Nothing?

 Nothing does not exist, when applied within the concepts of cosmology, at least within our experience. Consequently, saying something cannot come from nothing makes no sense. No, something must have always existed for there to be a something.

Necessary and Contingent Existence

 

1. Necessary and Contingent Existence

The argument relies upon a distinction between how something—an existent—can exist necessarily or contingently.[5]

Sadly, it seems the world could have existed without you or me in it. So, we exist contingently. The same also seems true of tables, cats, this essay, and the rest of the physical universe. These things can and do exist, but they need not have.

Contingent things, Avicenna thinks, have essences or natures that do not guarantee their existence.[6] This is true of you and me: after all, lots of possible humans do not exist![7] Contingent things require something to cause and sustain their existence.[8]

A ‘necessary existent’ would have an essence that guarantees its existence. If so, then that entity’s existence is uncaused, and its continued existence depends upon nothing.[9] Avicenna calls such a thing ‘necessary-in-itself.’[10]

NOTE: The above is the part of the philosophy of an Islamic Philosopher named by westerners as Avicenna. The essay is at Avicenna’s ‘Proof’ for the Existence of God - 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology