Anti-Dementia Food - The God Argument

One can never win a God existence argument with a God believer by using science as a basis for the argument.  No matter what scientific proof is put forth to the believer, the counter-argument will always be that God gives us the ability to reason and to thus present a scientific argument that tries to disprove God.  This counter-argument continues by saying the existence of god is actually proved by our scientific reasoning ability - not disproved.

A counter-argument to use in this case is to argue that our ability to believe in God (#1) is given to us by God #2.  And, therefore, since there is no proof (scientific or otherwise) to logically distinguish God #2 from God#1, or that God#2 does not exist independently from God #2, then God #2’s independent existence is confirmed. This is logically true because it applies exactly the same argument for God#2 that was used in the above argument for proving God#1.

To explain further, the argument for or against God #2 instead of God #1 is as valid as the argument for or against God #1 using science because the premise underling the argument for God #1 is exactly the same premise underlying the argument for God #2.  And since God #2’s existence is confirmed subsequent to Gods #1, God #2 must be the real God because he is really the God that gives us the ability to reason logically and to try to unsuccessfully disprove God#2.

This argument is a winning argument until someone comes along who believes in God #3 and that God #3 gives us the ability to logically present a God #2 and  God #1 argument………