The existence of the universe is contingent and occurred after an ex nihilo creation event know as the Big Bang. An ex nihilo creation event can’t cause itself. Something had make it happen. Scientific materialists broadly accept the overwhelming proof that the Big Bang was the origin of the universe. What they cannot accept is that it wasn’t the result of an action by some pre-existing something. Of course, even if it were true that it could cause itself, that only creates another problem. If there was a pre-existing something, a strictly physical universe generator of some sort, where did that other thing come from? Very quickly, we are looking at an eternal regression fallacy.1 Even if whatever caused the Big Bang was itself an eternal physical thing uncaused by anything else, that leads to yet another fallacy, described by the Kalām cosmological argument.2 In brief, the Kalām argument comes from the world of transfinite mathematics and argues that there cannot be an eternal (therefore infinite) past. If time is eternally receding into the past, it would have to overcome an infinite amount of time to reach a present moment. An infinite amount of time cannot be traversed. There is no fixed time point for anything to start. The starting point is always retreating from the target point. The barrier of any infinite distance cannot be surmounted. Therefore there can be no present moment, because everything preceding it is eternally retreating into the past. If there is an infinite past that means there is no present.
The argument is broadly similar to Thomas Aquinas’ uncaused cause cosmological argument. Aquinas observed that everything that exists in the universe is caused by something that preceded it. If the past is infinitely receding away from the present, then there are no proximate causes to create the present, since they are all receding into the past. Something has to be the uncaused cause that set everything in motion. The argument goes as follows:
1. Things exist.
2. It is possible for things not to exist.
3. Whatever could not have existed but does exist has been caused to exist.
a. Something that doesn’t have to exist can’t bring itself into existence since it must have pre-existed in order to cause itself. That is a contradiction.
4. There cannot be an infinite number of causes causing causes that bring something into existence.
a. An infinite regression of causes means there is no initial cause which is the same thing as saying there is no cause for existence.
b. The universe exists. Therefore it must have a cause.
5. Since the universe exists, somewhere it must have an uncaused cause.
6. The uncaused cause is God.
We know from modern science that the Big Bang is the ex nihilo creation event of the universe. The Big Bang did not have to occur because there were no identifiable pre-existing causes, therefore something must have chosen (willed) to create it. The uncaused cause that pre-existed the Big Bang and chose to create it is God. By definition, he is what is uncreated and always exists.
Even further, if one accepts these cosmological arguments, it’s not just that a God hypothesis is one among many that can explain the phenomenon of the Big Bang, it is the only possible correct hypothesis since an uncaused God must exist to explain the Big Bang since without his uncaused cause nothing could exist. The only discussion then is what to call the Uncaused Cause. If the name “God” is too difficult for atheists to accept, then we can call him anything including Being X, as long as Being X always existed, possesses a will, and is extremely intelligent.
Why add extreme intelligence to the list of requirements for a hypothetical Being X?
Not only is the existence of the Big Bang contingent, the qualities of the Big Bang are contingent. The universe does not have to look the way it does. Someone chose to make it look that way. What we see is not a dopey, random collection of irrational properties, but rather a finely tuned universe ordered toward the development and support of life on one planet — Earth.
There are several dozen numbers, such as physical constants, values, and proportions, that have to be finely adjusted to dozens of decimal places to make possible the development of the universe and ultimately of life.3 4 If any at all of these constants were infinitesimally different, then the universe that we know could not be possible.5 If one were to take all of the finely calibrated constants involved in finely tuning the universe, in aggregate, it has been estimated that they need to be accurate to within an enormous number with hundreds of zeroes. Designing a universe with such precision requires an incredibly intelligent mind. So, not only was the universe chosen by a God with a free will, it is designed by one who is spectacularly rational.
To illustrate how precisely the amount of matter in this enormous universe consisting of billions of stars in billions of galaxies is calibrated, let’s look at a small coin. If the amount of mass equal to a dime had been added or taken away from the total mass of the universe, the proper chemical elements necessary to form life couldn’t have formed inside the furnaces of stars, life as we know it would be impossible, and we would not be here. This tiny amount of matter, compared with the vastness of all of the matter that exists in the universe, stands between a universe that is habitable and one that is not.
One finely calibrated physical law that is easy to understand is gravity. If gravity were any weaker, then stars could not condense and might not even ignite. If they ignited, they may not burn very long leaving no time for life to evolve or exist. If gravity were too strong, then the Big Bang might not have been able to expand the universe far enough before gravity took over and the universe collapsed back upon itself. Stars might condense too much and therefore burn very hot and dense for only a short period of time. Of course, whether the force of gravity is too strong or too weak depends upon how much matter there is for gravity to act upon. The total amount of matter in the universe has to be perfectly proportioned to the strength of gravity. To quote Stephen Hawking, “If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million it would have recollapsed before it reached its present size.”6 That means one part in a number with 15 zeroes—an unbelievably tiny number.
Someone highly rational had to choose to create a contingent universe with these extremely specific properties.
“Infinite Regress,” Wikipedia, accessed January 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_regress.
“The Kalām Cosmological Argument,” Wikipedia, accessed January 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kal%C4%81m_Cosmological_Argument#:~:text=The%20Kal%C4%81m%20Cosmological%20Argument%20is,the%20beginning%20of%20the%20universe.
Jay Richards, “List of Fine Tuning Parameters,” Discovery Institute, accessed August 10, 2020, https://www.discovery.org/a/fine-tuning-parameters/.
L. A. Barnes, “Fine Tuning of the Universe for Intelligent life,” Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, Volume 29, Issue 4, 2012, pp. 529-564, https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/222321D5D4B5A4D68A3A97BBE46AEE45/S1323358000001491a.pdf/finetuning_of_the_universe_for_intelligent_life.pdf.
Steinar Thorvaldsen and Ola Hössjer, “Using statistical methods to model the fine tuning of molecular machines and systems,” Journal of Theoretical Biology, vol. 501, September 21, 2020, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022519320302071?via%3Dihub.
Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 1996), 126.