Atheism: Why The Universe Exists at All
“Where does time, space, and matter come from?” Is a question posited from some, incompetent Apologists. Well, it can very simply be answered and you can refute the “conclusion” Apologists eventually reach that God exists. Here’s how:
[a] Matter doesn’t come from anywhere, it’s eternal.
Firstly, the apologist must assert some sort of evidence to prove that “matter”, as we know of it, had a beginning. The best way to do that is via the Law of Entropy, which states that everything is winding down. Simply put, everything is going from a state of order to disorder. However, this fails for three reasons:
- Entropy simply refers to “disorder” which only means that atoms will separate. Like so in the image. This means that atoms aren’t truly dying off, they’re only going into disarray which means that they aren’t actually going to end. This means that the Apologetic CANNOT assert that the universe will have an end to assert that it will have a beginning.
2. We can simply assert that there’s a meta-verse that is a physical infinity that would defeat the Law of Entropy as Entropy only applies to Closed Systems. Alternatively, we could assert that there’s another universe that doesn’t fall victim to Entropy and one which gives us energy.
3. Applying The Law of Entropy to the entirety of the universe would be a logically fallacious argument known as “the composition fallacy” or “the whole and the parts fallacy”. This makes leaps in Logic as we cannot know what applies to the earth (or the part) applies to the universe (or the whole).
Furthermore, the atheist can assert that these things have no cause in a couple ways:
(1): Matter is eternal
We know this because of the 1st Law of Thermodynamics or Law of Conservation of Energy and Mass which states that “matter cannot be created or destroyed”. The average atheist could assert a double horn or dilemma:
Either (i) you believe in Science and Scientific Discovery that Matter is not created nor destroyed or you (ii) believe in a God who broke these laws of Science in order to create the universe.
(2): Absolute Nothing is Impossible
(i) The Laws of Logic would still exist
Suppose we pretend like saying “Nothing (given ‘Nothing’ means ‘that which does not exist’) exists” is NOT a logical contradiction.
Now, what we’re left with is the assertion that “nothing exists”, now in order for such an assertion to be made, we must have all three Laws of Logic to sustain it.
[a] Nothing = Nothing; Law of Identity
[b] Nothing cannot be both nothing and not nothing at the same time in the same way; Law of Non-Contradiction
[c] Nothing cannot be both True and False at the same time; Law of Excluded Middle
(ii) Asserting “Nothing Exists” is a Logical Contradiction:
Moving on, remember how I said it would be a logical contradiction to assert that “Nothing Exists”? Well, here’s why:
[a] If I assert “nothing exists” it contradicts with the very definition of “nothing” as “nothing” means “that which does not exist”.
[b] If I assert that Objective Reality doesn’t exist then I have asserted an Objective Truth Claim, and therefore it is self-defeating. Think of it like this: imagine I’m making an argument that there are no arguments, it would be by it’s very nature a contradiction.
[b] Time Never Began to Exist
Suppose a friend asks you “when did time begin to exist?” it’s nonsensical, it would be like asking “what is the cause for the Law of Cause and Effect?”
“Time” means “the progression of events from the past to the present into the future.” In order to make the assertion that anything has a beginning, you must assert that time always existed as it tracks what exactly a “beginning” is. Realistically, it is just as rational to be an atheist over theist because a theist can assert that God is outside of time and created it whereas the Atheist can assert that time had no beginning and was never created.
Necessarily, there’s no way for the theist to prove that time had a beginning as you would need time to do that.
[c] Space Never Began to Exist
“Space” means the same as “time” so the former objections would apply.
Conclusion
It’s nonsensical to say that these things would “need a cause”, it would be like asking the theist “what caused god?” Under theism, God didn’t begin to exist and therefore he doesn’t need a cause. Whereas under Atheism, Matter, Time, and Space never began to exist either. It’s just as rational, if not more rational (because of brute facts — and various philosophical problems with God), to assert that Space, Time, and Matter are simply eternal and never began existing. Furthermore, we know the universe always existed because Absolute Nothing is impossible and because of the Law of Conservation of Energy and Mass.
In Conclusion, it’s just as rational when asserting that these things that Theists claim need a cause are without beginning and are causeless as it is for the Theist to assert that God is without beginning and is causeless.
