There is a traditional argument for the existence of God, called the cosmological argument, according to which the existence of God is proven by the necessity that the universe has a cause. While I consider that a true statement, some atheists get around its implications by claiming that the universe had no beginning, and therefore requires no cause. That is, it exists necessarily.
I would suggest that a universe that is eternal and exists necessarily is thereby demonstrated to be God. But that isn't what I am here to say.
Rather, for those atheists who hold this view, I would suggest that it is logically self-defeating.
Here's why: it is not sufficient merely to assert the possibility that the universe is eternal and self-existing.To put it in logical terms, A is not disproved because not-A may be true. Rather, their logic requires that it be certain that the universe is eternal and self-existing.
How can one be certain of an eternal and self-existing universe? Only by the testimony of an eternal and self-existing witness! Thus, if true, this argument from atheists doesn't support their case; it refutes it!
In contrast, Christians can assert that the universe is neither eternal nor self-existing because we have the testimony of an eternal and self-existing Witness (Genesis 1:1): "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep." Only the triune God of the Bible fulfills the logical underpinning required by atheism. For the atheist to have his argument, he must assume the existence and truth of the Christian God.
Like Eden’s Cooling Breeze
1 hour ago