On a Supposed Proof for God

 

  1. Argument

 

  1. If the term “God” means anything at all,

then “God” in the least means what is real, what exists.

  1. The term “God” does mean something.

Therefore, the term “God” in the least means

what is real, what exists—in which case God exists.

 

  1. Rationale for premise 1.

 

1.1 If the term “God” means anything at all,

then “God” in the least means Being.

1.2. If the term “Being” means anything at all,

then “Being” in the least means what is real, what exists. 

Therefore, if the term “God” means anything at all,

then “God” in the least means what is real, what exists.

 

  1. Rationale for premise 1.1.

 

1.1.1. If the term “God” means anything at all,

then “God” in the least means the ultimate—

that is, the buckstopping—source of Being,

the essence in common among all beings. (Obvious)

1.1.2. If the term “God” means the ultimate—

that is, the buckstopping—source of Being,

then “God” in the least means Being.

Therefore, if the term “God” means anything at all,

then “God” in the least means Being.

 

  1. Rationale for premise 1.1.2

 

Premise 1.1.2 says that if “God” means the ultimate—

that is, the buckstopping—source of Being,

then “God” in the least means Being.

To say otherwise would be to say that Being comes

from Nonbeing, that some-thing comes

from no-thing. But Being cannot come

from Nonbeing; some-thing cannot come . . .

 

  1. Rationale for premise 1.2

 

Premise 1.2 says that if “Being” means anything at all,

then “Being” in the least means what is real, what exists.

To say otherwise would be to say that Being—

if it means anything at all—means what has no being:

Nonbeing. But this is a contradiction. For Being no doubt

means Being—the opposite of Nonbeing. Indeed, to say 

that Being means what is is to say that what is

means what is, which is a self-evident truth.

 

  1. Rationale for premise 2

 

Premise 2 says that “God” means something.

It does. It is the name we give for the ultimate source

of everything, a source with all the attributes of perfection.

 

  1. Problem with the Argument

 

Notice the inference drawn in the conclusion:

the inference from (a) God in the least means what exists

to (b) God exists. This inference is illicit. The argument

merely shows that “God” in the least means what is real.

But this is not to prove that God—an all-perfect creator

of everything—exists, is real. It shows that what is real

is what is real; that Being is Being. To prove that what is is

is not to prove that God—an all-perfect creator—exists.

 

To be sure, along the way it has been shown that “God”

in the least means Being. Being—eternal, never coming

or going—is the immutable essence in common among,

omnipresent in, all beings. Being is that which all else—

all beings (all objects, all knowledge, and so on)—depend

and yet is that which does not depend on anything else.

Still, even if one proves that God construed as Being exists,

that does not mean that God—an all-perfect creator—exists.

 

 

About the Poet

M. A. Istvan Jr., PhD, born and raised in a functioning ghost town (now turned hipster haven), has a gift for sensing the vibrational frequencies—the earth spirits, if you will—of even the densest flesh: tree, stone, mineral. A certified (but failed) forest-bathing therapist, Istvan writes best—bestial—faded into the backgrounds of brothels, tended to by the ladies for whom his focused presence proves that men can want—can be—something more. Most people stay out of Istvan’s vicinity. His hurried step, fierce expression, and wild hand gestures while speaking (speaking in what is perhaps best described as auditory cursive) set off the insanity-detectors ingrained in us by deep history.