To find out if GOD exists or not, assume a hypothetical entity, ABC, which has all the qualities opposite to GOD. In a very basic sense, God is colloquially defined as a supernatural entity which directs two things: one, the creation of every metaphysical entity (reality) in the universe; two, the human consciousness. Most people believe in either the first or second or both of these characteristics. Hence, the entity ABC must have characteristics which are opposite of above two: one, no role in the existence of metaphysical entity; two, can't dictate the human mind. It means that: a metaphysical entity exists as such with ABC not responsible for its existence (axiom/premise of identity), the human mind has a faculty of volition (free will) to use its consciousness as it wishes to use. If we assume the axiom of identity (former) and the axiom of consciousness (later) which are nothing but the abovesaid characteristics of ABC, then ABC must exist.
Now, it's important to question whether ABC and GOD can exist simultaneously. Let say, they exist. It means these two opposing entities are the reason behind the existence of metaphysical objects and human consciousness. Even if there is an infinitesimal chance that GOD is playing a role in directing human mind and physical objects, you have to start with some premise to prove this (just the way I used the premise of identity and consciousness to prove the existence of ABC). And the premise must be easily acceptable and based on observation. For instance, the premise of identity and consciousness is enabling me to write this draft (a very basic action). Is there any basic premise for God's role in the universe? Well, there's anyone used by Eastern philosophy - that God (supreme being) is divided into billions of parts (souls) which are, at least, actuators for human consciousness, if not metaphysical objects. Hence, the premise of soul and identity is enough to prove that God exists. The first premise is completely questionable as very few people claim that their soul is guiding their actions. Their claims are based on their personal experiences which are neither shareable nor provable. Furthermore, their claims are the result of historic mistakes repeated again and again by the so-called scholars who think that their consciousness is below someone's direction. A premise cannot be accepted if one experiences it with any prior conviction. I didn't use the premise of consciousness with any conviction- it's a matter of fact that, for example, if I wish to move my right hand I can and if left I can. Everyone can easily agree with this premise. But it's not possible to agree with premise of soul; only cultural and social knowledge (attained as I grew up) asked me to hold such convictions.
Hence, the entity ABC definitely exists with 2 major premises which everyone accepts. The premises of anti-ABC (GOD) aren't commonly agreeable, which rules down its accountability further.
Now, it's important to question whether ABC and GOD can exist simultaneously. Let say, they exist. It means these two opposing entities are the reason behind the existence of metaphysical objects and human consciousness. Even if there is an infinitesimal chance that GOD is playing a role in directing human mind and physical objects, you have to start with some premise to prove this (just the way I used the premise of identity and consciousness to prove the existence of ABC). And the premise must be easily acceptable and based on observation. For instance, the premise of identity and consciousness is enabling me to write this draft (a very basic action). Is there any basic premise for God's role in the universe? Well, there's anyone used by Eastern philosophy - that God (supreme being) is divided into billions of parts (souls) which are, at least, actuators for human consciousness, if not metaphysical objects. Hence, the premise of soul and identity is enough to prove that God exists. The first premise is completely questionable as very few people claim that their soul is guiding their actions. Their claims are based on their personal experiences which are neither shareable nor provable. Furthermore, their claims are the result of historic mistakes repeated again and again by the so-called scholars who think that their consciousness is below someone's direction. A premise cannot be accepted if one experiences it with any prior conviction. I didn't use the premise of consciousness with any conviction- it's a matter of fact that, for example, if I wish to move my right hand I can and if left I can. Everyone can easily agree with this premise. But it's not possible to agree with premise of soul; only cultural and social knowledge (attained as I grew up) asked me to hold such convictions.
Hence, the entity ABC definitely exists with 2 major premises which everyone accepts. The premises of anti-ABC (GOD) aren't commonly agreeable, which rules down its accountability further.
