Are there any Level 1's here?

[Esquilax]

Sure.
1) The universe is governed.

... By perfectly natural, physical laws determined by the nature of particulate matter. No creative mind has been demonstrated to have a part in it.

Nothing in the universe can take up the same space as anything else. Therefore it can be said that the state of every object in the universe depends on the state of every other object in it.

Oh, I see a spurious connection based upon linguistic tricks and not science coming up!

Now take any 2 objects in the universe. If they both depend on each other, who/what is in charge of them? It can't be either of the objects, because then one could control the other, but not the other way around. And it can't be nothing, because then they would both be independent and neither would control the other. It has to be a third being/thing. Now extend this principle to the whole universe, and there must be a someone/something controlling everything in then universe.

Ha ha, nailed it! So, just to be clear: you've defined a relationship into existence, this "dependency," using nothing more than a bit of word-trickery and your own fiat declaration, and now you're trying to twist it so that it seems scientific. It's the same thing people do with Kalam, where only things that begin to exist need a cause... sorry, it's not going to work.

2) The governor is the same as the creator.
Nothing that depends on its governor can exist before or without it. Otherwise, it would not be dependent on it. Moreover, things in this universe cannot have existed forever, since cause-and-effect can only propagate forward, not infinitely backward. Therefore we had to come into existence under our governor's control, i.e. we were created by it. Finally, if the object was created by something, its creator would have made it a certain way, and therefore would be in charge of its state, making it the governor as well.

A bunch of assertions that haven't been justified at all. Can you demonstrate any of this paragraph?

3) The mind is not a physical thing.
There is a difference between how a human thinks and how any purely physical device solves problems. A physical device, e.g. a computer, uses physical means, e.g. transistors, to store and compute information. But the motion of transistors is not knowledge. It cannot be called knowledge any more than flicking a light switch on and off can be called knowledge. With humans, it is different - we actually know and understand things. We are sentient.

Sorry, but "people and computers are different," is not adequate justification for the claim that the mind is non-physical, because it doesn't address the claim at all. It's a non-sequitur: we already know computers are different from people. Care to consider the possibility that some of those myriad differences between people and computers, physically speaking, may be the reason why our consciousness exists?

4) The governor/creator must be sentient.
This is probably the simplest of my four points: Humans are among those things in the universe that depend on each other and therefore share a governor/creator. Nothing can control a power it does not have. Therefore, if this governor/creator is in charge of sentient beings, he himself must be sentient.

Yet more assertions. Demonstrate them, or they will be discarded.

So now we have a sentient being who not only created everything in the universe, but also controls it. This is a god.

So, remember when you were asked specifically not to use poetry or rhetoric in your list? This is all rhetoric.