ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the ontological argument (OA) and contend that if crucial words like ‘God’ and ‘great’ are not given a religious, Godly, understanding from the outset they are, by default, given a ‘worldly’ understanding hostile to real faith, and that while the OA fails as a proof. It presents a penetrating insight into the relationship between religious understanding and religious belief. Much philosophy of religion tries to prove or disprove the existence of God. The bare sequence of words “God exists” has as much truth in it as the culture or individual who uses it, or hears or reads it, can bring to it. The “more is better” criterion is an unnoticed default assumption in most discussions of OA and of God as a “perfect being.” Saying God is disembodied is not to say he is an invisible mind, but indicates that notions of visibility and invisibility have no application to God.
