Oh look, amazing theist logic: http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm
Quote:ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (I)
(1) I define God to be X.
(2) Since I can conceive of X, X must exist.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (II)
(1) I can conceive of a perfect God.
(2) One of the qualities of perfection is existence.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
MODAL ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
(1) God is either necessary or unnecessary.
(2) God is not unnecessary, therefore God must be necessary.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CHRISTIAN EXPERTS ARE IGNORED
(1) Dembski, Behe and Plantinga are ignored by mainstream intellectuals.
(2) Only a fear of the truth could explain this.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CHRISTIAN EXPERTS ARE NOT IGNORED
(1) Mainstream intellectuals are paying some attention to Dembski, Behe and Plantinga.
(2) Only a growing recognition of the truth could explain this.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MULTIPLICITY (II), a.k.a. TERCEL'S ARGUMENT (II)
(1) I have a large number of arguments for God.
(2) There is a small chance that at least one of them is true.
(3) Using voodoo probability calculations, this means that there is a much greater chance that all of them are true taken together!
(4) And this ISN'T just the mathematical version of the Ontological Proof; I'm a real mathematician and you obviously can't understand this proof because you don't know as much about math as I do.
(5) Oh, and don't confuse things by mentioning how many atheistic arguments there are, and the probability of each of them being correct...
(6) Or the fact that I basically pulled the probability of each of my arguments being correct out of my ass...
(7) And admit that I know more about math than you, and you'll see that...
(8) Therefore, God exists.
PETER KREEFT'S ARGUMENT FROM POSITIVE NUMBERS, a.k.a. FIRST CAUSE ARGUMENT (V), a.k.a. ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (III)
(1) Positive numbers are not caused by negative numbers.
(2) There is a parallel in the number series for a first cause: the number one.
(3) If there were no number one, there could be no subsequent addition of units.
(4) Two is two ones, three is three ones, and so on. If there were no first, there could be no second or third.
(5) God is like the number one.
(6) Therefore, God exists.
ST THOMAS AQUINAS' ARGUMENT FROM PERFECTION, GOODNESS OR VALUE, a.k.a. ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (IV)
(1) We rank things as more or less perfect, or good or valuable.
(2) If this ranking is false and meaningless, then souls don't really have any more perfection than slugs.
(3) Therefore, there must be an ultimate standard of perfection for this ranking or all our value judgments are meaningless.
(4) Our value judgments are not meaningless.
(5) God is the ultimate standard of perfection.
(6) Therefore, God exists.
ST ANSELM’S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
(1) God exists in our understanding. This means that the concept of God resides as an idea in our minds.
(2) God is a possible being, and might exist in reality. He is possible because the concept of God does not bear internal contradictions.
(3) If something exists exclusively in our understanding and might have existed in reality then it might have been greater. This simply means that something that exists in reality is perfect (or great). Something that is only a concept in our minds could be greater by actually existing.
(4) Suppose (theoretically) that God only exists in our understanding and not in reality.
(5) If this were true, then it would be possible for God to be greater then he is (follows from premise #3).
(6) This would mean that God is a being in which a greater is possible.
(7) This is absurd because God, a being in which none greater is possible, is a being in which a greater is possible. Herein lies the contradiction.
(8) Thus it follows that it is false for God to only exist in our understanding.
(9) Hence God exists in reality as well as our understanding.
(10) Therefore, God exists.
11th CENTURY'S ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT, a.k.a. TRANSCENDENTAL ARGUMENT (III)
(1) God is, by definition, a being greater than which nothing can be conceived or imagined.
(2) Existence in reality is better than existence in one's imagination.
(3) God must exist in reality; if God did not, then God would not be that than which nothing greater can be conceived or imagined.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
