Some atheists have objected to The Kalam Cosmological Argument on the basis that it entails a contradiction. If God existed beyond time, and then He decided to create the universe, and then the universe came into being, this, they argue, is a contradiction. This is because it entails cause and effect, before and after, before time even begins. But that's impossible! How can you have cause and effect and a before and after if there is no time? According to most scientists, time is required in order for cause and effect to take place. Time is the realm of cause to effect relationships. Moreover, don't have to be a scientist in order to know that before and after requires time.
What is the proponent of the Kalam Cosmological Argument to do? Well, it seems to me that the objector is assuming that God's decision to create and God's action of creating occur in a sequence; God decides "You know what? I'm gonna make a universe" and then He uses His omnipotent power to will a universe into being, and then The Big Bang occurs. This view would indeed be a contradiction, because you have an event before the first event. You would have an event before the first event. The first event would be the universe springing into being, and the event before the first event being God's decision to create.
However, who said that these things had to take place sequentially? It seems to me that all of these things could have occurred simultaneously. God could have decided to create a universe, and in that moment of decision, God acted and the universe came into being. This way, 3 things occur simultaneously within that very first moment of time. If this is the case, we don't have an event before the first event. There are no events occurring before The Big Bang.
God’s decision to create the world is simultaneous with the world’s coming into being. This proposition would relieve us from asserting the absurd notion that there was an event before the first event. The first event just was God’s decision to actualize the world. God was able to cause the effect of the universe because that decision was the first event.
In conclusion, The Kalam Cosmological Argument doesn't affirm a contradiction.
*The Kalam Cosmological Argument
*Does The First Law Of Thermodynamics Undermine The Kalam Argument?
*Do We Have Examples Of Things Beginning To Exist?
*Is The Big Bang The Origin Of The Universe?