The Problem of the Denial of the Prime Simplicity Required to Account for Existing Composed Substances within Atheism.

Substances that are composed of essence and being do actually exist with a composite universe.

The substances that do exist, yet may not exist, must be explained to provide a sufficient reason of be for the existing substances in accord with the principle of sufficient reason.

To provide sufficient reason of be for the existence of contingent substances, an ontologically prior substance that is not a composite, is required to account for the existence of said contingent substances.

Such an ontologically prior substance that is not composed is simple.

And that substance which is simple is act that is not composed.

And act that is not composed is act without limit.

And act without limit is pure act.

And pure act is being without limit.

But God is being, as the prime simplicity, as pure act.

Therefore, atheism must deny the prime simplicity as God to account for the existence of contingent substances.

Yet in denying the prime simplicity, atheism concludes to the absurdity of contingent substances existing without any efficient cause of the being of the contingent substances.

Atheism thereby concludes to the existence of the prime simplicity is not being, but is non-being which acts as being to cause composite substances.

The atheist's denial of the prime simplicity also affirms the denial of the prime simplicity (as nothing) which acts in the same manner as the prime simplicity.

The denial and affirmation of the same demonstrates atheism is false.