Sophia

, Volume 54, Issue 4, pp 411–427 | Cite as

The Kalām Cosmological Argument and the Infinite God Objection

Article

Abstract

In this article, we evaluate various responses to a noteworthy objection, namely, the infinite God objection to the kalām cosmological argument. As regards this objection, the proponents of the kalām argument face a dilemma—either an actual infinite cannot exist or God cannot be infinite. More precisely, this objection claims that God’s omniscience entails the existence of an actual infinite with God knowing an actually infinite number of future events or abstract objects, such as mathematical truths. We argue, however, that the infinite God objection is based on two questionable assumptions, namely, (1) that it is possible for an omniscient being to know an actually infinite number of things and (2) that there exist an actually infinite number of abstract objects for God to know.

Keywords

Kalām cosmological argument Omniscience Actual infinite Platonism 

References

  1. Achtner, W. (2011). Infinity as a transformative concept in science and theology. In M. Heller & W. H. Woodin (Eds.), Infinity: new research frontiers (pp. 19–51). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. al-Ghazālī. (2000). The incoherence of the philosophers: a parallel English-Arabic text (2nd ed.). (M. E. Marmura, Trans.). Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bergmann, M., & Brower, J. (2006). A theistic argument against Platonism (and in support of truthmakers and divine simplicity). In D. W. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 2, pp. 357–386). Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  4. Byl, J. (1996). On the kalam cosmological argument. In J. M. van der Meer (Ed.), Facets of faith and science. Volume 4: Interpreting God’s action in the world (pp. 75–90). Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  5. Craig, W. L., & Smith, Q. (1993). Theism, atheism, and big bang cosmology. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  6. Erickson, M. J. (2013). Christian theology (3rd ed.). Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.Google Scholar
  7. Huntington, E. V. (2003). The continuum and other types of serial order: with an introduction to Cantor’s transfinite numbers (2nd ed.). New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
  8. Moreland, J. P. (2003). A response to a Platonistic and to a set-theoretic objection to the kalam cosmological argument. Religious Studies, 39, 373–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Morriston, W. (2002). Craig on the actual infinite. Religious Studies, 38, 147–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Oppy, G. (2006). Arguing about gods. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Swoyer, C. (1996). Theories of properties: from plenitude to paucity. Noûs, 30(Supplement: philosophical perspectives, 10, metaphysics, 1996), 243–264.Google Scholar
  12. Verhoef, A. H. (2011). Timelessness, trinity and temporality. Acta Academica, 43(2), 82–112.Google Scholar
  13. Wierenga, E. (2012). Omniscience. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2012.). Retrieved April 15, 2013 from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/omniscience/
  14. Zagzebski, L. (1999). What is knowledge? In J. Greco & E. Sosa (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to epistemology (pp. 92–116). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Philosophy, Faculty of ArtsNorth-West UniversityPotchefstroomSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations