The segregation of science and philosophy is just an attempt to discover from different perspectives the reason for existence itself. And asking about existence is not reduced to a simple question, but rather addresses different questions along the way that border on theological and cosmological. Hence it is not surprising that science itself has its own argument that tries to discover whether it was God who created the Universe or it has simply existed like this for infinite times, this is Kalam’s cosmological argument.
To think about the beginning of things is to question their very cause, that is, why what exists in this tangible world exists if not to fulfill a function. But it is not as simple as it seems, the question of principles can be applied in all senses. One can start with simple things like money. And the answer will take us back to a historiography of economic models. But as one progresses, then the doubts come to encompass other ideas that already escape our understanding. For example, why does the Universe exist as we know it, a question that intrinsically implies questioning the beginning of the cosmos.
In the midst of this tangle of questions, Kalam’s argument emerged, which is based on three foundations that must be entirely true and without gaps in his arguments for it to be fulfilled. In this way, if all three are victorious under the scrutiny of scientific questions, then it could be said that the existence of God is plausible and it was he who created the Universe.
Kalam cosmological argument:
Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
The Universe began to exist.
And, therefore, the Universe has a cause for its existence.
We might think that the first statement is answered almost by itself when we think that it is not part of everyday logic that things begin to exist by themselves. The law of conservation of energy and matter has told us over and over again; Existence does not have a spontaneous origin, no matter if we talk about tangible things or energy itself. After all, the idea that things can arise from nothing sounds absurd, if that were the case then it would completely undermine the notion of cause and effect.
However, to assert that all the phenomena that are taking place or were taking place in the cosmos are governed by this everyday logic is to think a bit ambitious. The very idea of singularity rubs it in our faces, there is no one until now that does not face the problem of homogeneity in the Universe, what is known as the horizon problem.
Did the Universe begin to exist?
Scientists have been trying to decipher the birth of the Universe for centuries and so far have only managed to put together a few pieces of the enormous puzzle. We know that the cosmos emerged at some point from a pre-existing state that was different from the current one. Just as we know that billions of years ago the Solar System, the stars that we observe today, did not exist, and of course our appearance was not even part of the map yet. But the matter that made up the stars and all cosmic objects, even life on Earth, had to come from somewhere.
Science has told us that primitive energy comes from the Big Bang, that moment where the singularity does not allow us to know the initial states of the Universe and where everything was densely packed together in a space almost reduced to zero. Then came the explosion that allowed the first atoms to form, giving life to matter. However, although it seems that we have found the beginning, it really is not like that. It has been known for decades that the Big Bang was a conjunctural point, but it was not in itself the beginning. It was just the beginning of the Universe as we know it. But what was there before?
Today cosmologists think that the Big Bang was preceded by a completely different state called cosmic inflation. In this period, the Universe was not flooded with radiation and matter, but positive energy dominated. Unfortunately, the characteristics of inflation erase any cosmic memory prior to it and it is not known exactly what existed before. Therefore, stating that the Universe began to exist does not have a clear answer yet.
Did God create the Universe?
Finally we come to the last assertion of Kalam’s cosmological argument. “The Universe has a cause for its existence.” So far we have established that, under the rules of scientific logic, the first two premises are not fully proven. However, if we assume that they are true; Saying that God created the Universe could only be thought of in the case of looking at it as that which caused the Universe to come into existence as we know it now from a state of non-existence.
In this hypothetical case, the cosmological argument would conclude that there is an eternal, immutable, timeless and immaterial cause that brought the Universe into existence ex nihilo (out of nothing). Otherwise, the argument would not be fulfilled and the variable called God would have to leave the equations of astrophysics that try to discover where we come from.