Proof of God?

Let me play devil's, or better, god's advocate for a moment.

If we take "God" as an infinite being, then the scope of Earth in face of the rest of the universe would be irrelevant, an infinite being would have no reason to care about the difference between finite numbers.

what is a maximally great being? your "proof" is very simple, you could just switch "maximally great being" with anything and your proof would work. would you subscribe to such ontology?

>2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
Why?

Axiom 1 is really sketchy.

Explain step 3. I'm not really sure it follows.

Not op but.

Maximally great would mean it is capable of doing literally anything at any point of time. If it exists somewhere, one of God's abilities would be to dimension hop or make it so that it exists in multiple realities/universes/whatever

It's so fucking maximal it transcends boundaries of worlds amd expands throughout the entire multiverse

>1. It is possible that a maximally great being exists.

what if the possibility is 0%?

>2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.

Define "some possible world". If you mean planets, then perhaps there exists a phsyical limit to how "maximal" your being can be. If you mean different dimensions, you need to prove those first.

As
said, points 1 and 2 are shit axioms

1 through 5 = "it's possible"
6 = "therefore it's so"

well done, you've discovered faith

I would contest the move from (2) and (3).

Supposing that it is contingently true that a maximally great being existed at possible World w,
I do not think it would that (3) can follow from (2).
Here are my assumptions and objections (not really a cohesive argument on my part, just problems I don't think the formulation presented addresses):

Assumptions:
I. (Just to make my assumptions clear,) there are possible worlds we can quantify over.

II. Worlds are truthmakers (i.e. proposition p is true because it is the case at possible World w1, w2, . . . wn).

Objection 1, inter-world causality:

III. There are no 'gaps' or 'overlaps' between these possible worlds ( a fact cannot exist where there are no truthmakers).

IV. That is, facts at World w1, do not have causality at World w2.

V. Even a maximally great being would have to operate within the logical framework of other facts.

VI. If not (V), then it is outside the boundaries of logic, and cannot fairly be argued as such.

Objection 2, why we should more carefully consider what it means to be a maximally great being:

VII. A maximally great being exists in some possible world, however, this is dependent on possible World wx existing, and to say otherwise is to confuse ontological priority (that is, the world needs to exist for this to be a fact).

I'll give you (1) and (2) any day of the week, but I think that there is some additional work needed to be done to move towards (3).

What is a "maximally great being"? The whole argument is about it, but what it is is not clear.

Yes, that's pretty much an offshoot of Godel's ontological proof of God. Can't remember the guy's name, though.

. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
My dick is the greatest dick in existence in some possible worlds, as such my dick is god's gift to womankind in every possible world. What kind of asshole are you to not let me fuck you wife since I have, undoubtedly, the greatest dick in existence?

nah

>maximally

Aquinas pretty much strangled the ontological argument at birth by pointing out humans couldn't define God.

>1. It is possible that a maximally great being exists.
No it isn't, because that's subjective, and subjectivity can't be transferred to reality just because you want it to.
>2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
I deny that there is more than one world (universe), as there isn't any evidence whatsoever
>3. If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
Um... No? If a lava lamp exists in my apartment, that doesn't mean it exists in every apartment.
>4. If a maximally great being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
Well I suppose, but that seems really fucking obvious given that this world is a world
>5. If a maximally great being exists in the actual world, then a maximally great being exists.
Again, no shit. These last two have been utterly pointless
>6. Therefore, a maximally great being exists.
No.

Enjoy Philosophy 110 though. Adams doesn't actually take attendance, by the way.

You are the proof of God! I am too! Even your cat!

If you were a Christian, this isn't how you'd justify your beliefs at all.

God is not a thing in the world. He is outside of creation. This is where athiests don't understand God, when they say the sky wizard or whatever, God transcends all space and time and every dimension. God is existence itself. I AM THAT I AM

. It is possible that a maximally great being exists.

Aaaand we are fucked right out the gate.

>1. It is possible that OP is a faggot.
>2. If it is possible that OP is a faggot, then OP is a faggot in some possible world.
>3. If OP is a faggot in some possible world, then he is a faggot in every possible world.
>4. If OP is a faggot in every possible world, then he is in the actual world.
>5. If OP is a faggot in the actual world, then OP is a faggot.
>6. Therefore, OP is a faggot.

Literally """"""""""prove"""""""""" anything!

>1. It is possible that a maximally faggoty OP exists.
>2. If it is possible that a maximally faggoty OP being exists, then a maximally faggoty OP exists in some possible world.
>3. If a maximally faggoty OP exists in some possible world, then he exists in every possible world.
>4. If a maximally faggoty OP exists in every possible world, then he exists in the actual world.
>5. If a maximally faggoty OP exists in the actual world, then a maximally faggoty OP exists.
>6. Therefore, a maximally faggoty OP exists.

>Addenda: A maximally faggoty OP exists in this very thread.

If God is outside reality, then why do Thesist even presume that the God can be understood at all by anyone?

>muh special gnosis
>muh transcendent emotional experience
>muh bible verses

>1. Dude a self-aware cat-shaped comet with a rainbow tail can possibly exist in some possible world (although it really can't)
>2. Therefore it actually exit in this world and it's coming to earth right now
>3. We're fugged

FORTOLD BY THE DEVIL HIMSELF
youtube.com/watch?v=QH2-TGUlwu4

You weren't thinking shit, you just pasted Plantinga's modal ontological argument

Poor bait

>1. It is possible that a maximally great being possibly exists.
>2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being possibly exists in some possible world.
>3. If a maximally great being possibly exists in some possible world, then it possibly exists in every possible world.
>4. If a maximally great being possibly exists in every possible world, then it possibly exists in the actual world.
>5. If a maximally great being possibly exists in the actual world, then a maximally great being possibly exists.
>6. Therefore, a maximally great being possibly exists.

ftfy

>1. I can imagine that my sick has 30 centimeters when flat.
>2. Therefore my dick actually is 30 centimeters when flat.
I like this game!

Behold the proof:
Science accepts you get spiritual experiences out of meditation.
Only if there is something does it make sense that you have these, since you are sitting down breathing.
>inb4 child of the devil gets disproportionately mad at me

product of your own mind, not that of a divine omnipotence.

That's not what a proof is. And stop smoking marihuana.

Prove that

>Science accepts you get spiritual experiences out of meditation

No it doesn't since there isn't even a consens on what "spiritual" even means or is supposed to be.

Stop making up stuff, thank you sir.

Heres the predicted irate child of the devil, they turned the bible upside down, then they come and say theres nothing when prayers directed at hell go by unanswered.
Meanwhile I achieved dragon consciousness, which is even considered a black art by some while it is sacred.

Read the work of actual scientists maybe?
You can start with Rick Strassman.

Lol you're parodying the speech of someone whose brain has been corroded by extensive use of marihuana, right? I get it.

See

burden of proof is on your side link to the study thay says "Science accepts you get spiritual experiences out of meditation.
Only if there is something does it make sense that you have these, since you are sitting down breathing"

until that point your case is very weak and acutally nothing but making up stuff and wishful thinking

ITT: homosexuals cleave huge tyrannosaur dildos in their anuses while asking for evidence in a topic where lab proof is impossible and all that counts is personal experience.

>I have a delusion
>something must be causing that delusion
>it can't possibly be that the drugs I'm using are messing with the chemicals in my brain
>therefore God exists

>being
>existing

>I have a plastic dick in my butt
>I move it rythmycally
>that makes me a huge faggot

burden on proof is on you