## Personal Development for Smart PeopleTM Forums

 Personal Development for Smart People Forums Proof God Exists

 Notices Please note: The Personal Development for Smart People Forums officially closed on Dec 26, 2011 after more than 5 years of service. The forum archives remain available here. For additional help on your path of conscious growth, please visit Steve's blog.

 Fun & Recreation Travel, vacationing, enjoying life, pleasurable experiences, adventure, games, jokes, humorous stories

 03-30-2007, 02:43 AM #1 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 110 Proof God Exists i) If God does not exist, then it is not the case that if I pray, my prayers will be answered. ii) I do not pray. iii) Thus, God exists.
 03-30-2007, 05:00 AM #2 (permalink) Member   Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 65 I don't get your logic... could you clarify?
 03-30-2007, 04:51 PM #3 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 105 DiscoDan, Your proof is flawed due to a few reasons. 1) You assume that the answering of prayers is caused by God an no other. There are people here who believe that by simply believing in something (such as praying) will cause it to become reality. Based on the proof given, it is still possible that prayers are answered by something other than God. In order to substantiate your proof, you also need to prove that prayers are only answered by God and no other. 2) Your second statment has no bearing on the first statement. What does you not praying have to do with prayers being/not being answered? The active action of praying is being tested, not the passive action of not praying. This, of course, does not mean that I do not believe in God. Last edited by DarkSociologist; 03-30-2007 at 04:58 PM.
 03-30-2007, 05:10 PM #4 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 110 To formalize, let: G = "God exists", P = "I pray", and A = "my prayers are answered". Then, by the premise, we have: ~G --> ~(P --> A) (premise) ~G --> ~(~P \/ A) (def'n of -->) ~G --> (P /\ ~S) (distributing the ~) ~P (given) ~(P /\ ~S) (since ~P) ~(~G) (I forget the name of this property. modus tollens maybe?) G Thus, God exists.
 03-30-2007, 05:21 PM #5 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 105 G --> (P --> A) is not logically equivalent to ~G --> ~(P --> A) For example: "If I am sleepy, then I will sleep" S = "I am Sleepy" W = "Will Sleep" S --> W But let's throw in "If I am bored, then I will sleep" B = "I am bored" B --> W Since both B and S imply W, you cannot say ~S --> ~W because you're really saying (~S)(B) ^ (~S)(~B) --> ~W, which is not true. This is why you first need to prove that prayers are only answered by God
 03-30-2007, 05:22 PM #6 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 112 I have a rock that repels bears. 1) if the rock does not repel bears, then if I don't have the rock, I won't be attacked by bears. 2)I don't have the rock 3)therefore, the rock repels bears? Last edited by Truefire; 03-30-2007 at 05:32 PM.
 03-30-2007, 05:58 PM #7 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Michigan Posts: 132 Nicely put with the rocks and bears. This reminds me of one of the old arguments, I think it went something like: Existence is a perfection (of sorts) Existence exists therefore God is perfect! Or something like that. I had to learn it in philosophy class a million years ago and I managed to wrap my brain around it for a moment, I think. But there are flaws in it too, if I remember right. I have since forgotten it. Anyone else remember what I'm talking about? Sorry I'm so crazy!
 03-31-2007, 07:39 AM #8 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 363 Actually, both Discodan and Darksociologist are wrong. If we accept Discodans two premises, G indeed follows, but as Darksociologist points out, his reasoning is wrong. ~G --> ~(P --> A) is equivalent to (P->A) -> G in classical logic (which I don't believe in, BTW). From ~P it follows that P->A. Combining this with (P->A) -> G, we have G.
Senior Member

Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 112

Quote:
 Originally Posted by skinnyninja Nicely put with the rocks and bears. This reminds me of one of the old arguments, I think it went something like: Existence is a perfection (of sorts) Existence exists therefore God is perfect! Or something like that. I had to learn it in philosophy class a million years ago and I managed to wrap my brain around it for a moment, I think. But there are flaws in it too, if I remember right. I have since forgotten it. Anyone else remember what I'm talking about? Sorry I'm so crazy!
I not sure, but I remember something from a philosophy class that went like this.

assume God is perfect, in the highest sense of the word, pure and utter perfection. Omniscient, all powerful, all pervading, the ultimate. etc.

Human thought is bound by experience and previous thought. Try it, try to come up with a completely original thought that cannot be broken down into something that you have previously learned. Its impossible. It can't be done, original thought doesn't exist in a pure form, instead everything we think about is based on things that are already in our mind. Therefore anything that we can imagine, must be based on previously existing principles. The very fact that we can conceive of a perfect being means that a perfect being must exist. Therefore god must exist.

or something along those lines... There are holes I know, this is an incomplete translation at best. When my teacher taught it is felt nearly irrefutable. (even if I wasn't convinced )

Family Member

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,061

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Truefire assume God is perfect, in the highest sense of the word, pure and utter perfection. Omniscient, all powerful, all pervading, the ultimate. etc. Human thought is bound by experience and previous thought. Try it, try to come up with a completely original thought that cannot be broken down into something that you have previously learned. Its impossible. It can't be done, original thought doesn't exist in a pure form, instead everything we think about is based on things that are already in our mind. Therefore anything that we can imagine, must be based on previously existing principles. The very fact that we can conceive of a perfect being means that a perfect being must exist. Therefore god must exist. or something along those lines... There are holes I know, this is an incomplete translation at best. When my teacher taught it is felt nearly irrefutable. (even if I wasn't convinced )
Holes, such as that the concept of a perfect being is still an amalgamation of other, smaller concepts. I.e., perfection, omniscience, all powerful, all pervading, being.

I choose to pray to the Flying Spaghetti Monster. By the same reasoning it must exist.

 04-02-2007, 02:32 AM #11 (permalink) Member   Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 52 The real question is "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" It's been an open problem in the field for centuries.
 04-02-2007, 02:35 AM #12 (permalink) Family Member   Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 1,061 42. It all makes sense now! That was the right question!
 04-04-2007, 04:00 PM #13 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Sheffield, United Kingdom Posts: 202 The perfect God argument has got a formal name, I cant remember it at the moment.. Ontological Argument. Guanilo, put forward a critique that goes like this... I imagine a perfect island It has monkey butlers, a rope swing, unlimited coconuts and it exists. Obviously the problem with the ontological argument and the island argument is you cannot just add existence to a list of requirements for a perfect island, wikipedia is a good source of info on the subject. Also it uses language to prove God, and this is dodgey in the extreme because applying our language to God in the first place is hard. Wikipedia info Ontological argument - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I prefer the design argument - the chance of the Earth existing in the correct conditions for us and other animals to live is (1/2)^6000000 or 6 million coins all landing heads up, is it really possible that that chance happened?
Family Member

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,061

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Wanderer I prefer the design argument - the chance of the Earth existing in the correct conditions for us and other animals to live is (1/2)^6000000 or 6 million coins all landing heads up, is it really possible that that chance happened?
I think it is possible, but since this is a thread about God, not the creation of the Earth, I'll leave it at that.

 04-05-2007, 04:28 AM #15 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 112 Assuming time is infinite...then it had to happen sometime right?
Senior Member

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: new south wales Australia
Posts: 221

Quote:
 Originally Posted by skinnyninja Nicely put with the rocks and bears. This reminds me of one of the old arguments, I think it went something like: Existence is a perfection (of sorts) Existence exists therefore God is perfect! Or something like that. I had to learn it in philosophy class a million years ago and I managed to wrap my brain around it for a moment, I think. But there are flaws in it too, if I remember right. I have since forgotten it. Anyone else remember what I'm talking about? Sorry I'm so crazy!
What if existence is deeply flawed? Then existence exists, God is existence and god is imperfection.

 04-09-2007, 11:22 PM #17 (permalink) Family Member   Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 1,061 It seems a strange argument. I'd like to hear how existence could be either perfect or imperfect. As far as I understand, existence defines a state of being. Something is, or it isn't, there's no grey area, no greater or lesser state, and therefore no perfection or imperfection.
 04-18-2007, 09:05 AM #18 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 586 I think all that's needed is: I exist. I cannot create my own existence. Therefore, God exists.
Senior Member

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 132

Quote:
 I prefer the design argument - the chance of the Earth existing in the correct conditions for us and other animals to live is (1/2)^6000000 or 6 million coins all landing heads up, is it really possible that that chance happened?
If the universe is infinite in time and space, then the probability of this happening isn't just good, it is certain.

Family Member

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,061

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ethereal I think all that's needed is: I exist. I cannot create my own existence. Therefore, God exists.
Who/what created God?

If your inability to create your own existence implies the existence of God, then God's existence must imply the existence of something greater than God. We're talking proof, not faith or personal belief, so this argument fails.

Mmmm, I like turtles.

 04-22-2007, 06:56 PM #22 (permalink) Family Member   Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,243 Now i have to adopt SR/LOA model (after reading the posts here ) so i can become a god of my own SR world . More power to me . I'm clearly inspired by Alaskan_Librarian
 04-23-2007, 01:33 AM #23 (permalink) Senior Member   Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 112 ooooooh! I love dogma! Wicked movie too...
 04-23-2007, 01:09 PM #24 (permalink) Junior Member   Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Croatia, Europe Posts: 4 The Riddle of Epicurus Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence come the evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? Last edited by Gabriel; 04-23-2007 at 01:40 PM.
Senior Member

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 538

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Gabriel The Riddle of Epicurus Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence come the evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
lol This riddle has flaws

 08-13-2011, 05:03 PM #26 (permalink) Member   Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 86 Yes God exists and proof is this.... In my views the most solid proof of existence of God is consciousness. I am still amazed that from where consciousness emanates. You see a living body and the very next moment something happens and the same body becomes lump of matter and nothing else. It is only this consciousness which separates inanimate matter from animate matter. We are conscious beings and definitely there must be a supreme consciousness from where all creation emanates, from where all consciousness emanates.
Senior Member

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In Bliss
Posts: 398

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DiscoDan i) If God does not exist, then it is not the case that if I pray, my prayers will be answered. ii) I do not pray. iii) Thus, God exists.
i) is a false premise. You can pray and still have your prayers answered even if god doesn't exist, and you can pray and NOT have your prayers answered and god can still exist, so this is a false premise that god answers prayers all the time, or that god is responsible for all prayers...

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ethereal I think all that's needed is: I exist. I cannot create my own existence. Therefore, God exists.

Your logic is flawed. This would make more sense:

I exist.
I cannot create my own existence.
Therefore, someone else created my existence for me.

You can trace this back from your parents to your ancestors, you can trace it back to evolution and abiogenesis. Problem solved without a god.

I'm not saying that a god doesn't exist. I'm just saying that we already know where it all came from without filling in a god in the gaps...

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Lychee lol This riddle has flaws
Where exactly are these flaws?

Quote:
 Originally Posted by greatmind In my views the most solid proof of existence of God is consciousness. I am still amazed that from where consciousness emanates. You see a living body and the very next moment something happens and the same body becomes lump of matter and nothing else. It is only this consciousness which separates inanimate matter from animate matter. We are conscious beings and definitely there must be a supreme consciousness from where all creation emanates, from where all consciousness emanates.
You might as well say that the wind is proof that god exist...

Because the wind exist there is obviously a supreme wind where all winds emerges from...

Um, no...

 08-14-2011, 02:26 AM #28 (permalink) Family Member   Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 2,881 I believe in a God I see as a creative life force of the cosmos. The only thing I can prove are my own thoughts and feelings. This is a 4 year old thread thanks for bring it back from old thread heaven great mind . desert rat
Banned

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: on God's beautiful earth, in heaven :), & you?
Posts: 1,341

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DarkSociologist you first need to prove that prayers are only answered by God
Many so called 'prayer-answers' have nothing to do with God.

Iow, answers came from other sources: satan's minions, or more often
(erroneous) beliefs & actions, screwing-up children.
But
God for sure exists, for IN-God we have our being...

 08-14-2011, 10:45 PM #30 (permalink) Banned   Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: on God's beautiful earth, in heaven :), & you? Posts: 1,341 erm, it copied itself, lol Last edited by sk8joyful; 08-14-2011 at 11:12 PM.

 Bookmarks

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are Off Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Rob S Psychic & Paranormal 143 05-13-2009 03:47 PM Radical Spirituality, Consciousness, & Awareness 56 05-26-2007 07:03 PM Jim Intention-Manifestation 3 02-14-2007 04:35 PM Karess Spirituality, Consciousness, & Awareness 31 01-19-2007 06:33 PM Frans Intention-Manifestation 102 01-02-2007 03:35 PM

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:06 AM.