(September 30, 2019 at 10:08 pm)Inqwizitor Wrote:(September 30, 2019 at 9:59 pm)Grandizer Wrote: I do think so, yeah. But that's besides the point anyway. The person making the argument still has the burden to show that such a being is logically possible in the first place. I refer you back to my math analogy.
And if the person making the argument responds back with how do you prove such a thing, well, tough luck, buddy ... you're the one trying to make a supposedly compelling argument here.
If we switched sides on the theism chessboard, say, just for fun, how do you think one could show that such a being is logically possible?
I don't really know. I've thought of it a lot, and ultimately, the best way to prove God is really to show that it is the best explanation for what we observe in this universe, not by appealing to its logical/metaphysical possibility as a central premise of our argument.
