Does God Exist?

In the earliest stages of the universe, the physical laws governed all matter and energy throughout the universe. Then at some moment in time, there appeared the first molecule that always and everywhere hosts a conscious mind. With the appearance of this first core amino acid, we found that there must now exist a conscious mind that can freely exert forces on this matter. But only moments before, this same matter had been fully determined.

This transition undermines everything we know about the physical laws. If the universe had been fully determined in the beginning, then it should have remained fully determined throughout time. Accepting free will means accepting that the universe passed through an impossible transition.

But impossible is not possible. So how do we make sense of this transition from a fully determined universe into a universe where conscious minds freely exert forces on matter?

To resolve the problem of this impossible transition, we find that the universe cannot be all that exists. If we consider the universe to be a first system, then there must exist a second system that coexists with the universe. This second system must be capable of acting on the universe at any point in space and time. This is necessary because whenever and wherever a core amino acid forms, this second system will be the cause of the self-aware, conscious mind that gains governing rights over the newly formed matter.

Because this second system must confer rights over matter to newly created minds, this second system must first have ownership rights over all matter throughout the universe. The newly created minds will have user rights over matter, not ownership rights, for they cannot make alterations to their own rights, nor can they confer rights over matter to other minds.

Because this second system is able to create conscious minds where none had existed, and this second system is able to confer rights over matter to these conscious minds, it follows that this second system has ownership rights over both the conscious and the material universe. Thus, we find this second system to be an essential system while the universe is a subordinate system. But could this second system be fully determined?

Prior to the formation of the first mind signature, our universe was fully determined by the physical laws. If this second system were also fully determined, then the combination of two fully determined systems would be fully determined. Therefore, for the universe to make the transition from being fully determined to being a system with free will, this second system must itself have free will. A system that cannot make choices cannot make choices possible.

But before we can have choices, there must first exist a conscious mind. In Chapter 1, we found that, “Importantly, for free will to exist, there must first exist a conscious mind. Choices cannot exist if there is no conscious mind to consider alternative outcomes.” Therefore, we find that this second system must be a conscious system with free will.

In summary, we have found that for our universe to make the transition from a fully determined place to a less than fully determined place, there must exist a second system independent of this universe, this second system must have full rights over all matter and consciousness within the universe, and this second system must be a conscious, thinking system capable of making choices.

In keeping with the established language and vocabulary through which this book communicates with its readers, we shall refer to this second system as “god.” The word is uncapitalized as any form of veneration would create a bias and is therefore unacceptable in this free will paradigm.

We have now accepted that free will must be real, and if free will is real, then there must exist a second system with free will which we will refer to as god. We found that this god must be a conscious, thinking observer that is capable of making choices and that knows what is happening throughout the entire universe at every moment in time. Furthermore, we found that this god has ownership rights over all matter and consciousness everywhere in the universe. Therefore, we find that this god is the owner of the universe and has full authority over the universe.

God Must Be Knowable

In the last section, we found that god is conscious, god has free will, and god has ownership rights over the universe. This makes god a free agent with full rights to change physical and conscious events in the universe. In Chapter 2, we found that the universe can only be knowable if we can know all free agents capable of changing outcomes in the universe. Therefore, this free will paradigm now accepts that god must be knowable.

God’s Reason Is the Same as Our Reason

We have now found that if free will is real, then there must be a god. We have also established a full set of constraints that any god solution must meet to enable science to carry out its mission without any limitations. We will now start working out what must be true about this god so that we have a god solution that meets all the god constraints from Chapter 7.

To do this, we will be limited to the use of reason, for god cannot be empirically measured or observed. But is it not bold of us to think that our reason should be capable of knowing the creator god? Could not god be far beyond the reach of our reason? Could not god’s reason be entirely different from our reason? How can we justify thinking that our reason should be sufficient for gaining knowledge about the creator god?

If god’s reason were different from our reason, or if god’s reason were above or beyond our reason, then reason would be of no use for gaining knowledge about god. However, god is already beyond the reach of our senses and scientific instruments, so if god is also beyond the reach of our reason, then god could not be known and then neither could the universe. Therefore, for the universe to be knowable, god’s reason cannot be different from our reason and it cannot be above or beyond our reason.

Furthermore, the actions taken by god must always be rational, for if the actions of a god with ownership rights over the universe could be irrational, then the universe could not be knowable.

This free will paradigm now accepts that god is knowable through reason alone, that god is rational, the actions taken by god are rational, and god’s reason is the same as our reason.

The Non-Interference Rule

In Chapter 7, we found that if god interferes with the progression of either the physical or conscious universe, the universe would become unknowable. Before moving on, it is important that we clearly define “interfere” as it is being used here. In particular, if god is creating conscious beings and these conscious beings are then making decisions that change physical outcomes, would this not be the same as god interfering with the progression of the universe?

The core amino acid that is just forming as it is being brought to life is not being changed in any physical way when it is coupled with a conscious mind. Any physical changes that follow the introduction of this new life will occur only when the new conscious mind chooses to act on its newly formed core amino acid. Furthermore, god does not alter the progression of thoughts of the new minderelle at any time, for the new minderelle already has full governing control over its own thoughts the moment it comes into being.

When we say that god does not interfere in the universe, we are saying that god does not alter the progression of physical or conscious events, and no progression of these events is altered when god creates minderelles with free will. Thus, even in a universe where god creates new conscious minds, all physical and conscious events remain fully determined by the physical laws and the free will decisions of minderelles, and never by god.

This brings us to the free will paradigm’s non-interference rule.

The Non-Interference Rule:

God does not interfere with the progression of physical or conscious events.

A knowable universe requires a non-interfering god. The non-interference rule is one of the core principles of this free will paradigm, for without it, science would be crippled and the universe would be unknowable.

The Three God-Obligations

This free will paradigm is based on two main assumptions: the universe is a knowable place, and free will is real. We are now in the process of building a free will paradigm that makes it possible for science to carry out its mission without any limitations in the presence of a god with ownership rights over the universe. So far, we have established that for free will to be real, this god must faithfully fulfill three obligations to keep the universe knowable.

The three god-obligations are, (1) god must couple a newly created conscious mind with each newly formed mind signature, (2) whenever the structure of a mind signature is compromised, god must untether the associated mind from its presence in the universe, and (3) god must never interfere with the progression of the physical or conscious universe.

God Set Out to Create a Knowable Universe

Aside from fulfilling the three god-obligations, is anything else required of god to create a knowable universe?

Yes, there was one other action required by god to make the universe a knowable place. God had to make an irrevocable commitment at the birth of the universe to faithfully fulfill the three god-obligations for the lifetime of the universe. If god had not committed to the god-obligations at the birth of the universe, then there would have been a time when god was still open to not fulfilling the god-obligations. This would have meant a hiccup enabled universe at that time in the past, so the universe would have been unknowable at that time.

However, if the universe is unknowable at any point in time, then the universe could never be knowable. We covered this in Chapter 2, if any part of a whole is unknowable, then we cannot claim that the whole is knowable. The universe could only be knowable if god chose to make the universe knowable from the beginning. That is, god had to thoughtfully and deliberately set out to create a knowable universe.

The Discipline of God

As humans, we make commitments that we intend to keep irrevocably, and yet we still break our commitments. However, if this were possible with god, we would again have the equivalent of a hiccup enabled universe, and this would make the universe unknowable. Thus, our starting assumption of a knowable universe requires that the creator god be a disciplined god.

God and the First Assumption of Science

One of the foundational assumptions of this free will paradigm is that the universe is knowable. In Chapter 2, this knowable universe assumption led us to the finding that the physical laws must be always and everywhere the same.

It is important to point out that science has never proven that the physical laws are always and everywhere the same, and neither did we provide any such proof. Instead, we showed in Chapter 2 that the universe cannot be knowable unless the physical laws are always and everywhere the same. That is, our understanding that the physical laws are universal and invariant is only an assumption, but it is an assumption that must be true for the universe to be a knowable place.

We then showed that even if the physical laws are always and everywhere the same, this alone still would not be sufficient to have a knowable universe. Recall from Chapter 2 that for the universe to be knowable, science must also assume that the physical laws are always and everywhere the same.

We are now in the same situation with god as we were with the physical laws. We cannot prove that god committed to making the universe a knowable place. However, the universe could only be knowable if god did make this commitment. That is, god’s commitment to the god-obligations from the earliest moments of the universe is a necessary condition for having a knowable universe.

But this necessary condition is not a sufficient condition. Not only did god have to commit to the god-obligations to have a knowable universe, but science must also assume that god committed to creating a knowable universe from the beginning.

Thus, the first assumption of science leads to four derivative assumptions that are all necessary for having a knowable universe: (1) The physical laws must be always and everywhere the same. (2) Science must assume that the physical laws are always and everywhere the same. (3) God committed to making a knowable universe at the moment of its birth, and (4) science must assume that god committed to making a knowable universe from the beginning.

The first and second derivative assumptions make the natural universe knowable, while the third and fourth derivative assumptions make the conscious universe knowable. Once again, the first assumption of science that the universe is a knowable place truly is the foundation upon which all scientific activity becomes possible.

The Significance of God’s Commitment

We have now accepted that god committed to making a knowable universe from the beginning. But this knowledge does not rise to the level of understanding. This is important because god has free will and all god’s actions must be rational, so to bring ourselves to the level of understanding, we must figure out why god made this commitment.

We begin by pointing out just how extreme is god’s commitment.

The god of the universe is granting free will to newly created minds so they can act freely and spontaneously while this same god is surrendering all freedom and spontaneity. God’s every “choice” is now predetermined by the rigidity of the god-obligations. The creator god must never demonstrate a presence, may never reward the good or punish the bad, must never inspire or enlighten, shall never put god’s power on display, and can never alter the course of events no matter how desirable or undesirable the events taking place. By committing to the god-obligations, the god who created the universe has surrendered all demonstrations of godliness.

But god’s position in the universe goes more lowly still. We found that the mind signature consists of only four atoms. It is a molecule that can not only be formed by humanons, but can easily be broken apart by common humanon activities. This means that fulfilling the god-obligations will often require god to take actions as a direct result of the unpredictable choices made by humanons. By committing to the god-obligations, not only has god surrendered godliness itself, but god has become a slave to the whims and the ways of the very minds that god made free. Obedience alone now defines god’s existence with regards to our universe.

This irrevocable, perpetual, and extreme commitment taken on by god could not have been made lightly. As rational humans, we do not surrender that which is most valuable to us without a compelling reason, and this must be equally true for a rational god. So what was the reason that god committed to the god-obligations?

We begin with our finding that god’s commitment to never interfering in the universe makes the universe a knowable place. Because natural matter has no consciousness, natural matter is incapable of knowing. This means that god’s commitment would be irrelevant to the natural matter of the universe. We thus conclude that god committed to the god-obligations for sake of the conscious minds in the universe that are capable of knowing.

Next, we note that if god were indifferent to the conscious minds of the universe, then making such an extreme commitment would be irrational – rational minds only make sacrifices and take on obligations for things that they care about. Therefore, we find that god must care about us.

But god must more than care about us. Love is measured by how much we are willing to give up for those we love. We found that to make the universe knowable, god had to surrender all that makes one godly and commit to absolute obedience – a selfless surrendering so beyond measure that it could only be motivated by a love beyond measure.

God’s commitment to surrendering godliness itself for the lifetime of the universe demonstrates god’s unrelenting dedication to our individual and collective well-being. God committed to the god-obligations so that we could live in a universe that makes sense. Because the ongoing sacrifice of god is so extreme, so selfless, so extensive throughout time and space, and so absolute in discipline and restraint, we hereby accept that god created each of us out of love, and that this love is without limits.

In this chapter, we have been discovering what must be true about god. However, by discovering god’s motivations as well, our knowledge of what must be true now rises to the level of understanding. This free will paradigm now accepts that each of us is loved by god, and that all conscious life has value.

The Unlovable State

We found that god committed to the god-obligations to make the universe knowable to the conscious beings that god creates out of love. But what if all the minds and hearts throughout the universe were to grow cold, irrational, evil, and unlovable? If god refrains from interfering in the universe out of love, but all life in the universe becomes unlovable, will god’s commitment to the god-obligations become null and void?

One of our foundational assumptions is that the universe is knowable. If there could exist any state of the universe which could lead to god’s renunciation of the god-obligations, then this would make the universe hiccup enabled and it would already be unknowable. Therefore, we find that god’s love for us is unchangeable and without limits, and this remains true independently of the choices we make. We now accept that god can only know love for the conscious minds that god creates.

Final Comments on the God Problem

The god problem makes the argument that if there were a god, then this god could interfere in the universe, and this possibility alone would already make the universe unknowable. Therefore, the universe could only be knowable if there is no god.

However, our findings reveal the flaw in this argument. In logic, it does not matter how many conditions exist that enable an action, if there exists even a single condition sufficient to prevent the action, then the action cannot take place.

In the case at hand, god has committed to never interfering in the universe so that the universe will make sense to those god loves. Furthermore, to comply with our foundational assumptions, we found that this god must be rational and disciplined. Together, this results in a condition that is sufficient to ensure that god will never interfere.

So yes, god can interfere by rights, but god cannot interfere by commitment. The god problem argument does not take into account that god has free will, so god is free to commit irrevocably to keeping the universe knowable.

But god’s commitment alone would not be sufficient for the universe to be knowable. This commitment had to be discoverable, and it was our foundational assumption of a knowable universe that made god’s commitment discoverable.

Time as an Independent Entity

Is it possible for god to know the future of a universe where free will is real? If we are deciding between activities A and B, does god already know what we are going to do even though we do not yet know ourselves?

If we are actively choosing between activity A and activity B, and if we are truly free to choose either possible outcome, then god must see both possible outcomes as real, possible outcomes, for that is what they are. If god knows that we will choose A at any time prior to our actually choosing A, then B could no longer be a real, possible outcome, because if B were a real, possible outcome, then B might actually become the outcome. God could not know that B might become the outcome and that B will not become the outcome, both at the same time. These two facts are not simultaneously compatible. We must find that god cannot know the future of a universe with free will.

This free will paradigm is based on the assumption that free will is real. We found that for free will to be real, our choices must be completely free of the physical laws. Later we found that there must exist a god to bring free will into existence in an otherwise fully determined universe. However, we found that for the universe to be knowable, this god cannot interfere with the progression of our conscious thoughts. This means that all our choices are entirely our own to make. We bear full and sole responsibility for all that we do.

Thus, we accept that the future of the universe is not up to god and it is not up to the physical laws acting alone. Free will means that god put the future of the universe in our hands. God will learn what the future holds only when we decide what the future holds. Therefore, when we are faced with making decisions, the future must remain unknowable until we have decided what that future will be. The reason god cannot know the future is because no future yet exists to be known – it is in our hands. Anything less and free will could not be real.

It would make no difference whether it was our consciousness that knew the unknowable future, or whether it was the consciousness of god that knew the unknowable future, for the unknowable to be known would be a contradiction, and we cannot allow contradictions in this free will paradigm. We cannot accept an omnipotent god that is above contradiction, nor can we accept divine mysteries that deny words their meaning. So again, the answer is no – it is not possible for god to know the coming decisions of conscious beings in a universe where free will is real. In this free will paradigm, we must not yield to long and widely held doctrine that is contrary to reason.

So while it would certainly be possible for god to know the full spectrum of possible realities for any selected moment in the future, it cannot be possible for god to know ahead of time which of these many permutations will come to be the final reality in a universe where free will is real.

Before giving it much thought, we might think that knowing all the possible realities of the future would be even more valuable than knowing the single reality that will come to be. But try telling sports fans they do not need to watch their team play in the championship game because they already know both possible outcomes.

It should be emphasized that god is not choosing to not know the future, rather, god does not know the future because god cannot know the future. In a universe with free will, we have been given rights to make the future whatever it will be, so the future is now out of god’s hands. God will come to know the future at the same time we do because god does not have rights to see the future of a universe where free will has been granted.

Just as god cannot see forward in time to know what lies ahead, neither can god travel backwards in time. If god could travel backwards in time, then the present that is already known by god would become the future for that time in the past to which god traveled. This would now make it possible for god to know the future for that time in the past.

Again, if there were any mechanism by which the future could be known, then free will could not be real. Therefore, because we have accepted that free will is real, it necessarily follows that god cannot travel through time. God remains always in the present, and does so not by choice. This means that god’s thoughts are time dependent thoughts just as our thoughts are time dependent thoughts. Life is a continuum of thoughts in a continuum of time, and this is as true for god as it is for us.

For these reasons, we now accept that god does not have rights over time; time is a fully determined entity that exists independently of god.

The Image and Likeness Theorem

In the last section, we found that god lives always in the present and that the thoughts of god are time dependent thoughts. Earlier in the chapter, we found that god is a thinking, conscious being, that god’s reason is the same as our reason, and that this god has free will and makes choices. But all of this is equally true for us. We now accept that the rational, conscious, time dependent, decision making process for god is the same as the rational, conscious, time dependent, decision making process is for us.

We found that the creator god loves of us. When we say that god loves us, we are using a word that has a definition, and we cannot allow the definition of this word to change based on the agent to whom it is applied. So when we say god loves us, we are saying that god can experience the greatest of all emotions, and that god’s experience of this emotion will be the same as our experience – anything less and the word loses its meaning.

And if this god loves us, then by any definition of the word “love,” god must care about what happens to us. That is, an outcome that affects us must be an outcome that god cares about, and the more important the outcome is in our lives, the more important the outcome is to god, just as those same outcomes are more important to us.

Important outcomes create a wide variety of intense emotions for us and for those who love us. God loves us, so these important outcomes must create the same variety of intense emotions for god. That is, the range of emotions known by god must be the same as the range of emotions known by us. After all, could the createe experience what the creator god cannot?

We have repeatedly discovered that the conscious experience of god mirrors our own conscious experience as a result of our starting assumption that the universe is knowable. But should we not have known this from the beginning? If we must be able to know god, how could it be any other way? God must experience the same complex continuum of thoughts, reason, passions, emotions, appetites, desires, and hopes that we experience or else this god would be an unknowable other.

Initially, we may find it hard to accept that a bodiless god could experience the same appetites and desires known to matter-bound humanons. After all, when we experience hunger, we know our body needs food. How could we experience hunger without a body to be hungry? What would the experience even mean – would not the appetites of humanons make no sense to a god without a body?

The answer comes down to one of association. It is one thing for a conscious mind to have the conscious experience of an appetite. It is something different to have this craving experience associated to an action that will satisfy the appetite.

For example, when a baby is born, the umbilical cord is cut. The baby is now cut off from the only source of nutrition it has ever known. Without this supply of nutrition, the baby will now be introduced to the conscious experience of hunger. The baby begins fussing and crying as a result of this new and harsh conscious experience. However, as real and unpleasant as this hunger experience surely is, it is also unassociated. The baby does not know the cause of the experience nor how it can be alleviated. At this time, the conscious experience of hunger exists solely within the consciousness of the baby; it is, as of yet, completely unassociated to the needs of the baby’s biological body.

The mother, however, makes the association and responds to her baby’s cries. Through the mother’s unrelenting efforts and the suckling reflex of the baby, nutrition will be provided to the baby from the mother’s breast and the hunger will fade. After this hunger and feeding cycle is repeated a number of times, the baby’s conscious experience of hunger will eventually become associated to a need for milk from the mother’s breast. However, the baby’s experience of hunger was no less real prior to the formation of this bodily association. For many new mothers, working with their new baby to form this association between hunger and a need for the mother’s breast milk will often be the first real struggle they persevere through together.

Let us now consider the sexual desire of animals. This appetite in animals is assuaged by activities associated with reproduction. So is this same conscious experience assuaged by any activity for the creator god? Perhaps we owe our existence to a god who knows this same appetite and the experience of loneliness. Just as this appetite is satisfied by reproductive activities for animals, so may this same appetite be satisfied by the creation of new conscious minds with whom god can share existence. We must keep in mind, though, our previous finding that the creator god is disciplined, so any compulsive actions by god would be incompatible with this free will paradigm.

For the universe to be knowable, god must be knowable, and god cannot be knowable unless the conscious experience of god is the same as our own conscious experience. In Chapter 2, we found that the universe could only be knowable if the conscious experience of all minds is the same. We must now expand this finding to include god. The conscious experience granted to us by god is the same as god’s own conscious experience. In a knowable universe, the conscious experience must be always and everywhere the same.

It is this shared conscious experience that makes it possible for us to fully know god. It is also this shared conscious experience that makes it possible for us to be fully known by god. We find that divinity is but the ideal of humanity. The reasons and the findings detailed above bring us to the image and likeness theorem.

The Image and Likeness Theorem:

We can know god because we are created in the image and likeness of god.

The image and likeness theorem has a corollary. If we were created in the image and likeness of god, then god is the image and likeness of us. God is as human as we are, but ideally so. This means we can learn about god by learning about the essence and ideals of our own humanity.

Who Created God?

If god created the universe, who created god?

Before answering this question, we first recall our finding early in this chapter that the existence of a creator god was required. We found that we had to have a non-determined second system fully independent from the universe to solve the contradiction that resulted from the first appearance of free will. This free will paradigm could not be correct without a creator god to bring choice into an otherwise fully determined universe. But could there be another god that created our creator god?

All gods are free agents capable of causing change in the universe, otherwise they would not be gods by definition. Recall from Chapter 2 that every free agent capable of causing change in the universe must be discoverable or the universe would be unknowable. So if gods were to exist other than the one creator god of this free will paradigm, we would have free agents capable of causing change in the universe and no way of establishing their existence.

Therefore, this free will paradigm not only requires the existence of a creator god, but it also precludes the existence of any other gods.

Do Problems Exist for God to Solve?

In Chapter 12, we will discuss how god had to design the structure and operational capabilities of consciousness before creating the first conscious mind. This designing process implies that god had to progress through a time dependent thought process where the solution to a problem starts as an unknown and then becomes known over time. But if god has been around for an infinite amount of time, then would not god have already solved every problem?

This riddle is analogous to Zeno’s motion paradox from Chapter 1. Zeno’s problem with motion stemmed from his correct understanding that space could be divided up infinitely. How could any object move through an infinite number of points in space in a finite span of time?

The solution that eluded Zeno was that a finite time span can also be divided up infinitely just as a finite distance can be divided up infinitely. This means there could exist all the points needed in time for the infinite number of points to be occupied in space. The speed of motion corresponds to the relative rates at which we pass through the infinite number of points that lie upon both axes.

And so it is with unsolved god problems. God has been around for an infinite amount of time, yes, but the number of problems to be solved are also infinite. To see how this can be true, consider the following.

In physics, there are about twenty fundamental constants needed to make our universe as it is. Even a minuscule change in any of these constants would lead to an entirely new universe. If phase space represents every possible combination of all the fundamental constants, and if each fundamental constant can be varied in infinitesimally small increments, then there will be an infinite number of points in phase space, and therefore, an infinite number of possible universes. Thus, unsolved problems can exist for an infinitely old god because phase space is an infinitely big place.