God Exists

As everyone can probably see, I'm relatively new here, and I really have no experience on this topic. Please bear with me, and don't hold me to specific words. It's the idea I want to transmit. So, thanks for the invitation! (A) As my partner stated: God - the immensely great, omnipotent, omniscient, intelligent, transcendent cause of the universe. If God is truly omnipotent, meaning that he can really do anything, he can also create himself without existing prior. So, you know, like in Terminator or something. Bright flash of light, and there he is. God. He would create himself, because of his omnipotence. Before I go on, I would like to state that omnipotent beings are still omnipotent when non-existant. For example, an unexistant orange is still orange, despite it's unexistance. There's a whole philosophy concerning non-existant objects, which supports my point. Objects, or at least non-existant objects, all exist. In fact, every language that I know of calls unexistant objects existant. Words like "something" or "someone" allow us to create unexistant objects and use them in reality. In the sentence "Someone ate my lunch", that someone doesnt officially exist, yet we think he does. Lets use Santa as an example. Santa (MAJOR SPOILER) doesn't exist. And so nobody could argue against the fact that Santa is an unexistant person. Deriving from that is the statement: "There is an unexistant person, namely Santa". And so Santa (MAJOR SPOILER FOR ADULTS) technically does exist, but as an non-existant person. But let's think for a minute. How does the real Santa, if he existed, differ from the non-existant one? Well, the real Santa is exactly the same, except he exists! He has the same traits as the non-existant one, and the same job! Back to God. If God does not exist, we can safely say that God is an unexistant person (or is he an object or place? ). And if God is an unexistant person, that means that there is an unexistant person, namely God. But, since God is omnipotent in his unexistant form as well as his existant form, he can create/de-create himself and freely travel between the barrier of existance. But, when it comes down to to that, why should he even create himself if he can do anything he wants WITHOUT being created? So, instead of creating himself, he created the big bang, then us, and finally led us through history. And we haven't actually seen him yet, because, technically, he doesn't exist physically (and never did). But, since he can influence events in "reality", then we can presume that he exists metaphisically. But. .. you know. .. he isn't there because he wasn't created in the "metaphisical para-universe". And so we would have to create another realm, beyond the world of metaphysics. This place would be where non-existant things go, such as God and Santa Claus and that someone who ate my sandwich. Technically, it doesn't exist and therefore is inside of itself, but for now let's just use it a a folder for all unexistant things. That's God; he exists but doesn't. He's an non-existant person, yet he can become existant. He's real, but doesn't necessarily "have reality", as the definition states. What would it mean, to "have reality" anyway? So, to clarify, I wish to give an alternate definition that is grounded in simplicity instead of poetic maxims, as . Provided by me at no extra charge. Exist - "to be able to be interacted with or interact with other objects based in reality" (If anyone finds an existant object that doesn't follow this definition, or an unexistant one that does, please comment. ) (Notice to my partner: as the rules stated, I have asked you beforehand) Objects that exist can and will interact and even change events in our real world. Again, the existing Santa Claus, if he existed, would interact with reality every christmas by giving out presents, and interact everyday by simply taking up space. God, since we have established his omnipotence even as an non-existant being, can interact with reality at any moment. And so God exists. Those who know of Saint Thomas Aquinas will notice that this is basically a proof for: "God is the uncaused cause". (B) Anyway, Descartes, famous philosopher and mathematician, thought that the existance of God is a postulate. In an essay titled "Fifth Meditation", Descartes shows us his way of thinking. While sitting around and looking at objects, he notices that there are some hidden geometrical "figures", that he nor anyone can see, yet his mind is fully aware of and has even attributed several properties too. For example, triangles. Those who took geometry will understand just how much can be done with triangles, yet nobody has ever seen one. They have a determined essence in everyone's mind, but don't exist outside. The meditator also "denies that he has come to know the nature of triangles through his senses". Besides, one can actually think of many other hidden geometrical designs that can't be found in the real world. And so the triangle's attributes are certainly true, possibly more true than of real objects because triangles are in the mind. Are there any triangle atheists here? Descartes reasons by anaology that, like triangles, God exists in his mind and he has been ascribed several properties. One of them is existance, and so Descartes proves that, since the God in his mind has been ascribed this trait, He must exist. If he didn't, He would not be God and then none would be able to imagine Him. Like a triangle with four sides; none can imagine a triangle with four sides. And so, if triangles exist and they have only three sides, then God exists and is existant. Those two are proven the same way. (C) Another philosophy. If space is infinite, and if the universe created itself, which atheists believe, wouldn't it be possible for other "universes" to spawn beyond ours? If so, there must be an infinite number of universes, and therefore an infinite creative power. And so, according to the "Infinite Monkey Theorem", God must exist. (D) It's difficult to realistically and actually observe God, but I guess we can instead observe His actions. Before I continue, I would like to remind my partner that testimonies are a valid way of proving anything, including existance, in a federal court. If you find someone who met God and doesn't believe, by all means include his testimony. Let's start with me. First, I'm actually bound by a legal non-disclosure agreement because of the largest thing, so keep in mind that this is not nearly everything. Personally, I have no right not to believe in God. He's just done too many things for me and my family. It was little things, like when I prayed to him to find legos when I was seven. I looked for half an hour beforehand, prayed, and suddenly there it was, right in front of me. It seemed as if I hadn't noticed it. But there were bigger things too. One time, our family lacked the money to go on any proper vacation. A few nights later, some guy from church showed up on our doorstep to hand us 3,000 in cash. A while later, our landlord decided that he wanted to sell, and gave us a year to move out. Just as the year was ending, we found a perfect little house right next to my school, which was a good hour away beforehand. And then that big thing. Well, all I can say is it changed my life. Our family really depends on God, we would probably have gone bankrupt if we didn't. Now our family holds two expanding buisnesses, we can hold ourself up financially, and we all attribute it to God. And, of course, there are other people. There are probably hundreds of testimonies from people who ended up in heaven only to return. Colton Burpo, Julie Papievis, Don Piper, even a gang member named Tony. I mean, some of these guys are probably faking it, but there's so many of them, and even one testimonial will prove the existance of God (E) Since a vast majority of religions want people to believe in them, we can safely assume that God wants people to find Him. This, while it isn't visible in religious people under pressure to swap religions, is very clear in Atheist. Probably because they don't believe in God at all. For example, my partner Tejretics cannot stop thinking about God, which is shown by the vast amounts of debates he held and is holding against God's existance. Furthermore, looking through the website, I found that more than 5/6ths of debates about God's existance that were actually argued were created by atheists. I understand that Atheists think God is silly, but you must see that, for religious, not believing is silly as well. It's like not believing that the grass stays green when you don't look. And yet, religious people do not create debates about God's existance, even though we could probably show you how silly you are in our eyes. So, Atheist are discomforted by God, who is reaching out to them, and look for ways to make sure that he doesn't exist while thinking about him. Tejretics, I can tell you that you won't find God by debating him. In fact, debates like these are probably a huge waste of our time, because, no matter if we win or lose, it doesn't change anything. You can find God only through trying to believe, and it'll go from there. (A) . http://www.unc.edu... (D) . http://www.marianland.com... (B) . http://www.sparknotes.com... (E) . http://www.everystudent.com...