Thanks to scientific discoveries of the last fifty years, the ancient kalam cosmological argument has taken on a powerful and persuasive new force. As described by William Lane Craig, the argument is simple yet elegant:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
Even renowned skeptic David Hume didn't deny this first premise. In fact, atheist Quentin Smith's contention that "we came from nothing, by nothing, and for nothing" seems intuitively absurd.

2. The universe had a beginning.
Based on the data, virtually all cosmologists now agree the universe began in the Big Bang at some specific point in the past. Craig stressed that even alternate theories for the origin of the universe require a beginning. For instance, Stephen Hawking's use of "imaginary numbers" merely conceals the beginning point in his own model, which Hawking admits is not really a description of reality.

The conclusion then follows inexorably from the two premises: therefore, the universe has a cause.

Even once-agnostic astronomer Robert Jastrow conceded the essential elements of Christianity and modern cosmology are the same: "The chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply, at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy."