If nothing else this series on the existence of God has expanded your vocabulary. You can now tell your friends about the cosmological argument, teleological argument, and anthropic principle. To this you can add the ontological argument. This one is a little different from the others. It might stretch your mind some, but I trust you all can handle it.
Let me say this first. The ontological argument is a controversial argument. It is for a couple reasons. First, unlike the other arguments it is not an argument from the natural physical world we can see. Instead it is primarily a philosophical argument. Second, it is an argument that many (even Christians) find invalid. In fact, I have gone back and forth on the validity of the argument (currently I think it is valid). The version I defend is a modified version of how it was original presented.
Let me explain the argument in the simplest way and then I will expand upon it more in our next post in the series. The argument basically states that since humans can think of God then He must exist. The primary proof of the argument is that some sort of supernatural creator is seen in all civilizations of humanity. Therefore, God must exist. Otherwise where did this widespread belief in such a being originate?
Obviously I will have to unpack this more in the next post, but hopefully this post will get you thinking.
New to the site sign up for the monthly newsletter and check back for our morning devotionals and afternoon studies. If you are veteran keep spreading the Word. Lets grow together.