Existence of god: from & beyond human experience

Introduction:
In this article, we attempt to understand the very basis for the formulation of the ontological argument to prove the existence of god. We shall also Endeavor to analyze the significance of the religious experience of a person and how these two different segments which are equally important in the philosophy of religion and theology how these fragments help us to comprehend a better picture of the presence of the god. This article seeks to draw a clear picture of God based on primarily the proof that has been rendered to humanity by the common experience of mankind that is found in the religious experience a person has undergone and on the other hand we also get to draw inferences about the existence of the divine mind by the ontological argument that is not based on the human experience how these two arguments go about explaining the origination spoke and nature of the god.
“What art Thou then, my God?
Most highest, most good, most potent, most omnipotent;
most merciful and most just; most hidden and most present;
unchangeable and all-changing; and never new, never old;”
St. Augustine

Main Exposition:
To break the ontological argument further, we can efficiently assert that Anselm meant that whenever we say “that which no more greater being can be conceived ” We are pointing towards the god. And then, when we say the idea of God is the most supreme and the highest, it necessarily hints to the fact that it cannot only be an idea in deep fragments within our thinking pattern of mind. Since then we can conceive the idea of something that is existing in reality- in the practical universe that idea is having more weightage than the mere mental imagination of an idea, be it of the God or anything else.
“[Even a] fool, when he hears of … a being than which nothing greater can be conceived … understands what he hears, and what he understands is in his understanding.… And assuredly that, than which nothing greater can be conceived, cannot exist in the understanding alone. For suppose it exists in the understanding alone: then it can be conceived to exist in reality; which is greater.… Therefore, if that, than which nothing greater can be conceived, exists in the understanding alone, the very being, than which nothing greater can be conceived, is one, than which a greater can be conceived. But obviously this is impossible. Hence, there is no doubt that there exists a being, than which nothing greater can be conceived, and it exists both in the understanding and in reality.”
~ Excerpt from Anselm’s explanation about god.

To curb this grave discrepancy, Anselm came up with the Fructification of the idea that the god, which is the greatest being is not only existing in mind of a person, but if he has to be the greatest conceivable entity than which no other single entity could be conceived- then God has to be present not only in the mental mechanism but also be a part of the reality, he has to be present in the “here-and-now” Concept of the reality. It will, thereby prove that God is indeed the ultimate conceivable being than which no other being could be conceived.

Conclusion:
Anselm explicit his argument by providing the example of a painter and the painting in this case let us assume that there is the idea of painting within the mind of a painter and on the other hand we are having the actual practical piece in the form of an actual painting in the reality which of these two above mentioned options out of these which one would be more acceptable? The philosopher efficiently answers this question by emphatically reiterating towards the point that the painting that is existing both in the mind of the painter as well as actually having its presence in this universe the takes a toll and is bounds with the practical cosmology of this world that particular painting is having more weightage then the mere idea a painting in someone’s mind, because in this case it could downright be a delusional thought, illusion or deception at best.

Religious experience on the other hand is very Vivid living present in this universe there are numerous instances of people who have experienced various godly and Supernatural vibrations surrounding there bodily mechanism and in different circumstances have also felt the presence of a god or a godly figure or the vibrations of something that is called as god around them. Christianity and the Hindu culture the history of such philosophical religions, is replete with instances of the like. In the empirical world where the person is practically feeling the sensation impulsions as well as such supernatural vibrations around the significance surrounding’s those things are praying the way for this particular human being to confidently assert that he or she has experienced something of the sense of a god-related exposure. How can anyone deny the practical existence of such an act this is highly subjective realm but it is still of tremendous impact on a person. When a particular human is asserting to the fact that he has had a direct or indirect personal or impersonal mental or practical contact or exposure to this unsurpassable entity called as god- this is the very lively example instance as well as proof for the perpetual existence of God in this universe and speaking anything against this could be a blatant fallacy, at best. Thereby, we can explain the existence of the god.

References:
https://faculty.georgetown.edu/jod/augustine/aug-god.html
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/augustine/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo
https://iep.utm.edu/anselm-ontological-argument/#H2