Here’s a new theistic proof inspired by Spinoza (see Ethics, first part, proposition 11)
What does not exist is less powerful than what exists.
But finite beings exist.
Therefore what does not exist is less powerful than finite beings.
But the infinite being is by definition more powerful than finite beings.
If, however, it did not exist, it would be less powerful than finite beings.
But it is a contradiction
Therefore the infinite being exists.
Firstly, god does not exist nor do any of the beings from any religion exist, yet they are extremely powerful imaginings. A myriad of good and bad things have been done to honor or defame beings that do not exist. Thus, that which does not exist can be very powerful.
It could be argued though that the beliefs in such being do have a form of existence in that a belief is a thing, but an intangible thing.
But it is a contradiction
Therefore the infinite being exists.
Six and seven puzzle me. Why?
hello Thâmkhya -
by that reasoning - yes God exists, but so do daemons, vampires, ogres, really big monkeys and while we’re at it, all the hindu gods, the valkyres, and all the old greek pantheon gods and goddesses… nice try though.
as adlerian (not philosopher apparantly 
) says - a meme can have great power - but as a meme can transcend time and live on through a myriad finite generations is it not infinate in a way…? - perhaps god-the-meme is the only type available…?
igor thinkth that itth getting a bit crowded up there.
Igor,
Thank you for this pertinent criticism.
Igor,
Back in the corner! Humans aren’t infinite so neither are their memes. Memes can’t outlast the minds that carry them. I believe that an infinite being would outlast finite humans.
Oh, Sâmkhya, always coming up with new proofs for a belief that requires faith…
I don’t necessarily agree with TheAdlerian’s criticism here. While I’m not sure I buy the premise, if power is interpreted as having to be direct (i.e. creation of the universe or raising someone from the dead), his criticism falls apart.
In (4), you’ve assumed an infinite being exists, but I’ll let it slide for the sake of argument.
However: The infinite being would only be more powerful if it exists. If it does not exist, it has no power at all. That’s the problem with (4): You’ve assumed it exists, in which case it is more powerful, but there’s nothing to make me believe it does. In fact, if I accept the assumption, there’s no need to prove it to me. No contradiction here so far as I can see.
Keep working at this one, buddy…
-CDubs-
igor not like corner - igor break chainth long ago - igor free !!!
memes can outlast their human hosts, just as their genes/dna (or at least half of it) can pass down the generations so can memes by word of mouth tap of finger on keyboard dart of eye across screen. even if all humans died out - as long as one stored copy of the bible survived - so would the meme. okay not as infinite as an existant god would be if it existed - but still a lot less finite that you or me.
yeth - but if thomeone however thlightly influenced by the god-meme raiseth thomeone from the dead (are there no chrithtian ER doctorth…?) or whoa - way in the future createth a new univerthe (thtretching igor knowth) then adlerian would thtill be correct. it ith not totally impothible.
Igor! Don’t quibble! You know what I mean. In a trillion years from now I doubt that humans will be around or if a giant rock hits Earth, them all the memes will be ashes. Humanity will take with it what it brought into being, and that’s it.
I would not put you in the corner and I have turned off the cattle prod.
I don’t even know what this means. What does “power is interpreted as having to be direct†mean? Please explain.
I sincerely doubt that anyone has or will ever get raised from the dead by anything other than Earthly means. However, if supernatural events do start happening I will be the first to retract my arguments.
As in, power exhibited by the entities referenced in Sam’s first premise must be direct. i.e. what does not exist has less direct influence over the world (i.e. none) than that which exists. I was referencing the supposed actual, tangible actions of the Christian God, as opposed to the actions of those who claim to be acting on His behalf. As you alluded to, their actions are theirs alone, influenced by an idea, but still theirs, and they exist. I think premise 1 holds if you consider power as having to be demonstrated by the non-existent entity itself rather than by someone who merely acts as if it existed. If God does not exist, he did not create the universe and has never raised anyone from the dead. But also he didn’t spark any holy wars or aid in the foundation of Jerusalem - people alone did these things, though perhaps with some notion of God in mind.
Or how about this: Unicorns don’t exist, and therefore eat no grass or hay or whatever. Hence, they have no direct effect on the world. Now, if some idiot went off unicorn-hunting and burned down a forest, would you attribute the burning-down of the forest to the Unicorn?
-CDubs-
Ahh…I see what you are getting at. I think that we are on the same page for the most part.
Cdubth - igor ith jutht being picky but…
You say things that don’t exist can’t have direct effect…
let us say I tell you to shut the door. You shut the door.
Now - i told you to. you heard me. you percieved me. the information/order existed as a command/idea chain in your mind ie: now separated from the source (me). so you closed the door. (no existant external power forced you to)
now let us say that you read in the bible to go to church on sundays. you percieved the bible/word of god. the information/order existed as a command/idea chain in your mind ie: now separated from the source (non-existant god). so you went to church. (no existant external power forced you to)
does the source of the perception matter - if the rest of the process is the same…? real or unreal - it has the same effect does it not…?
anyway that wath jutht becauthe you dont like my lithp… 
The bible is nothing but someone (in fact a whole bunch of someones) transcribing his (their) beliefs. Reading it is the same as a preacher telling those same stories etc. Part of the dogma is that its writing was guided by the holy spirit, but not even the most fundamental fundamentalist thinks that God himself wrote it, so far as I know.
Reading the Bible and going to church is like reading a book about how to hunt Unicorns written by a looney who thought he’d seen one, then going out hunting. Did the unicorn cause you to go hunting any more than God caused you to go to church?
-CDubs-
The most religious people believe that the bible was created via a transmission by god. “You will be my pencil,†said God!
Igor, the effect might be the same but the cause is not the same and that’s important.
The proof that unicorns exist
What does not exist is less powerful than what exists.
A shred of dust exists.
Therefore, what does not exist is less powerful than a shred of dust.
But a unicorn is more powerful than a shred of dust by definition.
But if a unicorn did not exist, it would be less powerful than a shred of dust.
And this is a contradiction.
Therefore unicorns exist.
shit, Sam. You win. Let’s go catch us one!
WHY!!!
pssst I think it’s a joke. He’s given up this proof and is using it to demonstrate unicorns.
…I hope, anyway.
I have never subscribed to this “proof” but I wanted to see how you would deal with it, and interestingly, you thought of things I did not.
Oh…good because it was blowing my mind.