Assumption 2 means the thought of omnipresence into ready theoretic terminology
Premise 1: If Jesus is present, then God are an omnipresent being.
Premise 2: If goodness is definitely an omnipresent simply being, subsequently no set excludes Him.
Premise 3: absolutely a collection of items which are not goodness, refer to it as S.
Premise 4. perhaps Lord is within S, or Jesus is definitely left out from S.
Principle 5: If Lord is actually S, next Lord isn’t goodness, a contradiction.
Premise 6: God are excluded from S.
Principle 7: If goodness are excluded from S, consequently goodness will never be omnipresent.
Idea 8: Hence, goodness seriously is not omnipresent.
Bottom line: consequently, Jesus will not exists.
[given that the point is just resting there, youve must declare a couple of things concerning this, outlining the premise and these.]
This argument try deductively appropriate. Idea 1 pursue through the regular assumption about Gods properties. Presumably that is uncontroversial.
Idea 2 converts the notion of omnipresence into ready theoretical consideration. Its using the idea that an omnipresent existence happens to be wherever, and so it really is in almost every set.
Idea 3 is actually accurate, because nobody promises that each and every thing is actually goodness. Therefore, it stands to reason to refer these types of non-God pieces collectively as a collection.
Idea 4 uses within the axioms of put theory, as well as not debatable.
Philosophy 5 pursue within the meaning of the put S, as the selection of those things which are not God. Thus, if goodness has S, next goodness isn’t God. However this is a contradiction, and furthermore, as it follows from supposing Lord is during S, we will rule out Gods staying in S. Thus, premise 6, Lord is omitted from S.