Logical proof that God exists

This logic applies to concepts, not things that have been definitely proven.

Are you familiar with Descartes? He said "Cognito, ergo sum", which translates roughly to "I think, therefore, I am". He was mistaken about the "I" part, for that can be an illusion, but the basic premises was right. Thinking entails existence. Not necessarily existence of any sort of object, but just existence.

 

If you can't prove something that already exist with your logic, how can you prove something that doesn't exist?

Existence in one's mind only makes an illusion of existence itself. Yes, the idea exist, but it is as real as many dreams and fanasties I have had with many girls.

 

With tautological logic, the only way you can prove that something doesn't exist is by showing it to be self-contradictory (a square circle, etc.).

Existence in the mind confirms that existence exists. It might be the wrong perception of existence, but it is still proof that existence exists. If that thinking is possible, then something must exist to facilitate it.

 

Okay, so GOD is anything I think he is and it exist, because it exist in my mind.

God in my mind is a circle.
In my brothers mind he is a square.
The problem is there is the defintion of God in there mind.

You think Gd is just existence in peoples mind.
Other believe God is everything.

The only thing that actually exist is the person with the wrong perception of illusion. Once the person dies the illusion still exist, because it existed. It goes on for anything.

 

That's not the point I'm trying to make. My argument is that existence is a necessary thing. If it didn't exist, its existence would be logically impossible. The existence of existence is not logically impossible, so therefore, it does exist.

What I then did was called existence God to see who could find the logical fallacy.

 

God could exist.
does he? we don't know.
do i think he does? Nope.

the logic you used was logic, but my idea of God, is that he could exist, but in my view, he doesn't.

science ftw?

 

I've defined God as existence, not the God you're thinking about.

 

Well, existence is not necessary, although if something does exist anything may exist, if the thing existing has a great imagination.

 

Existence IS necessary, because if existence doesn't exist, what possibly could?

If it has an imagination, it has a mind, which is not necessarily so.

 

We are not necessary, nothing is necessary, we make existence exist by existing.

 

We are not necessary, but existence IS necessary! What could exist without existence?

 

Nothing, would exist with out existence, but existence need someting to exist, it may not be ourselves, but it has to be something.

 

Right. I agree with you there.

 

Following in-depth thought, I have come to the conclusion that my logic is not valid.

Its aim was to prove the existence of a God whose only attribute was existence, nothing more. However, existence is not an attribute.

Consider the elephant. It is large (relative to humans), eats vegetation, has four legs, and has ivory tusks. You all know what it is, and could probably recognize that it was an elephant from a number of attributes that it has.

Now, to say that an elephant exists is not to say that existence is an attribute of the elephant. To say that an elephant exists is to say that there are "x's" such that "x is an elephant" is true. Basically, it is to say that there are objects in the world to which the description summarized in the word "elephant" applies.

The same applies to non-existing entities. If we think of fairies, we do not deny them an attribute by saying that they do not exist. Instead, we assert that there are no instances of the concept of fairies.

Thus, my logic was incorrect, though not for the reasons that most of you were stating.

If I was unclear, I will be happy to clarify.

 

Okay, first off, what that list does, is invert the pardagrim, but since that pardagrim is god, and you are an atheist, how does this make any sense? In fact, this sort of resembles Satanism....

 

You're horribly misusing the word paradigm.

That isn't what I'm doing at all. :/

 

This entire conversation does not make any sense. If god exists, who created him? Or did he create himself? What if the Greeks were right, what with all the Gods and Godesses that live on Mount Olympus? What if our views that we believe are supirior, are not? What if this topic was made to not make sense on purpose? Because I think so.

 

My argument for the existence of god:

- We are all Dependable beings. At any one point in time, we will cease to exist in our current state.

For example: If it wasn't for the sun, we wouldn't be able to live.

- All phenomenons in the world are dependent on something else.

Example: the sun is dependent on the reactions of hydrogen.

- there are no interdependent phenomenons

Example: the sun does not create the properties of hydrogen

- Because of this a non Dependant being, must exist to support all dependable beings.

by the nature of god, he must be all powerful (cannot end). As this non dependable being cannot end, God must exist (in some form.)

 

but believing in god, is like saying that there actaully was a unicorn in my back yard last night, chewing on a leaf from a magical forest a mile away.

you cannot disprove both of them, however both of them are unreasonable

and also, if god exists then he is black, jewish, and bi.

thanks for reading.



Btw, if you didnt know the whole last part about god being black, jewish, and bi..thats called sarcasim

 

Are you trying to not understand the logic? Can you find its flaw?

Must it? Why do you claim this?