There is no god or gods!

[Dranu]

Particularly with regards to issues related to your claim that non-contradiction implies neccessarily possibility. I do not displute that claim.My problem with it is that "god" is so ill-defined in your argument to render the possiblility of finding contradiction meaningless. However, as the claim of necessary possibility is not currently under dispute, I see no need to belabor the point until the claimed properties of the entitiy are established.

So you do admit that the thing designated by my definition is necessarily possible, just that you don't think I have connected to 'God' in the more colloquial sense, correct? Just trying to understand before proceeding.

What I was asking for was your "proof" of your assertion that you have proof of actual existence.

As the OP says "Debating the existence of god is really for a different thread and not what [we are] looking for here". I agree, and like him would gladly debate it in another thread. Surely its an argument you have heard before, I just think its too easily dismissed without earnest, deep, consistent and logical consideration despite it withstanding every philosopher in the history of mankind... and I think it proves God with more certainty than anything else we can know.

---

Welcome Dranu.

I agree with what you say about being able to prove something doesn't exist at times. It's the same for the creation account, which in a lot of ways is like your elephant example. A literal Genesis interpretation doesn't fit into the different areas of science that all point to an old universe. [/quote] Hey Fallen, ya pretty much, and fortunately in my tradition much of Genesis has not been interpreted literal (at least in the sense of the modern Protestants; but a small blip on the radar of the history of Christendom).

I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say! I was just thinking about a Deist-type god on the way home today and maybe you've got something worth looking at.

I do not think many will be suprised or interested in the argument (the Ontological, without its many erroneous renditions). Most of the greatest gems in the world go unappretiated. So goes the fate of this one despite it never being disproven and providing (as far as I can tell after many hours of advocati diaboli) certain proof for God's existence. I will gladly argue for it though.

---

The OP's question is asking for something impossible right?

How did you come to this conclusion? How can something infinitely greater than the universe need to exist to create the universe, and yet have no creator itself? God is said to be an infinity, he can explain anything because he is everything. And yet despite him being everything, of him we have found nothing... Saying that we 'know' a god would have to be present to create the universe is just god-of-the-gaps.

I'll take that as a 'no' to my question correct? Could you by chance address my argument (you must either challenge the truth of one of its premises or the validity of the logic; these are the ways to argue logically).

Friend, we can definitely get to these points of yours in the process if you use them to refute a premise etc, but first thing first, logical dialogue.