William Lane Craig refutes the claim that the Kalam Cosmological argument* makes the equivocation fallacy on the word 'cause' and on the phrase 'begins to exist':
i. The argument commits the fallacy of equivocation. In the first premise 'cause' means 'material cause,' while in the conclusion it does not.
ii. The argument equivocates on 'begins to exist.' In (1) it means to begin 'from a previous material state,' but in (2) it means 'not from a material state.'
* - The Kalam Cosmological Argument:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Loading more stuff…
Hmm…it looks like things are taking a while to load. Try again?