Does God Exist?

Im sure there has been a thread on here before about if God does indeed exist. However, since most threads that contain the word God end up in this argument, why not just have a fresh thread devoted to this? Before you go freaking out please read the sticky on religion threads.

Personally, I do believe in a God, now I dont believe that any one religion has it perfectly right. But I do believe in a higher being.

The basis for my argument is a version of St. Anslem's original onotological argument, and i believe that everything I have listed is correct.


1. God is defined as a being which none greater can be concieved
2. A being that exists in reality is greater than one that does not exist in reality
3. If God exists in the mind but does not exist in reality then we can imagine a being greater than God
4. But we cannot imagine a being greater than God
5. If God exists in the mind as an idea then God exists in reality
6. God exists in the mind as an idea
7. Therefore God exists in reality

Yes, but he's stepped out for lunch.




Sorry. I just thought I'd add something that hadn't been said in one of these threads already.



Everyone keep it civil.

i follow the teleological argument. there are too many interacting forces sustaining life and causing life to happen. like bees collecting nectar for honey meanwhile inadvertantly pollinating each flower it flies to. or the fact that we need oxygen to breathe and we exhale carbon dioxide, while plants take in carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen. everything has it's own purpose, it's all too coincidental to have not had a designer, aka God. purposeful design can only be brought about by conscious intelligence.

.

Personally, I do believe in a God, now I dont believe that any one religion has it perfectly right.
Same here. We are human and are prone to mistakes. Even mistakes in interpreting "His word". The question is which one has it more right(or which one is less wrong). If you follow the one that has it more wrong then what?

Another thing. What if one is 100% right? How would you know?

St. Anselms argument has several flaws, which i will attempt to address here. please bear in mind, i havent slept in 36 hours, and have spent most of that time playing ridiculous video games...so my mind is somewhat mush right now.


1. God is defined as a being which none greater can be concieved
fair enough, stout definition of god.

2. A being that exists in reality is greater than one that does not exist in reality
id really like to know on whose scale. and anyway, this is to say the physical world trumps the mental. some people have problems with this

3. If God exists in the mind but does not exist in reality then we can imagine a being greater than God
you havent really clarified your point here. god existing in the mind is god existing. what i believe your trying to say, is that if god only exists in the mind, then a simple object, like a tennis ball, is greater than god, because it exists in the physical world, whereas your idea of god only exists in your mind. therefore, something is greater than god, which simply cant be, given our definition of god.

4. But we cannot imagine a being greater than God unecessary premise here.

5. If God exists in the mind as an idea then God exists in reality as the above logic states, yes.

6. God exists in the mind as an idea this is the biggest flaw in his argument, everything up until this point is fine. but what he's saying here is that you, me, that funky lookin dude next to you, and the dude down the street are all capable of understanding the total and complete concept of what GOD is. do you? i know i couldnt possibly fathom 1 tenth of 1 percent what god is, if god exists. i cannot form a complete idea of god. now, this doesnt mean god doesnt exist, but it means anselms argument no longer proves god.

7. Therefore God exists in reality
besides, this only proves god exists for you, not in the universal.

im not sure how to get this to quote everything ive said as well as what you have said so im gonna type it in here and hope its understandable.

response to 2. imagine a tennis ball in your mind, then hold a tennis ball, which is more of a tennis ball (if that makes sense) its saying a physical object has more to offer to a mass than a mental idea does, you can prove that the object is real, this is the hardest thing to try to explain lol

response to 3. the idea behind this is, the definition of god is a being which none greater can be concieved, if there was not a god then a greater being COULD be concieved

response to 4. it probably should be tied into number 3

response to 6 this is going back to the definition of God, the idea of a being which none greater can be concieved exists in the mind


Most of this makes sense to me, but im the one typing it so it should.

ahh, but see...

even if i dont believe in god, i can come up with a being (in my mind or in "real life") that is greater than anything else. does the definition work in reverse?

in other words, is the greatest thing that exists, above which no other thing can be, automatically god?

and i am capable of thinking "there exists something that no other thing is greater than" but thats about as far as i can go. i have noother knowledge of this being. is this being a creator? is this being aware of their power? is this being fatherly? etc etc etc. i cannot possibly even begin to fathom anything else about this being than it is greater than all others.

for all we know, then, samuel l. jackson is god.

Yes, what is greater than any other thing is capable of being would be, as defined "God". Thats the only reason why this argument works, is because us humans are not capable of coming up with anything beyond "perfection"

I think the being would be aware of its power, I would also assume this being is a creator but the only thing I have to base that on is getting into the whole how the universe came to be idea. Which is impossible to explain.

Im a little confused about the "does this definition work in reverse" but about he samuel l. jackson idea, to put it simply, yes he is god.

Yes, what is greater than any other thing is capable of being would be, as defined "God". Thats the only reason why this argument works, is because us humans are not capable of coming up with anything beyond "perfection"

so, lets say for the sake of argument, that a god does not exist. this definition you've provided leads towards us having to accept the greatest thing that DOES exist as god.

I think the being would be aware of its power, I would also assume this being is a creator

you think, and you assume, but you do not know. you do not have a complete idea of god in your head, and therefore anselms argument cannot work

Im a little confused about the "does this definition work in reverse"

you got it, you just didnt know.

Does God exist?
Do what any explorer would do when faced with a question of "Does it exist?"
Go and search for it.
People throughout history (including the present)have cailmed to know God. They claim to have a personal relationship with God. They went looking for Him and found Him. Is it just in their minds?
Seek and you shall find. Are these just words?
The only way to know for sure is to personally test them.

lazysmurff, i really dont have much of anything left to say to defend this argument. I cant think of any rebuttal that wouldnt contradict what I have already said. Good job in defending your point of view, really. Im not saying that im a great debater, but you do a good job of finding flaws in peoples arguments. However, I still believe Samuel L. Jackson is God...