I think Kyu is right. Applying his point to to the modal ontological argument, if you look at premise 6, it seems perfectly innocent. However, the argument only gives two choices - logically, God has to exist, or logically, God can't exist. You could rewrite premise 6 as 'it is impossible that God doesn't exist' - and in that form, I suspect it would have a lot fewer takers.
However, what I find interesting about this argument is that it does seem to show that God's existence is either necessary or impossible - I just think it fails to show which one it is.
Cleanthes.
However, what I find interesting about this argument is that it does seem to show that God's existence is either necessary or impossible - I just think it fails to show which one it is.
Cleanthes.