The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God

[Angrboda]

Here are the two definitions Plantinga starts with

[*]A being is maximally excellent in a world W if and only if it is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect in W; and
[*]A being is maximally great in a world W if and only if it is maximally excellent in every possible world.

Given these two definitions, the argument is constructed:

1. The concept of a maximally great being is self-consistent.
2. If 1, then there is at least one logically possible world in which a maximally great being exists.

Two doesn't follow from one. One only states that the concept of a maximally great being is coherent, not that it is instantiated in one or more possible worlds. I can only assume you've misstated the argument as I can't imagine Plantinga making such a bonehead mistake. You go on to state that there are no "holes" in the argument, despite this glaring one. Nice try but bluster doesn't substitute for logic.