Changes

Some [[Atheism|atheists]] object to premise 2 in that God does not have to be the explanation, but that the universe can be what is called a necessary being (one which exists of its own nature and have no external cause).  This was a suggestion of [[David Hume]] who demanded, "Why may not the material universe be the necessarily existent being?" (Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, part 9).   

Some [[Atheism|atheists]] object to premise 2 in that God does not have to be the explanation, but that the universe can be what is called a necessary being (one which exists of its own nature and have no external cause).  This was a suggestion of [[David Hume]] who demanded, "Why may not the material universe be the necessarily existent being?" (Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, part 9).   

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is helpful.  If Hume (and other atheists) is right in saying that the universe is a necessary being/thing, then this implies that the universe is eternal.  This is exactly what the Kalam argument seeks to disprove.  Thus, the Kalam is a valuable supplement to the Leibnizian argument.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is helpful.  If Hume (and other atheists) is right in saying that the universe is a necessary being/thing, then this implies that the universe is eternal.  This is exactly what the Kalam argument seeks to disprove.  Thus, the Kalam is a valuable supplement to the Leibnizian argument. However this argument is unsatisfactory in the sense that it is a circular argument.

==Teleological argument==

==Teleological argument==