Originally Posted by Mps2216
Wow. Yea, sure your statement might be 'self evident' if this premise is true, but the whole point of the matter is to discover if there is some sort of deity that exists or not. How can one assume God is real. I could just as easily assume he isn't real. What makes either assumption more valid? Nothing. Thus my point. If you're going to make a statement such as that, you need to substantiate your assumptions, especially such a grand one as that.
I am beginning to think you don't have the cognitive capacity to match your good grammar... I said I can't prove God exists. I don't even need to say this, it's obvious, just as it is obvious his existence can't be disproven.
The only thing to argue, then, is the potential validity of arguments assuming one or the other. Understand that an argument for either is completely debased by this fundamental topic, but there's nothing that can be done about that.
I apologize for not saying this earlier, I only assumed it was obvious. There would be no point in building arguments solely on God existing or not rather than the premise of one or the other.