Proofs for God - For All Levels of Comprehension

This article isn't meant to prove God, but rather just list some common proofs for God in increasing levels of complexity. Some of them work terribly, but others are quite solid proofs that I would use regularly in apologetics. The star ratings are how persuasive the argument is, this is highly subjective and a rough estimation on my part.

Level 1 - Creation/Creator Argument - ★☆☆☆☆

P1. When we observe a building we know it must have a builder because it had a beginning.
P2. When we observe the universe it too had a beginning.
C1. Therefore, a builder for the universe exists.

Level 2 - Kalam Argument - ★★★★☆

P1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause for its coming into being.
P2. The universe began to exist.
C1. Therefore, the universe has a cause for its coming into being.

Level 3 - Miracles Argument - ★★★☆☆

P1. A miracle is an event whose only adequate explanation is the extraordinary and direct intervention of God.
P2. There are numerous well-attested miracles.
P3. Therefore, there are numerous events whose only adequate explanation is the extraordinary and direct intervention of God.
C1. Therefore God exists.

Level 4 - Moral Argument - ★☆☆☆☆

P1. Real moral obligation is a fact. We are really, truly, objectively obligated to do good and avoid evil.
P2. Either the atheistic view of reality is correct or the "religious" one.
P3. But the atheistic one is incompatible with there being moral obligation.
C1. Therefore the "religious" view of reality is correct.

Level 5 - Contingency Argument - ★★★☆☆

P1. If something exists, there must exist what it takes for that thing to exist.
P2. The universe—the collection of beings in space and time—exists.
C1. Therefore, there must exist what it takes for the universe to exist.
P4. What it takes for the universe to exist cannot exist within the universe or be bounded by space and time.
C2. Therefore, what it takes for the universe to exist must transcend both space and time.

Level 6 - Consciousness Argument - ★★★☆☆

P1. We experience the universe as intelligible. This intelligibility means that the universe is graspable by intelligence.
P2. Either this intelligible universe and the finite minds so well suited to grasp it are the products of intelligence, or both intelligibility and intelligence are the products of blind chance.
P3. If naturalism is true, we have no reason to believe in naturalism since our thoughts are the products of seemingly random causes and effects. So it can't be blind chance.
C1. Therefore this intelligible universe and the finite minds so well suited to grasp it are the products of intelligence.

Level 7 - The Ontological Argument - ☆☆☆☆☆

P1. It is greater for a thing to exist in the mind and in reality than in the mind alone.
P2. "God" means "that than which a greater cannot be thought."
P3. Suppose that God exists in the mind but not in reality.
P4. Then a greater than God could be thought (namely, a being that has all the qualities our thought of God has plus real existence).
P5. But this is impossible, for God is "that than which a greater cannot be thought."
C1. Therefore God exists in the mind and in reality.

Level 8 - Modal Ontological Argument - ★★☆☆☆

P1. The expression "that being than which a greater cannot be thought" (GCB, for short) expresses a consistent concept.
P2. GCB cannot be thought of as:

a. necessarily nonexistent
b. contingently existing
c. necessarily existing.

P3. So GCB can only be thought of as the kind of being that cannot not exist, that must exist.
P4. But what must be so is so.
C1. Therefore, GCB (i.e., God) exists.

Level 9 - Modal Possible Worlds Argument - ★★☆☆☆

P1. There is a possible world (W) in which there is a being (X) with maximal greatness.
P2. But X is maximally great only if X has maximal excellence in every possible world.
P3. Therefore X is maximally great only if X has omnipotence, omniscience and moral perfection in every possible world.
P4. In W, the proposition "There is no omnipotent, omniscient, morally perfect being" would be impossible—that is, necessarily false.
P5. But what is impossible does not vary from world to world.
P6. Therefore, the proposition, "There is no omnipotent, omniscient, morally perfect being" is necessarily false in this actual world, too.
C1. Therefore, there actually exists in this world, and must exist in every possible world, an omnipotent, omniscient, morally perfect being.

Level 10 - Awareness Argument - ★★★★☆

P1. You are aware of your thoughts and not your brain states.
P2. If you are aware of A and not B, then A is not B.
C1. Therefore, your thoughts are not your natural (physical) brain states.
P3. Contingent minds either have a person explanation or a natural explanation.
P4. C1 states they do not have a natural explanation.
C2. The natural universe cannot be the explanation of contingent minds.
P6. The explanation of the existence of conscious minds is personal (P3).
P7. This personal source is what we call God.
C3. God exists.

Level 11 - Brain in a Vat Argument - ★★★★★

P1: One cannot deny one’s own existence.
P2: There is at least one thing that exists.

P3: There is such a thing as existence (called esse, Latin for "to be").
P4: The nature of esse is actuality.
P5: Esse is nothing but pure actuality.


P6: Esse not only does exist but must exist.
P7: Esse is distinct from everything else that exists.
P8: Esse must be one.
P9: Esse must be immutable.
P10: Esse must be eternal.



P11: Esse must be infinite.
P12: Esse must be omniscient
P13: Esse must be omnipotent.


C1: God, esse, exists.

Level 12 - Pruss and Rasmussen Modal Causation Argument - ★★★★☆

P1. For any positive state of affairs that can begin to obtain, it is possible for there to be something external to it that causes it to obtain.
P2. It is possible for there to be a beginning of the positive state of affairs of its being the case that there exist contingent concrete things.
P3. If P1 and P2 are true, then it is possible that there is a necessary concrete thing.
C1. Therefore, it is possible that there is a necessary concrete thing.
P4. If it is possible that there is a necessary concrete thing, then there is a necessary concrete thing by nature of it being necessary.
C2. Therefore, there is a necessary concrete thing.

Level 13 - Gödel's Necessary Truth Argument - ★★★★★

Ax. 1. If phi is a positive property and it is necessary that for every x if x has the property phi then x has the property psi, then psi is a positive property.
Ax. 2. Not-phi is a positive property if and only if phi is not a positive property.
Th. 1. If property phi is a positive property then it is possible that there exists an x such that x has property phi.
Df. 1. Object x has the godlike property if and only if for every property phi, if phi is a positive property, then x has property phi.
Ax. 3. The property of being godlike is a positive property.
Th. 2. It is possible that there exists an object x that has the godlike property.
Df. 2. Phi is an essential property of x if and only if object x has the property phi and –  for every psi, if object x has property psi then it is necessary that for every y if object y has property phi then object y has property psi.
Ax. 4. If the property phi is a positive property then it is necessary that the property phi is a positive property.
Th. 3. If object x has the godlike property then the godlike property is the essential property of object x.
Df. 3. Object x has necessary existence if and only if for every property phi, if phi is an essential property of x then it is necessary that there exists an object y that has property phi.
Ax. 5. Necessary existence is a positive property.
Th. 4. It is necessary that there is an object x that has the godlike property (God exists).