A friend of mine recently became an Orthodox Jew. Because of this, I questioned the validity of the concept of "God." When I discussed the concept with him, he never really explained what referents in reality the concept labelled "God" had. At first, he gave me some sloppy notions of the concept. I could not say I believed that there was no God, as he described it, because I did not know what the concept meant. I could only say that I lacked his theistic belief--that I was an atheist.
When my friend claimed that this "God" was the "creator of the universe," i.e., of existence. I realized I could investigate the possibility of such a thing existing--and perhaps defend the belief that there exists no creator, i.e., God. It was a fun exercise. Read along and enjoy the ride.
I shall start my investigation with what it means to exist. Ayn Rand wrote: "To exist is to be something, as distinguished from nothing of non-existence, it is to be an entity of a specific nature made of specific attributes." For example, I exist; I am a human being. My existence is my identity, which consists of many characteristics, e.g., that I am a student. The Law of Identity states that a thing is itself. The Law of Non-Contradiction says that an existent being can not act in contradiction to its nature.
Now I will speak of the concept of "nothing." Nothing does not exist. All things exist. It follows that no thing does not exist. That is clear, as any thing is an existent, as defined above. So "nothing" has never existed, or, there is no such thing as "nothing." By the definition of existence, the last statement says: There exists no such existent as a nonexistent. This boils down to a simple statement: Nonexistence does not exist.
So what is the universe? I define the universe as a name for the set of all existents--as in a set in mathematics. Every individual existent belongs to the set called the "universe." The universe consists of everything (the same as every thing), every existent. One can describe the universe only by describing the nature of one or more existents, and the way the existents interact. The universe does not have a nature apart from the nature of its individual members and their interactions.
To clear things up, compare the universe, as a name for a set, to Major League Baseball. The universe consists of all existents, every thing. Major League Baseball consists of every major league baseball team. Yet, it also has offices apart from any specific team. Major League Baseball consists of teams and a front office. The front office operates outside of the baseball games, the interactions between the teams. So in addition to Major League Baseball's being a name for a set of baseball teams, it has some attributes apart from those of the individual teams and the interactions among them.
The universe does not have a front office, a creator standing outside of existence. If "God" exists, then it would be an existent, and would just be part of the set of existents called the universe. Some people have a notion of God as eternal, always in existence. But if this were the only existent, and is conscious, what was it conscious of? To be conscious is to be conscious of something.
Further, this "eternal" notion of God rests on a false concept of time. Time is a measurement, a relationship between entities (note the plural), e.g., the earth's motion around the sun. The progression of motion gives us the concept of "time." Nothing can be said to move except in relation to something else. The term "eternal" is meaningless without the existence of physical entities. "Time" is within the universe; the universe is not within time.
There is no creator of the universe because there was no creation of the universe or creation of existence. The phenomenon of existence was not created. To prove that it is possible for existence not to exist, one must posit that nonexistence can exist.
People say that religion and politics are always hotbeds of heated debate. I had talked about politics enough in these pages, so I figured I should change gears. But remember: this has just been an exercise. People have every right to believe what they believe, but no right to force others to act according to these beliefs, be they religious or secular.