The Existence of God is More Probable than Not

I am glad to be having this debate with my opponent. I will now begin my opening statements down below. The definition of God[2]: superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity. God is beyond nature, so that means he must be immaterial, timeless, space-less, all-knowing, all-powerful, morally sufficient, and metaphysically necessary. The Teleological Argument[1]: 1. The fine-tuning of the universe is due to: physical necessity, chance, or design. 2. It is not due to physical necessity or chance. 3. Therefore, it is due to design. Fine-Tuning of the Universe: I think that both my opponent and I will have to agree that the Universe is so finely tuned. Now what do I mean by Fine-Tuned? The Universe’s value and constants fall into such narrow ranges, that if any one of these constants or values were changed by a degree or decimal, the conditions for life would not be suitable to live in. For example: n the 1950s, Cambridge University astronomer Fred Hoyle recognized the precision of the energy match up, called carbon resonance, and made the following observation down here below. "A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." The mass of a proton is roughly 1836.1526 times the mass of the electron. Were this ratio changed by any significant degree, the stability of many common chemicals would be compromised. In the end, this would prevent the formation of such molecules as DNA, the building blocks of life. Another interesting example of a finely-tuned initial condition is the critical density of the universe. In order to evolve in a life-sustaining manner, the universe must have maintained an extremely precise overall density. The precision of density must have been so great that a change of one part in 1015 (i.e. 0.0000000000001%) would have resulted in a collapse, or big crunch, occurring far too early for life to have developed, or there would have been an expansion so rapid that no stars, galaxies or life could have formed. This degree of precision would be like a blindfolded man choosing a single lucky penny in a pile large enough to pay off the United States’ national debt. The question we want to raise is why is the Universe so finely-tuned the way that it is? Why are the constants and values so narrow and precise in order for life to exist? Why are there “arbitrary” constants and values? This leaves us with only three options: Physical Necessity, Chance, or Design. I will explain the justification below for why it’s designed. Justification for Premise 1: Given above, the first Premise simply gives us three options to choose from: Physical Necessity, Chance, or Design. Physical Necessity a.k.a. “The Theory of Everything” says that there is an unknown theory waiting to happen or not yet know, that can explain why the Universe is so finely-tuned. Chance is pretty obvious, as it pretty much says at the roll-of-the dice, the Universe just sort of happened to be so finely-tuned. And then there’s Design, which says that an Intelligent Mind was behind the cause of the fine-tuning of the Universe. We want to now know which one is best. Justification for Premise 2: Now that we have addressed the three options, let’s go ahead and see which one provides or offers the best explanation of the Universe being this way. Let’s start with Physical Necessity. Physical necessity is extremely implausible, for it doesn’t have the explanatory scope to explain how the constants and values are independent of nature. How about the second option of Chance? Well Chance can’t explain the precision of how finely-tuned the Universe is. For it’s so improbable, that chance alone would be impossible to make these ranges and constants fall into such narrow arbitrary values. Conclusion of Premise 3: I think we can safely say with certainty that the cause of the Universe is from an Intelligent Mind(God), and that none of these other options that we have in this pool of explanation can logically explain the fine-tuning of the Universe. What my opponent needs to do is then show and defend how physical necessity or chance can best explain the fine-tuning, and he must also show why God is not the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the Universe. Sources: [1] www.reasonablefaith.org/the-new-atheism-and-five-arguments-for-god#ixzz2sNUVlGmU [2] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... [3] http://biologos.org...