God Exists

Let’s get right into it. I will prove, through various arguments, the existence of a Maximally Great Being – a being in comparison to which no other is, or could be, greater. Perhaps the most important thing to keep in mind is that the essence of this being necessarily involves existence. Some facts are contingent. It is *possible* for a faerie to exist in the world, though it either could or could not. Nothing within the concept of “faerie” binds it to existence or nonexistence. Given the idea of a faerie, one could not say whether any concrete faeries can be found. There is an important implication here: if we do find that a faerie exists, because its idea does not involve existence one way or the other, its state of existence is able to prove nothing. It is irrelevant to the understanding whether there are concretes of contingent beings; the understanding is able to fully grasp the ideas separate from actualities (though bear in mind that “separate” does imply that from the concept no knowledge of actuality is gained). It is NOT the case that: Concept -> Actuality. Certain facts are necessary. These have to do with the essences of things. Two and two make four, and they must always make four. The triangle is three-sided; it cannot be the case that X and not-X; A is A. If we know that these are necessary, then we *can* make claims about what exists in the world through them, a priori. If it is necessarily true that triangles are three-sided, we can know that, in the world, there does not exist a triangle which is not three-sided. So, if it is necessarily true that triangles are three-sided, given a non-specified triangle, in every possible world it is true that that triangle is three-sided. A fact which cannot exist in any possible world is necessarily false; it is impossible. Now, consider what we mean by Greatness. Two premisses should be uncontroversial:1. It is greater to contingently exist than to necessarily not exist.2. It is greater to necessarily exist than to contingently exist. If my opponent wishes to take issue with these premisses, I warn him that doing so would be unreasonable; if “greatness” is the wrong word, then I will fully accept using some other, such as “garxness”. The point is that one can imagine this sort of scale, atop which, among the other qualities that theology ascribes to “greatness”, is a being which necessarily exists. To make clear, again: my case is solely about a being which is Maximally Great (in different terminology, Perfect). There is no thing in the imagination which is greater than this being. After the existence of such a being has been proven, the definition of God as offered in R1 will be shown to be a part of the definition of this Maximally Great being (henceforth MGB). Proof One:1. If a MGB exists, then a MGB exists necessarily Justification: The prior discussion of greatness.2. It is not impossible for a MGB to exist. If my opponent wishes, to his detriment, to challenge this point, I will gladly elaborate why it is intuitively true in the rebuttal phase. Until then, it shall be an accepted premiss.3. If it is necessary that a MGB exists, then an MGB exists. A priori; the definition of necessary existence.4. It is necessary that a MGB exists, (non-exclusive) or it is not necessary that a MGB exists. Excluded middle.5. If it is not necessary that a MGB exists, then it is necessary that it is not necessary that a MGB exists. Modal status is necessary – if it is impossible that P, it is necessarily impossible that P; possible that P, necessarily possible that P; necessary that P, necessarily necessary that P, and so on. This is Becker’s Postulate. Again, I urge my opponent to consider carefully whether he wishes to waste time on this point.6. It is necessary that a MGB exists (non-exclusive) or it is necessary that it is not necessary that a MGB exists. Follows from the prior two premisses; if p -> q and q -> r, p -> r7. If it is necessary that it is not necessary that a MGB exists, then it is necessary that a MGB does not exist. Remember premiss one: If a MGB exists, then a MGB exists necessarily. If this is so, then if a MGB does NOT exist necessarily (if it is necessary that it is not necessary that a MGB exists), it is necessary that a MGB does not exist.8. It is necessary that a MGB exists (non-exclusive) or it is necessary that a MGB does not exist. Follows from the prior two premisses.9. It is necessary that a MGB exists. We have shown that it is false that it is necessary that a MGB does not exist in premiss two. Therefore, we are ready to conclude.10. A MGB exists. Via the rule from premiss three. Q.E.D. Proof Two: From nothing, nothing comes. There must be a source and a cause of everything, and this fountainhead must have at least as much reality as the things which follow from it (for you cannot get something greater from something lesser). Ideas are subject to this rule. The idea of a table, for instance, must have sprung from something as perfect and real as the idea itself – in this case, an actual table (or, in any case, a string of ideas that, in the end, rest in something as or more real as the final idea). The fact that we have an *idea* of God is not a matter of debate. We understand, intuitively, the concept of an infinite, perfect being. If this is so, we must ask whence this idea came. Since the idea of a perfect being could not have come from anything less real or less perfect than itself, it must have come from a real perfection, and therefore God must exist as the source our idea of Him. Since this idea is of a MGB, God, then, must be a MGB as well. Q. E. D. Proof Three: 1. If the Universe has a cause, there is something which has unlimited power over the Universe. - In the sense that everything about the Universe is the result of this cause; there is nothing in the Universe which would have independent existence.2. The Universe has a cause.3. There is something which has unlimited power over the Universe. - If this being is not yet God, then there must be able to be something greater than it – some reason for its existence – and therefore the argument is arbitrarily extended until we reach the thing which transcends the limits of the Universe and everything, and is thus maximal in all ways; it is beyond bounds, beginnings, ends, matter, and change. There is nothing which can constrain this being, and, thus, it is omnipotent. This is God. Omnipotence: A MGB is self-caused. Its essence involves existence; it is not reliant on anything but itself. Therefore, there must not be anything that can limit it. This is omnipotence. Omniscience: All knowledge is knowledge of some idea, and an idea may only be perfectly understood by understanding its essence. As Spinoza says, in his Ethics, “The knowledge of an effect depends on and involves the knowledge of a cause.” The essences of all secondary things involve those primaries which gave rise to them. A MGB, being the most fundamental existent (the cause of all things; the Prime Mover), must be the cause of all ideas. Therefore, knowledge of any sort must, at heart, be knowledge of God. Since God is but the full expression of God’s essence, and from God’s essence all knowledge follows, God is, in a sense, knowledge and truth itself, and thus, in the truest sense of the phrase, Knows All. Omnibenevolence: If we are to say that any thing is good or evil, we must be able to trace these moral ideas to their foundations. Much like with knowledge, we go to the most fundamental existent: God. God, then, must be the embodiment of morality, and, since we may never say that the source of our ability to pronounce anything good is not good, God must be perfectly moral. Cause of life and the universe: This has been established many times.