I recently realized one of the ramifications of my recent academic offerings. It came as quite a shock. I was forced to lay down and play Angry Birds for several hours. But let me back up and set the scene.

First, I explained that, when it comes to the existence of God, there are only three possible positions: Yes, No, or Maybe. Or as I label them, theism, atheism, and agnosticism.

Next, I showed that Atheism is not a valid position. The burden of proof is such that, for an atheist to be reasonable, they must be able to prove that God (a metaphysically necessary being) is metaphysically impossible. Just like it sounds, the atheist must prove that something which HAS to exist CANNOT exist. This is more absurd than trying to prove that light is darkness, or that infinity is equal to zero, and thus can never be done. It’s beyond impossible. It’s merely silly. I liken the atheists’ burden of proof to having to write a persuasive essay proving that words don’t exist. It’s that silly.

At this point I addressed those faithful viewers who attempted to insert a fourth position, namely the idea that “Atheism” can be defined as merely an absence of belief in the existence of God. I showed that this still leads to either my definition of atheism (“no”), or my definition of agnosticism (“maybe”) and so not only was this, in my opinion, an invalid use of the word Atheism, but it resulted in Atheism meaning either Atheism or Agnosticism. I didn’t find this particularly helpful. I find this to be, in terms of rational discourse, like having people try to argue that the RED light either means Yellow Light OR Red light, because, all RED light really means is NOT Green light. You’re not making rush hour more efficient with that philosophy, if you get what I’m saying.

But reflecting on it, I realized something so obvious that I was amazed that I hadn’t seen it before. I had shown that atheism is an invalid position because its burden of proof is SO BIG that is becomes literally absurd. But then, I realized, if atheism is not a valid position, neither is agnosticism!

Think about it- if no one can logically say NO, then on what basis can anyone logically say MAYBE? Once NO is no longer a valid option, MAYBE is not a valid option either. The only logical, defensible position is YES!

Now, for those of you who are getting caught up in the topic and can’t see the logic for the implications, let’s talk about something else for a minute. Imagine a chicken taco.

Close your eyes and picture the chicken taco before you (but then open your eyes again so you can keep reading). Here is the question: Is there CHEESE on this chicken taco?
When you reply, you have three possible options: YES (there is cheese on the taco), NO (there is NOT cheese on the taco) or MAYBE (there might be cheese on the taco, but there might not be- you do not know).
Now, I’d like to point out the fact that I am not asking what you think about the taco. I’m asking about the TACO. You may say “I lack a belief in the existence of the cheese, but that doesn’t mean I think there IS no cheese.” I don’t care. This isn’t about YOU, its about the TACO! Is there cheese on the taco? Yes or no? If you say MAYBE, you are saying you believe YES and NO to BOTH be possible options.

Now, here is where my revelation hinges: If I can show you that saying NO is not a valid option- then as a result you MUST say YES. If you don’t have the option of saying NO as a valid possibility, then you ONLY have YES as an option. It would be absurd beyond reason to say, “I know it can’t be true that there is NOT cheese on this taco, so I will say MAYBE there is cheese on the taco.” Once it can be shown that NO is not a valid option, then you already know for certain that there IS CHEESE ON THAT TACO!

This is very good news unless you are lactose intolerant.

When we apply the same simple logic to the existence of God, you will see that, since atheism is not a valid option, then agnosticism is not a valid option either. You can’t say MAYBE God exists when “God does not exist” is NOT a valid option. Once atheism is dead, agnosticism is no longer an option! Theism is literally the only option available!

You see why I needed to lie down for a while? Mind Blow!

Logically speaking, you can only say “I don’t know who God is.” Agnosticism remains valid only when it is agnosticism (ignorance) of God’s identity, and not His existence. His existence is just as valid as yours. Actually, more so, since he is a metaphysically necessary being, and you are contingent. If He didn’t exist, you wouldn’t either.

Doesn’t that just make you need to lay down and play Angry Birds for several hours? Or eat chocolate pudding? Both of those sound pretty good. I wonder if I could do both at the same time?

Sometime soon I shall get around to proving to you that Jesus Christ is God, as explained in the Bible. Until then, I highly recommend the comic book philosophy lesson which is Me, The Professor, Fuzzy, and the Meaning of Life, hosted for free enjoyment at: http://www.thebigmystery.com/

That does as good a job as anyone can do in comic book form. And remember #JesusLovesYou
Yes, sir, don’t mean maybe.