Objection: the argument doesn't mention God, so it's irrelevant. Response: the Kalam is always the beginning of a case, not the end — it forces you into the conceptual analysis that points to God.

Braxton: atheists say "I could grant the whole thing and still not have God." But Christian apologists always follow the Kalam with conceptual analysis. The Kalam forces you to conceptualize what the cause must be like. Mike notes he sometimes starts with the conceptual analysis in real conversations, then uses the formal argument if people push back.