The ontological argument for God's existance Term Paper

The ontological argument for God's existance - Term Paper Example Each Christian must be familiar and informed about the teachings of the Church and Christ. However, it is also helpful to be well-versed with the philosophical and theological writings of Church members. Most of these writings of Christian philosophers and theologians can shed light on the problem of evil, God’s existence and other hostilities that are rejected by modern non-believers. A concise philosophical foreword to intellectual arguments on the subject of God’s existence can aid in propagating the truth and representing Christianity as a logical religion and a lifestyle to other people. This study concentrates on three popular arguments concerning the existence of God – the ontological, cosmological and teleological argument. These evidences have constantly been disputed by different theologians and philosophers over the years. II. St. Anselm’s First Argument St. Anselm, a Doctor of the Church and Canterbury’s Catholic archbishop, was the firs t to formulate the Ontological Argument. This argument is conceivably the most bizarre and most intensely debated proof about the existence of God. It has gained the attention of prominent philosophers such as G.W.F. Hegel (who supported Anselm’s claim) and Immanuel Kant (who opposed Anselm’s claim). ... In essence, this means that the idea of God is a concept buried in people’s minds. God is a probable being and might truly exist. This is because the concept of God does not yield internal inconsistencies. If a particular thing/being exists solely in our own perception and could possibly have existed in reality, then it might have been superior and greater. Simply put, this certain something that is existent in reality great or perfect. Something that only resides in people’s minds can become greater by existing for real. Suppose that, theoretically, God exists solely in a person’s understanding and not for real, then it is probable that God would be greater than he already is (following from premise 3). This means that God can become greater. This argument becomes ridiculous because God is already a perfect being in which a â€Å"greater† is no longer possible. This is where the contradiction lies. Hence, it follows that the notion of God existing only in a person’s understanding is false. For this reason, God exists both in people’s understanding and in reality. This argument is intriguing because it claims that God, who is perfect, should exist in all possible situations so as to gratify his perfection. A God who is existent in only selected circumstances and does not exist in others is a being who is less than perfect. III. Gaunilo’s Reply to St. Anselm’s Arguments Gaunilo is a monk of Marmoutier and a contemporary of Anselm. He was responsible for the creation of one of the most vital critiques of the argument posed by Anselm. It is a sensible to care that the contention of Anselm unlawfully moves from the existence of a concept to the existence of something corresponding to that concept. As put sometimes by the objection, things are