Logical proof that God exists

[mage3158]

It's like food and digestion. The food at a point in time exist.. However once you chew, swallow, and digest the food, it no longer exist. However, if matter cannot be created nor destroyed, that must mean that the food still exist, but doesn't.

Get it?

No, the food will take on a new form (energy) and the food itself will not exist.
You can't call that energy food now can you?

 

[PurpleDragon O Doom]

You can't call that energy food now can you?

Why can't you call that energy food?

 

[mage3158]

Why can't you call that energy food?

Because as it changes from food to energy it cannot be classified as a food.
Same as if god changes form it is no longer classified as a god.

 

[PurpleDragon O Doom]

So if a male God was changed into a female God, would it still be God?

 

[mage3158]

So if a male God was changed into a female God, it would not be God?

No it wouyld not be classified as the same god.
Would I be the same human if I formed into you?
No.

 

[PurpleDragon O Doom]

So if God had a name .. Lets say .. John.

If John was a male God and John was transformed into a female God, would John be the same God?
God is God. If God were a God, he would always be classified as God .. Even if he transformed into a she.

 

[mage3158]

So if God had a name .. Lets say .. John.

If John was a male God and John was transformed into a female God, would John be the same God?
God is God. If God were a God, he would always be classified as God .. Even if he transformed into a she.

No because now since "John" now has a vagina, and has a completely different setup with reproductive organs and such, also the hormones could change his physical a mental attributes greatly.
So no, John is no longer the same John.

 

[Hell]

No because now since "John" now has a vagina, and has a completely different setup with reproductive organs and such, also the hormones could change his physical a mental attributes greatly.
So no, John is no longer the same John.

I disagree with this completely. John still exist, even though John's reproductive organs may be different. Since John still exist, he is the same John. Unless John were to stop existing, he would not exist, proving that he does exist. Even though John turned into a female, the person is essence is still John.

 

[vFreD]

yea if john didnt exist then he existed in only immagination which means there is no god only imagination so my point over rules everyone :]

 

[slimbojo]

that deffinately makes alot of sense

 

[Hell]

Your ignorance over the opinions of the internet peers that you have greatly astounds me in ways even your pathetic brain could not comprehend.

God does not necessarily have to exist for him to have existed. Basically, that's the conclusion. The accusation that God exist means that he exist, though he may not exist, so he does not exist. If God exist, he has to exist. Am I wrong??

 

[Tgump]

Your error is that you have made God a necessary being by making him synonymous with existence.

Existence has to exist, and that is true. God, stripped of all his attributes except existence, is no longer anything except existence. So if God is only existence, then he must exist... but God is not existence. If you instead assume that it was never originally one of his attributes (as an Atheist would), then he cannot exist.
If he doesn't hold the attribute of existence in the first place, then he is stripped down to nothing. Because after all, if he doesn't exist, then it is impossible for him to exist.

You are true, but wrong on some points.

It is possible for a God to exist, but if its only attribute is existing, then it would not have 'powers' such as creating something out of nothing, or nothing out of something. It is also ignorant to call a God a 'he' because if its only factor is existence than he is not mass, has no brain, is basically invisible to Time and Space and invisible to those who are within Time and Space. (Matter, mainly) So it is possible for a God to exist, but not necessarily the Christian God, as described.

 

[mage3158]

I disagree with this completely. John still exist, even though John's reproductive organs may be different. Since John still exist, he is the same John. Unless John were to stop existing, he would not exist, proving that he does exist. Even though John turned into a female, the person is essence is still John.

Wrong, with the change in gender, John will act, think, and look different, it could even change interests.
So how can you say it's the same John?
You can't.

 

[mr n0obie2]

are you some sort of philosopher? But ya I think about that kind of stuff all the time.

 

"The idea of God has no contradictions in it. It is not impossible for God to exist."

I think that's the part of your statement that is not factual. Considering that we have no idea what "God" is, we cannot say it has no contradictions. We also really do not come close to understanding how the universe truly functions, and what exists outside of it. So with that being said, for you to say that there are no contradictions or reasons that God cannot exist is simply false.

 

[PurpleDragon O Doom]

Wrong, with the change in gender, John will act, think, and look different, it could even change interests.
So how can you say it's the same John?
You can't.

You are true that John may act, look, and possibly think different, but that person is still John, no matter what. He was born John and she will die John.

 

[Buns and Cheeks]

You are true that John may act, look, and possibly think different, but that person is still John, no matter what. He was born John and she will die John.

No wrong, she will die with the NAME John. That person is not "John" anymore, as the way they think, the way their hormones effect (Or is it affect ) them might change the way they act.

For ex. Lets say...Abe Lincoln supported slavery. A white supremist, and was basically an American Hitler. Now is that way of thinking Abraham Lincoln, or someone else.

It may be the name that attaches to someone, but it's what the person does that defines who they are.

 

[Shawn_]

No wrong, she will die with the NAME John. That person is not "John" anymore, as the way they think, the way their hormones effect (Or is it affect ) them might change the way they act.

For ex. Lets say...Abe Lincoln supported slavery. A white supremist, and was basically an American Hitler. Now is that way of thinking Abraham Lincoln, or someone else.

It may be the name that attaches to someone, but it's what the person does that defines who they are.

They still are the same person, just with different beliefs.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Your error is that you have made God a necessary being by making him synonymous with existence.

Existence has to exist, and that is true. God, stripped of all his attributes except existence, is no longer anything except existence. So if God is only existence, then he must exist... but God is not existence. If you instead assume that it was never originally one of his attributes (as an Atheist would), then he cannot exist.
If he doesn't hold the attribute of existence in the first place, then he is stripped down to nothing. Because after all, if he doesn't exist, then it is impossible for him to exist.

Well, a God who holds naught but the attribute of existence is ONLY existence. All I did was assign it the name of God as a test, which numerous people have passed.

 

[mage3158]

They still are the same person, just with different beliefs.

How could it be the same person?
Wouldn't the same person think, and act the same way?