The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God

[ApeNotKillApe]

doublepost

[ApeNotKillApe]

There was no time before Big Bang. Thus, the Big Bang was not "caused". Right?

[GrandizerII]

A "cause" must PRECEDE its effect in time. There was no time before Big Bang. Thus, the Big Bang was not "caused". Right?

Beats me. Perhaps not temporally caused. But we don't know yet with much certainty what strange structure exists "out there" that may or may not have triggered the Big Bang in some weird atemporal or "transtemporal" kind of manner..

[ApeNotKillApe]

A "cause" must PRECEDE its effect in time. There was no time before Big Bang. Thus, the Big Bang was not "caused". Right?

Beats me. Perhaps not temporally caused. But we don't know yet with much certainty what strange structure exists "out there" that may or may not have triggered the Big Bang in some weird atemporal or "transtemporal" kind of manner..

I recommend reading A Universe from Nothing, or if you're stretched for time, Krauss gave a lecture on said book that can be found on YouTube.

[robvalue]

Even if our timeline began at the inception of the Big Bang, there could be independent timelines which preceded it, in other realities. Something in another reality could have caused it, such as fragmentation, or this being a manifestation of a process in that reality. I see those two as the most likely explanations after "this is all there is".

But if we're just talking about our timeline, "before the Big Bang" is a nonsense term, agreed. (If we assume time began at that point.)

[Ravenshire]

A "cause" must PRECEDE its effect in time. There was no time before Big Bang. Thus, the Big Bang was not "caused". Right?

Actually, it's questionable whether cause has to proceed effect at the quantum level. In fact, there's a lot of evidence against the idea. So, it may not matter if time existed before the big bang.

[LadyForCamus]

Beats me. Perhaps not temporally caused. But we don't know yet with much certainty what strange structure exists "out there" that may or may not have triggered the Big Bang in some weird atemporal or "transtemporal" kind of manner..

I recommend reading A Universe from Nothing, or if you're stretched for time, Krauss gave a lecture on said book that can be found on YouTube.

I'm actually reading this right now, but it will probably take me a year to finish because a lot of the physics and cosmology are way over my head. I am enjoying it so far though, and learning much about the Big Bang that I never knew.

[wiploc]

1. It is possible that a maximally great being does not exist. 
2. If it is possible that a maximally great being does not exist, then a maximally great being does not exist in some possible world. 
3. If a maximally great being does not exist in some possible world, then it does not exist in any possible world.
4. If a maximally great being does not exist in any possible world, then it does not exist in the actual world. 
5. If a maximally great being does not exist in the actual world, then a maximally great being does not exist.
6. Therefore, a maximally great being does not exist.

So, using Plantinga's logic, it is as easy to prove that god doesn't exist as that he does.  Any argument that proves both X and not-X is worthless.  It weighs zero in the scales of persuasion. 

An argument so easily slam-dunk refuted shouldn't have any standing or fame.  But this is a famous argument because the Christians have no better arguments.  Since they have no good arguments, they have to field trash like this.

Nice counterargument. Once again, the argument rests on whether Premise 1 is true or not.

Really, the whole ontological argument thingy is pointless if they can't even establish the possibility of such  being existing.

A possible world is one without logical contradiction. 
Any world with no logical contradiction is, by definition, possible.
Godless worlds are not inherently contradictory.  They are possible. 

Therefore, the first premise of my argument is true.  And some of the premises of Plantinga's argument are false.  
Some gods may exist, but Plantinga's "maximally great" god cannot.

[Cecelia]

Thinking about the Ontological argument... it actually disproves the Christian God. Because the Christian God is not a maximally great being by any means. Meaning if the Christian God exists, there's a God above him.

[robvalue]

Haha. Indeed! To make such a claim, they have to say their bible is a load of crap.

God is frequently described as very obviously limited in power. And the only thing he's "great" at is killing his own creations.