Life's First Question: Is There A God? Part II - Answer

    A reasonable theist must concede the following point: No one will ever be able to prove the existence of a God.  This is nearly as sure as our inability to disprove a God.   

• Since the rules of logic dictate that it is intellectually and literally impossible to prove that something does not exist, the burden of proof rests upon the theists.

    Theists will claim that God prefers to operate in shadow, just outside the visibility of man, and just inside the realm of possibility so as to remain aloof.  His motive for doing so is because of his desire for mankind to reach him exclusively through faith (which is an amalgamation of the two separate concepts of trust and confidence).

    Atheists believe that it is all too convenient to claim that the only God in the whole of creation just happens to have the personality that keeps him obscured from man's vision; and since there is no evidence in favor of such a claim, there is no reason to suspect that the universe functions in any other capacity but one independent from a superior being.

    These two viewpoints could be pitted against one another in an endless loop.  The side with which I agree is supported by one fact that, though not proof nor disproof of God, I find irrefutable.  The chain of reasoning is as follows:

•  We continually  ask the question, where did we come from for a purpose.  It is innate to realize that all that is had some sort of origin.  Somehow, no matter how many times we answer the question of where we came from, we continue to ask, "Then where did that come from?"  We continue to ask this because we, somehow by instinct, know that we had a beginning.
• Everything that is has three phases: initiation, duration, termination.  In plain English: beginning, middle, end.  This is true of:
• Life: birth, life, death
• Ideas: Inception, meditation, realization/disremembrance
• Productions: edification, utilization, decomposition
• etc.

    This is true of everything that is peculiar to our universe.  Of those things which do not pertain to the universe, we cannot speak since they do not exist or we are not in the least aware of them.

• If everything in our three dimensional reality rests on this principle, then it must also apply to the Earth, the Universe, time, and matter itself, since they are all of this dimension.  Yet the law of conservation of energy clearly states that energy and matter can never be created nor destroyed.

    Here we have a clear conflict since reason clashes with physical law in that matter must have had a creation (which is what the Big Bang Theory has attempted to explain) and yet it is physically impossible for it to have had that stage of initiation.

• Since we have a concept irreconcilable in our universe, the only possible explanation is the following:

Matter could indeed have been "created" if by means of intervention from another dimension.

    If the laws of our universe prevent us from knowing or doing certain things, who can say but that the laws of a higher dimension may allow for the spanning of dimensions and defiance of laws rigid to us who are bound by three dimensional limits?

    Some might call this alien life, but what is alien life but existence of non-earthly origin?  And what is God if not a force with greater capacity than nature?

    It is inexorable that by the very existence of matter in this universe (matter being the universe), a God must exist.

    Certainly if he does not exist, the consequences of the route of theism are not much more notable than fleeting.  If he does exist, the consequences of the route of atheism can be sufficiently catastrophic so as to instigate the gravest of considerations.