new form of proof for the existence of God, Saint Anselm of Canterbury’s ontological argument fails in its goal. This paper begins by summarizing the axioms and steps of Anselm’s argument. I then forward my own critique of the ontological argument, based on following his definition of understanding to its logical consequence. After objecting to his argument, I propose a possible resolution on behalf of Anselm, followed by a critique of the resolution. Anselm’s argument relies on proving a simple
Atonement. There are arguments that Atonement or Incarnation is not necessary within doctrine and the link to salvation of sins. Arguments deliberate that Incarnation or Atonement does not make sense due to the impossible payments of Sin from people, or why God would lower himself to this goal. These arguments attack the logical and rational way of convincement of non-believers. Both Incarnation and Atonement are necessary for the orderly restoration of the universe through Anselm’s definitions of