Why is There Something Rather than Nothing? A Look with Leibniz at Evidence for God

Over the last couple of posts we've been taking a long look at the Kalam Cosmological Argument, a great (and very effective) tool for providing "evidence for God" (most atheists base their atheism not on any proof for atheism, but on what they claim to be the lack of evidence for God¹, presenting them with evidence, then, is the best course to take when speaking with them). I enjoy sharing the kalam argument, online and in person, as it is a very quick, simple, and powerful argument. It also can withstand atheist critiques quite easily (as we saw in An Atheist Responds to the Kalam Argument... My Retort Follows and in Another Atheist Takes a Swing at Kalam as well as Dr. William Lane Craig's video (HERE) where he refutes the ten most common internet "pseudo-intellectual" objections).

Today, for Catholic365, I take a look at another argument for the existence of God, the argument from there being something rather than nothing. It is a bit more complicated, but is logically airtight and requires one less premise (that the universe began to exist) than kalam. Interestingly, this argument shows us the necessity of God even if the universe was itself infinitely old. You can add this to your arsenal for the next time you run across someone ignorantly (and usually smugly) claiming "there is no proof for God).

Enjoy!

Gottfried von Leibniz, German philosopher and mathematician,  famously saw that the question of questions, the most fundamental, most important, most life-changing question of all was simply "why is there something rather than nothing?"¹ From this simple question, Leibniz was able to demonstrate the existence of God. As his argument might not be as familiar as some others, I thought I might quickly review it here.... (read the rest at Catholic365)

von Leibniz

__________________

1. Ironically, this claim, even if true, would fail to establish atheism, as we saw here: Does Lack of Evidence for God Justify Atheism?