Is There One Sound/valid Syllogistic Argument For The Existence Of God?

[PratchettFan]

Your arguments all uses logical fallacies and therefore are irrelevant.

That is an argument from fallacy. Yey!!! We're all irrelevant. We should form a club.

 

[G.T.]

If there is I haven't seen one. Every pseudo-response in this thread breaks down as you regress backward, but those typing them cannot see it because of their presuppositions and/or their cognitive dissonance.

First, God has to be defined and every individual speaking on "God" might in their mind be justifying a different term.

If "God" is not defined as a cognitive entity, but simply as whatever burst existence into being ("existence" defined as this universe, or if there was one before it/or are multiple universes) - there is evidence for that but most definitely not proof of it. The evidence is that we have not observe a nothing turn to something. Hell, we haven't even observed a nothing at all. So that's evidence, but not proof because not having observed it does not discount its possibility.

If God is defined as some cognitive entity, there is not evidence n'or proof. Any suggestions that the function of logic is proof of a super-mind of a source for said logic is supposition, and not supported. Also, in reference to "absolutes," whether they exist or whether they do not is not proof that said God exists, it's just proof that said absolutes exist or do not exist. I'd say that absolutes do exist, and they can exist independent of said God.

For example, it is an absolute truth that a non-omniscient being knows that it is not omniscient. Omniscience is complete knowledge, something cannot be omniscient and not omniscient in the same way at the same time. There's also cogito ergo sum. This is an irrefutable absolute; however, it does not prove that YOU are not the cognitive God, so long as said cognitive God is NOT omniscient.

Anyway, I love these discussions when people don't bloviate with hole-filled arguments and proceed by talking past people while really saying nothing. My elbows are pointed at you. You know who you are.

You make excellent points. I really can't argue with the essence of it. People are attempting to prove the existence of something they have no information on, thus we don't even know what evidence would be evidence.

With due respect to Descartes, I have never felt comfortable with going that far with the concept of knowledge. For practical purposes, it leaves us nowhere. There is a coffee mug sitting in front of me right now. I am quite comfortable saying I know that it is there. However, from a macro perspective it is so small as to be non-existent. From a micro perspective it is essentially vacuum and thus non-existent. Neither of those perspectives will hold my coffee, which is seriously inconvenient. So I am content with accepting my less than perfect senses in order to meet my daily caffine requirements.

I've also thought the phrase itself, cognito ergo sum - I think therefore I am - doesn't capture the true nature of human thought. I prefer ego ergo sum - I'm fabulous therefore I am.

I understand that it leaves us wanting, but it cannot be refuted.

The mug is not you, so it doesn't apply to the mug. "I think therefore I am" only refers to your thinking, not what you're sensing in terms of your incomplete 5 senses, and their relativity to what is real.

It is simplistic, which is why it leaves you wanting - but if "you weren't," then "you" couldn't be sitting there thinking "am I, or am I not."

This doesn't prove the existence of anyone else, either. Just yourself. But - it proves yourself, to yourself, and to you is an absolute.


edit: 5 senses, wow bruce willis

But the basic thesis of Descartes was that our senses can lie, therefore the only thing we can truly know is that we exist and that only because we are knowing it. The mug may exist or it may not and I have no way of knowing this for certain. This, however, does not get me my caffeine fix. My cup of coffee (Sumatran dark roast with a touch of honey brewed in a French press) is an absolute. It may, in fact, be the closest thing we are going to find as evidence of God.

I said the same things you just, said in my post that you quoted^^

I'm not really sure what you were saying. If we follow Descartes then how do you know anything beyond yourself exists? You can't. You can only know that you exist and you may be hallucinating everything. Saying this does not apply to the mug really means nothing since all you have to connect with the outside world is your brain connected to your senses. If the mug exists only in your mind, then the mug is your mind.

This really is the problem with Descartes. He takes us to a place where we are paralyzed by uncertainty. It does, however, point out the need for compromise. At some point you have to be willing to say "that is enough information to say we know it."

Dude,

I said this:

"I think therefore I am" only refers to your thinking, not what you're sensing in terms of your incomplete 5 senses, and their relativity to what is real.




We are saying the same thing, and you're posting as though we disagree on that.

You need coffee.

 

[G.T.]

Your arguments all uses logical fallacies and therefore are irrelevant.

This is not english, and is not supported.

 

[MaxGrit]

Actually it makes a huge difference what the definitions of words are.

Your definition of omnipotent is self-contradictory.

Therefore all arguments that uses that definition of omnipotent are automatically fallacious.

No, they aren't - because said omnipotence doesn't necessarily exist to create said contradiction.

In order for omnipotence to be an actual paradox OR contradiction, it must first exist in reality.

That it does not - means logic as we know it is still sound, as far as OUR knowledge is concerned.

The whole point is that most people didn't know the correct definition of omnipotent.

 

[G.T.]

Actually it makes a huge difference what the definitions of words are.

Your definition of omnipotent is self-contradictory.

Therefore all arguments that uses that definition of omnipotent are automatically fallacious.

No, they aren't - because said omnipotence doesn't necessarily exist to create said contradiction.

In order for omnipotence to be an actual paradox OR contradiction, it must first exist in reality.

That it does not - means logic as we know it is still sound, as far as OUR knowledge is concerned.

The whole point is that most people didn't know the correct definition of omnipotent.

That doesn't get you over the fallacy I pointed out to you:

that God not being proven to exist means that humans lacking understanding of his "omnipotence" has not been PROVEN either, as you said it has.

Jeebus christmas

 

[G.T.]

Something unproven cannot serve as proof of something else.

I should have just went with that and avoided your pseudo tap-dancing responses because they honestly wasted a lot of time, here. ugh

 

[MaxGrit]

Actually it makes a huge difference what the definitions of words are.

Your definition of omnipotent is self-contradictory.

Therefore all arguments that uses that definition of omnipotent are automatically fallacious.

No, they aren't - because said omnipotence doesn't necessarily exist to create said contradiction.

In order for omnipotence to be an actual paradox OR contradiction, it must first exist in reality.

That it does not - means logic as we know it is still sound, as far as OUR knowledge is concerned.

The whole point is that most people didn't know the correct definition of omnipotent.

That doesn't get you over the fallacy I pointed out to you:

that God not being proven to exist means that humans lacking understanding of his "omnipotence" has not been PROVEN either, as you said it has.

Jeebus christmas

Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – where the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence

LoL. No one is trying to prove anything. It's all in your head.

 

[MaxGrit]

Something unproven cannot serve as proof of something else.

I should have just went with that and avoided your pseudo tap-dancing responses because they honestly wasted a lot of time, here. ugh

LoL. That's how I feel.

 

[G.T.]

Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – where the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence

LoL. No one is trying to prove anything. It's all in your head.

"They prove that Man has an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of this aspect of God's nature." - maxgrit



So again, for the comprehension deficient:

They (irresistible force vs. the immovable object) do not "prove (yes, your words) that man has an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of this aspect of God's nature."

Here is why:

God isn't proven to exist, therefore his nature cannot be used as a proof of anything.
Immovable objects are not proven to exist, therefore cannot be used as a proof of anything.
Irresistible forces are not proven to exist, therefore cannot be used as proof of anything.


Your sentence has been soundly proven illogical. If you disagree, your basis of knowledge is broken and you're irrelevant to these discussions.

 

[MaxGrit]

Here's another resource for those who are still confused.
Omnipotent God

Omnipotent God – What is Omnipotence?
We have an omnipotent God. He has the ability and power to anything (omni=all; potent=powerful). This power is exercised effortlessly. A good example of God’s omnipotence is in the name el shaddai, which means “self-sufficient” or “almighty.” God’s power is unlimited.

A proper definition is given by Thiessen: “God is all-powerful and able to do whatever he wills. Since his will is limited by his nature, God can do everything that is in harmony with his perfections.”1

Ephesians 1:18-23 says, “I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in his holy people, and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.”

“Since He has at His command all the power in the universe, the Lord God omnipotent can do anything as easily as anything else. All His acts are done without effort. He expends no energy that must be replenished. His self-sufficiency makes it unnecessary for Him to look outside of Himself for a renewal of strength. All the power required to do all that He wills to do lies in undiminished fullness in His own infinite being.”2 – Tozer
It is important to note that God cannot do anything that is contradictory or that is contrary to His nature. For example, God cannot lie, even though He has the power to do anything. Hebrews 6:18 says, “God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged.”

“Although such power might seem frightful, remember that God is good. He can do anything according to His infinite ability, but will do only those things that are consistent

 

[PratchettFan]

You make excellent points. I really can't argue with the essence of it. People are attempting to prove the existence of something they have no information on, thus we don't even know what evidence would be evidence.

With due respect to Descartes, I have never felt comfortable with going that far with the concept of knowledge. For practical purposes, it leaves us nowhere. There is a coffee mug sitting in front of me right now. I am quite comfortable saying I know that it is there. However, from a macro perspective it is so small as to be non-existent. From a micro perspective it is essentially vacuum and thus non-existent. Neither of those perspectives will hold my coffee, which is seriously inconvenient. So I am content with accepting my less than perfect senses in order to meet my daily caffine requirements.

I've also thought the phrase itself, cognito ergo sum - I think therefore I am - doesn't capture the true nature of human thought. I prefer ego ergo sum - I'm fabulous therefore I am.

I understand that it leaves us wanting, but it cannot be refuted.

The mug is not you, so it doesn't apply to the mug. "I think therefore I am" only refers to your thinking, not what you're sensing in terms of your incomplete 5 senses, and their relativity to what is real.

It is simplistic, which is why it leaves you wanting - but if "you weren't," then "you" couldn't be sitting there thinking "am I, or am I not."

This doesn't prove the existence of anyone else, either. Just yourself. But - it proves yourself, to yourself, and to you is an absolute.


edit: 5 senses, wow bruce willis

But the basic thesis of Descartes was that our senses can lie, therefore the only thing we can truly know is that we exist and that only because we are knowing it. The mug may exist or it may not and I have no way of knowing this for certain. This, however, does not get me my caffeine fix. My cup of coffee (Sumatran dark roast with a touch of honey brewed in a French press) is an absolute. It may, in fact, be the closest thing we are going to find as evidence of God.

I said the same things you just, said in my post that you quoted^^

I'm not really sure what you were saying. If we follow Descartes then how do you know anything beyond yourself exists? You can't. You can only know that you exist and you may be hallucinating everything. Saying this does not apply to the mug really means nothing since all you have to connect with the outside world is your brain connected to your senses. If the mug exists only in your mind, then the mug is your mind.

This really is the problem with Descartes. He takes us to a place where we are paralyzed by uncertainty. It does, however, point out the need for compromise. At some point you have to be willing to say "that is enough information to say we know it."

Dude,

I said this:

"I think therefore I am" only refers to your thinking, not what you're sensing in terms of your incomplete 5 senses, and their relativity to what is real.




We are saying the same thing, and you're posting as though we disagree on that.

You need coffee.

Cognito ergo sum comes from Descartes and that is not what he was saying. He was talking about what we could actually know. Further, there is no separation between your senses and your thinking. Bioelectrical pulses do travel through your nervous system but your senses actually occur within your brain as an interpretation of those pulses. They cannot be considered as separate from your thoughts.

But yes, I still need coffee.

 

[MaxGrit]

Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – where the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence

LoL. No one is trying to prove anything. It's all in your head.

"They prove that Man has an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of this aspect of God's nature." - maxgrit



So again, for the comprehension deficient:

They (irresistible force vs. the immovable object) do not "prove (yes, your words) that man has an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of this aspect of God's nature."

Here is why:

God isn't proven to exist, therefore his nature cannot be used as a proof of anything.
Immovable objects are not proven to exist, therefore cannot be used as a proof of anything.
Irresistible forces are not proven to exist, therefore cannot be used as proof of anything.


Your sentence has been soundly proven illogical. If you disagree, your basis of knowledge is broken and you're irrelevant to these discussions.

You need to read in context of the whole argument. What is proven is the lack of knowledge of the man that is making that argument. Geez.

 

[G.T.]

Here's another resource for those who are still confused.
Omnipotent God

Omnipotent God – What is Omnipotence?
We have an omnipotent God. He has the ability and power to anything (omni=all; potent=powerful). This power is exercised effortlessly. A good example of God’s omnipotence is in the name el shaddai, which means “self-sufficient” or “almighty.” God’s power is unlimited.

A proper definition is given by Thiessen: “God is all-powerful and able to do whatever he wills. Since his will is limited by his nature, God can do everything that is in harmony with his perfections.”1

Ephesians 1:18-23 says, “I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in his holy people, and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.”

“Since He has at His command all the power in the universe, the Lord God omnipotent can do anything as easily as anything else. All His acts are done without effort. He expends no energy that must be replenished. His self-sufficiency makes it unnecessary for Him to look outside of Himself for a renewal of strength. All the power required to do all that He wills to do lies in undiminished fullness in His own infinite being.”2 – Tozer
It is important to note that God cannot do anything that is contradictory or that is contrary to His nature. For example, God cannot lie, even though He has the power to do anything. Hebrews 6:18 says, “God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged.”

“Although such power might seem frightful, remember that God is good. He can do anything according to His infinite ability, but will do only those things that are consistent

This is a description of an unproven entity. It serves no purpose, except to say that Biblical omnipotence and the English word omnipotence are defined different which defeats any paradox that a reader might think is created within the Bible and its description of God's characteristics.

It doesn't serve a purpose in the discussion of a sound, valid syllogistic argument for the existence of God.

At all.

Not even a tiny teeny weency lil' bit.

 

[G.T.]

I understand that it leaves us wanting, but it cannot be refuted.

The mug is not you, so it doesn't apply to the mug. "I think therefore I am" only refers to your thinking, not what you're sensing in terms of your incomplete 5 senses, and their relativity to what is real.

It is simplistic, which is why it leaves you wanting - but if "you weren't," then "you" couldn't be sitting there thinking "am I, or am I not."

This doesn't prove the existence of anyone else, either. Just yourself. But - it proves yourself, to yourself, and to you is an absolute.


edit: 5 senses, wow bruce willis

But the basic thesis of Descartes was that our senses can lie, therefore the only thing we can truly know is that we exist and that only because we are knowing it. The mug may exist or it may not and I have no way of knowing this for certain. This, however, does not get me my caffeine fix. My cup of coffee (Sumatran dark roast with a touch of honey brewed in a French press) is an absolute. It may, in fact, be the closest thing we are going to find as evidence of God.

I said the same things you just, said in my post that you quoted^^

I'm not really sure what you were saying. If we follow Descartes then how do you know anything beyond yourself exists? You can't. You can only know that you exist and you may be hallucinating everything. Saying this does not apply to the mug really means nothing since all you have to connect with the outside world is your brain connected to your senses. If the mug exists only in your mind, then the mug is your mind.

This really is the problem with Descartes. He takes us to a place where we are paralyzed by uncertainty. It does, however, point out the need for compromise. At some point you have to be willing to say "that is enough information to say we know it."

Dude,

I said this:

"I think therefore I am" only refers to your thinking, not what you're sensing in terms of your incomplete 5 senses, and their relativity to what is real.




We are saying the same thing, and you're posting as though we disagree on that.

You need coffee.

Cognito ergo sum comes from Descartes and that is not what he was saying. He was talking about what we could actually know. Further, there is no separation between your senses and your thinking. Bioelectrical pulses do travel through your nervous system but your senses actually occur within your brain as an interpretation of those pulses. They cannot be considered as separate from your thoughts.

But yes, I still need coffee.

Well, that's irrelevant unless someone is saying "i think therefore I am, therefore also all of my thinking is valid."

Because you can misinterpret your sense and your senses can also be wrong.

Still, "I think therefore I am" is an absolute.

 

[G.T.]

Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – where the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence

LoL. No one is trying to prove anything. It's all in your head.

"They prove that Man has an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of this aspect of God's nature." - maxgrit



So again, for the comprehension deficient:

They (irresistible force vs. the immovable object) do not "prove (yes, your words) that man has an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of this aspect of God's nature."

Here is why:

God isn't proven to exist, therefore his nature cannot be used as a proof of anything.
Immovable objects are not proven to exist, therefore cannot be used as a proof of anything.
Irresistible forces are not proven to exist, therefore cannot be used as proof of anything.


Your sentence has been soundly proven illogical. If you disagree, your basis of knowledge is broken and you're irrelevant to these discussions.

You need to read in context of the whole argument. What is proven is the lack of knowledge of the man that is making that argument. Geez.

No, it is not PROVEN.

The KNOWLEDGE of the nature of God is NOT proven to exist, so it cannot be PROVEN then that a man doesn't fully understand it (god's nature). That's a fallacy.



To know that, answer this:

Can you lack knowledge of the nature of something that doesn't even exist?

 

[MaxGrit]

Here's another resource for those who are still confused.
Omnipotent God

Omnipotent God – What is Omnipotence?
We have an omnipotent God. He has the ability and power to anything (omni=all; potent=powerful). This power is exercised effortlessly. A good example of God’s omnipotence is in the name el shaddai, which means “self-sufficient” or “almighty.” God’s power is unlimited.

A proper definition is given by Thiessen: “God is all-powerful and able to do whatever he wills. Since his will is limited by his nature, God can do everything that is in harmony with his perfections.”1

Ephesians 1:18-23 says, “I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in his holy people, and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.”

“Since He has at His command all the power in the universe, the Lord God omnipotent can do anything as easily as anything else. All His acts are done without effort. He expends no energy that must be replenished. His self-sufficiency makes it unnecessary for Him to look outside of Himself for a renewal of strength. All the power required to do all that He wills to do lies in undiminished fullness in His own infinite being.”2 – Tozer
It is important to note that God cannot do anything that is contradictory or that is contrary to His nature. For example, God cannot lie, even though He has the power to do anything. Hebrews 6:18 says, “God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged.”

“Although such power might seem frightful, remember that God is good. He can do anything according to His infinite ability, but will do only those things that are consistent

This is a description of an unproven entity. It serves no purpose, except to say that Biblical omnipotence and the English word omnipotence are defined different which defeats any paradox that a reader might think is created within the Bible and its description of God's characteristics.

It doesn't serve a purpose in the discussion of a sound, valid syllogistic argument for the existence of God.

At all.

Not even a tiny teeny weency lil' bit.

Dude your logic is fallacious.

Argument from ignorance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Argument from ignorance (Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance stands for "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to prove the proposition satisfactorily to be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four, (1) true, (2) false, (3) unknown between true or false, and (4) being unknowable (among the first three).[1] In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used to shift the burden of proof.

The fallaciousness of arguments from ignorance does not mean that one can never possess good reasons for thinking that something does not exist, an idea captured by philosopher Bertrand Russell's teapot, a hypothetical china teapot revolving about the sun between Earth and Mars; however this would fall more duly under the arena of pragmatism, wherein a position must be demonstrated or proven in order to be upheld, and therefore the burden of proof is on the argument's proponent. See also Occam's razor ("prefer the explanation with the fewest assumptions").

Overview

Basic argument

Arguments that appeal to ignorance rely merely on the fact that the veracity of the proposition is not disproven to arrive at a definite conclusion. These arguments fail to appreciate that the limits of one's understanding or certainty do not change what is true. They do not inform upon reality. That is, whatever the reality is, it does not "wait" upon human logic or analysis to be formulated. Reality exists at all times, and it exists independently of what is in the mind of anyone. And the true thrust of science and rational analysis is to separate preconceived notion(s) of what reality is, and to be open at all times to the observation of nature as it behaves, so as truly to discover reality. This fallacy can be very convincing and is considered by some[2] to be a special case of a false dilemma or false dichotomy in that they both fail to consider alternatives. A false dilemma may take the form:

If a proposition has not been disproven, then it cannot be considered false and must therefore be considered true.
If a proposition has not been proven, then it cannot be considered true and must therefore be considered false.
Such arguments attempt to exploit the facts that (a) true things can never be disproven and (b) false things can never be proven. In other words, appeals to ignorance claim that the converse of these facts are also true. Therein lies the fallacy.

To reiterate, these arguments ignore the fact, and difficulty, that some true things may never be proven, and some false things may never be disproved with absolute certainty. The phrase "the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence" can be used as a shorthand rebuttal to the second form of the ignorance fallacy (i.e. P has never been absolutely proven and is therefore certainly false). Most often it is directed at any conclusion derived from null results in an experiment or from the non-detection of something. In other words, where one researcher may say their experiment suggests evidence of absence, another researcher might argue that the experiment failed to detect a phenomenon for other reasons.

Matters of confusion

Much confusion about arguments from ignorance can be caused when one side of a debate forgets that we often possess evidence of absence in practice.

The ignorance fallacy is sometimes confused (or combined) with logically valid contrapositive arguments. Contrapositive arguments rightly utilize the transposition rule of inference in classical logic to conclude something like: To the extent that C implies E then Not-E must also imply Not-C. In other words, if a cause always leads to an effect, then absence of the expected effect is evidence of absence of the cause. For example, if the causal proposition that If it's raining outside then the streets will be wet is assumed, then it can be assumed that if the streets are not wet then it is not raining outside. The inference that it cannot be raining outside because the streets are not getting wet is exactly as true, or perhaps exactly as untrue, as the original proposition. The statements are logically equivalent.

Carl Sagan explains in his book The Demon-Haunted World:

Appeal to ignorance: the claim that whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa. (e.g., There is no compelling evidence that UFOs are not visiting the Earth; therefore, UFOs exist, and there is intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe. Or: There may be seventy kazillion other worlds, but not one is known to have the moral advancement of the Earth, so we're still central to the Universe.) This impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the phrase: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.[3]

For instance, absence of evidence that it rained (i.e. water is the evidence) may be considered as positive evidence that it did not rain. Again, in science, such inferences are always made to some limited (sometimes extremely high) degree of probability and in this case absence of evidence is evidence of absence when the positive evidence should have been there but is not.

Arguments from ignorance can easily find their way into debates over the existence of God. It is a fallacy to draw conclusions based precisely on ignorance, since this does not satisfactorily address issues of philosophic burden of proof. But null results are not ignorance and can be used as evidence to achieve a given burden of proof.

Related terms

Contraposition and transposition

Contraposition is a logically valid rule of inference that allows the creation of a new proposition from the negation and reordering of an existing one. The method applies to any proposition of the type If A then B and says that negating all the variables and switching them back to front leads to a new proposition i.e. If Not-B then Not-A that is just as true as the original one and that the first implies the second and the second implies the first.

Transposition is exactly the same thing described in a different language.

Absence of evidence

Absence of evidence is the absence, or lack of, any kind of evidence that may show, indicate, suggest, or be used to infer or deduce a fact.
Evidence of absence

Evidence of absence is evidence of any kind that can be used to infer or deduce the non-existence or non-presence of something. For instance, if a doctor does not find any malignant cells in a patient this null result (finding nothing) is evidence of absence of cancer, even though the doctor has not actually detected anything per se. Such inductive reasoning is important to empiricism and science, but has well established limitations. The challenge thus becomes to try to identify when a researcher has received a null result (found nothing) because the thing does not exist (evidence of absence - objectively negative result), and when one simply lacks proper means of detection (absence of evidence - false negative).

Negative evidence

Negative evidence is sometimes used as an alternative to absence of evidence and is often meant to be synonymous with it. On the other hand, the term may also refer to evidence with a negative value, or null result equivalent to evidence of absence. It may even refer to positive evidence about something of an unpleasant nature.

Null result

Null result is a term often used in the field of science to indicate evidence of absence. A search for water on the ground may yield a null result (the ground is dry); therefore, it probably did not rain.

Related arguments

Argument from incredulity/Lack of imagination

Arguments from incredulity take the form:

P is too incredible (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be true); therefore P must be false.
I cannot imagine how P could possibly be false; therefore P must be true.
These arguments are similar to arguments from ignorance in that they too ignore and do not properly eliminate the possibility that something can be both incredible and still be true, or appear to be obvious and yet still be false.

Argument from self-knowing (auto-epistemic)

Arguments from self-knowing take the form:

If P were true then I would know it; in fact I do not know it; therefore P cannot be true.
If P were false then I would know it; in fact I do not know it; therefore P cannot be false.
In practice these arguments are often fallacious and rely on the veracity of the supporting premise. For example the argument that If I had just sat on a wild porcupine then I would know it; in fact I do not know it; therefore I did not just sit on a wild porcupine is probably not a fallacy and depends entirely on the veracity of the leading proposition that supports it. (See Contraposition and Transposition in the Related terms section in this article.)

Distinguishing absence of evidence from evidence of absence

Absence of evidence is a condition in which no valid conclusion can be inferred from the mere absence of detection, normally due to doubt in the detection method. Evidence of absence is the successful variation: a conclusion that relies on specific knowledge in conjunction with negative detection to deduce the absence of something. An example of evidence of absence is checking your pockets for spare change and finding nothing, but being confident that the search would have found it if it was there.

Formal argument

By determining that a given experiment or method of detection is sensitive and reliable enough to detect the presence of X (when X is present) one can confidently exclude the possibility that X may be both undetected and present. This allows one to deduce that X cannot be present if a null result is received.

Thus there are only two possibilities, given a null result:

Nothing detected, and X is not present.
Nothing detected, but X is present (option eliminated by careful research design).
To the extent that option 2 can be eliminated, one can deduce that if X is not detected then X is not present and therefore the null result is evidence of absence.

Examples

Absence of evidence

(These examples contain or represent missing information.)

Statements that begin with "I can't prove it but ..." are often referring to some kind absence of evidence.
"There is no evidence of foul play here" is a direct reference to the absence of evidence.
"There is no evidence of aliens, and therefore, aliens do not exist" appeals to an absence of evidence
Negative results

When the doctor says that the test results were negative, it is usually good news.
Under "Termites" the inspector checked the box that read "no".
The results of Michelson–Morley's experiment reported no shift at all in the interference pattern.
Evidence of absence

(These examples contain definite evidence that can be used to show, indicate, suggest, infer or deduce the non-existence or non-presence of something.)

A biopsy shows the absence of malignant cells.
The null result found by Michelson–Morley's famous experiment represents "strong evidence" that the luminiferous aether was not present.
One very carefully inspects the back seat of one's car and finds no tigers.
The train schedule does not say that the train stops here at 3:00pm on a Sunday.
Arguments from ignorance

(Draws a conclusion based on lack of knowledge or evidence without accounting for all possibilities)

"I take the view that this lack (of enemy subversive activity in the west coast) is the most ominous sign in our whole situation. It convinces me more than perhaps any other factor that the sabotage we are to get, the Fifth Column activities are to get, are timed just like Pearl Harbor ... I believe we are just being lulled into a false sense of security." – Earl Warren, then California's Attorney General (before a congressional hearing in San Francisco on 21 February 1942)
In the field of science

One looks in the back seat of one's car and finds no adult-sized kangaroos and then uses this negative/null adult-sized kangaroo detection results in conjunction with the previously determined fact (or just plain old proposition) that adult-sized kangaroos, if present, cannot evade such detection, to deduce a new fact that there are indeed no adult-sized kangaroos present in the back seat of said car.
Principles in law

The presumption of innocence, if present, effectively removes the possibility that the accused may be both guilty and unproven, from consideration in judgment, and as such the accused is considered as innocent unless proven guilty. (See decision table below)
Innocent and guilt is unproven. Judged as innocent.
Innocent and guilt is proven. Judged as guilty. (Jury is biased, misled, makes error; law is incorrect; false evidence fabricated etc.)
Guilty and guilt is unproven. Judged as innocent. (Presumption of innocence)
Guilty and guilt is proven. Judged as guilty. (Innocent unless/until proven guilty is a summary of this and easier to remember.)
Origin of the term

From Fallacies: classical and contemporary readings by Hans V. Hansen, Robert C. Pinto:

"It is generally accepted that the philosopher John Locke introduced the term in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding:"
"Another way that Men ordinarily use to drive others, and force them to submit their Judgments. And receive the Opinion in debate, is to require the Adversary to admit what they alledge as a Proof, or assign a better. And this I call Argumentum ad Ignorantum" — John Locke[4]

 

[G.T.]

It's only an argument from ignorance if God is proven.

Gluck with that.

 

[MaxGrit]

How is God Omnipotent Omnipresent and Omniscient

How is God Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient?

The Bible teaches:

24 God is Spirit (John 4:24).

Because God is spirit, this helps explain why God is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. Notice a couple of comments from two books:

Both God and the Word (who became Christ) have existed eternally and before all else. From them emanates the Spirit of God, by which God is omnipresent and omniscient. God the Father is the divine Father of the God family, into which truly converted Christians shall be born. (Mystery of the Ages. Dodd, Mead & Company, New York. 1985 ,p. 57)

"In the Beginning-GOD" God had to be there first because He made everything that ever was. (Genesis 1: 1.) Probably one of the first things you wonder about God is where He came from. He didn't come from anywhere. He has always existed.' It is hard for us to understand. We must remember that "the secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever" (Deuteronomy 29:29). God always was anJ He always will be. (Revelation 1:8.)(Wolverton B. RadioCG, 1961, pp. 2-3)

God has always existed. Notice also what God's name is:

13 Then Moses said to God, "Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" 14 And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And He said, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'" (Exodus 3:13-15)

Before there was a universe, there was God.

In 2007, Wallace Smith had an article published titled God and the "Three 'O's. It begins with:

Is God omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient? In answering such questions, we should always begin with another question: “What does the Bible teach on these matters?” If our beliefs are not rooted in God’s inspired word, they are not beliefs worth having!...

Is God Omnipotent?

This is, perhaps, the easiest of the three to answer: Yes, God is omnipotent! There is even a verse that, in the King James Version and New King James Version, uses this very word: “Alleluia! For the Lord God Omnipotent reigns!” (Revelation 19:6).

The Greek word translated as “Omnipotent” here is pantokrator, meaning “All-ruling” or (as it is more frequently translated) “Almighty.” When we say God is “Almighty,” we are stating our belief in His authority and rulership over all creation, and the Bible is firm in declaring this fact. Even though Satan is now the “god of this age” (2 Corinthians 4:4), it belongs to him only because Almighty God has granted it to Him: “And the devil said to Him, ‘All this authority [over all the kingdoms of this world] I will give You, and their glory; for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish’” (Luke 4:6).

It is God who ultimately reigns in the universe, and all legitimate authority must derive from Him. If we let Scripture tell us of God’s authority, we must agree that He has all authority to do all His pleasure (Isaiah 46:10–11), and to see to the fulfillment of His plans without fail. If we accept the Scriptural definition of “almighty”—and we must accept no other!—we can rightly call God omnipotent. Indeed, Christ says clearly that “with God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26).

However, if we were to insist that omnipotent meant God could do anything and everything at all, we would need to reject that description, because His word says He cannot! For example, God “cannot lie” (Titus 1:2), and He “cannot deny Himself” (2 Timothy 2:13). The Bible clearly shows that God cannot act contrary to His nature. But do these “cannots” mean He is not omnipotent—not almighty? Not if we let Scripture define its own terms!

There is no limit to the power of God. A search I did in the NKJV revealed that God was referred to as "Almighty" 48 times in the Hebrew scriptures and 9 times in the Greek scriptures, a total of 57 mentions in the Holy Bible. This is a point that God wants humankind to clearly understand.

The article continued with:

Is God Omnipresent?

Correctly understood, the question of God’s omnipotence has historically caused little controversy. The term omnipresent, however, has caused more trouble. Basically, being omnipresent means being present everywhere at the same time. Can this term be applied to God? What does Scripture tell us?

Ask yourself: is there any physical location in this universe where we can hide from the presence of God? The answer, according to Scripture, is a resounding “No!” In fact, King David posed this question directly, asking: “Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend into heaven, You are there; if I make my bed in hell [the grave], behold, You are there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there Your hand shall lead me, and Your right hand shall hold me” (Psalm 139:7–10).

David answers the question beautifully: it is futile to search for a place to hide from the presence of God (and it is unwise to try—just ask Jonah!). In this sense, God’s infallible word shows that He is omnipresent—within His vast creation, there is no place where you can hide from His presence.

Still, we must be careful with our terms! Many have tried to twist God’s omnipresence to portray Him as some kind of shapeless “blob”—even though the Bible clearly shows that God has a body and a shape—and it is a shape like ours! Consider Genesis 1:26, which tells us that man is made in God’s image and likeness—words that do convey a sense of shape. We do not use human philosophies to avoid the clear statements of Scripture! Consider, as well, the passage in which God says unambiguously that He has a face, a hand and a back (Exodus 33:18–23)! The only way to understand this passage from Exodus without making a mockery of God’s word is to agree that God has a shape and a body!

So, how is God “everywhere”? We already read the answer, in David’s words: “Where can I go from your Spirit?” (Psalm 139:7). It is by their Spirit that the Father and the glorified Christ have complete access to their creation! Through His Spirit, God’s reach extends to every nook and cranny of the universe, and there is—as David wrote—no place to flee from His presence. Yet He still retains a shape—a body—ruling in glory from His throne in heaven. It is from there that “His eyes behold” the sons of men (Psalm 11:4).

We must also note that although God is omnipresent through His Spirit, we can become separated from Him. In fact, we are warned, “your iniquities have separated you from your God; and your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He will not hear” (Isaiah 59:2). Jesus Christ experienced this horrible separation during His crucifixion, when on our behalf He took upon Himself the full penalty of our sins (cf. Mark 15:34; Isaiah 53:4–5).

The world’s scholars and theologians often have a wrong idea about God’s omnipresence. But if we let God’s flawless word teach us what God’s omnipresence truly means, our footing is made sure.

God is everywhere, in the known, and unknown universe. And the Spirit of God is infinite.

The article continued with:

Is God Omniscient?

Having considered God’s omnipotence and His omnipresence, we can address the most troublesome of the “Three ‘O’s”— His omniscience. Is God omniscient?

Philosophers and theologians have debated this question over the millennia. Were you to read what the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says about God’s omniscience, you would find more philosophical gobbledygook than you may have seen in your entire life. So, before we determine whether or not God is omniscient, we need to recognize that the world has some weird and conflicting ideas about what this word means. Why is there so much confusion?

The Random House Unabridged Dictionary (2006) offers this definition of omniscient: “having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things.” That is quite a mouthful; what does it mean to have “complete or unlimited knowledge”? Scholars disagree about what it means, but if we let the lamp of God’s word light our path and guide our steps (Psalm 119:105), we can know the truth of the matter.

The Bible tells us that God does perceive all things, which means that no fact can be hidden from His knowledge. As King David recognized: “Indeed, the darkness shall not hide from You, but the night shines as the day; the darkness and the light are both alike to You” (Psalm 139:12). God sees all things, and nothing can be hidden from His knowledge—not even the secret intentions of the heart (Psalm 44:21). In fact, He understands our own intentions better than we do (cf. Jeremiah 17:9-10; Hebrews 4:12)! As Paul explains, “there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account” (Hebrews 4:13).

Human beings perceive through the senses, but there are limits to what the senses let us perceive and understand. But God’s senses are not limited like ours! His Spirit searches all things (1 Corinthians 2:10), and nothing is beyond God’s ability to perceive it. In this sense, He is omniscient. Nothing can escape His gaze and His knowledge. If it can be known, He knows it!

But if we are to use the word omniscient to describe our Father and His glorified Son, it cannot mean that God knows our every choice before we make it in every circumstance, because Scripture tells us otherwise! For example, the Bible shows that when God gave Abraham the supreme test of sacrificing his son Isaac, He did not know until that moment whether Abraham would choose to obey. Upon seeing his choice, He told Abraham: “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me” (Genesis 22:12). This was one of the most crucial points in the history of faith and in the plan of God! It was a challenge so intense, and involving such faith, that God did not know what choice Abraham would make.

Most of the choices we make each day may be rather predictable. Parents with young children can see this for themselves. If a parent can often predict a young child’s choices, how much more can the One who sees all—even the intent of our heart, which we sometimes do not know ourselves—predict our choices? Yet the Bible reveals that God does arrange circumstances to challenge our character— to help us to grow—where the outcome is not so predictable. When we choose, we participate with God in the creation of our character. We have a role to play in God’s creation of His character within us, as He prepares us to become future members of His Family! We should not allow vain philosophy to rob us of this truth.

It is not that God cannot determine the future. He can, and He does! We read: “Remember the former things of old, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure’” (Isaiah 46:9–10).

Yet this passage shows that declaring the end from the beginning is not just a function of “seeing” what is “destined” to happen. Continuing in Isaiah, we read that God acts and intervenes in history to accomplish His ends, “calling a bird of prey from the east, the man who executes My counsel, from a far country. Indeed I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it; I will also do it” (v. 11).

We can say with confidence that God is omniscient. But we must allow the Bible to define what omniscient means. Let the world’s theologians and philosophers wander from the path of Scripture in their pointless arguments if they choose—we need not follow them!

The Godhead Inhabits Eternity

The Bible reveals that God is eternal. Notice what God is called:

27 The eternal God (Deuteronomy 33:27).

God also does not change and will be around always:

27 But You are the same, And Your years will have no end. (Psalm 102:27)

8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. (Hebrews 13:8)

Notice the further the following:

13 Then Moses said to God, "Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" 14 And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM" (Exodus 3:13-14).

Thus, even the name that God identified Himself as "I am who I am" signifies eternity.

The Bible reveals that the eternal power of the Godhead should be obvious:

20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse (Romans 1:20).

This does not mean that humans fully understand the eternity of the Godhead, but that there should be enough evidence of His existence that logical people will realize that His eternal attributes are partially understood through what God has made (an article of related interest may be Is Evolution Probable or Impossible or Is God's Existence Logical).

In Isaiah 57:15 it states that God "inhabits eternity." Now eternity is a difficult concept for humans to fully grasp. While most of us seem to have no problem envisioning that we could live forever, the idea of something not having a physical beginning is totally foreign to our lives' experiences.

Notice that God does understand this:

11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end (Ecclesiastes 3:11).

26 Behold, God is great, and we do not know Him; Nor can the number of His years be discovered (Job 36:26).

5 He does great things which we cannot comprehend. (Job 37:5)

8 And to God I would commit my cause—8 Who does great things, and unsearchable, Marvelous things without number (Job 5:8-9).

So we see that God put eternity in human hearts and God is infinite, but that we cannot fully understand even the work that God does from the beginning to the end. It is beyond our ability to grasp at this time. Yet the Bible reveals:

18 Known to God from eternity are all His works (Acts 15:18).

Thus it is clear that God knows all His works from eternity, but that there are some things that humans simply cannot fully understand.

It also seems to be able to be beyond our ability to grasp the entire universe (cf. Jeremiah 31:32). Like God, the dimensions of the universe have no beginning and have no end. And if one concludes that empty space is the end, where does the empty space end?

Of course, it does not.

Thus, just like no one can go to one end or the other of the universe, no one can get to the beginning or the end of the Godhead. So even though the idea of an endless universe can be within our hearts and minds, it is a concept, like the eternity of God, that is difficult for humans to fully understand.

God is Love

Even though God is immortal, how was it possible for God to inhabit eternity? The answer also seems to be found in the Bible.

First read the following:

23 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4, KJV). For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 6:23).

15 For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin (Hebrews 4:15).

Because the Godhead does not ever sin, the Godhead never has to die and is thus capable of living eternally (Jesus only died because He allowed Himself to do so, see Matthew 26:53). Only a sinless being could exist without a beginning. Do you know that Jesus taught the following?

17 But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments (Matthew 19:17).

17 Now as He was going out on the road, one came running, knelt before Him, and asked Him, 'Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?' So Jesus said to him...19 "You know the commandments" (Mark 10:17,19)

And in Mark's account he then He listed half of the ten commandments (also in Luke 18:19-20). (An article of related interest may be What Did Jesus Teach About the Ten Commandments?, Protestants may also wish to read What Did Paul Actually Teach About the Ten Commandments? and Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God differ from most Protestants.)What does the Bible say is the love of God requires of us?

3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome (1 John 5:3).

(An article of related possible interest may be Was the Commandment to Love the Only Command?)

Who is God? Notice that God is love:

8 God is love (1 John 4:8).

Also notice that there is no fear of judgment in love:

16 And we have known and believed the love that God has for us. God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him. 17 Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as He is, so are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment (1 John 4:16-18).

The reason that the Godhead was able to exist from eternity is because that the Godhead is love--anything other than love would eventually destruct. There was no fear in love. No fear of destruction nor any adverse judgment. Also:

10 Love does no harm to a neighbor (Romans 13:10).

Notice what what was inspired to write about aspects of love:

4 Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; 6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. 8 Love never fails. NKJV (1 Corinthians 13:4-8a).

Because God is love, the Godhead was able to exist from eternity. Because God is love, God has a plan to share His love and offer salvation to all.

Notice:

8...God is love. 9 In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. 10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins (1 John 4:8c-10).

16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved (John 3:16-17).

We humans do not possess perfect love, hence there are still some things we do not fully grasp, but because of the love of God we will have the ability to do so. Because God is love, God has been able to inhabit eternity.

The going back to the God and the "Three 'O's article, it concluded with:

The Final Word

So, what does God’s word teach us? We learn from Scripture that God is omnipotent—or “almighty”—such that no part of creation can escape His influence or authority. We see that God—through His Spirit—is omnipresent, such that no part of creation can escape His presence. And we understand that God—perceiving all things—is omniscient, such that no part of creation can escape His knowledge...

But is there any practical use for this knowledge? Yes, absolutely! We should never forget that God has called us to become His full sons and daughters, to share His level of existence with us for all eternity. Just as these characteristics— amazing power, access to all of the universe and perception of all things—apply to Christ and the Father now, they one day will apply to us!

As John wrote in his epistle, “everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as He is pure” (1 John 3:3). The more clearly we can see our awesome calling, the better we can put this present life into perspective. So, for those who wish to purify themselves, understanding the nature of the God Family has more practical application than you might at first assume!

As we seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, let us be motivated by our high calling and our ultimate destiny! We must avoid the snares and pretensions of this world’s philosophers, and instead let God teach us truthfully of His glory, that we may one day share it with Him.

God is all powerful, everywhere, and all knowing. God is Spirit, and because of that, is capable of being omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient.

While some of this is not possible for humans to understand, we need to realize that God, who has always existed, has unlimited understanding:

5 Great is our Lord, and mighty in power; His understanding is infinite. (Psalm 147:5)

Since the Bible teaches that Christians can enter the God family, the time will come when our own understanding about all matters is greatly increased as well.

 

[G.T.]

How is God Omnipotent Omnipresent and Omniscient

How is God Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient?

The Bible teaches:

24 God is Spirit (John 4:24).

Because God is spirit, this helps explain why God is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. Notice a couple of comments from two books:

Both God and the Word (who became Christ) have existed eternally and before all else. From them emanates the Spirit of God, by which God is omnipresent and omniscient. God the Father is the divine Father of the God family, into which truly converted Christians shall be born. (Mystery of the Ages. Dodd, Mead & Company, New York. 1985 ,p. 57)

"In the Beginning-GOD" God had to be there first because He made everything that ever was. (Genesis 1: 1.) Probably one of the first things you wonder about God is where He came from. He didn't come from anywhere. He has always existed.' It is hard for us to understand. We must remember that "the secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever" (Deuteronomy 29:29). God always was anJ He always will be. (Revelation 1:8.)(Wolverton B. RadioCG, 1961, pp. 2-3)

God has always existed. Notice also what God's name is:

13 Then Moses said to God, "Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" 14 And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And He said, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'" (Exodus 3:13-15)

Before there was a universe, there was God.

In 2007, Wallace Smith had an article published titled God and the "Three 'O's. It begins with:

Is God omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient? In answering such questions, we should always begin with another question: “What does the Bible teach on these matters?” If our beliefs are not rooted in God’s inspired word, they are not beliefs worth having!...

Is God Omnipotent?

This is, perhaps, the easiest of the three to answer: Yes, God is omnipotent! There is even a verse that, in the King James Version and New King James Version, uses this very word: “Alleluia! For the Lord God Omnipotent reigns!” (Revelation 19:6).

The Greek word translated as “Omnipotent” here is pantokrator, meaning “All-ruling” or (as it is more frequently translated) “Almighty.” When we say God is “Almighty,” we are stating our belief in His authority and rulership over all creation, and the Bible is firm in declaring this fact. Even though Satan is now the “god of this age” (2 Corinthians 4:4), it belongs to him only because Almighty God has granted it to Him: “And the devil said to Him, ‘All this authority [over all the kingdoms of this world] I will give You, and their glory; for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish’” (Luke 4:6).

It is God who ultimately reigns in the universe, and all legitimate authority must derive from Him. If we let Scripture tell us of God’s authority, we must agree that He has all authority to do all His pleasure (Isaiah 46:10–11), and to see to the fulfillment of His plans without fail. If we accept the Scriptural definition of “almighty”—and we must accept no other!—we can rightly call God omnipotent. Indeed, Christ says clearly that “with God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26).

However, if we were to insist that omnipotent meant God could do anything and everything at all, we would need to reject that description, because His word says He cannot! For example, God “cannot lie” (Titus 1:2), and He “cannot deny Himself” (2 Timothy 2:13). The Bible clearly shows that God cannot act contrary to His nature. But do these “cannots” mean He is not omnipotent—not almighty? Not if we let Scripture define its own terms!

There is no limit to the power of God. A search I did in the NKJV revealed that God was referred to as "Almighty" 48 times in the Hebrew scriptures and 9 times in the Greek scriptures, a total of 57 mentions in the Holy Bible. This is a point that God wants humankind to clearly understand.

The article continued with:

Is God Omnipresent?

Correctly understood, the question of God’s omnipotence has historically caused little controversy. The term omnipresent, however, has caused more trouble. Basically, being omnipresent means being present everywhere at the same time. Can this term be applied to God? What does Scripture tell us?

Ask yourself: is there any physical location in this universe where we can hide from the presence of God? The answer, according to Scripture, is a resounding “No!” In fact, King David posed this question directly, asking: “Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend into heaven, You are there; if I make my bed in hell [the grave], behold, You are there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there Your hand shall lead me, and Your right hand shall hold me” (Psalm 139:7–10).

David answers the question beautifully: it is futile to search for a place to hide from the presence of God (and it is unwise to try—just ask Jonah!). In this sense, God’s infallible word shows that He is omnipresent—within His vast creation, there is no place where you can hide from His presence.

Still, we must be careful with our terms! Many have tried to twist God’s omnipresence to portray Him as some kind of shapeless “blob”—even though the Bible clearly shows that God has a body and a shape—and it is a shape like ours! Consider Genesis 1:26, which tells us that man is made in God’s image and likeness—words that do convey a sense of shape. We do not use human philosophies to avoid the clear statements of Scripture! Consider, as well, the passage in which God says unambiguously that He has a face, a hand and a back (Exodus 33:18–23)! The only way to understand this passage from Exodus without making a mockery of God’s word is to agree that God has a shape and a body!

So, how is God “everywhere”? We already read the answer, in David’s words: “Where can I go from your Spirit?” (Psalm 139:7). It is by their Spirit that the Father and the glorified Christ have complete access to their creation! Through His Spirit, God’s reach extends to every nook and cranny of the universe, and there is—as David wrote—no place to flee from His presence. Yet He still retains a shape—a body—ruling in glory from His throne in heaven. It is from there that “His eyes behold” the sons of men (Psalm 11:4).

We must also note that although God is omnipresent through His Spirit, we can become separated from Him. In fact, we are warned, “your iniquities have separated you from your God; and your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He will not hear” (Isaiah 59:2). Jesus Christ experienced this horrible separation during His crucifixion, when on our behalf He took upon Himself the full penalty of our sins (cf. Mark 15:34; Isaiah 53:4–5).

The world’s scholars and theologians often have a wrong idea about God’s omnipresence. But if we let God’s flawless word teach us what God’s omnipresence truly means, our footing is made sure.

God is everywhere, in the known, and unknown universe. And the Spirit of God is infinite.

The article continued with:

Is God Omniscient?

Having considered God’s omnipotence and His omnipresence, we can address the most troublesome of the “Three ‘O’s”— His omniscience. Is God omniscient?

Philosophers and theologians have debated this question over the millennia. Were you to read what the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says about God’s omniscience, you would find more philosophical gobbledygook than you may have seen in your entire life. So, before we determine whether or not God is omniscient, we need to recognize that the world has some weird and conflicting ideas about what this word means. Why is there so much confusion?

The Random House Unabridged Dictionary (2006) offers this definition of omniscient: “having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things.” That is quite a mouthful; what does it mean to have “complete or unlimited knowledge”? Scholars disagree about what it means, but if we let the lamp of God’s word light our path and guide our steps (Psalm 119:105), we can know the truth of the matter.

The Bible tells us that God does perceive all things, which means that no fact can be hidden from His knowledge. As King David recognized: “Indeed, the darkness shall not hide from You, but the night shines as the day; the darkness and the light are both alike to You” (Psalm 139:12). God sees all things, and nothing can be hidden from His knowledge—not even the secret intentions of the heart (Psalm 44:21). In fact, He understands our own intentions better than we do (cf. Jeremiah 17:9-10; Hebrews 4:12)! As Paul explains, “there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account” (Hebrews 4:13).

Human beings perceive through the senses, but there are limits to what the senses let us perceive and understand. But God’s senses are not limited like ours! His Spirit searches all things (1 Corinthians 2:10), and nothing is beyond God’s ability to perceive it. In this sense, He is omniscient. Nothing can escape His gaze and His knowledge. If it can be known, He knows it!

But if we are to use the word omniscient to describe our Father and His glorified Son, it cannot mean that God knows our every choice before we make it in every circumstance, because Scripture tells us otherwise! For example, the Bible shows that when God gave Abraham the supreme test of sacrificing his son Isaac, He did not know until that moment whether Abraham would choose to obey. Upon seeing his choice, He told Abraham: “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me” (Genesis 22:12). This was one of the most crucial points in the history of faith and in the plan of God! It was a challenge so intense, and involving such faith, that God did not know what choice Abraham would make.

Most of the choices we make each day may be rather predictable. Parents with young children can see this for themselves. If a parent can often predict a young child’s choices, how much more can the One who sees all—even the intent of our heart, which we sometimes do not know ourselves—predict our choices? Yet the Bible reveals that God does arrange circumstances to challenge our character— to help us to grow—where the outcome is not so predictable. When we choose, we participate with God in the creation of our character. We have a role to play in God’s creation of His character within us, as He prepares us to become future members of His Family! We should not allow vain philosophy to rob us of this truth.

It is not that God cannot determine the future. He can, and He does! We read: “Remember the former things of old, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure’” (Isaiah 46:9–10).

Yet this passage shows that declaring the end from the beginning is not just a function of “seeing” what is “destined” to happen. Continuing in Isaiah, we read that God acts and intervenes in history to accomplish His ends, “calling a bird of prey from the east, the man who executes My counsel, from a far country. Indeed I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it; I will also do it” (v. 11).

We can say with confidence that God is omniscient. But we must allow the Bible to define what omniscient means. Let the world’s theologians and philosophers wander from the path of Scripture in their pointless arguments if they choose—we need not follow them!

The Godhead Inhabits Eternity

The Bible reveals that God is eternal. Notice what God is called:

27 The eternal God (Deuteronomy 33:27).

God also does not change and will be around always:

27 But You are the same, And Your years will have no end. (Psalm 102:27)

8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. (Hebrews 13:8)

Notice the further the following:

13 Then Moses said to God, "Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" 14 And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM" (Exodus 3:13-14).

Thus, even the name that God identified Himself as "I am who I am" signifies eternity.

The Bible reveals that the eternal power of the Godhead should be obvious:

20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse (Romans 1:20).

This does not mean that humans fully understand the eternity of the Godhead, but that there should be enough evidence of His existence that logical people will realize that His eternal attributes are partially understood through what God has made (an article of related interest may be Is Evolution Probable or Impossible or Is God's Existence Logical).

In Isaiah 57:15 it states that God "inhabits eternity." Now eternity is a difficult concept for humans to fully grasp. While most of us seem to have no problem envisioning that we could live forever, the idea of something not having a physical beginning is totally foreign to our lives' experiences.

Notice that God does understand this:

11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end (Ecclesiastes 3:11).

26 Behold, God is great, and we do not know Him; Nor can the number of His years be discovered (Job 36:26).

5 He does great things which we cannot comprehend. (Job 37:5)

8 And to God I would commit my cause—8 Who does great things, and unsearchable, Marvelous things without number (Job 5:8-9).

So we see that God put eternity in human hearts and God is infinite, but that we cannot fully understand even the work that God does from the beginning to the end. It is beyond our ability to grasp at this time. Yet the Bible reveals:

18 Known to God from eternity are all His works (Acts 15:18).

Thus it is clear that God knows all His works from eternity, but that there are some things that humans simply cannot fully understand.

It also seems to be able to be beyond our ability to grasp the entire universe (cf. Jeremiah 31:32). Like God, the dimensions of the universe have no beginning and have no end. And if one concludes that empty space is the end, where does the empty space end?

Of course, it does not.

Thus, just like no one can go to one end or the other of the universe, no one can get to the beginning or the end of the Godhead. So even though the idea of an endless universe can be within our hearts and minds, it is a concept, like the eternity of God, that is difficult for humans to fully understand.

God is Love

Even though God is immortal, how was it possible for God to inhabit eternity? The answer also seems to be found in the Bible.

First read the following:

23 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4, KJV). For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 6:23).

15 For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin (Hebrews 4:15).

Because the Godhead does not ever sin, the Godhead never has to die and is thus capable of living eternally (Jesus only died because He allowed Himself to do so, see Matthew 26:53). Only a sinless being could exist without a beginning. Do you know that Jesus taught the following?

17 But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments (Matthew 19:17).

17 Now as He was going out on the road, one came running, knelt before Him, and asked Him, 'Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?' So Jesus said to him...19 "You know the commandments" (Mark 10:17,19)

And in Mark's account he then He listed half of the ten commandments (also in Luke 18:19-20). (An article of related interest may be What Did Jesus Teach About the Ten Commandments?, Protestants may also wish to read What Did Paul Actually Teach About the Ten Commandments? and Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God differ from most Protestants.)What does the Bible say is the love of God requires of us?

3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome (1 John 5:3).

(An article of related possible interest may be Was the Commandment to Love the Only Command?)

Who is God? Notice that God is love:

8 God is love (1 John 4:8).

Also notice that there is no fear of judgment in love:

16 And we have known and believed the love that God has for us. God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him. 17 Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as He is, so are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment (1 John 4:16-18).

The reason that the Godhead was able to exist from eternity is because that the Godhead is love--anything other than love would eventually destruct. There was no fear in love. No fear of destruction nor any adverse judgment. Also:

10 Love does no harm to a neighbor (Romans 13:10).

Notice what what was inspired to write about aspects of love:

4 Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; 6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. 8 Love never fails. NKJV (1 Corinthians 13:4-8a).

Because God is love, the Godhead was able to exist from eternity. Because God is love, God has a plan to share His love and offer salvation to all.

Notice:

8...God is love. 9 In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. 10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins (1 John 4:8c-10).

16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved (John 3:16-17).

We humans do not possess perfect love, hence there are still some things we do not fully grasp, but because of the love of God we will have the ability to do so. Because God is love, God has been able to inhabit eternity.

The going back to the God and the "Three 'O's article, it concluded with:

The Final Word

So, what does God’s word teach us? We learn from Scripture that God is omnipotent—or “almighty”—such that no part of creation can escape His influence or authority. We see that God—through His Spirit—is omnipresent, such that no part of creation can escape His presence. And we understand that God—perceiving all things—is omniscient, such that no part of creation can escape His knowledge...

But is there any practical use for this knowledge? Yes, absolutely! We should never forget that God has called us to become His full sons and daughters, to share His level of existence with us for all eternity. Just as these characteristics— amazing power, access to all of the universe and perception of all things—apply to Christ and the Father now, they one day will apply to us!

As John wrote in his epistle, “everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as He is pure” (1 John 3:3). The more clearly we can see our awesome calling, the better we can put this present life into perspective. So, for those who wish to purify themselves, understanding the nature of the God Family has more practical application than you might at first assume!

As we seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, let us be motivated by our high calling and our ultimate destiny! We must avoid the snares and pretensions of this world’s philosophers, and instead let God teach us truthfully of His glory, that we may one day share it with Him.

God is all powerful, everywhere, and all knowing. God is Spirit, and because of that, is capable of being omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient.

While some of this is not possible for humans to understand, we need to realize that God, who has always existed, has unlimited understanding:

5 Great is our Lord, and mighty in power; His understanding is infinite. (Psalm 147:5)

Since the Bible teaches that Christians can enter the God family, the time will come when our own understanding about all matters is greatly increased as well.

The Bible discussing God's nature =/= proof of God's existence.

This thread is titled: is there one sound, valid syllogistic argument for the existence of God

 

[MaxGrit]

That's easy.

Ex nihilo nihil fit.