Several individuals have tried to prove through many ways that God exists. Anselm used the ontological argument, proposing that if God could be thought of and perceived, then God has to exist. At the center of the ontological argument is the idea or concept of existence. The Ontological argument is a deduction and being of Hericladis which nature loves to hide. "Ontological" means talking about being and so in the Philosophy case, that being is the existence or being of God. The ontological argument differs from other arguments in favor of God because of the fact that it is an a priori deductive argument, a priori means that a person arguing this can reach a certain conclusion by the use of reason and not proof. A deductive argument means that if the premises that are put into the argument are true, then the conclusion must be true, deduction to see where idea leaves. First of all, if God loved us all, then why doomed us to live in this chaotic world and let us suffer or getting a second try. Could he, an omnipotent being, not create a world where there is no natural evil or suffering? For example, I LOVE my dog. I, being the PERFECT architect that I am, create a house for my dog. For example that it could have made the doghouse with utmost comfort since the best architect in the world. It seems absurd, or even cruel for me to pound the nails in from bottom to top, allowing the pointy tips of the nails to pierce through the floor, sticking straight up. Yeah, the dog might struggle walking around his house, but at least I have taught him to value life and the meaning of determination. Reality is greater than thoughts which exist in understanding which exists in reality. The methodology gives an understand meant to faith. This argument basically states that God, in creating people, wanted us to have freewill, that which involves being free to act wrongly as well as to act rightly. Furthermore, if somehow God has the ability to control what we should and should not do, then we are mere human puppets, dangling from the strings of predestined principles. Therefore, it would be contradictory for God to give us freewill, but at the same time, control what we choose to do with that privilege. The theist, in turn, has defended existence of God in the presence of evil by stating that God gave us free will, and with that comes evil. If God is everywhere then how do motion work and the object actually exist? If God isn’t visible, if motion isn’t capable of happening and how nature is the creator isn’t God the creator.
On the other hand, if God has this so call control over mortals how is there ontovana which there is no self or object. In the phenomena world there is no same touching. Apparently all this is controlled by God but if an object and the person doesn’t exist why
