The existence of God is more probable than not.

The Argument from Entropy and Uncaused Cause This is often referred to as the “Kalam Cosmological Argument.” This argument attempts to show how God exists due to the laws of science, nature, and uncaused causes. The formulation of this argument was made by Matt Slick of the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry. [1] The universe is not infinitely old because it has not "run down." (Entropy is the phenomena of increased chaos and loss of useful energy in a system.) If the universe were infinitely old, it would have reached a state where all usable energy is gone. But, we are not in this state; therefore, the universe is not infinitely old and must have had a beginning. Because the universe has had a beginning it is not infinite in size. . It would require an infinite amount of time to become infinite in size. Since the universe had a beginning, it has not had an infinite amount of time to expand, therefore it is finite in size. The universe could not have brought itself into existence. . If something does not exist, it has no ability to perform an action by which it can bring itself into existence. If it exists so as to be able to perform an action, then it already exists. The universe was brought into existence by something other than itself. All things that come into being have causes. . There cannot be an infinite regress of events because that would mean the universe (or past universes) were infinitely old. But, this would require an infinite amount of time to be traversed in order to arrive at the present. This cannot happen since an infinite amount of time cannot be traversed. i. If the universe were infinitely old, the universe would be in a state unusable energy, which it is not. ii. If it were infinitely old, the universe would be infinitely large, which it is not. iii. If it were infinitely old, then in order for us to exist here and now, an infinite amount of time would have had to have been traversed in order to get here now. But, an infinity cannot be traversed. Since the universe is finite and had a beginning and there cannot be an infinite number of regressions of causes to bring it into existence, there must be a single uncaused cause of the universe. . A single uncaused cause of the universe must be greater in size and duration than the universe it has brought into existence. i. Otherwise, we have the uncaused cause bringing into existence something greater than or equal to itself. (Any cause that is natural to the universe is part of the universe). ii. An event that is part of the universe cannot cause itself to exit. iii. Therefore, there must be an uncaused cause outside the universe. (An uncaused cause cannot be a natural part of the universe, which we know to be finite). iv. An uncaused cause would be infinite in both space and time since it is greater than which it has caused to exist. This uncaused cause is supernatural. . By supernatural we mean it is completely 'other' than the universe is not natural to it. i. This would make the uncaused cause supernatural. ii. This supernatural uncaused cause is God. Argument from the Laws of Logic. This argument was also formulated by Matt Slick. [2] The Laws of Logic exist Examples of laws of logic are: i. A cannot be A and not A at the same time. ii. Something cannot bring itself into existence. The Laws of logic are conceptual by nature . Logic is a process of the mind Logical absolutes are conceptual conventions. The Laws of logic are not the product of the universe . Logic is not a process of the universe Laws of Logic are not found "under rocks", or "inside atoms," etc. They are not related to physical properties. The Laws of logic are not the product of human minds . The laws of logic are absolute. Human beings' minds are not absolute. They differ. They disagree. Therefore, what is absolute to one person may or may not be absolute to another. Therefore, they are not the product of human minds. The laws of logic are not dependent upon people since they are true whether or not people exists. The Laws of logic are transcendent . The laws of logic are not dependent upon the universe since they are true whether or not the universe exists. The laws of logic transcend space and time since they are true no matter where you go in the universe and they are true no matter when you exist in the universe. The laws of logic are conceptual, absolute, and transcendent. . Since the laws of logic are conceptual, absolute, and transcendent and since conceptual realities require a mind, and since the conceptual realities reflect the mind thinking them, then the mind that thinks the laws of logic is absolute and transcendent. Therefore, there is an absolute, transcendent mind in existence. The Teleological Argument In his debate with blackvoid, contradiction points out this formulation of the teleological argument. [3] If teleology exists, then an ordering intellect exists. Teleology exists. Therefore, an ordering intellect exists. What is teleology? The term teleology refers to an end, goal, or purpose to which something is directed towards. Thus, to say that something has telos is just to say that it has a function. Teleology implies intentionally, and intentionally is a feature of minds. Hence, if teleology exists, then there must exist an ordering intellect in which something is grounded in. As Edward Feser illustrates: “Where goal-directness is associated with consciousness, s it is in us, there is no mystery. A builder builds a house, and he is able to do so because of the form of the house exists in his intellect because it is instantiated in a concrete particular object. And of course, the materials that will take on that form also exist already, wating to take it on.” [4] We know that teleology must exist, for without it, we cannot possibly make any logical sense of the universe. The question proposed by contradiction, “Does a heart just happen to pump blood, or does it pump blood that is its purpose? Does one’s mind just happen to think rationally, or does it think rationally because that is its purpose?” In both cases, the latter is forced to be true. Therefore, the latter defines that teleology must exist. David Oderberg points out that teleology is present not just in organic process, but also in the inorganic. Processes such as the water cycle and rock cycle are inherently teleological in nature. [5] What can we glean from this? From this, we know that there must be an ordering intellect which grounds the teleology present in the universe. Because the being has a mind, it must be personal. Because this being is the ground of all teleology, there cannot be a higher being from which teleology is derived. What do we call this? We call this “God.” References [1] Slick, Matt. “The Argument from Entropy and Uncaused Causes.” https://school.carm.org... [2] Ibid. [3] Contradiction-vs.-Blackvoid. “It is probable that God exists.” http://www.debate.org... [4] Quoted in the Contradiction-vs-Blackvoid debate. See source 3 [5] Ibid.