My Philosophical Proof of God’s Existence

 

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 philosophical proof of God’s existence, the Kalam Cosmological Argument.

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

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 a sound argument.  Remember, an argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are true.  This argument is TRUE because it is philosophically valid and scientifically or observationally sound.

I find this philosophical proof of God’s existence logically consistent, philosophically valid, and scientifically sound.  It works because its Premises are based upon observed truths.  However, it can be greatly improved.

My Adjustments to the Kalam Cosmological Argument

Even though Craig’s argument is philosophically valid and scientifically or observationally sound, 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, 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 or an Ultimate Cause;

Our physical universe began to exist;

Conclusion:

Therefore, our physical universe has a Beginner or an Ultimate Cause.

These adjustments are important and essential, because I’m trying to bring the premises and conclusion into line with what has been observed and experienced 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.

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.

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 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.  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.

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.  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.

Our physical universe came from something that already existed, and our physical universe was organized by Someone Psyche who also already existed.

My adjustment 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.

My Philosophical Proof of God’s Existence

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 our physical universe and physical matter, by definition, in principle or practice, that Beginner, Designer, Manufacturer, and Creator is 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 sub-quantum.  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, 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.  He 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.

Commentary on My Philosophical Proof of God

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 or a Psyche who caused it to happen.  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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosmological_argument

https://philosophy-of-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Kalam-Cosmological-Argument.pdf

As with any philosophical proof, however, if you don’t find the premises, arguments, and observations compelling, credible, and convincing, then you won’t find the conclusions 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 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.

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.

The wonderful thing about the Kalam Cosmological Proof of God’s Existence, especially my modified version, is that it’s backed by 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.

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

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.  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.

Now, try this one:

Premises or Observations:

We have observed that everything that has a beginning has some kind of Creator 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 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 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 and Intelligent Creation is an OBSERVED, verified, and proven science.  We KNOW that it is REAL because it has been 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 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 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.

As a result of this observation, I upgraded my science to Science 2.0.

Science 2.0 allows ALL of the evidence into evidence, and then it pursues a preponderance of that evidence.  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:  I Upgraded My Science

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0771K6WTX

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.  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 sub-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.

Go Out of Your Way to Get the Right Interpretation

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, 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.

A Proof or Argument Has to Be Logically Sound

Remember, 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.

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.  Missing evidence cannot be used as evidence.  The missing links really are missing, so get used to it.

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.  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.

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.

In contrast, the verified 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 that designed, created, manufactured, and produced that thing.  This reality has always held true.  A Beginner or Creator 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, 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.

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.

Observational Reality and Common-Sense Logic

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, 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 and Creator 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.

Critiquing Craig’s Cosmological Argument

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 logically 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 sansthe universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful;

Therefore:

An uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sansthe 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.

Conclusions

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.

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.  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

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

 

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

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0771K6WTX