The Existence of God is possible

First thing first, Pro plagerized his ENTIRE argument fromhttp://www.peterkreeft.com...He didn't even sources it.Second thing, we agreed to god being defined ashe creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.This is NOT the same definition of god that Pro used in his second round arguments.Why this definition of God is impossibleThe definition of god that was agreed upon is impossible for a simple reason, the universe cannot logically be created.P1) If the universe was created, then it has a cause.P2) The universe does not have a cause.C) The universe was not created.Premise 1 is true as a taughtology. I will therefore defned Premise 2 here.From some of my previous debates (for example: http://www.debate.org...;):P1) If God created the universe, the universe has a cause.P2) The universe can only have a cause if tensed facts exist.P3) Tensed facts do not exist.C1) The universe does not have a cause (follows from P2 and P3).C2) God did not create the universe (follows from P1 and C1).Defense of Premise 1:I am sure that this does not need much for explanation. If God created the universe, the logically god is the cause and the universe is the effect.Defense of Premise 2:The principals of causality require for there to be a movement of time. A before the effect, an after the cause, etc. This requires tensed facts.This point is seemingly agreed upon by all time theorists, even William Lane Craig.Defense of Premise 3:To defend premise 3 I will be proposing that the most probable theory of time is the B-Theory of Time.Effects like relativity and time dialation support the B-Theory of Time while refuting the A-Theory of Time (the A-Theory of Time is the theory of time that allows tensed facts to exist).Further support for this premise comes from recent experiments in quantum mechanics. Under the B-Theory of Time, the progression of time is an illusion, and time does not really pass. If one were to have "god view", a view of the universe from outside of it, the universe would appear static.A recent study has shown that the progress of time is an illusion caused from quantum entanglement, and that if you did have "god view" that the universe would actually appear static.Conclusion:From the above, we can conclude that the universe cannot logically have a temporal cause, and thus cannot have a creator.Why the Ontological Argument failsEven though Pro showed EXTREMELY poor conduct, I will show why the ontological arguments fail.Anselm's Version1.It is greater for a thing to exist in the mind and in reality than in the mind alone.2."God" means "that than which a greater cannot be thought."3.Suppose that God exists in the mind but not in reality.4.Then a greater than God could be thought (namely, a being that has all the qualities our thought of God has plus real existence).5.But this is impossible, for God is "that than which a greater cannot be thought."6.Therefore God exists in the mind and in reality.This argument attempts to add to the definition of god the property of existence. The problem is that existence is not a physical property, and thus cannot be assigned to things.If I define Big Foot as existing, it does not make Big Foot real.If I define Vulcan as existing, it does not make Vulcan real.Let's try a joke argument using the logic from Anselm's version:P1) It is greater for a thing to exist in the mind and in reality than in the mind alone.P2) Vulcan is the greatest planet.P3) Suppose that Vulcan exists in the mind but not in reality.P4) Then a greater than Vulcan could be thought (namely, a planet that has all the qualities our thought of Vulcan has plus real existence).P5) But this is impossible, for Vulcan is the greatest planet.C) Therefore Vulcan exists in the mind and in reality.Vulcan does not automatically exist because we describe it as being the greatest, or describe it as existing. The same is true of god.Another probelm with the argument is that it commits a converse error.It states that if something exists that it has greatness, but at the end it says that god has greatness and thus exists.FURTHERMORE, using greatness as a measure of reality can be used in a parody argument that shows it would be greater for god not to exist.Gasking made the following argument as a parody of the ontological argument:P1) The creation of the universe is the greatest achievement imaginableP2) The merit of an achievement consists of its intrinsic greatness and the ability of its creator.P3) The greater the handicap to the creator, the greater the achievement (would you be more impressed by Turner painting a beautiful landscape or a blind one-armed dwarf?)P4) The biggest handicap to a creator would be non-existenceP5) Therefore if we suppose that the universe is the creation of an existing creator, we can conceive a greater being — namely, one who created everything while not existing.C) Therefore, God does not exist.Using the same idea that greatness makes something real will also show that that thing cannot be real.Since the logic of the ontological argument does not force a single conclusion, the logic is flawed.If the logic is flawed, the argument is flawed.The possible worlds version also does not force the conclusion since the following argument can also be made:P1) It is possible that God does not exist, i.e. there is some possible world where God does not exist.P2) God is defined as a necessary being, i.e. exists in all possible worlds.P3) If there is one possible world where God does not exist, then there is no possible world in which God exists in all possible worlds.P4) If there is no possible world in which God exists in all possible worlds, then it is impossible that God exists.C) It is impossible that God exists.Again, the arguement's logic is flawed.Pro's argument from Time and Contingency depends on the A-Theory of Time, I showed at the beginning of this round that the B-Theory of Time is, in fact, correct.I also want to point out one more time that the definition of God that was agreed upon does not even work for these ontological arguments.