Is God's Existence Possible?

[Tree of Life]

On the face of it yes.

But depending on how God is defined, His attributes implied by the definition could make him logically impossible.

So its not a simple question.

Well lets begin there and if you think we've begun dealing with an impossible God, let me know. Here's the argument in simple expression:

1. God's existence is possible.
2. If God's existence is possible, then God exists in some possible world.
3. If God exists in some possible world, then God exists in all possible worlds.
4. If God exists in all possible worlds, then God exists in the actual world.
5. If God exists in the actual world, then God exists.

Notes:

Premise (2) is just a technical explanation of the meaning of premise (1). A "possible world" is what philosophers mean by a "hypothetical situation".

This argument depends on a right understanding of "possibility" (which we've discussed in other posts). If something is logically possible then it is not necessarily false.

This argument also depends on a right understanding of "God". "God" is a logically necessary being. If he exists, then he must exist and it would be inconceivable for him to not exist. His non-existence would be just as inconceivable as 2+2=5.

If a logically necessary being exists in some possible world, then he exists in all possible worlds because that's what it means to be a necessary being.

So if it's possible for God to exist, then God certainly exists.

 

[Chriliman]

There’s no reason to think so.

There is at least one valid reason to think so and that is that you(nor I) don't know everything.

 

[Tree of Life]

There’s no reason to think so.

Your insistence on a distinction between logical impossibility and physical impossibility isn’t valid.

Tell that to a logician. Did you do any philosophy in college?

 

[Chriliman]

Well lets begin there and if you think we've begun dealing with an impossible God, let me know. Here's the argument in simple expression:

1. God's existence is possible.
2. If God's existence is possible, then God exists in some possible world.
3. If God exists in some possible world, then God exists in all possible worlds.
4. If God exists in all possible worlds, then God exists in the actual world.
5. If God exists in the actual world, then God exists.

Notes:

Premise (2) is just a technical explanation of the meaning of premise (1). A "possible world" is what philosophers mean by a "hypothetical situation".

This argument depends on a right understanding of "possibility" (which we've discussed in other posts). If something is logically possible then it is not necessarily false.

This argument also depends on a right understanding of "God". "God" is a logically necessary being. If he exists, then he must exist and it would be inconceivable for him to not exist. His non-existence would be just as inconceivable as 2+2=5.

If a logically necessary being exists in some possible world, then he exists in all possible worlds because that's what it means to be a necessary being.

So if it's possible for God to exist, then God certainly exists.

Thats really cool if I do say so myself, just hope it's not a reason people will start denying that God is logically possible. Here's to hoping!

 

[Tree of Life]

Thats really cool if I do say so myself, just hope it's not a reason people will start denying that God is logically possible. Here's to hoping!

I think it's their only move.

 

[Chriliman]

I think it's their only move.

Eh, love them anyway, that's what God would do.

 

[durangodawood]

...This argument also depends on a right understanding of "God". "God" is a logically necessary being. If he exists, then he must exist and it would be inconceivable for him to not exist. His non-existence would be just as inconceivable as 2+2=5....

Ouch.

We can just as well skip all the logic steps, and just go straight to the question: Is "God" a logically necessary being. As far as I can tell, thats strictly a matter of faith.

 

[Tree of Life]

Ouch.

We can just as well skip all the logic steps, and just go straight to the question: Is "God" a logically necessary being. As far as I can tell, thats strictly a matter of faith.

I don't see how we could understand God as anything other than a logically necessary being. Otherwise he would be something less than God.

I would suggest that if you don't believe in God (or believe his existence is impossible), then you would believe that something like "the universe" is logically necessary. Think about it. Can you conceive of nothing existing?

 

[durangodawood]

I don't see how we could understand God as anything other than a logically necessary being. Otherwise he would be something less than God....

How about we define "5D hyperchess" as a logically necessary game. We can run that through the logic steps you outline, and conclude it exists! What other things should we try that with? otoh, you did it with "God"... so I'm not sure we could top that.

I would suggest that if you don't believe in God (or believe his existence is impossible), then you would believe that something like "the universe" is logically necessary. Think about it. Can you conceive of nothing existing?

The capacities of my mortal, time-conditioned, space-conditioned mind should not be expected to grasp boundaries of whats logically necessary in such an ultimate sense. Thats why these questions come down to faith.

 

[Tree of Life]

How about we define "5D hyperchess" as a logically necessary game. We can run that through the logic steps you outline, and conclude it exists! What other things should we try that with? otoh, you did it with "God"... so I'm not sure we could top that.

I would say that 5D Hyperchess as defined is impossible, as you should say with God. Either that or start considering the implications of its existence!

 

[ToddNotTodd]

There is at least one valid reason to think so and that is that you(nor I) don't know everything.

It’s true that we don’t know everything. But that doesn’t mean a god is possible. It just means the question is undecided, and that any argument that relies on a possible god is flawed.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Tell that to a logician. Did you do any philosophy in college?

Lol... yes, yes I have...

Now would you like to respond to the part of my post that explains why there’s no reason to believe a god is possible?

 

[durangodawood]

I would say that 5D Hyperchess as defined is impossible, as you should say with God. Either that or start considering the implications of its existence!

Before I consider the implications of all the countless possible things, its better to narrow down the field to those that are probable.... which means evidence and judgement comes into play.

Also, it seems that your initial argument has basically run aground on the necessity to pre-suppose the existence of God by making existence part of the definition of the term "God". I see through this trick!

 

[gaara4158]

Maybe not. But my argument is that if God's existence is logically possible, then God exists. Do you believe God's existence is logically possible?

The more important debate in the ontological argument should be whether existence is a predicate.

 

[Dirk1540]

I can’t see it as any more complicated as A - God exists, or B - Infinite regress.

Isn’t the most basic definition of ‘God’ necessary existence? Necessary existence vs all other contingent things, is to talk about God vs non-God as far as I know. I don’t know why a huge percentage of atheists aren’t deists instead. A hands off God that doesn’t care seems way less confusing than an infinite regress IMHO, whatever form that necessary being may take.

 

[Chriliman]

It’s true that we don’t know everything. But that doesn’t mean a god is possible.

How doesn’t it? As long as you don’t know everything, there always remains a possibility that you’re wrong about thinking God isn’t possible.

 

[Tree of Life]

Lol... yes, yes I have...

Now would you like to respond to the part of my post that explains why there’s no reason to believe a god is possible?

God is logically possible so long as God's existence is not necessarily false. I don't see why God's existence would be necessarily false. Therefore God's existence is possible.

 

[Tree of Life]

Before I consider the implications of all the countless possible things, its better to narrow down the field to those that are probable.... which means evidence and judgement comes into play.

Also, it seems that your initial argument has basically run aground on the necessity to pre-suppose the existence of God by making existence part of the definition of the term "God". I see through this trick!

My argument is that if God's existence is possible then God exists by definition. I'm not arguing that God exists by definition.

 

[Tree of Life]

The more important debate in the ontological argument should be whether existence is a predicate.

Existence is not a predicate. But this doesn't really affect this version of the ontological argument.

 

[Tree of Life]

I can’t see it as any more complicated as A - God exists, or B - Infinite regress.

Isn’t the most basic definition of ‘God’ necessary existence? Necessary existence vs all other contingent things, is to talk about God vs non-God as far as I know. I don’t know why a huge percentage of atheists aren’t deists instead. A hands off God that doesn’t care seems way less confusing than an infinite regress IMHO, whatever form that necessary being may take.

God's necessity is a very part of the concept of God. This is why, per my argument, God must either exist or be impossible.