This is an unoriginal thought, but I can’t remember where I learned about the following argument. It’s been bouncing around my head for awhile, so if anyone could tell me where this argument came from it’d be appreciated.
The ontological argument for theism is supposed to prove God exists from the supposition that the concept of God includes not only the properties of being all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good but the property of perfection itself.
That is, God, if He is anything at all, is the most perfect being that could possibly exist. Now here’s the work horse question of the traditional ontological argument: does the property of existence itself count amount the properties that a perfectly perfect being necessarily has?
Theists answer in the affirmative, since surely a God that exists is more perfect than a God that does not exist.
And since God is by definition the most perfect being possible, we can conclude that God exists because the most perfect being would perfectly have the property of existence .
“Not so fast!” says the atheist.
Consider this. One of God’s most impressive alleged feats was the creation of the universe, an event universally considered to be a big deal. But wouldn’t it be more impressive if God had managed the trick of creating the universe without existing at all?
Now that would be impressive! To make yourself vanish and in your place have a universe. Neat trick. A God who could do that seems more powerful than a God who couldn’t even manage to create a universe without existing.
When you think about it, it seems awfully easy to create the universe if you actually exist. But to do so from beyond the grave is very difficult. But if anyone could do it, it’s God alright.
Therefore, God does not exist
images: pixabay
Cross posted from my blog Minds and Brains