There are many theories as to why a God might exist, but the ontological argument tells us that a God is a necessary truth based on self-contradiction or denial of God's existence . They use the proposition of the concept of God to argue the implicit existence of God. This is to assume that God is by definition the greatest thing imaginable and that imagining something greater that could also exist is impossible. They use the general rule of positive and negative existential statements to try to prove the existence of God. they do this in several ways, with the classical version of the ontological argument being the most recognized, the reductio ad absurdum ("reduction of the absurdity") of the ontological argument, and the modal versions of the argument. He explains that nothing can exist in imagination alone, it must also exist in reality to truly exist, and they decided that there must be such a being that exists in imagination and reality for nothing bigger than can exist. I do not find this argument true in asserting the fact that God must exist in reality, even if...