The "Supreme Being" MUST exist

Thank you for accepting. Most theists believe that there is only one God and that He is the "Supreme Being". That has been defined as "that which there can be nothing greater", or the "greatest being". Logically the greatest being MUST exist. Of all the men that exist in the world only ONE can be "the strongest man in the world" or "the fastest man in the world", even if no one knows who he is. In the same way of all the beings that exist within the universe only ONE can be "the greatest being in the universe" and of all the beings that do exist inside or outside of the universe only ONE can be "the greatest being in or out of the universe whether they be physical or non-corporal". Therefore logically the "Supreme Being" or "that which there can be nothing greater" must in fact exist. Please note that I am not using Anselm"s argument of "the best that can be imagined" but rather the more practical argument of "the best that actually is". Theists BELIEVE the Supreme Being to have specific attributes. We believe Him to be transcendent (not a part of the universe), immanent (involved in the affairs of the world), omnipotent (capable of doing all that He wills to do that is not self-contradicting), omnipresent, omniscient (having all knowledge), and the creator of the universe. Certainly we may be wrong in that assessment... the "Supreme Being" inside or outside the universe could be Fred, the guy who picks up my recycling on Thursdays and who has no special attributes at all. But an the examination of the universe, its form and structure, that life sprang from the non-living and intelligence sprang from the non-intelligent, the huge list of "outside the normal" events both past and present, and even the fulfilled prophesies found in texts which we call "Sacred" have proved to theists that the Supreme Being MUST have these attributes. Recent scientific studies can also be seen to be on my side in this. Last year two different studies were released which if treated logically together can be seen to be a strong indication of the existence of God. The first was a study released in the premier scientific journal "Icarus" [1]. The scientists involved were studying a problem brought to them by SETI. What it concludes is that terrestrial DNA was in fact "intelligently designed". As a result there are only two logical conclusions: either our DNA was programmed by an alien intelligence from within our universe, or that the programming was done by a supernatural intelligence from beyond our universe. Also note that the code is not designed simply to pass along biological date but non-biological information as well. The last sentence of the abstract above reads: "Overall, while the code is nearly optimized biologically, its limited capacity is used extremely efficiently to pass non-biological information." The second study also released last year was the result of a three year study by Oxford University in 20 different nations. It concluded that humans are in fact PREprogrammed to believe in God and in an afterlife.[2] It basically is stating that to believe in God is as much a part of human nature as breathing is. History and anthropology have proved that man has sought God from the very beginning of the species. So this is not some sort of learned behavior that was passed on, but rather something encoded in our DNA from man's beginnings. When you take this study with the first one I think it is clear to see the logical implications. Of the two choices give us as the result of the "intelligent design" of our DNA in the first study, alien race or supernatural intelligence, the far more likely becomes the supernatural intelligence. Likewise the first study showed that non-biological information could be passed along. The second study shows that to believe in God was a part of our DNA. This is non-biological information which the first study has shown can be passed along. So we are left with one question concerning an alien species doing the programming: Why would an incredibly advanced alien species program us to believe in a God which they themselves did not believe in? As a result in either case it strongly affirms the existence of God, or the Supreme Being. In addition, scientists have encountered a "wall of numbers" which are the incredible odds against the natural occurrence of chains of events which had to happen for life to occur in the universe: "The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron ". The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been finely adjusted to make possible the development of life." -- Stephen Hawking [3] Although an atheist, Hawking acknowledges that the universe is "finely adjusted". The simple fact is that something cannot be finely adjusted without an intelligence to do the adjusting. Comments from other scientists: "A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the 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." -- Sir Fred Hoyle "For the scientist who has lived by faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries." -- Robert Jastrow (agnostic) [4] "Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on earth. And they have found that all this happened as a product of forces they cannot hope to discover. That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think a scientifically proven fact." " Robert Jastrow.[5] "If we accept the big bang theory, and most cosmologists now do, then a "creation" of some sort is forced upon us." - Barry Parker [6] So what do these scientists (and many, many more) show us? Please note that they are NOT talking about the planet Earth but rather the origins of the UNIVERSE, and that they are acknowledging an intelligence beyond our comprehension who is responsible for "finely tuning" the universe to allow for life. As a result this eliminates the idea of the intelligence being an alien lifeform simply because an alien from within the universe could not create the universe. It therefore necessitates that the "Supreme Being" is a transcendent intelligence. To create the universe logically necessitates that He also be omnipotent and omniscient. [1] http://www.sciencedirect.com... [2] http://www.ox.ac.uk... [3] http://www.montana.edu... [4] Ibid [5] as quoted by B. Durbin, "A Scientist Caught Between Two Faiths: Interview with Robert Jastrow," Christianity Today, Vol. 26, 6 August 1982, p. 15 [6] "Creation"the Story of the Origin and Evolution of the Universe" New York & London: Plenum Press, 1988, p. 202