Premise .2

Before we continue any further, we need to establish what is called the Law of Non-Contradiction. (Interestingly enough, it is also called the Law of Contradiction - fricken' philosophers.) Basically, the Law of Non-Contradiction says that A cannot equal Non-A at the same time in the same respect. For example, right now, at this very moment either I am typing on the computer or I am not typing on the computer. Both cannot be true at the same time in the same respect. Now I know that many of you are thinking to yourself, "Well, duh. Why do we need to establish that?" Well, for three reasons: 1) there are people in the world who just aren't as smart as you, 2) because this will be important for the following argument and 3) it's not just a good idea, it's the law.

In this segment we are going to establish the existence of an entity referred to as God (or a god). Now, if your panties are currently collecting into a bunch, bear with me. This has nothing to do with the Bible or the Christian God (yet). We are simply establishing that a God of some sort does exist rather than one not existing by looking at logic and science.

There are several lines of argument that prove the existence of God. The Design Argument looks at the universe and various aspect thereof and sees that the design points toward a Creator. The Argument from the Mind shows how God's existence is evident by humanity's
ability to have rational thought. It also argues that given mind/body dualism, the human mind could not have simply evolved from matter. The Argument from the Meaning of Life basically says that if there were no God, existance would have no meaning which would result in utter chaos.

My favorite argument for establishing the existance of God is what is called the Cosmological Argument. This argument looks at creation and science to establish the existence of God. The best line of this argument is called the Kalam Argument.

The Kalam argument sets the situation up into three dilemmas. The first is that either the earth and universe had a beginning or it did not have a beginning (the universe always has existed).

Logically, it cannot be possible for the universe not to have a beginning. This would imply an actual infinity. The problem is that actual infinities do not exist. For example, if someone were to count toward infinity, he or she would never reach it because in their counting, they are always at a finite number. This present moment can be viewed as the last number in a counting series which, of course, is finite. So if this is the last number, the beginning of the existance
of the universe started the counting to reach the present moment.

Scientifically, there had to have been a beginning of the universe. The Second Law of Thermodynamics, also called the Law of Entropy, says that all energy is equalizing; which results in the gradual degeneration of the entire universe. For example, if one were to set
out a cup of coffee in the room, the tempurature of the coffee cup would drop and the tempurature of the room would raise until all of the temperatures were equal. This same thing is happening on a universal level. Since this is true, if the universe had no beginning it would
have degenerated an infinite number of years ago, would not have been able to sustain life and probably would have fallen apart into an almost infinite number of dust particles.

Conclusion: the universe had a beginning.

The second dilemma is either the beginning was created or it was not created. This dilemma is fairly simple to understand. It rests on the simple principle that from nothing comes nothing. In other words, the universe didn't create itself or just happen out of nothing. The first event requires necessary and sufficient conditions. God is not an event nor is He a contingent being. Thus it cannot be said that the first event (the beginning of the universe) just happened; it is not true that the universe was not created.

Conclusion: the universe had a beginning and the universe was created.

The third and final dilemma is that the first event was caused by either a personal being or an impersonal cause. In order for the cause to be impersonal, the necessary and sufficient conditions had to be present for all "eternity" past prior to the first event. These
conditions then would have spontaniously caused the first event. The problem is that when the necessary and sufficient conditions for an event are present, the event takes place. There is no waiting or spontinuity. A spontanious act must take place by the result of a free act of a person or agent. Thus the "agent" that caused the first event was a personal, non-contingent being.

Conclusion: the universe had a beginning, the first event was creation, and the creation was the result of a free act of a personal, non-contingent Being whom we call "God."

There you have it, folks. God exists. Now, as previously noted, this does not speak anything towards who God is or what He (or she or it) does. We'll get to that stuff later. This simply proves that there is a God. Thus it disproves such godless worldviews such as Atheism and probably many forms of Agnosticism.

Enjoy the brain candy.

For more information, see J.P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City: A Defense of Christianity (Baker Book House: Grand Rapids, 1987), Ch. 1.