uberkuh

Can logic be trusted to prove or disprove God’s existence? To answer this question, we must first understand the limitations, if any, of natural language. If natural language does not constitute a consistent or complete system or if it is fundamentally illogical at core, then it is inconsistent, incomplete, or impossible to determine and no argument using natural language ultimately proves or disproves anything. If natural language is consistent, complete, and logical, then all arguments can be proved or disproved given sufficient evidence.

However, note that, either way, a single argument can be proved or disproved. This does not mean that a premise could not be added to or taken from that argument to invalidate it. What it means is that, within a finite set of premises, a conclusion can be drawn about the argument.

So, to return to the initial question, if an argument is created to prove the existence of God, it contains a finite number of premises, and one or more of those is false or indeterminable, then that argument fails. Conversely, if an argument is created to disprove the existence of God and all of its statements are true, then that argument holds. The answer to the initial question, then, is that while logic might or might not suffice to prove or disprove everything, it can prove or disprove some things, such as the existence of God. I find that God’s existence cannot be proved, if for no other reason than that the major premise includes the purposely indefinable concept of a deity.