Finding God Where the Atheists Refuse to Look for Him
I was told that it can’t be done. They were wrong. I’ve developed a few Scientific Proofs of God’s Existence that I have found convincing. It was Science that convinced me that God exists.
I’ve been working on this Philosophical Proof of God’s Existence for three years now, because it wasn’t obvious at the beginning how to proceed.
An argument is valid if the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. An argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are true.
I have developed a philosophical proof of God’s existence – or two – that I find logically compelling, philosophically valid, and scientifically sound. Let’s start with the best and most believable conventional philosophical proof of God’s existence, the Kalam Cosmological Argument.
Let’s start with William Lane Craig’s version of the Kalam Cosmological Argument.
Premises:
Whatever begins to exist has a cause;
The universe began to exist;
Conclusion:
The universe has a cause.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosmological_argument
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Kalam-Cosmological-Argument.pdf
It begs the question, “Which universe began?” And, that’s the main problem with the Kalam Cosmological Argument. The term “universe” is too vague and needs to be more carefully defined because we know of some universes that had NO beginning. Nevertheless, the Kalam Cosmological Argument is a good place to start, when it comes to a philosophical proof of God’s existence.
This argument or proof is a syllogism. If the premises are true, then the conclusion has to be true. This is a properly constructed syllogism; therefore, it is a valid philosophical argument. An argument is valid if the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises.
This argument is also believed by many people to be a sound argument. Remember, an argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are true. This argument is considered TRUE by many people because it is philosophically valid and seems to be scientifically or observationally sound.
I find this philosophical proof of God’s existence logically consistent, philosophically valid, and somewhat sound. It works in part, because its Premises are based somewhat upon observed truths. However, it can be greatly clarified and improved upon, because I can think of many exceptions to Craig’s second premise.
Craig’s Kalam Cosmological Argument FAILS to convince me in the end, because I can think of many exceptions to his second premise. There are some universes that had NO beginning; and therefore, they have NO cause. They are uncaused.
You have got to get your premises perfect – perfectly true – or the proof doesn’t work because it isn’t sound. Craig’s Kalam Cosmological Argument is a valid or well-constructed argument; but, it isn’t sound – it isn’t true. Craig can’t see it nor understand it because he is using a falsehood as one of his hidden premises – namely creation ex nihilo. Falsehoods negate or falsify proofs.
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
IN THE BEGINNING OF WHAT?
It’s extremely important to figure out and KNOW for sure which beginning they are actually talking about. You see, verse one of Genesis is also supposed to be a philosophical proof of God’s existence; but, it only works if you know which beginning they are talking about.
Clearly God existed BEFORE this beginning, or He wouldn’t have been able to begin it. Verse two of Genesis actually tells us that God was in a spirit form or a spiritual body during the formation of our physical earth.
Clearly, whatever substance God organized our heavens and our earth from had to exist BEFORE the beginning of our heavens and our earth because creation ex nihilo is impossible – meaning that it is scientifically and logically unsound. Creation ex nihilo is philosophically and scientifically absurd. It didn’t happen because it can’t happen. Not even God can create something from nothing. This is what science and logic tells us is true. Something from nothing leaves nothing.
Every aspect of your philosophical proof has to be perfect, perfectly sound or perfectly true, and perfectly understood; or, your philosophical proof isn’t going to work and isn’t going to be convincing.
SO, IN THE BEGINNING OF WHAT?
In the beginning of our physical universe!
The majority of the scientists are Big Bang proponents, which means that the majority of the scientists really truly believe and KNOW that our physical universe as well as physical matter had a beginning of some kind, which means that our physical universe had a Maker, or Creator, or Organizer, or Ultimate Cause. It’s unavoidable. Every beginning has a Cause. If there was a Big Bang, somebody pushed the button! Clearly, our physical universe began, which means that it has a Maker or Creator of some sort.
Once we successfully identify “the beginning” as the Beginning of our Physical Universe, then the first verse of Genesis becomes a successful and believable and convincing Kalam Cosmological Argument because we KNOW that all the premises are true. We scientists KNOW for a fact that our physical universe and physical matter had a beginning of some sort, which means that our physical universe had a Beginner or Maker who made it. It’s undeniable, since we KNOW that the premises are true.
Then we also KNOW for a fact that whatever substance God used to make or to construct this physical universe, it wasn’t physical matter! It had to be some kind of Dark Matter or Spirit Matter because physical matter didn’t exist yet in this universe. We also KNOW that whoever and whatever God is, He pre-dated or pre-existed the beginning of this physical universe. Now, we have a platform of truth and knowledge upon which we can build.
An argument is valid if the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises; and, an argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are true. Remember, the premises have to be true in order for the argument to be sound.
Even though Craig’s argument is philosophically valid and scientifically or observationally sound, at least superficially, I found that I had to adjust it a bit so as to make it specifically clear what I’m talking about and what I’m trying to prove. Craig’s argument is too vague and universal for my tastes, which allows falsehoods, faulty interpretations, confusion, logic fallacies, and unscientific ideas to creep into it too easily.
So, I chose to adjust it in the following manner and tighten it up a bit.
Premises or Observations:
Whatever begins to exist has a Beginner, Maker, or an Ultimate Cause;
Our physical universe began to exist;
Conclusion:
Therefore, our physical universe has a Beginner, Maker, or an Ultimate Cause.
Now this thing is bullet-proof. The premises are TRUE and universally agreed upon, which means that the conclusion has to be TRUE as well.
These adjustments are important and essential, because I’m trying to bring the premises and conclusion into line with what has been experienced and observed in real life by real people. I’m trying to make my argument scientifically valid and sound, not just philosophically so. A philosophical proof that proves a lie to be true is of no value to anyone. I want this thing solid and sound when I’m done with it so that it actually does prove that some kind of God exists. In other words, I was able to think of exceptions to Craig’s second premise that actually falsified and ruined his Kalam Cosmological Argument for me so that it no longer worked as a proof of God’s existence. The Premises of a proof have to be empirical, obviously true, and bullet-proof in order for the proof to be efficacious, convincing, real, and true.
Whenever I develop a philosophical proof, I try to switch over to observational evidence, experiential proof, verified reality, scientific evidence, and logical common sense as quickly as I can in order to prevent myself from being tricked and deceived. Self-deception works, and it works every time.
It’s the physical universe that we are talking about here because the non-physical universe, quantum universe, non-local universe, psyche universe, syntropy universe, transdimensional universe, transcendent universe, or spiritual universe had NO beginning; and therefore, it will have no end. It’s the physical universe that had a beginning, not the transdimensional universe. This is crucial to get straight and get right.
Craig’s argument talks about “the universe” – that’s way too vague.
Why?
Well, the Multi-Verse, or the Non-Physical Universe, or the Chaos Construct, or the Quantum Transdimensional Transcendent Universe, or the Spirit Realm had NO beginning, which technically makes Craig’s premise #2 false to begin with when he says that “our universe began,” because the Primal Universe or Original Universe had NO beginning and therefore had NO cause. However, it has been observed and agreed upon by the scientists in general that our physical universe definitely had a beginning; therefore, our physical universe definitely had to have had an Ultimate Cause or a Person who organized it and brought it into existence. It’s our physical universe that began, NOT “the universe”.
Furthermore, the Beginner or Ultimate Cause has to be a person, or a living entity, or a Psyche, or an intelligent being of some kind because we KNOW that raw matter, or dead matter, or inert matter, or chaotic matter, or entropy cannot spontaneously generate into anything whatsoever. There’s no such thing as spontaneous generation or creation ex nihilo where physical matter is concerned.
Psyche is the Ultimate Cause; and, Psyche is the ultimate causal agent. Matter cannot design and create. There is NO such thing as spontaneous generation or creation ex nihilo. Spontaneous generation or creation ex nihilo has been FALSIFIED by the scientific method. Such a concept as Creation Ex Nihilo is philosophically, logically, and scientifically unsound. It doesn’t make any logical sense. Something from nothing is illogical. It can’t be done, which means that it wasn’t done. Not even God can do the impossible. Not even God can do creation ex nihilo!
Our physical universe came from something that already existed, and our physical universe was organized by Someone Psyche or Someone Spiritual who also already existed.
Creation Ex Nihilo and Atheism are kissing cousins. They are of the same kind. You could even say that they are siblings.
Creation Ex Nihilo is the creation or manufacture of something from nothing. Creation Ex Nihilo has NEVER been experienced nor observed; and, it never will be, because it’s impossible. Creation Ex Nihilo is illogical and patently absurd. It’s magic. It won’t happen, because it can’t happen. It never happened because it can’t happen.
Atheism is creation or manufacture of something by NOTHING. Technically, Atheism has NEVER been experienced nor observed; and, it never will be, because it’s impossible. Atheism is illogical and patently absurd. It won’t be verified, because it can never be verified. NOTHING will never be caught in the act of manufacturing something.
Likewise, spontaneous generation, macro-evolution, chemical evolution, and abiogenesis are a type of Atheism – the creation or manufacture of something by NOTHING. It can’t be done, which means that it wasn’t done. These types of “evolution” are physically impossible and prevented from happening by entropy or the second law of thermodynamics. They can’t happen, which means that they didn’t happen.
Most people are content to simply provide a valid philosophical proof; but when I’m doing proofs, I demand that the Premises be based upon scientific proof, actual observations, and real-life experiences. In other words, I demand that the Premises be scientifically and observationally sound. It makes for a better and an infinitely more convincing proof. The soundness of a proof is everything, in my humble opinion.
Ultimately, Craig’s version of the Kalam Cosmological Argument isn’t sound because I can think of many exceptions to his second Premise. My second premise doesn’t allow for any exceptions because I tightened it up and made it specific.
My version of the Kalam Cosmological Argument does indeed PROVE that some kind of God exists – the God who designed, created, and produced our physical universe.
Why?
My proof works and is convincing because MOST of the scientists in the world are in agreement that our physical universe began in some sort of Big Bang; and, this proof should be convincing to the Christians and Muslims because their God and scriptures tell us that He created the heavens and the earth – namely our physical universe. Physical matter and physical universes have a beginning, which means that they have a Beginner, Maker, or some sort of Ultimate Cause. Big Bangs have a beginning, which means that they have somebody who pushed the button and made them go bang.
God’s Psyche didn’t have a beginning, because it has always existed. The spirit matter or dark matter from which God organized this physical universe has always existed. But, practically everyone is in complete agreement that this physical universe, physical matter, and our physical earth had a beginning, which means that the Beginner or Ultimate Cause was some type of Psyche, Spirit, or God BEFORE the beginning or organization of physical universes and physical matter.
My adjustment to the Kalam Cosmological Argument is already philosophically valid and scientifically sound; so, it already works as a philosophical proof of God’s existence; but, let’s formalize it and expand it just a bit, so that I can comment on it some more.
Remember, an argument is valid if the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises; and, an argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are true.
Premise and Observation: Anything that has a beginning has a Beginner or an Ultimate Cause – a Designer, Creator, and Manufacturer who brought it into existence. This is Logic 101. It’s inherently logical and sound. It has been experienced and observed.
Observations: It has been observed that our physical universe had a beginning, which means that it had a Beginner or an Ultimate Cause – a Designer and Creator who brought it into existence. That means that physical matter had a beginning, which means that it had a Beginner or Ultimate Cause – a Designer, Creator, and Manufacturer who organized it or brought it into existence.
Conclusion: When it comes to the organization and beginning of our physical universe and physical matter, by definition, in principle or practice, that Beginner, Designer, Manufacturer, Maker, and Creator has to be a God.
This is a logical conclusion since the rest of us here on this physical earth aren’t in the habit of making physical matter and physical universes from scratch. As physical beings, we can’t touch the sub-atomic or the quantum or the spiritual. Only a transcendent and transdimensional God would have such capabilities. Such a God would have to exist BEFORE the organization of this physical universe from spirit matter, chaotic matter, dark matter, or primal matter. Such a God would have to be transcendent without any physical limitations whatsoever – an omnipotent God who is the master of transdimensional physics or quantum mechanics. Such a God would have to have sufficient knowledge and power for such an endeavor.
The FACT that our physical universe had to have had a Beginner or an Ultimate Cause tells us some important things about the nature and capability the Being, the Psyche, the Spirit, or the God who designed and organized our physical universe. The Person or God who organized our physical universe had to pre-date our physical universe; and, the stuff that He used to form or organize our physical universe also had to pre-date our physical universe. This is Logic 101. First things first!
Technically, according to the rules associated with arguments and proofs, the first premise is allowed to be a Given Truth, Axiom, or a freebie; but, I demand that the first premise be scientifically proven, or observed and experienced by Someone Psyche sometime somewhere. All of the hidden premises and freebies that philosophers use is what gets us into trouble in the first place. I want all of my premises and my conclusion to be proven and verified in one way or another; otherwise, my philosophical proofs and scientific arguments are worthless in my humble opinion – as worthless as the philosophical proofs and scientific arguments being used to support and promote Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, and Atheism.
I demand that ALL of the premises be observed, verified, experienced, and proven to be real and true. ONLY then is the conclusion guaranteed to be true. A valid proof is worthless, if it proves a lie to be true. The premises and the conclusion must be sound! Consequently, I demand that ALL of the premises and even the conclusion be observed, verified, experienced, and proven to be real and true in Real Life by Real People. ONLY then can you be sure that you have indeed found the truth.
Notice that in this Philosophical Proof of God’s Existence, I used OBSERVATIONS as my Premises so that I could be absolutely sure that my conclusion is true. My Premises are not as concise as in the previous examples, but I KNOW that they are true, which is all that really matters to me in the end.
The Materialists, Naturalists, and Theists are simply satisfied to win the argument. But, winning the argument isn’t enough for me. I want to have the truth and KNOW the truth when I am done. I’m a scientist. I want to know the truth, not just win the argument.
Try this one! It’s got teeth and claws.
Observation: Anything that was obviously made obviously had a Maker or Creator who made it.
Observation: A genome was obviously made.
Logical Conclusion: Therefore, a genome obviously has a Maker or a Creator who designed it, programmed it, engineered it, field-tested it, fine-tuned it, made it, manufactured it, and deployed it.
My philosophical proofs of God’s existence really do PROVE that some kind of God exists, because my philosophical proofs of God’s existence are in fact Scientific Proofs of God’s Existence or OBSERVED Proofs of God’s Existence. There’s a huge difference there; but, only for those who are actually looking for such a thing. Like I said, MOST philosophers are simply satisfied to provide a valid argument and could care less if their Premises are scientifically and observationally sound. MOST philosophers and scientists are satisfied with a valid argument and a valid conclusion, and they could care less if their Conclusion has actually been experienced and observed in real life by real people.
I want EVERY PART of my philosophical proofs and scientific arguments to be experienced and observed; or, my philosophical proofs, scientific arguments, and chosen conclusions end up being completely worthless to me. I even want my Conclusions to have been experienced and observed by Someone Psyche, sometime somewhere. Only then can I KNOW that I have finally found the truth.
Remember, an argument is valid if the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises; and, an argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are true.
While doing philosophical proofs, theological proofs, and scientific proofs, I DEMAND that ALL of the Premises and the Conclusion be sound, which means that I demand that all of the Premises and the Conclusion be experienced and observed by Someone Psyche somewhere sometime. That’s one of the reasons why Islam FAILS for me, because nobody has ever seen Allah; however, thousands, if not millions, of different people have seen and experienced our resurrected Lord Jesus Christ either in the flesh or during their Near-Death Experiences. Jesus Christ is the being of light and love whom people encounter and experience after they have died, and their brain is clinically dead. Jesus Christ is REAL, and He truly exists, because ALL of the observational evidence is telling us that it is so.
It’s the observational evidence that I find convincing, and NOT the philosophical proofs. The philosophical proofs simply give us a way to structure, compound, and then multiply the effects of the observational evidence. It’s the observational evidence, knowledge, and truth that I’m after, and NOT victory over my foes. Victory is hollow if what you win ends up being worthless and false.
Every beginning has a Person or a Psyche who caused it to happen. Psyche is the Ultimate Cause; and, Psyche is the ultimate causal agent.
See: The Ultimate Model of Reality: Psyche Is the Ultimate Cause
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071NC9JK6
Remember, every beginning has a Person, Intelligence, or a Psyche who caused it to happen or brought it into existence. This is Logic 101.
My Philosophical Proof is a philosophical proof of God’s existence that actually makes logical sense to me and works for me. I find it compelling and convincing. It’s based upon the Kalam Cosmological Argument, which I also find convincing and believable, as long as it is worded in a manner such that the Premises are based upon observational evidence and lived experiences. It’s the Observational Evidence that I find convincing, not necessarily the philosophical proof.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosmological_argument
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Kalam-Cosmological-Argument.pdf
With Observed and Proven Premises in place, I found my version of the Kalam Cosmological Argument convincing; but, just because it works for me is no guarantee that it will work for you.
As with any philosophical proof, if you don’t find the premises, arguments, and observations compelling, credible, and convincing, then you won’t find the conclusion convincing either. That’s the weakness of philosophical proofs. Observation and experience can easily falsify them; and, a lack of personal observational experience can easily make that person a victim of the philosophical proofs that are faulty and false. I seldom find any philosophical proof convincing because they are all subject to legerdemain or trickery. Most of them have NO observational evidence supporting them.
When it comes to philosophical proofs, their conclusion is also subject to personal interpretation, which introduces a wide variety of logic fallacies into the mix. Philosophical proofs are worthless if their Premises have NEVER been experienced nor observed. Their conclusions and the interpretations of their conclusions are worthless too if they have NEVER been experienced nor observed. That’s why Materialism, Naturalism, Nihilism, and Atheism are worthless, because their hidden assumptions or major premises have NEVER been experienced and observed, nor can they be experienced and observed. Materialism, Naturalism, and their derivatives are FALSIFIED automatically due to a complete lack of observational evidence supporting their hidden assumptions or major premises which claim that the quantum, or the non-local, or the non-physical does not exist.
I was never really convinced by philosophical proofs. Most people aren’t. There’s too much self-deception going on when it comes to philosophy. Materialism and Naturalism are philosophy or religion, not science. They have to be taken on blind faith as being true. In contrast, whether I’m talking about science or philosophy, the thing that I do find compelling, convincing, and believable is Evidence, Observation, and Experience. Science is observation, or it should be. I’ve always found a Scientific Proof of God’s Existence infinitely more believable and convincing than a philosophical proof of God’s existence, because the science is based upon observation and experience.
Furthermore, a complete lack of observational experience or verified proof can easily falsify a premise, a philosophical proof, a hypothesis, or even a theory. That’s what happened to Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Behaviorism, Determinism, Scientism, Atheism, Macro-Evolution, and therefore the Theory of Evolution. A complete lack of observational evidence supporting their major premises, primary assumptions, or hidden assumptions completely FALSIFIES them.
It’s the observations and experiences that I find convincing, not the philosophical proofs or philosophical sophistry. The wonderful thing about the Kalam Cosmological Proof of God’s Existence, especially my modified version, is that it’s backed by tons of observational evidence and it’s easily transformed into a Scientific Proof of God’s Existence simply by finding some observed evidence and experiential evidence to insert as your premises.
For example:
Premises or Observations:
Anything that has been fine-tuned has a Fine-Tuner;
Our physical universe has clearly been fine-tuned;
Conclusion:
Therefore, our physical universe has a Fine-Tuner.
This is a powerful syllogism that works as an excellent philosophical proof of God’s Existence because it is based exclusively upon observational evidence and logical common sense. This argument is philosophically and logically SOUND because its premises have been experienced and observed by real-life human beings.
This argument is solidified by the scientific observation that spontaneous generation is physically impossible, thanks to entropy or the second law of thermodynamics. There’s no such thing as spontaneous generation, abiogenesis, chemical evolution, creation ex nihilo, or macro-evolution thanks to entropy or the second law of thermodynamics which prevents these types of things from happening in the wild.
This Fine-Tuner Argument is as much a Scientific Proof of God’s Existence as it is a philosophical proof of God’s existence. The evidence of fine-tuning is all around us and impossible to deny. Fine-tuning is one of the most convincing Scientific Proofs of God’s Existence.
Every instance or example of cosmic fine-tuning, mechanical fine-tuning, and biological fine-tuning is a miniature scientific proof of God’s existence.
How do we know?
We scientists KNOW because living cells, genomes, genes, proteins, eyes, brains, and life forms have NEVER been observed spontaneously generating from atoms out of thin air. They can’t because it’s physically impossible for them to do so thanks to entropy, random diffusion, or the second law of thermodynamics.
For me personally, I found all of those precision-tuned Cosmological Constants or Physical Constants to be one of the most convincing Scientific Proofs of God’s Existence that I have ever come across, especially since we scientists KNOW for a fact that such precision fine-tuning doesn’t spontaneously generate out of thin air, because of entropy or the second law of thermodynamics. Likewise, we scientists KNOW for a fact that the exquisite and precise programming found in our genomes doesn’t just spontaneously generate out of thin air either, here in this physical realm – once again thanks to entropy or the second law of thermodynamics. Your genome is God’s Signature.
Again, for your convenience.
Observation: Anything that was obviously made obviously had a Maker or Creator who made it.
Observation: A genome was obviously made.
Logical Conclusion: Therefore, a genome obviously has a Maker or a Creator who designed it, programmed it, engineered it, field-tested it, fine-tuned it, made it, manufactured it, and deployed it.
My Genomic Argument is a variation on the Fine-Tuning Argument. They both are excellent Scientific Proofs of God’s Existence, which also makes them some of the very best philosophical proofs of God’s existence around because they are real and true, having been experienced and observed.
The BEST listing and documentation of God’s precision fine-tuning is found on Reasons to Believe, by Hugh Ross, and is freely available to the public. Ross presents a link to this list in the appendix of his book, Why the Universe Is the Way It Is, and in the appendix of a couple of his other books. I archived it on a couple of my websites because it kept disappearing or moving around on me, and I could never find it again.
Fine-Tuning Is Scientific Proof of God’s Existence
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/compendium_part1.pdf
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/compendium_part2.pdf
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/compendium_Part3_ver2.pdf
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/compendium_Part4_ver2.pdf
Ross, H. (2008). Why the Universe Is the Way It Is. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
For me personally, the first truly convincing Scientific Proof of God’s Existence came to me on the day when I first realized that entropy or the second law of thermodynamics prevents chemical evolution, random mutations, and natural selection from spontaneously generating proteins, genes, genomes, eyes, brains, and life forms out of thin air from scratch. The theory of evolution is spontaneous generation, and spontaneous generation is physically impossible thanks to entropy or the second law of thermodynamics. Functional information-rich genomes, functional proteins, and life forms do not and cannot spontaneously generate from atoms. They just can’t. It’s physically impossible. It was then that I realized that God must exist in order to have done all of the Science and Fine-Tuning and Programming which chemical evolution, random mutations, and natural selection could NEVER have done. On that day, I simply KNEW that God exists, because I KNEW why He must exist.
Ironically, Louis Pasteur FALSIFIED spontaneous generation (and therefore Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Atheism, Chemical Evolution, Macro-Evolution, Creation Ex Nihilo, and the Theory of Evolution) in 1859 – the very same year that Charles Darwin published “On the Origin of Species”. We have KNOWN since the very beginning of the theory of evolution that spontaneous generation, abiogenesis, macro-evolution, chemical evolution, creation ex nihilo, or the theory of evolution is FALSE; but, most scientists have deliberately chosen to ignore that evidence and pursue wishful thinking instead. Wishful thinking, or confirmation bias, or blind-faith is a logic fallacy – one of the logic fallacies upon which Materialism, Naturalism, and Darwinism are based.
Remember, your philosophical arguments and syllogisms are NOT sound if their premises have NEVER been experienced nor observed. They may be logically valid, but they are NOT sound. That’s how the Materialists, Naturalists, and Darwinists trick us and deceive us. They give us syllogisms and philosophical arguments that are logically valid, but totally unsound due to a complete lack of observational evidence supporting their chosen premises or hidden assumptions. Consequently, because of faulty premises, these people also jump to conclusions that are philosophically, logically, and scientifically impossible and unsound. Jumping to conclusions or begging the question is also a logic fallacy. Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, and Atheism are unscientific because their premises are scientifically unsound, having never been experienced nor observed.
Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, and their derivatives are based exclusively upon entropy; and, entropy by definition in principle cannot do Fine-Tuning and Programming. Therefore, God or Syntropy must of necessity exist in order to have done ALL of the Fine-Tuning and Programming that needed to be done. Simple. Logical. Parsimonious. TRUE!
Notice that whenever I present a scientific argument or a philosophical proof, I try to switch over to observed science or proven science for my Premises, as quickly as I can. It’s the Observations and Experiences and Science that are convincing, and NOT the philosophical proof or syllogism. Remember, Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Behaviorism, Determinism, Scientism, and Atheism have NO observed and NO proven Premises. Consequently, they FAIL before they even get started. There’s no way to support them with science or observation because there is none, where their major premises or hidden assumptions are concerned.
Discussion of fine-tuning and the physical constants.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Fine-tuned-Universe.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensionless_physical_constant
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Dimensionless-physical-constant.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_constant
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Physical-constant.pdf
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Physical-constant.pdf
Remember, the second law of thermodynamics, random mutations, death (natural selection), random diffusion, or entropy cannot do Physical Constants, Precision Fine-Tuning, and Programming. It’s physically impossible. It can’t be done, which means that it wasn’t done.
Now, try this one:
Premises or Observations:
We have observed that everything that has a beginning has some kind of Creator or Maker who made it.
We have observed that our physical universe had a beginning. Consequently, we have observed that physical matter had a beginning.
Conclusion:
Therefore, it is logical to conclude that our physical universe and the physical matter within it had some kind of Creator or Maker who made them, organized them, or brought them into existence.
This argument has teeth because its premises have been experienced and observed. This argument is philosophically and logically SOUND because its premises have been experienced and observed. This Creator Argument or Maker Argument is as much a Scientific Proof of God’s Existence as it is a philosophical proof of God’s existence.
We have caught intelligent beings in the ACT of design, creation, manufacturing, and production zillions of times in trillions of different ways. Intelligent Design or Intelligent Creation is an OBSERVED, verified, and proven science. We KNOW that it is REAL because it has been EXPERIENCED and OBSERVED. It has been caught in the act. There’s NO philosophical speculation, guesswork, or wishful thinking going on here where the observation of intelligent beings (or intelligent psyches) in action is concerned.
I find these Philosophical Proofs of God’s Existence equally as compelling as the others because their premises have been experienced and observed in real life by real people. If you want the truth, then go with what has been experienced and observed, because the philosophical speculation, wishful thinking, and blind-faith of the Materialists and Naturalist are worthless in the end.
Notice once again that when it comes to My Philosophical Proofs of God’s Existence, I try to turn them into a Scientific Proof of God’s Existence as quickly as I can. In other words, I try to turn them into an OBSERVED Proof of God’s Existence. When it comes to science and proof, observation is where the tires really hit the pavement. Observed Proof of God’s Existence is the most convincing and believable proof of God’s existence. That’s just the way it is.
In contrast, I also found the complete lack of observational evidence supporting their major premises or hidden assumptions equally as convincing when it came time to falsify theories and ideas such as Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Behaviorism, Determinism, and Atheism. These philosophies or hypotheses are FALSIFIED by a complete lack of observational evidence supporting their major premises or hidden assumptions which state that the Non-Local, the Quantum, or the Non-Physical does not exist. The very existence and the verified existence of Quantum Mechanics and Action at a Distance FALSIFIES Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Atheism, Classical Physics, and their derivatives.
As a result of these observations, I upgraded my science to Science 2.0.
Science 2.0: I Upgraded My Science
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0771K6WTX
Science 2.0 allows ALL of the evidence into evidence, and then it pursues a preponderance of that evidence. Evidence or observation is the only thing that has value to us. Philosophical arguments and philosophical proofs are absolutely worthless if the Premises that are employed are false and have been falsified, as has happened in the case of Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, and their derivatives.
When it comes to the non-physical sciences, Science 2.0 uses a Burden of Proof Methodology that is based upon a preponderance of the observational evidence. Under Science 2.0, observation and experience of any kind take precedence over philosophical speculation, guesswork, hypothesis, wishful thinking, scientific inferences, and confirmation biases. Science 2.0 is the way that science should have always been done but wasn’t.
Science 2.0 is a new and better way of doing science that is based upon observational evidence, eye-witness evidence, and experiential evidence.
Under Science 2.0, the BEST way to find and know the truth is to live it, experience it, and observe it for yourself, or to choose to trust someone who has. The second-best way to find and know the truth is to use the scientific methods to falsify and eliminate everything that is false such as Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Atheism, and their derivatives. If you successfully eliminate and remove everything that is false, then ONLY the truth will remain. It’s fascinating to observe what remains after you have eliminated everything that is false and everything that has been falsified.
Remember, a syllogism can be logically valid but totally unsound. If the Premises of your argument, syllogism, or logic proof are NOT backed by observational evidence, then your philosophical argument is unsound. That’s yet another serious problem with Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Atheism, Behaviorism, Determinism, Scientism, Atheism, and the Theory of Evolution. There is NO observational evidence supporting their major premises or hidden assumptions, and there can NEVER be any observational evidence supporting their primary assumptions or major premises; therefore, the arguments produced by these philosophies, religions, dogmas, or pseudo-sciences can be forced to be valid, but they will NEVER be philosophically or logically sound. In other words, they will always be false. These falsified philosophies are unscientific and unsound because there can never be ANY observational evidence supporting their hidden assumptions or major premises which claim that the non-physical or the quantum does not exist.
The moral of the story is that when it comes to your philosophical proofs, be sure to use observed evidence, verified scientific evidence, experienced evidence, veridical evidence, and empirical evidence as your Premises if you want to have the greatest chance of your conclusions and subsequent interpretations being true.
My Philosophical Proofs of God’s Existence have teeth and claws because their premises are OBSERVED evidence and have actually been experienced in real life. My Philosophical Proofs of God’s Existence are both valid and sound because they are in fact Scientific Proofs of God’s Existence, meaning that their premises are backed by tons of observational evidence and experience. We KNOW that the experienced and the observed are TRUE because they have been experienced and observed. We KNOW that Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, and Atheism are false because their major premises or hidden assumptions have NEVER been experienced nor observed and can’t be experienced or observed.
We KNOW that God exists, because the Philosophical Arguments and Scientific Arguments that I have presented here PROVE that He exists. Once I knew that God exists, then I realized that I still have a long way to go before I get to know God. I used to be a Materialist, Naturalist, Nihilist, and Atheist; so, I still have a lot of work to do and a lot to accomplish where knowing God is concerned.
Remember, philosophy has NO value whatsoever if it doesn’t match with what has been experienced and observed. Notice how I tried to switch over from logic to what has actually been experienced and observed, before drawing any conclusions. The observations are essential. Science is observation. A philosophical proof has to match with reality, or it’s worthless.
It’s also important to draw the correct conclusion.
Online, when I provided a scientific proof of God’s existence, one of the readers asked me which of all the man-made gods we should believe in.
Therefore, in harmony with his question, I ask, “Which of all the man-made gods is the one who was the Beginner, Designer, Manufacturer, Maker, and Creator of this physical universe and the physical matter in this universe?”
I chose to go with the True and Living God, Jesus Christ, because He has been experienced and observed after He rose from the dead. Thousands have seen Him and touched Him in the flesh; and, thousands have seen Him and embraced Him during their Near-Death Experiences. Should you ever find yourself in hell, remember that Jesus Christ can get you out of there just for the asking.
We KNOW that the Biblical God Jesus Christ exists, because He has been experienced and observed by thousands after He rose from the dead. Jesus Christ claims to be the God who organized the heavens and this earth, as well as all the life forms on this earth.
Notice once again, that when it comes to God’s Existence, I try to switch over to observation and experience as quickly as I can, because philosophical speculation and wishful thinking are absolutely worthless in the end.
I define “science” as observation and experience. I have trained myself to switch away from philosophical speculation, wishful thinking, hypothesis, confirmation biases, and sophistry over to observation, experience, and empirical evidence as quickly as I can in order to prevent myself from being deceived. I encourage my readers to do the same.
This is most important thing to know and understand about philosophical proofs and scientific arguments – they MUST BE valid and sound. In other words, their Premises MUST BE true; otherwise, the proof, argument, and conclusion are absolutely worthless and liable to deceive.
An argument is valid if the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. An argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are true.
Remember, a philosophy and a philosophical proof are worthless if their Premises are false. Likewise, a scientific argument is worthless if its Premises are false. That’s precisely what’s wrong with Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Atheism, and their derivatives. Their hidden premises are false and can never be true.
If the premises of your argument don’t add up to the conclusion, then your proof is worthless no matter how valid it might seem to be. If your premises have NEVER been experienced nor observed in the wild, then your conclusion is nothing but fiction and is philosophically unsound. Your chosen conclusion is automatically falsified by a complete lack of observational evidence. It’s called falsifying a theory!
In order to be logically sound, your Premises have to be experienced, observed, and verified. In order for your Conclusion to be logically sound, your Premises have to be logically sound, and your Conclusion also has to be experienced, observed, and verified in real life by real individuals. Missing evidence cannot be used as evidence. The missing links really are missing, so get used to it.
Remember, a God who has never been experienced nor observed is completely worthless to us. Evolution is a man-made god who has never been experienced, observed, nor caught in the act. A premise or a conclusion has to be experienced and observed in order for it to be philosophically and logically sound. A premise and a conclusion that has never been experienced nor observed is completely worthless to us. If the Biblical God hadn’t revealed Himself to us, He would have remained forever unknown. In any philosophical proof, religious argument, or scientific argument, the Premises absolutely MUST BE true, or those arguments and proofs are totally worthless to us. That’s just the way things work.
If your Premises completely lack confirming evidence or verified evidence, then your conclusion is automatically false. Design and creation by Chemical Evolution, Spontaneous Generation, Abiogenesis, or Macro-Evolution have NEVER been experienced nor observed, which means that these concepts or theories are automatically false. We KNOW that these things are prevented from happening by entropy or the second law of thermodynamics.
Technically, random mutations and natural selection have NEVER been caught in the act of design and creation, which means that these theories or concepts are automatically false. In other words, random mutations and natural selection cannot design and create. Random Mutations are entropy. Natural Selection ultimately results in death and extinction, which means that natural selection is also a type of entropy. Evolution is entropy. By definition, in principle, Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Atheism, Classical Physics, and the Theory of Evolution are based upon entropy. Entropy cannot design and create anything. So, who did?
The Premises behind Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, and their derivatives are false and have been falsified by science and by observation, which means that the Conclusions that these people make are also false and have already been falsified. Materialism, Naturalism, and Darwinism are FALSIFIED by a complete lack of confirmed evidence, verified evidence, or observed evidence supporting their major premises and hidden assumptions, which claim that the quantum or the supernatural does not exist. A claim that something or someone does not exist cannot be verified, which means that it can NEVER be proven true; therefore, such a Premise is assumed to be false and will always be false until someone finds a way to prove it true, which they NEVER will. The Premises behind Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Behaviorism, Determinism, Physical Reductionism, Scientism, Atheism, and their derivatives will always be false because it’s impossible to prove them to be true.
In contrast, the verified, observed, and proven existence of Quantum Mechanisms, Action at a Distance, or Supernatural Mechanisms FALSIFIES the major premises of Materialism and Naturalism which claim that the quantum or the supernatural does not exist. The very existence of Quantum Mechanics or Transdimensional Physics FALSIFIES Materialism, Naturalism, and their derivatives such as Nihilism, Darwinism, and Atheism.
I have observed and experienced the FACT that anything that has a beginning has a Beginner or an Ultimate Cause, who is the person who designed, created, manufactured, and produced that thing. This reality has always held true.
A Beginner or Creator or Maker is the person who brings a thing into existence in the first place. This is a FACT that I find fully compelling, believable, and incontrovertible whether we are talking about science, philosophy, logic, religion, reality, or existence in general. I find it convincing, because it has been experienced and observed. We have observed people or intelligent beings bringing things into existence or choosing things into existence zillions of times in trillions of different ways.
Likewise, I find the existence of the Biblical God Jesus Christ compelling and believable because He has been experienced and observed by thousands, if not millions, of different people after He died and rose from the dead. Science is Observation, or it should be. These people have seen Him and touched Him both here on the physical plane as well as on the spiritual, quantum, or transdimensional plane.
Every time that Jesus Christ is seen, experienced, touched, embraced, and observed whether in the flesh, in visions and theophanies, or during our Near-Death Experiences (NDEs), those experiences and observations are Scientific Proof of His Existence. Science is observation, or it should be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPj4wci_bcI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm647n1360A
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/11?lang=eng
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/js-h/1?lang=eng
In order for an argument or a proof to be logically sound, the premises have to be true, which means that the premises have to be experienced and observed by Someone Psyche. A philosophical proof that has NO observational evidence supporting it is completely worthless in the end. That’s why Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Behaviorism, Determinism, Atheism, and the Theory of Evolution are completely worthless. They don’t have and can’t have any observational evidence supporting their major premises or hidden assumptions which claim that the quantum or the supernatural does not exist. In fact, the observed and proven existence of Quantum Mechanics and Action at a Distance FALSIFIES Materialism, Naturalism, and their derivatives.
It took me three years to develop a Philosophical Proof of God’s Existence that I found completely and totally believable and true.
Why did it take so long?
I realized in hindsight that it took me so long to develop such a proof because I was looking for Premises that I KNOW to be true. I was looking for Scientific Proof of God’s Existence, not just philosophical proof of God’s existence. I was looking for OBSERVED Proof of God’s Existence or EXPERIENCED Proof of God’s Existence. It’s the observations and experiences that I find convincing, NOT the philosophical proofs. It’s the empirical evidence that I find convincing, NOT the philosophical arguments.
I don’t trust philosophical proofs, because MOST of them have hidden premises that I KNOW to be false. Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Behaviorism, Determinism, Atheism, and their derivatives ARE philosophical proofs or philosophical arguments. I don’t believe them to be true because they have hidden premises that are demonstrably and empirically false. As a race, WE have FALSIFIED Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Atheism, the Theory of Evolution, and their derivatives trillions of times in thousands of different ways. Falsified theories cannot be used as convincing Premises, especially when you KNOW that they are false and why they are false.
If you successfully eliminate everything that is false, then ONLY the truth will remain. It’s fascinating to study and observe what remains after you have successfully falsified and eliminated Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Atheism, and their derivatives. The VERIFIED and the OBSERVED remain. The Truth remains. Suddenly you find yourself looking at TRUE and VERIFIED Premises, as well as philosophically sound, scientifically observed, verified, experienced, and proven Conclusions. Your Conclusions ARE TRUE because they have been experienced and observed, and because their Premises are true and philosophically sound. Your Premises ARE TRUE because they too have been experienced and observed in real life.
Do you see how that works?
It works because it is TRUE.
In the end, all you really want is the truth.
Anything that has a beginning has a Beginner or a Creator.
In contrast, God’s Psyche and your psyche have always existed and will always exist. Your psyche and God’s Psyche have no beginning, which means that they will have no end. This also means that your psyche or intelligence has NO Beginner, Designer, Creator, Manufacturer, Maker, or Ultimate Cause who brought it into existence in the first place. You have always existed, and you will always exist.
Things that have a beginning have a Beginner or a Creator, the person or psyche who brought them into existence. Physical matter, physical universes, physical genomes, and physical life forms have a beginning, which means that they have a Designer, Creator, and Maker who brought them into existence. In contrast, the things that have always existed, such as Psyche and Syntropy and Quantum Mechanics, have NO Creator because they have always existed.
Do you see how that works? This is Logic 101.
The things that have always existed, such as Psyche and Syntropy, have NO Creator. They are without a beginning of days or an end of years. Psyche is Syntropy. Quantum Mechanics or Transdimensional Physics is Syntropy. Syntropy is a type of unity, wholeness, completeness, or perfection. The Atonement of Christ is Syntropy. Syntropy means “without a beginning of days or an end of years”. Syntropy means eternal, everlasting, and infinite. The Priesthood Power of God is Syntropy. Quantum Mechanics is the Priesthood Power of God. Syntropy had no beginning, and it will have no end. Syntropy, or Psyche, or Intelligence, or Consciousness has always existed. Syntropy is an organizing force that counteracts the effects of entropy. Syntropy has to exist or entropy wouldn’t exist. Our physical universe had to receive an initial infusion of Syntropy, or none of that subsequent entropy would have been possible.
Do you see how that works?
Its explanatory power is through the roof and without limit!
I just provided the answer to life, the universe, and everything. That’s the explanatory power of Syntropy, Psyche, and Quantum Mechanics.
William Lane Craig and others have declared him to be the master of the Kalam Cosmological Argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosmological_argument
Notice that William Lane Craig makes an argument that is philosophically valid and semi-sound; but then, he jumps to a conclusion at the end that is philosophically illogical and scientifically unsound. Craig is not going to critique his own argument, because he is too close to it and too emotionally invested in it to be able to see what might be wrong with it.
William Lane Craig states the Kalam cosmological argument as a brief syllogism, most commonly rendered as follows:
Whatever begins to exist has a cause;
The universe began to exist;
Therefore:
The universe has a cause.
From the conclusion of the initial syllogism, he appends a further premise and conclusion based upon ontological analysis of the properties of the cause:
The universe has a cause;
If the universe has a cause, then an uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful;
Therefore:
An uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful.
Referring to the implications of Classical Theism that follow from this argument, Craig writes:
“… transcending the entire universe there exists a cause which brought the universe into being ex nihilo … our whole universe was caused to exist by something beyond it and greater than it. For it is no secret that one of the most important conceptions of what theists mean by ‘God’ is Creator of heaven and earth.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosmological_argument
William Lane Craig deliberately left his Kalam cosmological argument vague so that he could sneak a falsehood in at the end.
The only thing Craig gets wrong is that he jumps to the conclusion that God brought our universe into being ex nihilo. Jumping to conclusions or begging the question is a logic fallacy. In his conclusion, ex nihilo is an unjustified add-on or a special pleading, which are logic fallacies. In his promotion of Creation Ex Nihilo, Craig is assuming facts not in evidence.
There’s NO such thing as Creation Ex Nihilo. Technically, Creation Ex Nihilo is Atheism – design and creation from nothing by nothing. It’s impossible to create something from nothing. It’s also impossible for nothing to design and create something. Even God can’t do the impossible. Atheism is also impossible, because it’s impossible for nothing to create something from nothing. Creation Ex Nihilo is philosophically and logically unsound because it doesn’t make logical sense and because it’s the result of jumping to conclusions, which is a logic fallacy. Creation Ex Nihilo or spontaneous generation is also scientifically unsound because it has been falsified by the scientific method.
Clearly, God existed BEFORE He organized this physical universe and brought it into existence. The very existence of God, the pre-existence of God, FALSIFIES creation ex nihilo. God did not spontaneously spring into existence from nothing. Creation ex nihilo does not and cannot apply to God, nor can it apply to the dark matter or spirit matter from which God organized this physical universe. God’s Psyche has always existed and will always exist. The dark matter or spirit matter has always existed and will always exist. Creation Ex Nihilo or spontaneous generation is false and has been falsified. Creation Ex Nihilo is unnecessary and unjustified, so let’s delete it. If you successfully eliminate everything that is false, then only the truth will remain.
Therefore, Craig’s concluding statement should read:
“Transcending the entire universe there exists a cause which brought the universe into being. Our whole universe was caused to exist by something beyond it and greater than it. For it is no secret that one of the most important conceptions of what theists mean by ‘God’ is Creator of heaven and earth.”
As long as we get rid of the logic fallacy and scientific falsehood that Craig tacks on at the end of his argument, I find the Kalam Cosmological Argument philosophically, logically, and scientifically valid and sound.
William Lane Craig teaches us by example that a philosophical proof can be valid, the premises can be sound, and the conclusion absolutely true; but, the person can still draw false conclusions and produce faulty and invalid interpretations from that True Conclusion or Proven Conclusion. Interpretation of the evidence or scientific inference is where the Scientific Method always falls down and dies whenever the Scientific Method is used to prove that a lie is true.
Remember, even William Lane Craig falls down and FAILS whenever he switches away from observational evidence over to wishful thinking and starts jumping to conclusions rather than relying upon observational evidence to make his case. Creation Ex Nihilo has NEVER been experienced nor observed; and, it never will be, because it’s impossible. It’s the observational evidence that we find convincing, and NOT the philosophical arguments. Philosophical arguments are worthless if their premises are not backed-up by observational evidence, verified evidence, and experiential evidence. Even a valid and sound conclusion from a philosophical argument is worthless, if it has NO observational evidence supporting it.
We find the existence of the Biblical God Jesus Christ compelling, believable, and convincing ONLY because it’s backed-up by observational evidence and experiential evidence. Philosophical proof of God’s existence is worthless if the premises are NOT backed up by observational evidence, verified evidence, scientific evidence, experiential evidence, eye-witness evidence, and empirical evidence. A conclusion is also worthless if it has NO observational evidence supporting it.
I was able to tighten up my version of the Kalam Cosmological Argument and get even more specific with it because I wasn’t trying to insert a falsehood at the end. I was only interested in finding the observed and verified truth. Creation ex nihilo has never been experienced nor observed. It doesn’t exist. It’s impossible. Even God cannot do the impossible. Since I wasn’t trying to support a falsehood with my philosophical argument, I was able to go directly to the Observed and Experienced Truth of the matter.
The theory of evolution is spontaneous generation; and, spontaneous generation is a type of Atheism or Creation Ex Nihilo – creation of something from nothing or by nothing. Something from nothing or something by nothing is impossible. It didn’t happen because it can’t happen.
If you accept the premises of the Kalam Cosmological Argument as being true, then they PROVE that our physical universe had a Creator, Beginner, or Ultimate Cause; however, they do NOT prove the veracity of creation ex nihilo. In fact, ALL of the observational evidence and experiential evidence that we have on hand as a race FALSIFIES creation ex nihilo, spontaneous generation, or the theory of evolution. Furthermore, it’s ONLY our physical universe that had a beginning. The quantum universe, or the supernatural universe, or the spiritual universe, or the non-physical universe, or the non-local universe has always existed and will always exist. It has NO Creator or Ultimate Cause because it has always existed.
Biology is the study of complicated things that have the appearance of having been designed with a purpose. – Richard Dawkins.
They have the appearance of having been designed because they were designed. There’s NO other logical explanation for their origin because entropy or physical matter or natural selection cannot design and create anything. It’s NEVER been caught in the act of doing so. It can’t, which means that it didn’t.
Spontaneous generation, creation by entropy, macro-evolution, abiogenesis, creation ex nihilo, chemical evolution, OR the theory of evolution was FALSIFIED in 1859 by Louis Pasteur. Biology appears to have been designed because it was designed.
Now try this philosophical proof of God’s existence. It’s an extremely powerful syllogism, because it is also a Scientific Proof of God’s Existence or an OBSERVED Proof of God’s Existence.
First Observation or Premise: Anything that was obviously made obviously had a Maker or Creator who made it. This is Logic 101.
Second Observation or Premise: A genome was obviously made. Such a thing doesn’t just spontaneously generate out of thin air. It took some planning, programming, science, and manufacturing to get the job done.
Conclusion: Therefore, a genome obviously has a Maker or a Creator who designed it, programmed it, engineered it, field-tested it, fine-tuned it, made it, manufactured it, and then deployed it.
These observations convinced me that God does in fact exist, because I’m a scientist and I believe in the scientific evidence that has been experienced and observed. In other words, I KNOW that the premises are true; therefore, I KNOW that the conclusion MUST be true as well.
Some type of Syntropy, Psyche, or God MUST exist; or, physical matter, entropy, genomes, proteins, and this physical universe would NOT exist. It’s elementary.
Consequently, since WE KNOW for a fact that God does indeed exist, the next task is to figure out who He is. I choose to go with our resurrected Lord Jesus Christ, because He has been EXPERIENCED and OBSERVED both in the flesh and during our Near-Death Experiences (NDEs), after He rose from the dead. I choose to go with the ONE who has been experienced and observed in real life by real people like you and me.
Mark My Words
The Beginner or the Ultimate Cause of this physical universe has to pre-date the beginning of this physical universe, and so does the stuff of which He was made and the stuff by which He made. This is Logic 101.
God organized the heavens and the earth from already pre-existing matter. God transformed some of that pre-existing spirit matter or dark matter into physical matter; and therefore, our physical universe had a physical beginning, even though the spirit matter or dark matter from which it was made has always existed. We KNOW that the dark matter or spirit matter exists by the effect that it has on ordinary physical matter. It has to exist, or our observations and measurements don’t make any logical sense.
Do you see how that works?
Everything makes sense to me once we get rid of the logic fallacies and switch over to observations and measurements instead. Then suddenly, everything is philosophically, logically, and scientifically valid and sound.
Verified means that it has been experienced and observed. Falsified means that it has NEVER been experienced nor observed. Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, Behaviorism, Determinism, Creation Ex Nihilo, and Atheism have been FALSIFIED by the fact that their major premises or hidden assumptions have never been experienced nor observed and can’t be. Materialism, Naturalism, Darwinism, Nihilism, and Atheism are FALSIFIED by the things that have been experienced and observed. They are FALSIFIED by Science.
The lesson in all of this is to switch away from philosophical speculation and sophistry over to observational evidence, experiential evidence, eye-witness evidence, empirical evidence, veridical evidence, scientific evidence, and phenomenological evidence as soon as you possibly can.
The truth has been repeatedly verified, experienced, and observed. The falsified and the false have NEVER been experienced nor observed, which is why they have been falsified. The false is falsified by the truth; and, the truth has been experienced and observed. That’s just the way things work. That’s the way things should work in science; and, that’s definitely the way that things should work in religion, philosophy, and logic as well. Go with the experienced and the observed, and get rid of the wishful thinking, scientific inferences, blind-faith, and confirmation biases as quickly as you can. Go with the best and get rid of all the rest.
If you successfully eliminate everything that is false, then ONLY the truth will remain.
Mark My Words
—
Source
Syntropy in Defense of Quantum Mechanics: The Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07BPT3W8R/
Web Page:
https://philosophy-of-science.com/my-philosophical-proof-of-god/
The Official Website:
https://philosophy-of-science.com/
Source for the Original One
Some might prefer the tighter version with less commentary; but, it’s still pretty long. With this essay, I wanted to explain why I now believe in God’s existence. It’s the culmination of years of research, study, and thought. I’m not a prophet, so I don’t know the Biblical God in person; but, I am a scientist, scholar, philosopher, logician, and theoretician, so I’m able to think things through carefully, logically, and rationally in order to reach a reasonable conclusion on the matter.
The Ultimate Model of Reality: Psyche Is the Ultimate Cause
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071NC9JK6
Science 2.0: I Upgraded My Science
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0771K6WTX
Web Page:
https://philosophy-of-science.com/original-one/
References
Slife, B. D. & Williams, R. N. (1995). Science and Human Behavior. In What’s Behind the Research? Discovering Hidden Assumptions in the Behavioral Sciences, (pp. 167–204). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
https://mypsyche.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Science.pdf
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Science.pdf
Gantt, E. (2014). Logical Arguments. In Psychology 353 – LDS Perspectives in Psychology, (pp. 8-11). Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Logical-Arguments.pdf
Gantt, E. (2014). Leveling the Playing Field – Why Science is Not a Trump Card. In Psychology 353 – LDS Perspectives in Psychology, (pp. 50-58). Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.
https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Verification-vs-Falsification.pdf
Rychlak, J. F. (1981a). A Philosophy of Science for Personality Theory (2nd ed.). Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company.
Ross, H. (2008). Why the Universe Is the Way It Is. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
My Amazon Page:
https://amazon.com/author/science
Science 2.0: I Upgraded My Science
Entropy Is Death and Syntropy Is Eternal Life Syntropy is by far my greatest, most useful, most powerful, and most explanatory scientific discovery that I have made so far. Logical common sense tells us that some type of Syntropy MUST exist, or all of that subsequent entropy wouldn’t have been possible. NONE of our …
Continue reading “Entropy Is Death and Syntropy Is Eternal Life”
I’m Not a Creationist I’m not a Creationist. What does this mean in practice? It means that I don’t believe in creation ex nihilo, which the Christian Catholics and Protestants choose to believe in and promote. Creation ex nihilo is impossible and patently absurd. I’m not a Creationist – I don’t believe in creation …
Kin Selection Kin Selection is another smoking gun where Psyche is concerned. Kin Selection: The idea that evolution has selected altruism toward one’s close relatives to enhance the survival of mutually shared genes. Our genes dispose us to care for relatives. Thus, one form of self-sacrifice that would increase gene survival is devotion to …
The best way to contact us is through the books that I have written. All of my books attempt to provide Scientific Proof of God’s Existence in one way or another. It’s what I do.
My Amazon Author Page:
https://amazon.com/author/science