Where did the universe come from?

By Michael Eppel

The origin of the universe is a mystery that has perplexed the greatest thinkers of civilization up to the present time. Aristotle believed that the universe came from “The Unmoved Mover,” an abstract being that cannot directly manipulate the physical world but rather creates the world through forces of attraction, much like how a beautiful woman creates the love in a man. Conversely, 20th-century scientist Fred Hoyle proposed that the universe was in a static, steady state, which suggests the universe to be eternal since any kind of beginning or end would require it to change.

Historically, there are two options offered for the origins of the universe:

• The universe is eternal.
• The universe was created by something eternal.

Recent developments in science, however, have demonstrated that the eternality of the universe is not a viable option. It is here that ancient theological wisdom merges with contemporary science: the Bible declares that God created the heavens and the earth, while science tells us that it all began with a big bang. What many scientists fail to recognize is that this conclusion is problematic for their materialistic assumptions. If the physical universe is not eternal, then something outside the physical universe must have produced it. 

The reason the beginning of the universe requires something to have brought it into existence can be expressed in this line of reasoning:

1. Everything that begins to exist has a prior cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a prior cause.

Something cannot begin to exist without a prior cause for the simple reason that it is impossible to extract something out of nothing. As an alternative, some have suggested that the universe might have created itself, but this is just as illogical as the “creation from nothing” hypothesis. Something cannot create itself because it requires that thing to have existed before it existed, which, of course, is impossible. 

The idea that the universe began is not an artificial claim made by armchair philosophers. Rather, it is supported by the most respected scientific minds of the modern age and validated by empirical evidence.

Such evidence for the beginning of the universe can be reduced to two key discoveries:

• The Law of Thermodynamics
• Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity

Regarding the second law of thermodynamics, it states that there is a finite amount of usable energy in the universe, which will eventually run out. This indicates the universe has a beginning because if there were an infinite amount of time before now, the finite energy would have already been depleted. 

The second piece of evidence, which attests to the universe’s beginning, is Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity. It articulates that the universe is expanding. While in forward time the universe is expanding, the further back one goes in time, the smaller the universe gets until it disappears altogether. The precise moment that the universe appears is the same moment that it begins. 

Since the beginning of the universe is a well-attested fact, it must have had a prior cause. It would need to be non-physical or supernatural, since physical matter cannot bring itself into existence. It would have to be extremely powerful if it is to create the vast universe. It must be highly intelligent to finely tune and calibrate all the laws of nature that maintain the integrity of the universe. Finally, it would need to be personal if it is to will the universe into existence. While material causes cannot account for these four requirements, the God of the Bible fully satisfies them. He is the transcendent first cause that creates and sustains the world in which we inhabit.

Let’s return to the line of reasoning that establishes God’s existence as necessary to explain the universe’s beginning:

First, everything that begins to exist must have been brought into existence by something else.¹Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, The Kalam Cosmological Argument Vol. 2 (London, England: Bloomsbury Academic, 2017), 16. Things simply do not pop into physical reality on their own. If something could begin to exist without a prior cause, it would mean one of two things: 1) either the thing created itself, or 2) nothing created it. Since it is plainly evident that it is impossible to extract something out of nothing, we will focus our attention on the first option.

The notion of self-creation violates one of the most fundamental laws of logic, namely the law of non-contradiction. This law states that a thing cannot be itself and not itself at the same time and in the same way. For example, Abraham Lincoln cannot both be and not be the sixteenth president of the United States at the same time and in the same way. This commonsense principle applies to the idea of self-creation in that something cannot exist and not exist simultaneously.²R.C. Sproul, The Consequences of Ideas (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2000), 126 To argue that the universe created itself is also to argue that the universe existed before it came into existence, because it is the universe that brings itself into existence. In other words, the claim that the universe existed and did not exist at the same time is patently absurd. 

Now that the truth of our first premise, that everything that begins to exist must have a prior cause, has been established, it is safe to move on to the second premise, which is that the universe began to exist. As noted earlier, both science and theology agree that the universe began. However, such a recognition presents significant metaphysical challenges for the materialistic scientist that are not present for the biblical theologian.

One of the biggest challenges becomes apparent in the conclusion of the first two premises: if 1) everything that begins to exist must have a prior cause, and 2) the universe began to exist, then 3) the universe must have a prior cause.³Copan and Craig, 16-17. Atheistic scientists struggle to provide a natural explanation of this very cogent and reasonable deduction. But why? Succinctly put, naturalism denies that the supernatural realm exists – nature is all there is. If the universe, or nature, contains everything in all of reality, then there could not have been something outside of nature that caused it to enter into existence. But this is precisely what the scientific data suggests: that the universe began, which logically requires an external agent to make it happen.

After understanding that the universe must have a prior cause and realizing that this fact is at odds with a materialistic view of reality, we must explore the evidence for this conclusion. While space limits an in-depth discussion of the proof of the universe’s beginning, two key pieces of scientific evidence attest to this fact: the second law of thermodynamics and Einstein’s theory of general relativity. These laws speak to the truth that the universe is finite rather than infinite, and temporary rather than eternal.

While it may sound intimidating in its technical wording, the second law of thermodynamics merely observes the practical reality that the universe has a finite amount of usable energy, which will eventually run out. We can think of the universe as being like a giant cosmic campfire that will eventually fizzle out when its usable energy – represented by the firewood – is reduced to ash. While this illustration clearly shows the universe has a definite end, it implicitly suggests that the universe must also have had an absolute beginning. If the universe did not begin, then it would mean there is an infinite amount of time before today. If this were the case, there would not be any available energy because it would have been exhausted during the infinite time that preceded the present.⁴Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004), 76. Clearly, if you are reading this article, then the heat death of the universe has not yet arrived, and you can be confident that the universe, in fact, began.

Next, there is Einstein’s theory of general relativity. The primary insight of this theory is that it mathematically demonstrates that the universe is expanding. We can picture the universe as a large balloon that is continuously inflating as time moves forward. But what happens when the clock is turned backward? The further into the past one goes, the smaller the universe gets. This is kind of like a deflating balloon, until eventually the universe collapses to a single point which has no substance.⁵Ibid., 79. Not so coincidentally, we come to the same place we found ourselves earlier in our discussion: the universe appears to “pop” into existence from nothing. Yet, we already know that it is a logical impossibility for something to come from nothing. So, what do we make of this?

The truth is that the universe did not magically pop into being. It was caused by something else. The question is, what (or who) did it? Unfortunately, science is an inappropriate instrument to determine the nature of the first cause. This is because science measures nature, and the first cause is, by definition, outside of nature: it created nature. We are therefore forced to use another means of insight to determine what the cause of the universe might be. Interestingly, or even providentially, the requirements of the first cause closely align with the characteristics attributed to God in revealed Scripture. 

First, it would need to be non-physical (or spiritual), since it is the cause that brings physical matter into existence. Second, the first cause must be extremely powerful if it is to create the vast universe, complete with red giant stars, nebulae, and galactic clusters. Third, it would require incredible intelligence to finely tune the laws of nature that prevent the universe from descending into a state of abject chaos. Last, the first cause must be personal and willfully choose to either create or not create the cosmos. When one steps back and assesses these four requirements – spirituality, omnipotence, omniscience, and personality – he realizes that they describe the essential qualities of God without using the title “God.” Whether one calls him the “first cause,” the “Creator,” or “Yahweh,” one cannot escape from the truth that the universe declares the Creator’s glory. 

More specifically, we have reason to believe that this Creator is Yahweh (the Lord), who specifically revealed himself through Jesus of Nazareth. Why? Continue with us on this ultimate journey toward truth and discover why millions have found this conclusion impossible to ignore.