The concept of God can be understood as the mathematical limit of our knowledge.

[questfortruth]

Proof starts. An omniscient being knows that He exists. Proof ends.

COMMENTARY:

Let us consider the possibility that an omniscient being exists.
Then, He must know that He exists.
This means that His existence is part of knowledge.
Therefore, He exists.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Proof starts. An omniscient being knows that He exists. Proof ends.

COMMENTARY:

Let us consider the possibility that an omniscient being exists.
Then, He must know that He exists.
This means that His existence is part of knowledge.
Therefore, He exists.

Sadly for your "proof," it actually doesn't say anything useful at all. Because if that being did not exist, then it would not know that it doesn't exist, which does nothing, which would be completely consistent with being an "omniscient being." While it could know everything that is, it couldn't know what isn't.

And in either case, its existence is in no way part of our knowledge, unless it makes itself known, which in my opinion it has never done.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Let us consider an omniscient being doesn't exist.
Then, there is no omniscient being to know.
This means knowledge exists in the absence of an omniscient being.
Therefore, an omniscient being is not requisite to knowledge.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

Proof starts. An omniscient being knows that He exists. Proof ends.

I've been trying to prove my own existence, without much success.

You may have isolated the problem.

Babel Fish - The Oddest Thing In The Universe - The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy - BBC​

 

[questfortruth]

Let us consider an omniscient being doesn't exist.

do not change the wording of my proof.

 

[McBell]

do not change the wording of my proof.

your "proof" is nothing more than a bold empty claim.

 

[questfortruth]

your "proof" is nothing more than a bold empty claim.

When JC returns, He will force people to accept it as official proof.

 

[McBell]

When JC returns, He will force people to accept it as official proof.

Bold empty threat.
Me no worry.

 

[Twilight Hue]

When JC returns, He will force people to accept it as official proof.

Paper tiger messiah....

 

[Tomef]

Proof starts. An omniscient being knows that He exists. Proof ends.

COMMENTARY:

Let us consider the possibility that an omniscient being exists.
Then, He must know that He exists.
This means that His existence is part of knowledge.
Therefore, He exists.

If he exists then he must exist isn’t much of an argument.

 

[Tomef]

I've been trying to prove my own existence, without much success.

You may have isolated the problem.

Babel Fish - The Oddest Thing In The Universe - The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy - BBC​

You’re putting yourself forward as a contender?

 

[questfortruth]

If he exists then he must exist isn’t much of an argument.

I have logic there. If you get to know all about something, then you get to know that this person, who knows about this something exists.

 

[Tomef]

I have logic there. If you get to know all about something, then you get to know that this person, who knows about this something exists.

The idea doesn’t apply to fictional characters, though. A first person narrator, like Ishmael in Moby Dick, can be used to convey some idea the author wants to get across. Although it’s the character who conveys this information in his own words as it were, it is the author who exists, the character only has a fictional existence.

 

[questfortruth]

If he exists then he must exist

please, do not change the wording of my proof. Your intention is to make it look stupid.

 

[Tomef]

please, do not change the wording of my proof. Your intention is to make it look stupid.

That’s the substance of the argument. It seems like a reworking of if there is a perfect being, its existence would be a necessary part of that perfection, therefore it exists type of ontological argument. It’s an example of thinking getting beyond itself, forgetting that simply having an idea doesn’t make the thing you ideate real. If a being knows about itself, it is because it exists, if it doesn’t exist, it can’t know about itself. However you put your argument, it doesn’t remove the if.

 

[questfortruth]

However you put your argument, it doesn’t remove the if.

Proof starts. An omniscient being knows that He exists. Proof ends.

There is no if.

The if is only in the commentary section, but there is also no if: "Let us consider the possibility that an omniscient being exists." From this possibility comes the fact that the existence of such a being is written into knowledge.

According to this argument, JC will provide the ultimate proof of all scientific conjectures upon His return. How? The argument suggests that one can seek validation of scientific conjectures from JC through prayer.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Proof starts. An omniscient being knows that He exists. Proof ends.

There is no if.

Sure there is. One has not proven any omniscient being.

 

[questfortruth]

Sure there is. One has not proven any omniscient being.

An omniscient being knows that He exists.

I am not seeing here any IF. The IF is only in your imagination. I am seeing here: An, omniscient, being, knows, that, He, exists. There is no home, glass, turkey, if.

 

[SalixIncendium]

An omniscient being knows that He exists.

I am not seeing here any IF. The IF is only in your imagination. I am seeing here: An, omniscient, being, knows, that, He, exists. There is no home, glass, turkey, if.

Still no proof. One has to assume an omniscient being. You have not presented evidence of one. Ergo, no proof.

 

[questfortruth]

Sure there is. One has not proven any omniscient being.

An omniscient being knows that He exists.

I am not seeing here any IF. The IF is only in your imagination. I am seeing here: An, omniscient, being, knows, that, He, exists. There is no home, glass, turkey, if.

I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word. Revelation 3:8