An Ontological Argument for the Existence of God 1. Introduction

As the epigraph makes clear, one of the irrefutable facts about the history of humankind has been the existence of various types of religions since time immemorial. Indeed, ancient peoples looked at the sky and the world around them in wonder, and instinctively sought to identify the source of all of this miraculous creation. It is not surprising, then, that the belief in the existence of God can said to be as old as humankind itself. The purpose of this study is to provide a critical analysis of the relevant literature concerning the historic and contemporary ontological argument for the existence of God, and to explicate these findings into a coherent analysis that can serve as a foundation for further research.

2. Historical ontological arguments for the existence of God

In this regard, one authority reports that, “One of the most fascinating arguments for the existence of an all-perfect God is the ontological argument. While there are several different versions of the argument, all purport to show that it is self-contradictory to deny that there exists a greatest possible being. Thus, on this general line of argument, it is a necessary truth that such a being exists; and this being is the God of traditional Western theism.”[footnoteRef:2] From an ontological perspective, then, the existence of God is an a priori reality even when mere humans fail to cognitively grasp and consciously concede this reality. Consequently, the arguments in support of the existence of the “God of traditional Western theism” all stem from this a priori assumption, making the analysis somewhat circular and therefore confounding for many biblical scholars.[footnoteRef:3] [2: Kenneth E. Himma (2018) “Anselm: Ontological Argument for God's Existence” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, [online] available: https://www.iep.utm.edu/ont-arg/.] [3: Joseph H. Pearson, “The Cambridge Companion to Anselm/Anselm of Canterbury and His Theological Inheritance/Anselm of Canterbury: The Beauty of Theology.” Anglican Theological Review 88 (1, Winter 2006), 107.]

While the seemingly legitimate argument can be made that the existence of God can be proven by “just looking around,” theologians and laypersons alike are vitally interested in delving further into the issue in ways that can provide more concrete evidence to support this view. As Jesus made clear in Luke 4:12, though, “It is said: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’” Nevertheless, this admonition has not stopped countless individuals from seeking some type of proof positive that they can point to in order to reassure themselves and their fellow humans that there is indeed a “greatest being” in the universe who is responsible for all of the creation around them..

One of the early proponents of the ontological argument in support of the existence of God was Saint Anselm of Canterbury.[footnoteRef:4] According to Anselm’s perspective written in the early 12th century, the mysteries that abound in the world are sufficient evidence to confirm the existence of God and it would be foolhardy to argue otherwise. For example, one authority notes that, “St. Anselm’s version of the ontological argument appears in his Proslogium, Chapter II, and is the definitive statement of the argument.”[footnoteRef:5] For example, in Chapter II of his Proslogium, Anselm writes: “Truly there is a God, although the fool hath said in his heart, There is no God,”[footnoteRef:6] and then goes on to explain why in detail. As a relevant analogy, Anselm argues that, “When a painter first conceives of what he will afterwards perform, he has it in his understanding, but he does not yet understand it to be, because he has not yet performed it. But after he has made the painting, he both has it in his understanding, and he understands that it exists, because he has made it.”[footnoteRef:7] [4: Phillip Luke Sinitiere, “The Medieval Theologians: An Introduction to Theology in the Medieval Period.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 46 (1, March 2003), 152.] [5: “St Anselm’s Ontological Argument” (2018) Philosophy of Religion. [online] available: http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/theistic-proofs/the-ontological-argument/st-anselms-ontological-argument/] [6: Sidney N. Deane (1903), Works of St. Anselm [online] available: sacred-texts.com.] [7: Deane (1903).]

In sum, Anselm maintains that humanity depends on experiential sources to confirm or refute abstract conceptualizations, including most especially the fundamental hypothesis concerning the existence or nonexistence of God. This reliance on experience, however, flies in the face of what Anselm contends is the overarching reality of God’s existence. In this regard, one biblical authority points out that Anselm’s argument assumes “the form of a reductio ad absurdum, which means...

In the case of Anselm’s ontological argument, the hypothesis treated in this way is the hypothesis that God does not exist. Anselm’s argument rests upon the conception of God as ‘that than which no greater can be conceived.’ It is this conception of God with which the hypothesis that God does not exist is supposed to conflict.”[footnoteRef:8] [8: “St Anselm’s Ontological Argument” (2018).]
In truth, the hypothesis that God does not exist would appear on its face to be as problematic to confirm or refute as its corollary, but here again this profound constraints has not stopped humanity from making the attempt. Speculations and conjectures have always abounded concerning problem statements such as whether if there is a God, can he create a boulder so large that even he cannot move it, and in some ways this same reasoning applies to the ontological argument in support of the existence of God. For instance, Anselm asserts that:

If God is that than which no greater can be conceived, then nothing can be imagined that is greater than God. If God does not exist, though, then something can be imagined that is greater than God, namely a God that does exist. Obviously this is impossible. Hence, there is no doubt that there exists a being, than which nothing greater can be conceived, and it exists both in the understanding and in reality.[footnoteRef:9] [9: “St Anselm’s Ontological Argument” (2018).]

In sharp contrast to the modern scientific method whereby a hypothesis is first propounded, methods are formulated to test that hypothesis and a conclusion is drawn from the resulting empirical observations and findings, the ontological argumentative approach begins with a hypothesis that cannot be logically refuted and arguments to the contrary are either misinformed, ill-intentioned or ignorant of the reality of God’s existence and are therefore erroneous. This apparently unassailable position, of course, begs the attempt to refute it but the ontological arguments in support of the existence of God do not brook refutation.

The rationale in support of this irrefutable position concerning the existence of God is based squarely on the aforementioned “can God make a boulder” argument: “The hypothesis that God does not exist thus seems to give rise to a logical absurdity: that there both is and is not something that can be imagined that is greater than God. There is, because it’s possible to imagine a God that does exist. There isn‘t, because it’s impossible to imagine something greater than the greatest thing imaginable.”[footnoteRef:10] In other words, like young children arguing over what number is the largest (“Infinity plus one”), the arguments against the existence of God pale when compared to his truly ubiquitous and omnipotent nature which preclude superlative comparisons. In this regard, the point is also made by Anselm’s view that, “A hypothesis that gives rise to a logical absurdity, though, must be false. The hypothesis that God does not exist, therefore, is false; God exists.” [footnoteRef:11] [10: “St Anselm’s Ontological Argument” (2018).] [11: “St Anselm’s Ontological Argument” (2018).]

A form of Anselm’s ontological argument in support of the existence of God is summarized below.

(1) God is that than which no greater can be conceived.

(2) If God is that than which no greater can be conceived then there is nothing greater than God that can be imagined.

Therefore:

(3) There is nothing greater than God that can be imagined.

(4) If God does not exist then there is something greater than God that can be imagined.

Therefore:

(5) God exists.[footnoteRef:12] [12: “St Anselm’s Ontological Argument” (2018).]

Based on the argument’s first premise (1), the conceptualization of God propounded by Anselm (2) should be regarded as an obvious truth based on humanity’s inability to conceptualize any entity greater (3). As a result, Anselm’s final premise (4) naturally follows from this line of reasoning.[footnoteRef:13] [13: “St Anselm’s Ontological Argument” (2018).]

During the 17th century, René Descartes took up a similar argument in support of the existence of God in his Fifth Meditation wherein he “claims to provide a proof demonstrating the existence of God from the idea of a supremely perfect being [arguing] that there is no less contradiction in conceiving a supremely perfect being who lacks existence than there is in conceiving a triangle whose interior angles do not sum to 180 degrees.[footnoteRef:14] When Descartes argued, Cogito ergo sum [“I think therefore I am”], he was making essentially the…