Is there a God? Can we find reasons for why there may be a creator? Here we provide five arguments why we think so.
Whatever begins to exist has a cause
The Universe began to exist.
Therefore the universe has a cause.
Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
Something cannot come from nothing; existence requires an external cause.
In all observed cases, things that begin to exist have an external cause (e.g., a building requires builders, a painting requires a painter).
The universe began to exist.
Scientific evidence:
The Big Bang Theory indicates that space, time, and matter had a beginning.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics shows that an eternal universe would have already reached heat death.
Philosophical reasoning:
An actual infinite cannot exist in reality; an infinite past is logically incoherent.
An infinite regress of causes is impossible, as it would prevent anything from existing now.
Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Since time, space, and matter began at the Big Bang, the cause must be:
Timeless (because it created time).
Spaceless (since it created space).
Immaterial (not composed of matter).
Extremely powerful (to bring the universe into existence).
Personal (because only a personal agent can choose to create something from nothing).
The universe exhibits intricate order, complexity, and fine-tuning.
Design is the best explanation for such fine-tuning.
Therefore, the universe is the product of an intelligent designer.
The universe exhibits intricate order, complexity, and fine-tuning.
The laws of physics (e.g., gravity, electromagnetism) are precisely calibrated for life.
The cosmological constants (such as the fine-structure constant) fall within an extremely narrow range that allows for a life-permitting universe.
Biological complexity, such as DNA, contains information akin to a code, which is a hallmark of intentional design.
Design is the best explanation for such fine-tuning.
Chance is implausible due to the astronomical improbability of these conditions arising randomly.
Necessity (i.e., the laws of nature had to be this way) is unsupported, as no known principle demands these specific values.
Intelligent design is the most reasonable explanation, as specified complexity and information-rich systems (like DNA and the cosmos) typically arise from intelligence.
Therefore, the universe is the product of an intelligent designer.
This designer must be beyond nature (transcendent) because it designed the natural world.
It must be immensely powerful and intelligent to create and fine-tune an entire universe.
A personal agent best explains the purposeful arrangement of conditions for life.
The best candidate for this intelligent designer is God, who intentionally created and ordered the universe.
If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
Therefore, a maximally great being exists in the actual world.
If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
A maximally great being is one that possesses all great-making properties to the highest degree (e.g., omnipotence, omniscience, moral perfection, necessary existence).
If such a being is even possible, then it must exist in at least one possible world.
If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
Necessary existence is a defining attribute of a maximally great being—it cannot exist only contingently.
If it exists in one possible world, then it must exist in all possible worlds, including the actual world.
Therefore, a maximally great being exists in the actual world.
Since the actual world is a possible world, and a maximally great being exists in all possible worlds, it must exist in reality.
This being must be God, as only God possesses maximal greatness (omnipotence, omniscience, moral perfection, and necessary existence).
If God’s existence is even possible, then God must exist necessarily. Therefore, God exists.
If the universe operates according to objective, non-physical mathematical laws, then these laws require an external, rational source.
The universe does operate according to objective, non-physical mathematical laws.
Therefore, these laws require an external, rational source.
If an external, rational source exists beyond the physical universe, then this source must be infinite, uncaused, and intentional.
An external, rational source for mathematical laws does exist.
Therefore, this source must be infinite, uncaused, and intentional.
The only entity that aligns with these attributes is God.
Therefore, God exists.
Infinity as a Source Without Cause
In mathematics, infinity is the boundless foundation from which numerical systems derive meaning.
Infinity is uncaused, self-existent, and cannot be created, divided, or exhausted.
The concept of zero (0) gains meaning only in contrast to infinity, just as "nothingness" in the metaphysical sense implies the necessity of an infinite, eternal source.
Since nothing (0) cannot produce something, there must be an infinite, eternal source of existence.
Non-Physical Laws Governing the Physical World
Mathematics is not a mere human invention; it is universal and governs physical reality.
Mathematical laws, though non-physical, are inseparable from the physical universe, guiding everything from subatomic interactions to cosmic motion.
The existence of such rational, immaterial laws aligns with the theistic view of a transcendent, immaterial source (God).
Without these governing principles, the universe would collapse into chaos, yet it remains orderly and predictable.
Randomness is Governed by Mathematical Laws
Randomness is not truly lawless; it follows strict mathematical principles:
Probability and Statistics: Random events follow predictable distributions (e.g., Gaussian curves).
Chaos Theory: Seemingly chaotic systems, like weather patterns, still adhere to mathematical laws.
Even when things appear random, they still follow structured, mathematical constraints.
This suggests that even apparent chaos is governed by order, pointing to an intentional framework behind reality.
The Infinite Detail and Specificity of Mathematics
Mathematics is both orderly and infinitely detailed, from simple equations to the complexity of fractals.
This precision and universal applicability suggest an intentional structure rather than mere chance.
Mathematics describes everything from planetary motion to DNA structure, reflecting design rather than randomness.
Infinite complexity combined with perfect consistency is best explained by a designer rather than pure chance.
The characteristics of infinity, order, rationality, and precision found in mathematics strongly suggest an intelligent, transcendent source behind the universe. The best explanation for these attributes is God, the infinite, uncaused, rational, and intentional designer of all reality.
Further Explanation:
Infinity is the source—it has no beginning and no end, no boundaries or limits. Since nothing cannot cause something, we cannot logically trace the origin of reality to "nothing" (represented conceptually as zero). Zero is not a thing, but the absence of a thing. It is the point at which space, time, and matter do not exist.
Because nothing cannot produce something, the origin must lie in something that is not bounded or limited—infinity. Just as the number 0 on a timeline is not the source of value for the other numbers but merely a marker, so is God, as the infinite source, the origin of all value and existence. Infinity is not just a concept—it is a necessary condition for anything to exist. God, being infinite, is that condition.
Infinity is not just endless quantity, but necessary existence. Just as a canvas must exist before a painting can appear, the infinite must precede the finite—not in time, but in logical order. God is not part of the chain of things—He is the reason the chain exists at all.
If objective moral values and duties exist, then God exists.
Objective moral values and duties do exist.
Therefore God exists.
If objective moral values and duties exist, then God must exist.
Moral values refer to what is truly good or evil, independent of human opinions.
Moral duties refer to what we ought to do, not just what we prefer to do.
If morality is truly objective, it must be grounded in something beyond human society—namely, a transcendent moral lawgiver.
Objective moral values and duties do exist.
We recognize that some actions (e.g., torturing children for fun, genocide) are objectively wrong, regardless of cultural or personal beliefs.
Moral relativism fails because it would mean that no act—no matter how evil—could be universally condemned.
Even those who deny objective morality often live as if moral truths exist.
Therefore, God exists.
The best explanation for the existence of objective moral values and duties is a transcendent, personal being.
This being must be the source of moral law and have authority over all moral agents.
A purely materialistic universe provides no foundation for binding moral obligations, whereas a moral lawgiver (God) does.
The existence of objective morality points to God, the ultimate foundation of goodness and moral duty.
Note: Objections may be raised, but do not be startled. These are most likely beta responses. Provided below are ways you may press further to show inconsistency in flow of thought
Does the objection misrepresent the argument?
If the objector misrepresents the argument, it shows either a lack of comprehension or malicious intent. If they understand the argument yet still misrepresent it, the objection stems from inconsistency—and thus, a failure to fully grasp what they claim to understand.
Is the objection subjective in nature?
If the objection is subjective, the objector affirms not only what they oppose—but also what they oppose it with. By reducing truth to personal preference, they strip both your argument and their objection of authority. In the same way, they cannot consistently condemn what they find repulsive, because all moral or rational claims become equally valid—or equally meaningless.
Does the objection argue something intrinsic?
If the objector claims something is intrinsic, they are appealing to a standard beyond opinion—something objective. But if they reject the need for an objective source, they collapse back into subjectivity, where nothing can truly be intrinsic. One cannot affirm intrinsic value or meaning while denying the existence of an objective source that makes it so.
Is the objection raised without an alternative?
When an objector offers no alternative, they argue from a position of epistemic nihilism, subjectivism, or emotionalism—none of which can justify any claim, including their own. Without an alternative explanation, the objection is not constructive; it’s a denial of reason itself, which collapses under its own weight.