Anselm
Dean Zimmerman and Alvin Plantinga discuss the ontological argument for the existence of God. After Kant‘s, and others’, critiques of Anselm, most philosophers regarded the ontological argument as a failed argument for theism–perhaps useful for theology, but not useful for demonstrating that God exists. However, in the 20th Century, Alvin Plantinga and others reworked the argument by incorporating modal logic. Plantinga’s version of the argument, while often confusing to non-philosophers, is relatively uncontroversial among philosophers today in terms of its logic and conclusion. By admitting the possibility of God, a standard theorem of modal logic leads to the conclusion that God exists. Atheists are quick to respond by denying the possibility of God in order to side-step the argument’s conclusion. But is it rational to make such a bold claim? That God cannot possibly exist?
Related articles
- Philosophy In the Real World: When Plantinga Is Near (christmyredeemer.wordpress.com)
- The Logical Problem of Evil (2) (veritasmizzou.wordpress.com)
The Good News 
There is a curiously thin line between believing in god through faith in God and believing in God through reason. Were the two are usually mixed together I think there is a very distinct difference. When people say they believe in something for a reason, they make up arguments and proofs and write books on modal logic. When someone says they have faith they are believing without reason, or “without seeing”, as it is sometimes said. They need no reason, they fully trust in the idea of God with no other precedent then their hearts. This sounds foolish to the logician, but I think it can be infinitely more stable. People who believe things out of reason can be frustrated or knocked out of their belief through argument, people who have faith are hardly effected by argument because they’re beliefs have an entirely different foundation than logic, and thus can hardly ever be shaken.
LikeLike
I approved this comment but somehow it got lost.
You said: “When someone says they have faith they are believing without reason, or “without seeing”, as it is sometimes said.” This is sooooo classic. I here this all the time from Richard Dawkins to the little lady around the corner. There is reason, but, to contrast, many Christians do place their faith in Jesus, without studying the evidence and that is perfectly legitimate to do! BUT, just because some Christians do that does not mean that there is no evidence and not reasons behind belief–there are many reasons to believe and enormous mounds of evidence.
LikeLike