ok, God is real, and i can and will prove it.

[Swholli]

God is a being which has every perfection. (This is true as a matter of definition.) Existence is a perfection. Hence God exists.

I conceive of a being than which no greater can be conceived. If a being than which no greater can be conceived does not exist, then I can conceive of a being greater than a being than which no greater can be conceived—namely, a being than which no greater can be conceived that exists. I cannot conceive of a being greater than a being than which no greater can be conceived. Hence, a being than which no greater can be conceived exists.

It is possible that that God exists. God is not a contingent being, i.e., either it is not possible that God exists, or it is necessary that God exists. Hence, it is necessary that God exists. Hence, God exists. (See Malcolm 1960, Hartshorne 1965, and Plantinga 1974 for closely related arguments.)

[It is brown townytic, necessary and a priori that] Each instance of the schema “The F G is F” expresses a truth. Hence the sentence “The existent perfect being is existent” expresses a truth. Hence, the existent perfect being is existent. Hence, God is existent, i.e. God exists. (The last step is justified by the observation that, as a matter of definition, if there is exactly one existent perfect being, then that being is God.)

The word ‘God’ has a meaning that is revealed in religious experience. The word ‘God’ has a meaning only if God exists. Hence, God exists. (See Rescher 1959 for a live version of this argument.)

I exist. Therefore something exists. Whenever a bunch of things exist, their mereological sum also exists. Therefore the sum of all things exists. Therefore God—the sum of all things—exists.

Say that a God-property is a property that is possessed by God in all and only those worlds in which God exists. Not all properties are God properties. Any property entailed by a collection of God-properties is itself a God-property. The God-properties include necessary existence, necessary omnipotence, necessary omniscience, and necessary perfect goodness. Hence, there is a necessarily existent, necessarily omnipotent, necessarily omniscient, and necessarily perfectly good being (namely, God).

[Ad Bot]

[Skorpion]

I conceive of a being than which no greater can be conceived. If a being than which no greater can be conceived does not exist, then I can conceive of a being greater than a being than which no greater can be conceived—namely, a being than which no greater can be conceived that exists. I cannot conceive of a being greater than a being than which no greater can be conceived. Hence, a being than which no greater can be conceived exists.

It is possible that that God exists. God is not a contingent being, i.e., either it is not possible that God exists, or it is necessary that God exists. Hence, it is necessary that God exists. Hence, God exists. (See Malcolm 1960, Hartshorne 1965, and Plantinga 1974 for closely related arguments.)

[It is brown townytic, necessary and a priori that] Each instance of the schema “The F G is F” expresses a truth. Hence the sentence “The existent perfect being is existent” expresses a truth. Hence, the existent perfect being is existent. Hence, God is existent, i.e. God exists. (The last step is justified by the observation that, as a matter of definition, if there is exactly one existent perfect being, then that being is God.)

The word ‘God’ has a meaning that is revealed in religious experience. The word ‘God’ has a meaning only if God exists. Hence, God exists. (See Rescher 1959 for a live version of this argument.)

I exist. Therefore something exists. Whenever a bunch of things exist, their mereological sum also exists. Therefore the sum of all things exists. Therefore God—the sum of all things—exists.

Say that a God-property is a property that is possessed by God in all and only those worlds in which God exists. Not all properties are God properties. Any property entailed by a collection of God-properties is itself a God-property. The God-properties include necessary existence, necessary omnipotence, necessary omniscience, and necessary perfect goodness. Hence, there is a necessarily existent, necessarily omnipotent, necessarily omniscient, and necessarily perfectly good being (namely, God).

[Yosher]

And you had to quote that whole thing for that?

[Bisjac]

paste-cigarettes are cigarettes

[Wedge]

Haha, I love these. I would generalize them to 'God exists for various definitions of God.'

I think it's also important for everyone to note that meaning of necessary in these statements.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_sufficient_condition

Here's a quick example of the distinction. The existence of a god is a necessary condition for the existence of the Christian God but the existence of a god is not sufficient for the existence of the Christian God. In other words, if you are able to prove that a god exists, you still have not proven that any religion at all is worshiping the "right" god. In fact, if someone in this thread is able to "prove" God exists (Swholli's post outstanding), it is not even evident that this god wants to be worshiped or acknowledged at all. It may seem odd but the existence of a god is not evidence for the "correctness" of religion.

[Jaydee]

/lie

I love the fact you ignore reason and try to fiddle off logic in a bigoted way.

Seriously, I can't stop laughing at other atheists at this thread that try to flaunt their "knowledge" about every Christian on this planet. You seriously need to see yourselves at how comparable you are with bigoted theists too, really.

[Bisjac]

existence of a god is not evidence for the "correctness" of religion.

hey now. the weak minded can only go 1 step at a time through life. give them some breathing room.

[Swholli]

-snip-

The Ontological Argument seems rather confusing if not overly assumptious.

It provides no proof in physical nature other than "if He exists, God is all powerful, we can both agree on that, right?"

It's proof through words, and nothing more.

Great way of ignoring everything I wrote and quoting my entire statement for one "linked to Wikipedia" joke. You are quite the comedian.

[Jerkface]

God is a entrepreneur ; He is surrounded by hot, naked chicks with wings.

[Gojira]

part of this actually makes sense

agreed.
I was like :/ and then I was like :o, then :O

dkamm, you are brilliant.

[dkamm65]

I didn't write this.

http://www.facebook.com/?sk=question&id=213897075304021&post_id=223143451046050&qa_ref=nac

Wanted to see the response from blf.

[Gojira]

okay, whoever wrote that is brilliant.
herp derp I need to read better.

[dkamm65]

okay, whoever wrote that is brilliant.
herp derp I need to read better.

I think you mean whoever wrote that is fundamentally handicapped.

[Gojira]

I think you mean whoever wrote that is fundamentally handicapped.

uh nope

i'm christian

but thinking about it
i honestly don't know what my opinion on it is.
:s

[ultimamax]

God is supposedly perfect.
But if he was, then wouldn't he have made some way to absolutely convince everyone he is alive? He could send everyone a dream on their birthday or something, really.