The impossibility of proving the existence of God/gods with logic

[mw2xboxplayer]

Attempting to prove the existence of God or deities with logical evidence is a difficult task, one that even the greatest minds have difficulty accomplishing. But is the effort to prove the existence of God/gods with such evidence a fruitless task? Is it even possible to prove a deity's existence with evidence that is logical?

All deities exist in a realm that is unattainable or unreachable by human standards. No one can reach the level of existence where God/deities reside; as they exist in a state that is outside the realm of this knowable and understandable universe. No amount of space travel will allow you to reach the gods, as they do not exist in this universe as a physical/energetic being. Every physical/energetic entity in this universe is governed by unbreakable laws (such as physics), and gods regularly bypass these laws to achieve their ends. Thus, gods cannot exist within a plain of understanding that is governed by logical laws. Therefore, logic is inapplicable to God/deities due to the very nature of these entities, being able to exist outside the realm of the natural laws that govern the universe. A god can bypass any natural law, and in that regard this makes gods/deities illogical in all manners.

Now, it has been established that gods/deities are illogical in every aspect by the very nature of their existence. Additionally, us humans only have logical methods of existence and understanding. Therefore, how can humans even begin to describe how a god/deity would exist or act within this universe if we do not have the capability to understand the illogical method in which they exist or operate. Our universe is comprised of only logical matter/energy that must conform to the laws of physics, etc that govern them. If we take any piece of logical evidence, it will be irrelevant to explaining the existence/workings of a god or deity as logic does not apply to their existence or operation. Only illogical evidence could be used to describe the nature or working of a deity, and no such evidence can exist in our logical universe.

Therefore, how can anything within this logical universe be used to support or explain the existence/actions of an illogical god/deity?

[chriscase]

Without the ability to supply evidence, the existence of God cannot be tested. No amount of logic in the absence of evidence can establish objective existence.

I think of this in terms of physical and logical instruments. Every physical instrument requires a logical instrument that governs its use. A ruler needs the logical instrument of length. A barometer requires the theory that describes atmospheric pressure.

When we consider how we could construct a physical instrument to detect God, we need a logical instrument - a specification of what God would look like, how its presence could be detected. So long as there is any inconsistency in the logical instrument we construct for the theoretical detection of God, no physical instrument can ever be designed.

[basics]

" Therefore, how can anything within this logical universe be used to support or explain the existence/actions of an illogical god/deity? "

chriscase,

To put up all that you have said here would fill a lot of space so my reply will be based on all that you have written not just the above although it covers just about all.

First of all you talk of deities as though all carry the same significance but there is one vital difference here in that there is but one God by whom everything exists whether seen or not, whether in this realm or another, the rest being attributed to man as the second commandment testifies. Therefore our focus should really be where it is meant.

It has been recorded from the mouth of God to Moses and onto parchment how this universe was made and why. There is no ambiguity about that. We were made for His good pleasure. That pleasure is that He should reveal Himself to His creation which in a fallen state needs Him to recover them from what they have been bound by. That those who are not interested feel as they do is inconsequential because His pleasure will be fulfilled.

And when it is the reward to certain men and women is that they should be where He is, that already confirmed in His word and revealed by Himself in Jesus Christ. We are shown this by Jesus' explanation of two persons, one in heaven in the bosom of Abraham and the other in hell wishing he wasn't and furthermore seeking to warn his disbelieving brothers that it was so. No stone unturned.

It is also written that the Jews seek signs whilst the Greek, us Gentiles, seek wisdom. The Jews were given plenty of signs yet when the signifer Himself was amongst them they reverted to the wisdom of the Law to block out what was signed. The Gentile would love signs, the evidence they always plead for, but their own wisdom overrules what any sign could ever do for them. To him the pathological table of dissection is his sign.

But for the few, Jews still reject the very idea of Jesus Christ being God, the Gentile going one better to say that there is no God. Yet around them both, Jews and Gentiles are having Jesus Christ revealed to them in a manner that no earthly wisdom can value if only because it is not of this earth and therefore to them has no value. In their wisdom and by the Law both consider these recipients as little more than cranks.

Like aliens they live amongst you, because they are now alienated from this world. Every single thing that is promised in Scripture to them began the day that God revealed Jesus Christ to them so that for the rest of their existence on this panet they look forward to the day when they go into another place already in its foundations. Like their forebears they have a power in them and by them that overshadows what the Jews and Greeks have with their signs and wisdom.

What I have written above is only valued if it is true otherwise I write nonsense. The wonderful thing is that it is perfectly true as I have witnessed to on many occasions on these threads. I find no shame in relating what God, a real and living God, has done for me personally especially as this body deteriorates that life appears near to ending. If God does not exist why do I have hope? It is because He has revealed Himself to me that I do.

[chriscase]

chriscase,

To put up all that you have said here would fill a lot of space so my reply will be based on all that you have written not just the above although it covers just about all.

I think you meant to address the OP, not me.

What I have written above is only valued if it is true otherwise I write nonsense.

Finally you post something I can agree with completely. The cool thing about logical inference is that its validity is independent of the truth of its premises. If you want to write more stuff that has value regardless of whether your assertions are in dispute, you should try more of that. Preaching is light on logic, and thus only has value to those who already agree with it. Considering this I see little value in it.

[Helm]

You can't prove materialism with logic either so we're at an impasse.

All deities exist in a realm that is unattainable or unreachable by human standards.

By your standards perhaps.

[mw2xboxplayer]

You can't prove materialism with logic either so we're at an impasse.

Based upon our current understanding of the universe, the logical conclusion is that matter is the only substance that can exist within our universe. Matter conforms to the logical laws that govern the universe, and cannot break said laws under any circumstance. God/gods obviously bypass these laws, therefore, they cannot exist as a physical/energetic being within this universe. God/gods must exist on another plain of reality that is not of this logical universe; but the understanding or discovery of this realm through logical methods is impossible. (Based upon its illogical nature.) Ultimately, materialism is the only theory that holds true based upon our current understanding of the universe.

By your standards perhaps.

If you have devised a method by which to reach the gods, I'm all ears.

[Helm]

Based upon our current understanding of the universe, the logical conclusion is that matter is the only substance that can exist within our universe.

The only substance we can physically detect by physical means. How does it make it the only substance to exist though? It seems like a bit of a jump particularly considering that it had to come from somewhere.

If you have devised a method by which to reach the gods, I'm all ears.

Subjective experience and profound mystical awareness of God, the Divine, the Transcendent, the Supreme Reality, the Great Spirit, Brahma, the Infinite, the Tao, the Living Force, you get the general idea. Its not particularly scientific anyway.

[mw2xboxplayer]

The only substance we can physically detect by physical means. How does it make it the only substance to exist though? It seems like a bit of a jump particularly considering that it had to come from somewhere.

Unless you can support the existence of other substances, the only substance known to exist is matter. Matter conforms to the laws that govern the universe, therefore matter is a logical substance. God/gods break the laws of the universe regularly, which brings one to the conclusion that deities must be comprised of illogical substances. Illogical substances have not been known to exist within this universe.

No one truly knows where the originating matter of the universe came from, but there are plenty of logical theories: such as our universe may have originated from another universe. Thus, the theory of materialism still holds true; with no illogical God/deity necessarily for creation.

Subjective experience and profound mystical awareness of God, the Divine, the Transcendent, the Supreme Reality, the Great Spirit, Brahma, the Infinite, the Tao, the Living Force, you get the general idea. Its not particularly scientific anyway.

None of which have ever been proven to be valid.

[Himster]

The only substance we can physically detect by physical means. How does it make it the only substance to exist though? It seems like a bit of a jump particularly considering that it had to come from somewhere.

It's the only substance we can honestly claim to exist.

[Helm]

It's the only substance we can honestly claim to exist.

Only substance we can have complete objective knowledge of. If it is the only substance there certainly won't be a God or any form of spirit world. Perhaps there will be physical beings who seem like gods to us but they're not quite the same thing. The human race as a whole seems to have some kind of awareness or understanding of their being something else though.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

The existence of God cannot be inferred through dialectical, logical, or empirical means. It's something you either learn from revelation, or you don't learn at all.

[Helm]

Well every effect has to have a cause and you can't have an infinite regression of effects without a cause. So at least you can rationalise a prime mover or a first cause that doesn't in itself require a cause. Though at best this just justifies a belief in some kind of deism so you will need more than that.

[chriscase]

Well every effect has to have a cause and you can't have an infinite regression of effects without a cause. So at least you can rationalise a prime mover or a first cause that doesn't in itself require a cause. Though at best this just justifies a belief in some kind of deism so you will need more than that.

Old logic. The premise that every effect must have a cause is based on intuition and induction, neither of which is sufficient to justify it. The possibility of infinite regress is also counter-intuitive, but no less intuitive than a prime mover. And intuition is a poor guide indeed to cosmology.

[Helm]

Old logic. The premise that every effect must have a cause is based on intuition and induction.

You can believe that something can just happen for absolutely no good reason at all but that is counter intuitive. Even if you take science its aim is to find a good reason for why things seem to happen, though it has to work with only what can be objectively observed.

[chriscase]

You can believe that something can just happen for absolutely no good reason at all but that is counter intuitive. Even if you take science its aim is to find a good reason for why things seem to happen, though it has to work with only what can be objectively observed.

Again, intuition based on limited experience. We cannot speculate about the origin of the cosmos using intuition as a guide.

[Helm]

Again, intuition based on limited experience. We cannot speculate about the origin of the cosmos using intuition as a guide.

Thats why you need the revelation of the scripture.

[SigniferOne]

People, what a fail thread.

It was possible to prove the existence of Black Matter solely through logic. In fact we still have no observations for it. It was possible to prove the Heliocentric theory solely through logic, long before the invention of the telescope.

[mw2xboxplayer]

It was possible to prove the existence of Black Matter solely through logic. In fact we still have no observations for it. It was possible to prove the Heliocentric theory solely through logic, long before the invention of the telescope.

Both of the theories you described (Dark matter and Heliocentrism) are rooted in logical premises. Proving the existence of those theories has no relevance to explaining/proving a God/gods as deities are illogical in nature.

The theories above must conform to the boundaries of logic and reason. Matter (even dark matter) must conform to the laws that govern the universe, no form of matter cannot break these laws. Thus, it can be defined through a logical system. Gods have no such limitations, and cannot be defined through logical methods.

Essentially, any logical substance or process can be defined through logic; as both logic and logical substances/processes conform to the same 'system'. Proving an illogical entity with logical processes is not possible, as the 'rules' of logic do not apply. It's like trying to measure time with a ruler, it's not possible.

[SigniferOne]

Both of the theories you described (Dark matter and Heliocentrism) are rooted in logical premises. Proving the existence of those theories has no relevance to explaining/proving a God/gods as deities are illogical in nature.

Lol.

The theories above must conform to the boundaries of logic and reason. Matter (even dark matter) must conform to the laws that govern the universe, such matter cannot break these laws.

Way to go in presupposing the anthropic principle, and presupposing God, in your argument.

Gods have no such limitations, and cannot be defined through logical methods.

God is the ultimate substance, the eternal. God is the first cause, and the principle why the universe is rational. God is Reason, and the principle why the contents of a man's mind are alone able to map to the rationality of the world out there.

Next.

Indirect observation is observation never the less.

I doubt anyone will contest that the idea of God exists and influences people. Whether that idea corresponds to the objective entity it purports to is the question.

Fine, and that's what we're proving, that's what theology is. Our Xbox enthusiast friend has had a amazing insight that it's impossible to prove God starting from Logical means, and I've shown why that's incorrect, and how humanity has always done things that way.

[mw2xboxplayer]

God is the ultimate substance, the eternal. God is the first cause, and the principle why the universe is rational. God is Reason, and the principle why the contents of a man's mind are alone able to map to the rationality of the world out there.

If God is the epitome of logic and reason, why is He illogical in nature? Shouldn't God have to conform to His own rules of creation if he exists as a logical being?

Do you agree that only logical process/substances can be described/explained with logic? For example, is it possible to logically describe an object existing in the same exact space as another object? No, it is logically impossible to describe that scenario, as it would break a fundamental principal that governs the universe. It defies the very nature of logic itself. It is impossible to define an illogical entity with a logical method. Do you suppose that you could logically describe an illogical scenario?

Therefore, how can an illogical God exist in a state that can be described with logic; if it is impossible to define a substance/process that does not conform to logic?