Logical proof that God exists

No. God is something.

Explain why.

God either exists, or doesn't. Whatever your beliefs are are irrelevant.

I certainly hope you're not talking to me.

 

Your logic is flawed. Using your logic I can prove that god does not exist:

1). God is a necessary being.

You are not a necessary being. The world will get along perfectly well without you. You can either exist, or not exist, and the world will continue on. God is not such a being, as will be explained a bit later.

2). God as so defined either exists or does not exist.

According to the definition provided by the first point, God either exists, or doesn't exist.

3). If God exists, he necessarily exists.

If God exists, he has to exist.

4). If God does not exist, he necessarily does not exist.

If God does not exist, he cannot exist.

5). The idea of God is not self-contradictory.

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

6). God exists.

Since it is possible for God not to exist, and since if God does not exist, he cannot exist, God does not exist.

 

Remember, when I say "God", I mean God stripped of all attributes except for existence.

If God does not exist, he cannot exist. That means that it would be logically impossible for God to exist. However, it is NOT logically impossible for God to exist, therefore that cannot be the case.

 

Since the contrapositive of all logical arguements are always true, then,according to your logic both of these statements are true:

Your statement:
"Since it is not impossible for God to exist, and since if God does not exist, he cannot exist, God exists."

Contrapositive of your statement:
"Since it is not impossible for God not to exist, and since if God exist, he has to exist, God does not exist."

Those statements are contradictory. Neither of them are true. It is only possible that god exists.

 

this is the gayest thread i've ever read, u haven't proved that "god" exists and yet the thread title is "Logical proof that "god" exists"

it's not fuckin logical at all

 

That second statement only works if the concept of God is logically impossible. You need to reverse everything.

Good job, "iNoob". You've just led me to form negative expectations of you.

You say I haven't proven anything, yet you don't back that up. Interesting.

Actually, it's purely logical.

 

Can you explain the reasoning behind your 6th logical statement. It seems to me like you are argueing that "If got might exists, god exists." Since the statement "If god does not exist, he cannot exist" doesnt give anything to the arguement. The following statement is true because your only using possiblity: If it is possible for god to exist, then it is possible for god not to exist.

 

Are you just saying he only exists if you want him too?

 

Obviously, God either exists, or does not exist.

Situation A. God does exist. This means that God has to exist. It would be logically impossible for him not to exist.

Situation B. God does not exist. This means that God cannot exist. It would be logically impossible for him to exist.

But, the concept of God (stripped of all attributes except for existence) is not logically impossible. This rules out Situation B. Situation A is what's left.

Note - I'm not proving the existence of the Judeo-Christian God, or a worship-worthy God, etc. I'm merely proving the God stripped of all attributes except for existence. What does that mean? Think of a laptop. Strip it of all attributes but existence. What do you have? Existence, which we arbitrarily call a laptop. The same applies to God.

Anything stripped of all attributes but existence is nothing but existence itself. This is not so much an argument for God, as most people conceive of it, but an argument for existence, which is named God.

No, I believe that God either exists, or doesn't exist, independent of each person's personal beliefs.

 

You shall also read it aloud. I've read it numerous times .. You should ask yourself if this makes sense .. No? Explain why ..
-------
I'm saying that He will only exist if you believe he exist. Example: You're running for President or whatever the US has .. You need supporters and your main goal is to attract supporters. Those who do NOT support you, you will not care about. Am I wrong?

If you believe in God .. He exist. If you do not believe in God, he does not exist to you.

No one person can say that God does not exist. He may not exist to you because you do not believe in Him .. But to someone else, it is He who exist and only he.

 

or you could try making sense

 

It makes sense to me, and it makes sense to my fellow philosophy students. If you cannot understand, you need to ask questions, and have points clarified.

 

This thread is getting repetative. We've got shredder saying the same damn thing to every other post and every other post saying the same thing to shredder.

My thoughts are still the same, this is a wonderfull theory (still am going to call it a paradox), but can't be used as concrete evidence. Saying this in a legit debate over the subject would make you look foolish. It CAN apply to other things, existance has little to do with anything.

"If God does not exist then his existance is impossible,
Since it is possible that he does exist then he must exist."

The fact that it is possible he does not exist disproves this, I don't care what you say.

The fact is his existance could be or could not be, you CAN'T prove it either way, especially with a silly statement such as this.

 

That's also getting on my nerves. From now on, every person who asks the same questions gets their post deleted.

How is it a paradox?

Right, it's not evidence. It's proof.

Not really. I have yet to lose when bringing up this argument.

Actually, no. It only applies to existence, for existence is the only thing that is "necessary". How could anything else be necessary.

That's not my argument at all. There are two situations. A., God exists. B., he doesn't.

If B applies, and he does not exist, then his existence is impossible. By impossible, I mean logically impossible. Yet, the concept of God has no logical contradictions, so this cannot be the case!

 

Since it is possible that god doesnt exist, and since if god exists, he does exist. he doesnt exist.

Did that make sense to you? No. Neither did your sentence.

 

That sentence did not make sense. However, mine did.

I will explain:

If God does not exist, that means that his existence is logically impossible. However, there is nothing about his existence that is logically impossible, so that is not the case.

 

I've already explained how logic is flawed and you're using logic in a circumstance to prove one side of a two sided arguement of which both sides have NOTHING to base upon except for tall tales from both sides, well actually, i take The Theories side on how everything was created from A Single Point in space and so on and so forth from there, yeah yeah, even though you said i was wrong before, you'll try to turn my own arguement against me and say logic was used to create those theories or something to that effect, i know mind games very very well.


Logical Proof That Shredder is Repetitive, Hard-Headed, Ignorant, Etc.

1). Shredder is a human being hoping that he can get other people to believe god exists, so that it will make his transition to believing easier. Without him being here, there would be no repititon of words and phrases due to his ignorance, so he has deemed himself necessary enough to be able to think that what he says matters.

He believes he is a messenger and is trying to get other people to believe over a gaming forum site

2). Shredder as a human, may or may not exist

According to the definition provided by the first point, he either exists and there is much repition and he is full of himself, or he wouldn't exist and there wouldn't be any repitition and a 'Messenger' trying to persuade people to believe in god.

3). Shredder Exists, and is a moron full of himself, so he necesarily exists

If he exists, he has to exist.

4). If he didn't exist, he wouldn't be a moron and full of himself and there would be no repitition and non-stop moronicness, so he doesn't necesarily not exist.

If he does not exist, then he cannot exist

5). So this answer is quite simple and straight forward and is NOT contradictory

The idea of Shredder existing and being full of himself is not contradictory because as it would seem, he is here and there is MUCH MUCH repitition and ignorace and such.

6). So, Shredder exists

Since it is not logically possible for Shredder to not exist and hence not be a repetitive fool, then he does exist and is a repetitive fool on a journey to religion and well as we can see, he's right here and it's proven

Discuss.

 

I personally am an Atheist. So do not hesitate to say that god doesn't exist. Before you counter, I will tell you a few things that I have noticed throughout my life. Humans tend to take comfort when they imagine a higher force that can protect them. They also take pleasure in creating figures of imagination that can do what humans cannot. Remind me how Superman came to being... Oh someone with a good imagination made him. X Ray vision and Super strength? Not exactly something your next door neighbor has.

 

That doesn't come together very well... Theres no proof god exists, and if none of us heard about him your logic would not exist.

 

It can.

Incorrect statement. We use 100% of our brains.

Logic is based on truth. 2 + 2 = 4, a square circle is logically impossible, etc.

You won't find too many people arguing about whether or not existence exists. If you have read all my posts, you should know that that is what I'm proving the existence of.

Careful.

First, I don't believe in the God you're talking about. I believe that existence exists. What you call it is another matter.

Do I detect flaming?

Yes, I do.

You completely butchered my logic. Completely.

Good.

I hope you realize that you cannot know that for certain.

It's likely true, but this does not make my argument logically invalid.

Also, pay attention to the type of God I am proving the existence of, which is one stripped of all attributes except for existence. What would any other person call that? Existence. Good job at reading my previous posts.

I disagree.

That depends on how you define God.

I may not have come up with it, but that doesn't make my argument logically invalid.