely, that the past is necessarily finite in its number of parts: H2. Possible Infinite Past, with Infinitely Many Parts (PIPIP). There is a possible world W and a region R and time t of W such R has a temporal part wholly earlier than d units before t, for every finite interval d. H3. Possible Quantitatively Infinite Past (PQIP). There is a possible world W, and a region R and time t of W such that R is wholly earlier than t, and R has infinite duration. H4. No Simple Infinite Past. No space time region can have an infinite duration without having infinitely many proper parts or overlapping an infinite series of temporally finite and temporally disjoint regions. Big Bang Theory I offer the Big-Bang theory as the start of our universe and opposing infinity. The Big Bang theory[5] is the prevailing cosmological model that describes the early development of the universe. According to the theory, the Big Bang occurred approximately 13.79 billion years ago which is thus considered the age of the universe. Extrapolation of the expansion of the Universe backwards in time using general relativity yields a singularity finite time in the past. This singularity is sometimes called "the Big Bang", but the term can also refer to the "birth" of our Universe. Begins to exist has a cause God has no cause. In order to have an explanation of a event, you don't have to have the explanation of the explanation.[6] God was not created therefore He needs no creator. If my opponent refers to the universe as infinite then He can comprehend that God is infinite. The first premise in the KCA is the Principle of Sufficient Reason.[4] The Principle of Sufficient Reason is a principle that everything must have a reason for coming into existence. It is reasonable to accept this premise as true because we do not see things coming into existence without reason. The second premise from the metaphysical Principle Ex Nihilo Fit,[6] we see that the universe could not come from nothing. These premises are strongly supported by our intuition and our experience. Summation I have given reason to believe things have a reason for their existence. I have given reason why the universe has to have a beginning. I have supported the A-series of time which is a hinge for the KCA. I brought forth the Big-Bang to show that the universe did have a beginning. I provided evidence that the first two premises of the KCA appear true and the conclusion follows. The KCA is sound. I send it back to Con. RESOURCES: [1] http://plato.stanford.edu......... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] http://en.wikipedia.org...... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org......'s_paradoxes [5] http://www.robkoons.net... [6] http://en.wikipedia.org... [7] http://www.godandscience.org...... [8] http://plato.stanford.edu...... [9] http://www9.georgetown.edu......