The Ontological Argument

View the Fine Tuning Argument animation video:

View the Moral Argument animation video:

View Leibniz’ Contingency Argument video:

Reasonable Faith features the work of philosopher and theologian Dr. William Lane Craig and aims to provide in the public arena an intelligent, articulate, and uncompromising yet gracious Christian perspective on the most important issues concerning the truth of the Christian faith today, such as:

-the existence of God
-the meaning of life
-the objectivity of truth
-the foundation of moral values
-the creation of the universe
-intelligent design
-the reliability of the Gospels
-the uniqueness of Jesus
-the historicity of Jesus' resurrection
-the challenge of religious pluralism

We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:

[PleaseReadTheBible]

I’ve watched hundreds of debates multiple times over (rewatching them) and have read about this a decent amount. This video really captures the essence of the argument better than anything I’ve ever seen. I actually had a truly amazing experience watching this. I already understood the argument but the addition of the PERFECT visual representation just blew me away. It’s burned into my brain and soul forever. What an absolutely brilliant video… Honestly.

[MechaWingZero]

This video is excellent both in presentation and content. The more I think about this wonderfully strange argument, the more I'm convinced it actually holds up.

[ChipChurp]

I studied geometry and this sounds exactly like proofs we would do

[owaisahmadshah]

Where are all the comments?

In a possible world

[TrendyWeb]

While I realize Dr. Craig disagrees with it, I believe the Ontological argument becomes far more convincing when we take into account God’s Infinite and Absolute Simplicity.

[vinniebasile]

This was by far the best explanation of the ontological argument I’ve heard. I used to shove this one aside as nonsensical, but now I’m starting to realize that I had a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument. The ontological argument is the most misunderstood philosophical concept known to man. If we were playing in the Super Bowl of theistic arguments, this underdog would pull off the upset that changes the game forever.

[danielanthony]

Never heard this argument up until a few weeks ago
I'm still trying to wrap my head around it

[Digitally_Faith]

Just thanks! I’m a nerd who discovered that logic and science are not separate from God like I was taught in school. 🙏🏽🥳

[LindeeLove]

How do you define great? Isn't that purely subjective?

[emil]

Thank you for this video. This video presents such an important and fascinating topic in a beautiful, coherent and articulated approach. The medieval animation for the video is spectacular and spoke directly to me. Bravo!

[drkhan]

I'm a Muslim, and I can understand why someone would be agnostic, but I find being atheist is dumb. Like if I don't know the answer to something, I would say "I don't know", not "no" which is why I don't understand atheism.

[sloanjackson]

I love St. Anselm! Also what a great video! I love all of your content!

[MichaelSmithfu]

But see..when you start using wordage like "a maximally great being must be all powerful, all knowing, and morally perfect", your fooling yourself because it is actually you yourself who is arbitrarily constructing and reapplying these concepts in the first place. Think about this...
"Great" is a subjective term first of all. You're just using it in a way that isn't obvious to it's suggestiveness.
2nd you call it a "being", anthropomorphizing it. Last but not least is the problem of asserting any sort of ideal like "moral perfection". Even there is some form of universal morally perfect being, it cannot be used in argument. That sort of fallaciousness destroys itself.

[colinadams]

The idea of being all-powerful and all-knowing is logically incoherent though. Can an all-powerful god create a stone that he cannot pick up? Can an all-powerful and all-knowing god change his mind? How can he be all powerful if he can't change his mind, how can he change his mind if he already knows all?
How do you define moral perfection? Is that not as subjective as the perfect pizza? If a maximally great being defined part of moral perfection as committing murder for no reason, would that be the objective moral standard?
Why is existence part of the definition of perfection? The logic follows that for a maximally great being to exist, then he must exist to be maximally great. So, if a maximally great being exists, then he exists?

[ARCTCH]

You can use this argument to define whatever you want into existence. It's a joke

[uke]

Frank sent me here. The video did not disappoint. Thank you.

[patriciaschuster]

Thank you for sharing this. Shades of medieval philosophy and philosophy of religion!

[daroay]

Knowing a bit of platonism helps understanding what the video means with "possibilities". Not sure if the monk who suggested the ontological argument was a scholastic, but by the sound of the argument... likely he was.

[senatorjosephmccarthy]

It is impossible anything popped itself into existence; gravity, quarks, centrifugal force, light, carbon and all.
It is Impossible those began their own existence, and close enough in time and space to cooperate in modifying themselves to higher states.
And without consciousness.
The most unworkable construct foisted unto the most unaware.

[bartbannister]

1 It's possible for a maximally great being not to exist.
2 In some possible world, a maximally great being does not exist.
3 A maximally great being must exist in all possible worlds.
4 Therefore a maximally great being does not exist.
Amazing what you can "prove" with word salad.