Does God Exist? The Cosmological Argument
“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.” - Genesis 1:1 (ESV)
The word “cosmological” comes from the Greek word cosmos, which simply means “world” or “universe.” As such, this is an argument for God’s existence from the beginning of the universe. On the surface, the cosmological argument is extremely simple to comprehend. However, objections raised against this argument can sometimes require careful thinking to overcome. In any case, I believe the cosmological argument offers powerful reasoning to believe in the existence of God. It goes something like this:
Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
The universe began to exist.
Therefore, the universe has a cause for its existence.
Pretty straightforward, right? But for any argument to be logically valid, its premises must be true. So today, we will examine the first two premises and some possible objections to see if our universe indeed has a cause for its existence.
**Note: This is a variation of the standard cosmological argument known as the Kalam argument.
Premise 1: Whatever Begins to Exist Has a Cause
This statement is self-evident. To deny the first premise would be to assume the opposite - that something can come into being from nothing. A fundamental principle of science is the “Law of Causality,” or the idea that everything that happens in our universe must have a cause. To believe otherwise is to irrationally deny a fundamental reality of our existence. As William Lane Craig puts it, this premise is “virtually undeniable for any sincere seeker after truth.”[1]
Objection to Premise 1: Subatomic Particles
Some skeptics may object to Premise 1 by citing the existence of subatomic “virtual” particles, which can randomly spring into existence out of the fluctuating energies contained in a vacuum. However, this argument is not valid in the case of a causeless beginning, because the vacuum is not “nothing.” Although a vacuum is devoid of matter, it still takes up space and houses the micro-energies that allow these subatomic particles to originate within it.[2]
Premise 2: The Universe Began to Exist
Understandably, this premise receives more objections than the first. The origin of our universe has been a controversial subject for centuries. All the Christian needs to do, however, is prove beyond a reasonable doubt that our universe does not have an infinite past, but instead had a beginning. Thankfully, science and philosophy are both on our side!
The Philosophical Evidence: Grasping the Concept of an Infinite Past
It’s time to put your thinking cap on…
There are two types of infinity: theoretical and actual. Here’s the difference - theoretically, you could begin counting [1, 2, 3, 4…] and continue in this manner all the way to infinity, because there will always be another number higher than the last. But in actuality, even if given an eternity to count, you would never be able to reach infinity. In fact, you could count as high as the number of every single atom in the entire universe and would still be no closer to reaching infinity than the moment you started! You might as well be back at zero because there would still be infinite numbers remaining.
Now, let’s apply this logic to the idea of an infinite past. To get around the idea of the beginning of the universe, some atheists claim that the universe has actually existed eternally in the past. After all, if God can exist in the infinite past, why can’t the universe? (I’ll get to that objection in a little bit) According to the atheist, we are just somewhere on the timeline between an infinite past and an infinite future. However, if you really think about it, this line of thinking falls flat. Let me explain: try to imagine each day in the infinite past as a series of dominoes falling over, eventually reaching the domino that represents today.
Theoretically, you could pick a random domino somewhere along the infinite sequence and eventually it will be knocked over. In actuality, however, any domino you choose would never be knocked over, because even after an eternity of watching the dominoes fall, there would still be an infinite number of dominoes waiting to fall before the wave ever reached your domino.
Can you see where this is going? If an infinite past existed, then there is no point along our timeline that could ever be reached because an infinite past doesn’t start at zero - it actually doesn’t “start” at all! Trying to reach a specific date from an infinite past is like walking on a treadmill - you’ll never get to your destination because the past will always pull you further backward. Because of this fact, the mere existence of the present day proves that both the universe and time itself had a beginning because only a finite amount of time could have passed for today to arrive.
Scientific Evidence #1: The Expansion of the Universe
The expansion of the universe was discovered in part by American astronomer Edwin Hubble. While carefully examining the night sky, he noticed that the light from distant stars appeared redder than expected, suggesting that the light waves were stretching as the stars expanded further away from us.[3] This discovery led to what has arguably become the most widely accepted scientific theory of the beginning of the universe: the Big Bang. If the universe is continually expanding outward, then it only makes sense that it all started expanding from a single point in the past. Although a number of cosmologists have attempted to produce viable alternatives to the Big Bang, none have truly succeeded. Regarding the Big Bang, scientist Alexander Vilenkin wrote,
“It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape: they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.”[4]
Scientific Evidence #2: The Thermodynamics of the Universe
If you’ve ever watched an ice cube melt in hot water, then you have witnessed the second law of thermodynamics in action. Among other things, this law states that energy will naturally transfer from hotter objects to colder objects until equilibrium is reached. But what does this have to do with the beginning of the universe? Because our universe only contains a finite amount of energy, this law of thermal dynamics will lead to what scientists call the “heat death” of the universe. Eventually, the sun and the stars will burn out, the universe will reach a state of thermal equilibrium, and everything will freeze.
But why hasn’t this already happened? Given an infinite amount of time and a finite amount of resources, the universe would surely have run out of energy a long time ago. The only explanation is that our universe is not infinite, but in fact, had a beginning. Robert Jastrow, an astronomer, founder of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, and author of God and the Astronomers writes:
“Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential evidence in the astronomical and biblical accounts of Genesis 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.”[5]
Conclusion: The Universe Has a Cause for Its Existence
And now we’ve arrived at the crux of the argument - what caused the universe to come into being? The atheist will presume that the universe has always been and that the Christian cannot deny this while also making the same claim about God. However, we already know that the universe is not eternal, because all the evidence points to a beginning! We also know that it cannot have caused its own beginning - it would have to exist before causing itself to exist! The simple matter is that something eternal and independent of the universe had to be the “First Cause.” If there is no eternal something, then our universe had to have inexplicably popped into existence out of nothing. It’s an absurd idea, but that is exactly the position the atheist must take. British author and atheist Anthony Kenny writes,
“According to the Big Bang Theory, the whole matter of the universe began to exist at a particular time in the remote past. A proponent of such a theory, at least if he is an atheist, must believe that the matter of the universe came from nothing, and by nothing.”[6]
So where does that leave us? Can we really claim that this eternal something is God and not just an unknown force of nature? Let’s take a look at the qualities that, by its definition, must be true of the First Cause of the universe:[7]
- As the creator of space, time, and matter, the First Cause must be independent of space, time, and matter. It must be spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.
- To create all the matter of the universe out of nothing, the First Cause must be powerful beyond our imagination.
- In order to initiate a spontaneous act of creation, the First Cause must be a personal being, both self-aware and capable of acting of His own free will. An impersonal force would not be capable of initiating such an event with no prior cause or preconditions.
- To exist before causing anything else to exist, the First Cause must be self-existent.
Add these up, and we see that the First Cause of the universe must be a self-existent, immaterial, unimaginably powerful, personal being that is independent of both space and time - an apt description of God if I’ve ever seen one! Robert Jastrow says,
“Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the Earth. And they have found that all this happened as a product of forces they cannot hope to discover…That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact.” [8]
When it comes down to the facts, there are only two options: that no one created the universe out of nothing, or that someone created the universe out of nothing.[9] Which is more reasonable to you?
Notes
[1] William Lane Craig, On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook, 2010), 75.
[2] Ibid, 76.
[3] Ibid, 88.
[4] Alexander Vilenkin, Many Worlds in One (New York: Hill and Wang, 2006), 176, cited in Craig, On Guard, 92.
[5] Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers (New York: Norton, 1978), 48, cited in Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004), 93.
[6] Anthony Kenny, The Five Ways: St. Thomas Aquinas’ Proofs of God’s Existence (New York: Schocken, 1969), 66, cited in Geisler and Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, 81.
[7] Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004), 93.
[8] “A Scientist Caught Between Two Faiths: Interview with Robert Jastrow,” Christianity Today, August 6, 1982, cited in Geisler and Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, 85.
[9] Geisler and Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, 94.