Ontological Argument for the Existance of God

1. God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived.
2. It is greater to be necessary than not.
3. God must be necessary.
4. God exists

Logically speaking, God MUST exist. But what God actually IS, no one really knows. He can be energy, mass, or some sort of spiritual being. All of these three fulfill the description: cannot be created nor destroyed.

>>46
Sorry if I did not state it clearly, by non-physical things I only meant what is conceived of the mind (ideas and thoughts). Whether the mind itself is physical or not is altogether a different subject.

By your argument "merely because the process used to come to these conclusions is not scientific," do you mean philosophical (thus mental and not physical) "experiments" can be conducted scientifically? If so, how would one conduct scientific research on philosophical subjects? So far this is the first time I had encountered an argument stating that it is possible.

"scientific discoveries are up for debate."
Yes, I never said it wasn't possible for them to be up for debate, I meant a scientific argument isn't as "readily" up for debate unlike a philosophical argument. Again, my apologies if I did not make my point clear, but unlike philosophy, in science a complete truth can be found, there is an answer and facts can be made from the results of scientific reasoning. In philosophy however, a complete truth or fact resulting from an argument cannot exist, therefore an argument is always up for further debate.