Part Ten:   What or Who Created God?  An Atheist’s Response to the Cosmological Argument.

 The previous nine blog posts in this series have demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that God exists. He is the best explanation for the existence of life and the cosmos.  However, atheists often raise the above common objection

This objection is rather simple but almost always asked: “If everything is contingent on something else for its existence, then what created God—who made God?” This question contains what in logic is called a categorical fallacy. As Geisler and Brooks put it in their book, Come, Let Us Reason Together: An Introduction to Logical Thinking,  “The category ‘before’ does not apply to the category ‘first’. It is logically impossible.”

If God is the “First Cause,” nothing can exist before Him. Nothing comes before “first.” The Bible says, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). Nothing can exist before creation except God. And since God has always existed, He is the uncaused First Cause. Therefore, to ask, “Who made God?” is meaningless and nonsensical. To make this point, you might ask the question, “What comes before first?”  Obviously, nothing can come before first!

Another way to respond to the question, “Who made God?” is to point out that, logically, whether or not another God made God is not an issue in terms of proving a God exists. If we have proven that the universe is not self-caused or eternal (as done parts 7 & 8), by default it had to have been created by something. This rules out atheism and establishes that a First Cause must ultimately exist. So we have won our argument and need only identify who this First Cause is, which we can legitimately call God. As we saw in last week’s blog, only God described in the Bible has the necessary attributes to be the Creator of the heavens (the cosmos) and Earth.

This blog post ends my ten-part series on demonstrating to atheists that we can prove God exists. If this data is rejected, I believe it’s not for philosophical or scientific reasons. It’s a willful choice to “suppress” what  God reveals through nature, logic, and an innate sense of His existence He placed in every human heart (e.g. Eccl. 3:11; Rom. 1:18-20). ©

New week’s blog post will be written by a guest blogger, nature photographer and writer Pasquale Mingarelli. It is a fitting application for ending this series. He will share the wonderful benefits of enjoying God in nature.

The following week I’ll start a new series of blog posts titled, “Should Christians Be concerned about Animal Rights? Yes—and Here’s Why”  It’s an expanded version of an article I wrote for the Christian Research Journal several years ago.