The kalam cosmological argument for God’s existence goes as follows:
(1) Anything that begins to exist requires a cause
(2) The universe began to exist
(3) Thus, the universe requires a cause
With some additional philosophical reasoning, the cause of the universe is ultimately identified as God. Many atheists object to the first premise, claiming that the universe just exists inexplicably. Such include Frank Wilczek, Chrispen Wright, Bob Hale, and John Post. Atheist philosopher, Quentin Smith, rejects this response as intellectually inadequate. He agrees that the universe needs a cause, but identifies that cause as the universe itself. He is not the first to do so. Daniel Dennett et al have made similar claims, but Smith’s version is much more sophisticated. Unlike most others, his version is rationally coherent (even if it is ultimately untenable), and thus deserving of attention.[1]
In Smith’s cosmogeny,[2] the beginning of the universe consists of an infinite number of simultaneous events, each causally connected to the next so that nothing popped into existence uncaused. Since the chain of events is infinite, there is no first event that lacks a causal explanation, and thus there is no need to posit God as the first cause of the universe. Each part of the universe is fully caused by another.
The events are identified by Smith as elementary particles (such as electrons and quarks). If we let t = 0 stand for the beginning of the universe, “…” stand for an infinite regress, e stand for electrons, q stand for quarks, and > stand for simultaneous causal relations, we can picture the beginning of Smith’s imagined universe as follows:
Thinking to Believe 