Version 2
1. If God exists, then he is perfect.
2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
3. If a being is perfect, then whatever he creates must be perfect.
4. But the universe is not perfect.
5. Therefore, it is impossible for a perfect being to be the creator of the universe (from 3 and 4).
6. Hence, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5).
The usual reply to this line of thought is that whatever imperfections the universe may contain, they are the fault of mankind, not God. Thus, the universe was indeed perfect when God first created it, but it later became imperfect because of the actions of humans. This could be taken as an attack on the argument's premise 3, construed to imply that what is perfect must remain so indefinitely. I shall not pursue the many twists and turns that this issue might take. It is essentially the same as what is called the "Deductive Argument from Evil," which is a topic beyond the scope of the present survey. Let us instead move on to a new argument.
RESPONSE:
1. If God exists, then he is perfect.
2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
3. If a being is perfect, then whatever he creates must be perfect.
4. But the universe is not perfect.
5. Therefore, it is impossible for a perfect being to be the creator of the universe (from 3 and 4).
6. Hence, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5).
The usual reply to this line of thought is that whatever imperfections the universe may contain, they are the fault of mankind, not God. Thus, the universe was indeed perfect when God first created it, but it later became imperfect because of the actions of humans. This could be taken as an attack on the argument's premise 3, construed to imply that what is perfect must remain so indefinitely. I shall not pursue the many twists and turns that this issue might take. It is essentially the same as what is called the "Deductive Argument from Evil," which is a topic beyond the scope of the present survey. Let us instead move on to a new argument.
RESPONSE:
Since this objection is essentially the deducitve argument from evil, I would simply recommend that you read the book that demonstrates that there is no logical contradiction between the existence of evil and the existence of God: God, Freedom, and Evil by Alvin Plantinga (http://www.amazon.com/God-Freedom-Evil-Alvin-Plantinga/dp/0802817319/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1332972291&sr=8-1)
Antoher avenue of response to this argument would be to question its assumption that there is such a thing as a perfect world, or a best of all possible worlds. It has been argued that the notion of a perfect world is incoherent because any great-making properties such a world has, there could always be one more of any or all of those properties added to it without limit. This means that for any world God chooses to create there will always be a better one that He could have created. Therefore, God must at most create a good world, not the best world (since there is no such thing).
Antoher avenue of response to this argument would be to question its assumption that there is such a thing as a perfect world, or a best of all possible worlds. It has been argued that the notion of a perfect world is incoherent because any great-making properties such a world has, there could always be one more of any or all of those properties added to it without limit. This means that for any world God chooses to create there will always be a better one that He could have created. Therefore, God must at most create a good world, not the best world (since there is no such thing).
RSS Feed
