1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured The ontological argument (Anselm and Descarte both) is sound.

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Link, May 19, 2020.

  1. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    God's existence is so big, nothing can exist with it or on par with it, it's high realm it is alone. This is what we are basically saying by Tahleel (only one God). God's Existence is not just so big that it happens there is no gods with God, it's that he so big, that there cannot be any possibility of a god with God.

    Why is it that God's Existence is downgraded if he has something with it's Exact properties? Well, because Existence absolute amount of it, is such nothing can be beside it.

    When we think of absolute existence, it's as such that if it exists, it would be the type that is Necessary. If It's necessary, just as we can know it is good, we can see it being necessary by just recalling it and seeing greatness is such that it's absolute and covers existence absolutely to the extent it definitely is necessary.

    Thus when we recall Ultimate possible being we see the actual being existing and CANNOT conceive of it not existing or possibly existing or not existing, it is rather seen to exist necessarily. The reason is because ultimate existence is such that it covers all existence including reality as is, and is in fact so big, that reality of it's existence covers all possible existence.

    The existence by which it covers all existence, a life that covers all life, is such that it's impossible to see this being and not see it exists.

    Any possibly conception of a god that doesn't get this attribute of being necessary type existence, is a lesser god then the God that is necessary. Give all attributes like goodness, love, etc, but not being necessary type existence, it would fall short of being absolute being. Therefore, the true God can only be seen to exist and cannot be imagined not to exist, for by sheer recalling it is necessary, it is known to exist.

    Anselm and Descartes both arguments were sound. Not only are they sound, but Tawhid only makes sense if they are sound. That is if they are not sound arguments, then Tawheed doesn't make sense either.

    Tawheed (Oneness of God) was never about counting that there is One God only, but to see the Absolute Eternal Being is One such that it covers all existence and all greatness and all treasures and all possible life and power and glory and beauty.

    This level if we conceive of the idea of that God - we recall instantly it not only exists, but cannot but exist, necessarily, that is no possible world can be free from it and that everything depends on it.

    It is full container by which all things depend upon (Samad) such that existence is so full in it, no existence can exist but dependent on it, no existence can exist with it, and existence of it cannot be conceived to not exist.

    If you an imagine a god that may or may not exist, that's lacking the absolute necessary level of existence which is absolute and hence not only exists, but cannot but exist.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. Nakosis

    Nakosis crystal soldier
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    15,180
    Ratings:
    +6,278
    Religion:
    Atheist Libertarian
    It's one thing to say that "God" is everything/all that exists. It's quite another thing to make claims that this God wants or expects anything from us.
     
  3. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    I was a Deist for five years. I came to believe in God's revelations and Prophets and Messengers, because, I believe in the arguments in the holy books for them make rational sense.

    If God won't guide us and his path is not the one we follow, what path will we follow and who will we rely on?

    Ourselves or others, all unreliable, God and his rope is the reliable means for me.

    That said, only those chosen by God can represent him, and we are in dark period without miracles, and so the truth is not as manifest or clear to claim.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Brickjectivity

    Brickjectivity Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Messages:
    27,865
    Ratings:
    +9,424
    Religion:
    Liberal Christian
    What if God exists, but we aren't important?
     
  5. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker

    We aren't important, he is, therefore we gain importance by attaching ourselves to what is important.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Brickjectivity

    Brickjectivity Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Messages:
    27,865
    Ratings:
    +9,424
    Religion:
    Liberal Christian
    Good answer. What if we are already important without attaching ourselves?
     
  7. Nakosis

    Nakosis crystal soldier
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    15,180
    Ratings:
    +6,278
    Religion:
    Atheist Libertarian
    Lots of prophets, lots of messengers, lots of folks, for whatever reason, to choose to believe. I think one has to go well beyond what was stated in the OP to support the idea of prophets/messengers. Why isn't it just as rational to think that "God" has never communicated with us.
     
  8. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    The thing about love is that is uses circular reasoning properly. It justifies itself by itself, and sees itself through itself, and values itself through itself.

    There is no arguing about it. Love has no justification other then itself and own experience and justification is itself. It's circular reasoning but in it's case, not a fallacy.
     
  9. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    I will make a thread about this. There is many reasons to justify the need of guidance from God.
     
  10. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    Then all the reasons for God to care about us more, ain't it?
     
  11. Nakosis

    Nakosis crystal soldier
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    15,180
    Ratings:
    +6,278
    Religion:
    Atheist Libertarian
    Not too hard to make an argument that humanity needs guidance. Showing evidence for fulfillment of that need is the harder argument to make.
     
  12. ratiocinator

    ratiocinator Lightly Seared on the Reality Grill

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    2,448
    Ratings:
    +1,601
    Religion:
    none
    This is a series of hand-waving assertions - where is the actual argument?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. icehorse

    icehorse Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    9,587
    Ratings:
    +5,183
    Religion:
    spiritual anti-theist : )
    The OP seems to be faith-based arguments dressed up as logical thinking.
     
  14. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    If you see it logically, there is no going back, you will see God exists for the rest of your life. This is what you might be afraid of and so aren't recognizing what I'm saying.
     
  15. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    True, general arguments for Prophets is easier to make than proving a particular Prophet or set of Guides.
     
  16. Mestemia

    Mestemia Advocatus Diaboli
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    45,158
    Ratings:
    +9,306
    I was hoping for something new....
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  17. ratiocinator

    ratiocinator Lightly Seared on the Reality Grill

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    2,448
    Ratings:
    +1,601
    Religion:
    none
    Pretending (to yourself, first and foremost, I suspect) that other people are not "seeing" the "logic" because they are afraid will not turn your assertions into logical arguments.

    You haven't even tried to structure it as logic. What are your premises? What are the distinct steps that you think follow from them? The very first statement in this thread is an assertion of your conclusion.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    If we can prove that God is Necessary, it's proven by default that he exists. This is for sure. The way to make this not just an assertion (asserting to the conclusion) is to say why he must be necessary. The reason is because the Greatest Possible being covers all life (possible life). His life is so huge that there is nothing that can be with it there, because it's absolute. Necessary means it cannot be that it doesn't exist any possible world. The highest type existence, is the absolute type, the type that no existence can exist, but is found in Him. Necessity that is proven, when we recall God, it's known it exists.

    In fact, it terms of perfection, it's part of perfection to hold life at absolute level. So it terms of existence type, it's perfect to be necessary.
    In terms of greatness, it's greater to be necessary then not to be.

    So therefore when we reflect over God, we see that not only do we see he exists, but that cannot but exist. It's impossible that he doesn't exist by virtue of being the necessary being.

    So when we recall God, we can conclude, we aren't actually thinking of a concept that may or may not exist, but recalling and looking at the real thing. In fact, everything other then him can be imagine to possible not exist, while God cannot be imagined, only seen to exist.
     
  19. Link

    Link Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,696
    Ratings:
    +507
    Religion:
    Twelver seeker
    By the way, the predicate thing is either false or a red herring. It doesn't do away with this argument, despite Western Academia efforts to misconstrue the argument and then refute by the predicate non-sense.
     
  20. Left Coast

    Left Coast Black Lives Matter
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2019
    Messages:
    3,098
    Ratings:
    +3,652
    Religion:
    Buddha-Curious
    I replied to this in your last thread, and I didnt get an answer. Replace "God" in your argument with "grilled cheese sandwich." Does a supernatural grilled cheese sandwich therefore necessarily exist?
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
Loading...