07 May '12 06:19>1 edit
def. God: a being which is "maximally excellent" in every possible world. Maximal Excellence includes such properties as omniscience, omnipotence, and moral perfection. A being which has maximal excellence in every possible world would have "maximal greatness."
Premises:
1. It is possible that a maximally great being exists.
2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
3. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
4. If a maximally great being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
5. If a maximally great being exists in the actual world, then a maximally great being exists.
Conclusion:
Therefore, a maximally great being exists.
Obviously, I do not believe the conclusion so I must reject a premise to invalidate it.
WLC's website insisted that premises 2-5 where uncontroversial and invited a debate about premise 1. But as I evaluate it, I wish to reject premise 3. I do not see how God's mere ability to be excellent in every possible world allows us to place him in every possible world.
I assume most theists would be happy to accept the argument entirely. For my atheist brethren: which premise(s) would you reject?
Premises:
1. It is possible that a maximally great being exists.
2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
3. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
4. If a maximally great being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
5. If a maximally great being exists in the actual world, then a maximally great being exists.
Conclusion:
Therefore, a maximally great being exists.
Obviously, I do not believe the conclusion so I must reject a premise to invalidate it.
WLC's website insisted that premises 2-5 where uncontroversial and invited a debate about premise 1. But as I evaluate it, I wish to reject premise 3. I do not see how God's mere ability to be excellent in every possible world allows us to place him in every possible world.
I assume most theists would be happy to accept the argument entirely. For my atheist brethren: which premise(s) would you reject?