Nothing proves that God exists?
February 6th 2009 02:03
The argument goes as follows:
"God is the perfect being. As He is most perfect, He must have all perfections. If God lacked existence, He would not be perfect, as He is perfect he must exist."
The problem here is the implication that nothing is not something that isn't, since it implies the existence of something that contains negative characteristics. But something (in this case, God) that lacks everything is still something. To say that God IS, gives him an existence. Nothing has no existence. It isn't the LACK of characteristics, but the absence of everything.
"God is the perfect being. As He is most perfect, He must have all perfections. If God lacked existence, He would not be perfect, as He is perfect he must exist."
The problem here is the implication that nothing is not something that isn't, since it implies the existence of something that contains negative characteristics. But something (in this case, God) that lacks everything is still something. To say that God IS, gives him an existence. Nothing has no existence. It isn't the LACK of characteristics, but the absence of everything.
| 24 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
