Second premise and thrid premise.

2. The universe has a explanation of it's existence and that explanation is God.

This might seem question begging but it is not. This is logically equivalent when the atheist asserts that the universe has no explanation for it's existence. If atheism is true the universe has no explanation for it's existence but if atheism is false than the latter theism is true, and the universe has a explanation of it's existence which would be God. Now if you don't understand what I am saying re-read this. Because you wont understand until you do. Now the third premise says the universe exists. Now is there anyone who would like to volunteer to raise a objection to that? Now premise 1 confirms 3 which confirm 2. Now since everything that exists has a explanation for it's existence and the universe exists, therefore the universe has a explanation for it's existence, and that explanation is God since on atheism the universe has no explanation. Hopefully you understand now what I am saying.


Plus, premise 2 is plausible in it's own right. Since the universe has a explanation for it's existence and the universe cannot be explained in terms of necessity of it's own nature. It must lie in a external cause which must be beyond space and time. Which must be personal as well. Which fits well with the description of God.



Next time we will conclude the argument and then move onto objections of the argument. Then I will do a article on the ontological argument for the existence of God and show why I think it is coherent.