I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?

[Asmodee]

Dear Simon Moon:

I have given the proof of God existing nth times already, starting from the postulation of the concept of God, to the evidence in objective reality outside of our mind, in all instances of causation, like conception and birth of babies by their papas and mamas, thus to the conclusion on the basis of the evidence, namely: an entity in existence corresponding to the posited concept scil. first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning, which I call God.

[Numbering of lines added by Mariosep]

1. And yes, I agree that it is a concept, and nothing more.

2. As soon as you are able to actually provide demonstrable and falsifiable evidence,

3. and valid and sound logic to support it, let us know.

I did not say as you put it in No. 1 “a concept, and nothing more,” what I say for nth times already is that: the concept will guide us to search for the entity in objective reality of existence corresponding to the concept: so, please take care to not put words in my mouth that it [the word God] is a concept only and nothing more.

On Nos. 2 and 3, I am very concise and clear, we will go into the objective reality of existence and search for evidence in all instances of causation: no need to bring in falsifiable and valid and sound logic.

Babies are good enough as instances of the the effects of causation, and wherefore evidence of the existence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning - think about that.


No need to bring in highfalutin terms.

I hate these logical arguments given as "proofs".  A logical argument can never "prove" any deity exists.  Without exception the logic is flawed.  One of the problems with this argument is that your first premise and your conclusion are exactly the same, "God is real and created everything".  If the conclusion and premise are the same thing, first, OF COURSE the conclusion is going to seem correct because it is also the premise and, second, it is not a sound argument.