Why Is There Something Instead of Nothing?

Gottfried Leibniz asked it in 1714. Philosophers have been haunted by it ever since:

Why is there something rather than nothing?

Not "how did the universe begin" — that's a physics question. This is deeper. Why does anything exist at all? Why is there a reality instead of just... void?

It sounds like a stoner question. It's actually the most fundamental question in all of philosophy. And every worldview has to answer it.

There are really only three possible answers:

Option 1: Something Came From Nothing

The universe just popped into existence from literal nothing — no cause, no reason, no prior state. Just... boom.

This is philosophically incoherent. "Nothing" has no properties. It can't produce anything. It can't do anything. From nothing, nothing comes — that's been a bedrock principle of rational thought since Parmenides in the 5th century BC.

Some physicists (looking at you, Lawrence Krauss) claim the universe came from "nothing," but when you read the fine print, their "nothing" is actually quantum vacuum fluctuations — which is very much something. It has laws, energy, and mathematical structure. Calling that "nothing" is like calling an empty bank account "having no bank."

Option 2: Something Has Always Existed (No God)

The universe (or multiverse, or some physical reality) has always existed — no beginning, no cause needed. It just IS.

Problem: modern cosmology strongly suggests the universe HAD a beginning. The Big Bang, the expansion of space, the second law of thermodynamics — all point to a start. Even speculative models (cyclic universes, eternal inflation) just push the question back without answering it.

But even if you grant an eternal universe: WHY does it exist? Saying "it's always been here" doesn't answer why it's here. An eternal rock still needs an explanation for its existence. Duration doesn't answer ontology.

Option 3: Something Has Always Existed (God)

An eternal, necessary being — one that exists by its own nature and doesn't depend on anything else — created everything that exists.

This is the only option that actually answers the question. A necessary being doesn't need an external cause because its existence is part of its nature. Everything else (the universe, matter, energy, time) is contingent — it COULD not exist. But a necessary being MUST exist.

"But who created God?" is the obvious follow-up. And it misses the point. The whole argument is that there must be something that ISN'T contingent — something that doesn't need a cause. That's what "necessary being" means. Asking "who caused the uncaused thing?" is like asking "what's north of the North Pole?"

Every time you look at literally anything — a tree, a star, your own hand — you're looking at something that didn't have to exist. The atoms in your body could have been elsewhere. The planet could have not formed. The universe itself is contingent.

Something holds all of this in existence. Something grounds reality itself. Something answers the question of why there's a "there" there.

The philosophical tradition calls this the "ground of being." The Abrahamic traditions call it God.

The Bible doesn't present an argument for God's existence. It just starts talking:

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1).

The "why is there something?" question gets a one-verse answer: because Someone chose to make it.

John goes further: "Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made" (John 1:3). Everything that exists — every atom, every galaxy, every consciousness — traces back to a personal, intentional act.

Paul adds: "In him all things hold together" (Colossians 1:17). The universe isn't just caused and then left alone. It's actively sustained. The ground of being isn't a cosmic watchmaker who set things in motion and walked away. It's a Person who is RIGHT NOW holding every particle in existence.

"Why is there something rather than nothing?" is a question that every human being intuits is important, and that no materialist framework has ever satisfactorily answered.

The best physics can do is describe HOW things work. It can't touch WHY they exist. The best philosophy can do is narrow the options to: something from nothing (absurd), eternal matter (incomplete), or a necessary being (sufficient).

The Bible looked at this 3,000 years ago and said: there's a Person behind all of this. Not a force. Not a principle. A Person who spoke reality into existence on purpose.

The universe exists because Someone wanted it to. That's not a cop-out. That's the only answer that actually answers the question.