Where the Kalam buck stops - Deism

Contents:
1. Kalam - It Ain't a Case for Theism
2. Theism and Government
3. Government
4. References in large
5. Additional Criticisms that I thought

of to address

1. Kalam - It Ain't a Case for Theism


The Kalam Argument

Exhaustive Dilemmas:

#1.The universe either had a beginning or no beginning.

Why this is proported to be a problem
for atheism:
If the universe had a beginning,
what caused it? It seems only reasonable
that an uncreated, unmoved mover must
have been at the beginning of the creation.

Why this is not a problem for atheism, yet:
This is a case for deism, whereat it stops;
the case for theism, and usually a specific
religion, and usually Christianity, is what
the atheist has problems with - not
deism. Deism is seen more like a transition
drug, how people might see cigarettes as
leading to using marijuana, meth, cocaine,
drive wrecklessly, get pregnant... well hey,
it happens...

#2.If it had a beginning, the beginning was either caused or uncaused.

Why this is proported to be a problem for
atheism:
If the beginning was caused, then someone
caused it, and that someone was God.
(Also:
Ref: Alan Watts - Chasing Yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqmkRrFYO1w
(1:18 - 3:10).

Why this is not a problem for atheism, yet:
Necessarily a Being, and not a Thing? This
is then dealt with on the next one.

3.If it was caused, the cause was either personal or impersonal.

Why this is proported to be a problem for
atheism:
If the cause was personal, then we are
accountable to God for all of our wrongdoings
and sins.

Why this is not a problem for atheism, yet:
The transition from deism to theism is
rarely made, and just about never made well.
This transition would include things like
Bible references and archaeological evidence
in support for the references of the God-thing
being personal rather than impersonal, since
if God is impersonal and deistic, then it
doesn't matter to atheists if God exists --
he isn't interacting with them directly,
so it's just as if there was no God at all.

The hypocriticality of theism:
(Also at Special Pleading)
"Context!!!!!!":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK7P7uZFf5o
"Offensive!!!!!!":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC91GYEumyA
"ATHEIST!!!!!!":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0A4_bwCaX0

Additionally:
1. Equivocation of "coming into existence" that TheologicalBullshit pointed out, which
is that "coming into being" through birth
is much different than coming into existence
"ex nihilo" - unless rearranging matter
counts (which in some cases, for our
intent-driven minds, is; however, that's not
how this arguments runs)

2. It is my conjecture (I start it with this
to say that you could dismiss this part
since it is my conjecture) that quantum
physics is related to the argument line of
free will, in that at both points we run
into the limits of being able to test things.
In running into the place where we are now
just about measuring our own thoughts,
things become a little more unstable and
unpredictable, since it's hard to "objectively" look at yourself.
Ref: Alan Watts - Chasing Yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqmkRrFYO1w
(0:00 - 1:00) along with 1:18 - 2:22 to #2 of
the Kalam argument



2. Theism and Government
Ref: "Why do atheists care about religion?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4fQA9mt-Mg
(gogreen18: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1ImMtHrrKo
rozeboosje: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCu2PzhU5Hc

1. Laws that prohibit atheists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4fQA9mt-Mg
2. Censorship.
3. Special pleading:
"Context!!!!!!":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK7P7uZFf5o
"Offensive!!!!!!":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC91GYEumyA
"ATHEIST!!!!!!":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0A4_bwCaX0


3. Government
The Kingdom of Moltz (A Tale of Inflation):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi-P-pLO0vY
Statism is Anti-social:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6YLkxVGfb0
"God is Subjective":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIhY43RFrbg
Barriers to Entry:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8C9s5n9VUk
Objective Morality is the Shadow of Religion
and of Statheism of the Personal (part 1):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ik8hdaWQh2M


4. References in large:
1. Ryan Faulk:
YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/fringeelements
Ning (anarchist/anti-statist site):
http://www.fringeelements.ning.com

2. NonStampCollector:
http://www.youtube.com/user/nonstampcollector

3. Alan Watts:
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpS85_E4xj4&feature=PlayList&p=A55EAF0FBF6E88BD&index=0&playnext=1
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSk-IrSGcTw&feature=PlayList&p=FCA9178E25A6E7B9&index=0&playnext=1

"Who would start a religion?":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY0x_YNlhz8


5. Additional Criticisms that I thought
of to address:

1. What a few Christians do does not apply
to all Christians.

Response: I agree. Also, those Christians
provide the ideological ground on which
fundamentalists who are violent can
escape scrutiny, which is why atheists
focus both on "the few" along with the
ideology behind it behind which those
few hide. Perhaps you could help us
distinguish between those who are fundamentalist and those who are not
so we can debunk the fundamentalists
instead of the ideology?

2. This side-steps the Kalam argument
entirely.

Response: The goal is Theism, Christianity, is it not? If that's
the point of the argument, then until
it transitions to the specific theistic
Biblical God, it's Deistic and
"doesn't matter", much the same way that
ZJemptv dismissed it.
(This is what the video was about, but
I thought I'd include it as "you're side-
stepping" because it doesn't exactly address
the Kalam argument, instead explaining why,
most often, the atheist even bothers
trying to refute it.)