I have recently been defending one of my favorite arguments for God’s existence known as the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA). The argument is based on two simple premises that lead to a logical conclusion with theistic significance. The KCA looks like this:
1- Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2- The universe began to exist.
3- Therefore, the universe had a cause.
In my past two articles (part 1, part 2), I have defended the premises of the KCA using nothing but logic and scientific data. Since the premises seem to be true, and the structure of the argument is valid, we have a sound argument. This means the conclusion must be true and Christians, atheists, and everyone in between can confidently state that the universe has a cause. However, when one starts to think about the rational inferences which are derived from this deductive conclusion, those committed to their faith in atheism start getting pretty uncomfortable for some very good reasons.
The Rational Inferences
If the cause of the universe transcends space-time, then, it must have been “timeless.” This means that whatever the cause was would have had no beginning (i.e., eternal), because a beginning necessitates time to already be in existence. If the cause existed apart from time and had no beginning, we can infer logically that this cause had no cause of its own, as it logically never began to exist, and therefore, it exists necessarily.
Moreover, as the big bang was the beginning of space-time, then it follows that the cause of the universe also had to have been “spaceless.” This means that the cause would have no size or shape. It was utterly immaterial. Accordingly, the Kalam takes atheistic naturalism off the table as a possible model of reality because this argument has provided evidence that a supernatural Cause of the universe exists.
What other inferences can we discover regarding the cause of the universe’s attributes and properties? Well, this cause must be enormously powerful. I can’t think of anything which requires more power than creating a universe from nothing! Moreover, the universe’s immaterial cause had to have been timeless, spaceless, and it necessarily had the power to spontaneously bring the world into existence without anything causing it to do so because then, whatever the cause of the cause was would be the cause. But since this cause exists outside of anything physical, temporal, or material, none of these things could logically cause or force this cause to do anything. Therefore, this cause has its own volition (a.k.a. libertarian free will). Apart from anything abstract (which are causally impotent anyway), only an unembodied mind (or soul) could logically exist “in nothingness” and transcend space-time.
Persons are the only types of things that could possibly possess immaterial minds with free will; therefore, we can decipher that the cause of the universe was personal. If it is personal, then it’s at least possible that “it” can have a personal relationship with other personal beings. We are personal beings. Therefore, it’s possible that we can have a personal relationship with the cause of the universe.
I call the cause of the universe “God,” but one is free to call this cause whatever they’d like; however, “a rose by any other name smells just as sweet.” To this point (including my two prior articles) I have only appealed to logic and science and have not even touched any religious book whatsoever. Be that as it may, the attributes we have drawn from the conclusion correspond perfectly with the way the Bible describes God’s properties. The KCA provides evidence of the Ultimate Mind behind the universe, which also makes perfect sense regarding immaterial minds that humans seem to have.
It’s amazing that by simply employing science, philosophy, and logic, we reach the conclusion that God exists. Moreover, we can infer that it’s possible for us to have a personal relationship with him. This is exactly what the Bible teaches too, and what we can learn through the logical study of the universe (Psalm 19:1; Romans 1:20-21).
Stay reasonable (Phil 4:5 ESV),
 Tim Stratton, The Abstract Dagger of Platonism, http://freakengministries.com/the-abstract-dagger-of-platonism/