What is the best and/or interesting proof for God’s existence?

What is the best and/or interesting proof for God’s existence?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/9R3BXJVjwKI?t=10m46s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Argument for a prime mover in an infinite universe

youtu.be/9R3BXJVjwKI?t=10m46s

>3 seconds in
>fedora as logo
What did they mean by this?

Why did they have to wait? Why didn’t they just leave?

teleological argument and kalam cosmological argument to supplement it

They're all fucking retarded.

What if thats proof of God's existence

human is god

The fine tuning argument proves that God (aka the demiurge) exists and he's a huge asshole

I think you can only argue with personal feelings and revelations based on faith. All other arguments are faulty and boil down to wrong premises or arbitrary conclusions.

What I never understand about the vast majority of these moronic God proofs (the big three anyway) is why, instead of specifying God in a way that imposes restrictions on him which will only lead to logical problems down the line ("God has to exist necessarily", "God cannot do things that would result in logical paradoxes", "God cannot *not* act benevolently", etc.) they don't just all commit to the "all powerful" bit and just say that God can do literally anything and everything, no exceptions. This would innoculate him/the theist's perspective against most kinds of criticisms.

not literature

That's easy to understand.

Considering that there is absolutely no evidence of any sort of supernatural creator, the most convincing arguments theists come up with tend to be semantics -- they phrase things in a certain way, using their own sets of rules, and then say, "Look at that!"

>The Master and Margarita
>Brothers Karamazov
>experience the Devil himself

Interesting points here. Semantic obfuscations are the main arguments that I'm familiar with, and they're never consistent realistically or logically.

Are you guys just uneducated or do you have your heads that far up your own arseholes it's just shit in and shit out? The idea that all notions of divine creation are logically impossible or inconsistent would get you slapped silly in any decent philosophy department. Based on the belief in a divine creator alone (so that we ignore other specific claims such as 'dinosaurs did not exist') it's actually not possible to show that this belief alone is inconsistent with the other standard premises we take for granted in life.
The idea that God is a ridiculous idea only comes from a very shallow look at the world. You make an enormous number of assumptions about the world when we make even the simplest observations. You're not even capable of proving that anyone exists independently of you, so I don't get why so people are that confident that they think they can categorically deny God as a possibility for the origins of the world. Dismissing all possibility and all arguments out of hand is stupid, plain and simple.

> You make an enormous number of assumptions about the world when we make even the simplest observations

That's fair. Assumptions that we do make would probably contrast against all the ones that we don't. We don't believe in the tooth fairy however, and we're not going to let the possibility of its existence reify itself in our lives to any extent.

The tooth fairy isn't quite a comparable example. The tooth fairy is of no consequence, so dismissing the argument altogether is as fine as banishing thoughts of teacups in the asteroid belt. We also can't separate the tooth fairy from other disprovable traits by her very nature so can show her existence to be contradictory with the nature of the rest of the world.
The argument over God isn't the same. The argument for God is one that has an answer which holds implications for your life as a whole. Your behaviour might change drastically based on whether you believe that you have a divine creator, or whether you believe you have an immortal soul (or can earn a soul, even). It might hold implications for the nature of perception itself. depending, as the act of perception is inherently laced with unrecognised fundamental assumptions which we hold to be the most primitive truths about our realities.
It's not the same as a simple 'well, we can't prove God doesn't exist.' Almost by definition God will not be accessible by logical deductions, to prove existence in either the positive or the negative.

>The argument for God is one that has an answer which holds implications for your life as a whole.

Yes, that's usually the case with theism. The tooth fairy isn't popularly known to fulfil existential roles and answer metaphysical questions like god does.

The foundational logic where both of these are derived are the same however. Let's say I'm under the impression that the tooth fairy does in fact come with a load of metaphysical complexities; not taking care of your teeth will result in an eternal damnation of waiting in a dentists office, children who eat sweets too often go to purgatory, mouthwash is sacred. I've attached all the rules I like to the arbitrary supposition.

>tooth fairy
>weak analogy
I gotta stop here

Going outside

>I think you can only argue with personal feelings and revelations based on faith
Yep, that's an accurate description of atheism

>Are you guys just uneducated or do you have your heads that far up your own arseholes it's just shit in and shit out
Grrrr the angry mature agnostic DEMOLISHES a pack of new atheists. DAE Richard Dorkins is like a total idiot?!?! Don't these plebs know that life is like a TOTAL mystery!

these

God set up a basis for non-belief, for the lulz

The best argument that there is a god controlling everything is that my luck is too shitty for it to just be random chance.

They wouldn't be waiting if they left. Also Estragon's feet hurt or something.