Different ways of formulating the KCA

In a lot of debate challenges I've seen on the Kalam Cosmological Argument, the person issuing the challenge always insists that the other person defend William Lane Craig's syllogism. I don't like that because I don't want my hands tied as to how I argue. I like to have the freedom to put things in my own words and defend it how I see fit. A lot of people think the KCA just is WLC's syllogism. But that is only one articulation of the argument. The argument can be expressed in a number of ways. Many of the objections raised to the KCA don't go to the substance of what the argument is saying, but rather nit pick over how WLC's syllogism is worded. I wanted to make this post showing several different ways the argument can be expressed in hopes that the reader will gain a better understanding of what the substance of the argument is rather than being hung up on the particular wording of WLC's syllogism.

Craig's version

• Whatever begins to exist has a cause to its existence.
• The universe began to exist
• Therefore; the universe has a cause to its existence.

A more precise variation

• If something comes into being out of nothing, then it has a cause.
• The universe came into being out of nothing.
• Therefore, the universe has a cause.

A more strongly worded first premise

• It is impossible for something to come into being out of nothing unless it has a cause.
• The universe came into being out of nothing.
• Therefore, the universe has a cause.

Another variation that makes a distinction between efficient causes and material causes.

• Anything that comes into being has either an efficient cause, a material cause, or both.
• The universe came into being, but it did not have a material cause.
• Therefore, the universe had an efficient cause

An alternate version with more steps

• If the universe has a finite past, then the universe came into existence out of nothing.
• If the univesre came into existence out of nothing, then the universe has a cause.
• If the universe has a cause, then something exists that is spaceless, timeless, immaterial, and posessed of unusual creative power.
• If something exists that is spaceless, timeless, immaterial, and posessed of unusual creative power, then something resembling a god exists.
• The universe has a finite past.
• Therefore, something resembling a god exists.

A disjunctive version with multiple steps

• The universe exists
• The universe has a finite past.
• The universe came into being
• The universe has a cause.
• The universe does not have a cause.
• The universe did not come into being
• The universe has an infinite past.
• The universe does not exist