G. K. Chesterton: He who does not believe in God will believe in anything. This is a glaring example. With no way to prove this, do these silly “scientists” really believe it?
Since there is no official antonym of anything, it is reasonable to think of 'nothing.'
It certainly isn't 'everything,' since both anything and everything(in this case) both mean all things. As in He who does not believe in God will believe in all things.
He who does not believe in God will believe in anything.
He who does not believe in God will believe in everything.
or in logical reverse, one is left with something rather compromising:
He who does believe in God will believe in nothing.
What do you think? (of the grammar....)