Proof God Exists: Logic & Reason

  • Thread starter Russell E. Rierson
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses two choices: [1.] Everything happens accidentally and randomly, without a purpose, and [2.] Everything happens for a reason and with a purpose. The speaker argues that [2.] is the only logical choice and that the existence of an ultimate creative God is necessary for a finite creation. However, this argument is based on a false dichotomy and contains a non-sequitur.
  • #1
Russell E. Rierson
384
0
There exist two choices:

[1.] Everything happens accidentally and randomly, without a purpose.

[2.] Everything happens for a reason and with a purpose.



[1.] Can be shown to be true IF we live in an infinite probability space with an infinite number of possibilities.

If [1.] is true THEN it becomes possible for the existence of ANYTHING.

So, then there becomes a strong possibility that an ultimate creative God exists that would be more powerful than the other possibilities.

So [1.] becomes invalidated due to the possibility for anything to exist, allowing for a non random creation to exist because an ultimate creative God can exist.

[2.] is the only logical choice and creation is then finite.

Since everything happens for a reason, there must be a reason for the existence of everything in a finite creation.

A "reason" of reasons. An ultimate purpose.

Therefore God must exist.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If only [1.], nothing will ever remain consistent and coherent. The possibility maybe there, but what's to hold that possibility together?
 
  • #3
Russell E. Rierson said:
There exist two choices:

[1.] Everything happens accidentally and randomly, without a purpose.

[2.] Everything happens for a reason and with a purpose.

This is a false dichotomy. [2.] is not the negation of [1.]

It should read: There exist two choices:

[1.] Everything happens accidentally and randomly, without a purpose.

[2.] At least one thing happens for a reason and with a purpose.

Since your reductio argument is based on this fallacy, I'll skip it.

Therefore God must exist.

*yawn*

Textbook example of a non-sequitir.

Really Russell, I thought you at least had enough familiarity with basic logic to know that an argument cannot possibly be valid if its conclusion contains a term ("God" in this case) that is nowhere to be found in the premises.

Sorry, but this is exactly the type of poorly formulated argument that our Philosophy Forums Guidelines were enacted to prevent. We will host ontological arguments here, but they at least have to be valid.
 

1. How can we use logic and reason to prove the existence of God?

There are various logical arguments for the existence of God, such as the cosmological argument, ontological argument, and teleological argument. These arguments use deductive reasoning to show that the existence of God is the most logical explanation for the existence of the universe and its complexity. Additionally, many philosophers and theologians argue that the concept of God is self-evident and can be understood through reason alone.

2. What evidence supports the existence of God?

There is no one single piece of evidence that definitively proves the existence of God. However, many people point to the complexity and order of the universe, the existence of moral values and the human conscience, and personal experiences of God as supporting evidence. Ultimately, belief in God is a matter of faith, and different individuals may interpret evidence differently.

3. Can the existence of God be proven scientifically?

No, the existence of God cannot be proven scientifically. Science deals with observable and measurable phenomena, while God is often considered to be beyond the physical realm. However, science can help us understand and appreciate the complexity and order of the universe, which some see as evidence of a creator.

4. What are some counterarguments to the existence of God?

There are several counterarguments to the existence of God, such as the problem of evil, the lack of empirical evidence, and the argument from ignorance. These arguments suggest that the existence of suffering, the lack of scientific proof, and the inability to fully understand or explain God's existence make it illogical to believe in a higher power.

5. How does faith play a role in proving the existence of God?

Faith is a crucial component in proving the existence of God. While logic and reason can provide evidence and arguments for the existence of God, ultimately, belief in God requires a leap of faith. Faith allows us to believe in something that cannot be fully comprehended or proven, and it is often seen as a necessary element in understanding and experiencing the divine.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • Cosmology
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
54
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
12
Replies
416
Views
83K
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Back
Top