By: Brian G. Chilton, M.Div., Ph.D. | October 12, 2025
In 1077, while serving as the abbot of the Benedictine monastery in Bec in Normandy, Anselm of Canterbury wrote these classic words about God that have been etched in theological history, saying the following:
“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”[1]
While Anselm’s words have been constructed to be an ancient form of the ontological argument, it is unclear whether Anselm meant for his writings to be an apologetic argument as much as a reflection on the greatness of God. Regardless of whether you view Anselm’s statement as an apologetic defense for God or a deep theological reflection, it is clear that Anselm makes an important statement about the necessary characteristics of God existing as a maximally great being.
Philosophers and theologians have called Anselm’s take on God the “Anselmian God.”[2] That is, a maximally great being possesses all the greatest-making properties, such as omnipotence (all-powerful), omniscience (all-knowing), omnipresence (ever-present), and omnibenevolece (the epitome of goodness and love).
The Anselmian God—a maximally great being—is not just a theoretical concept of God; rather, it exemplifies the essential characteristics of Who God must be. A case can be made for God existing as a maximally great being from three important domains—philosophical, theological, and biblical. Let us dive into the three frameworks to make our case for an Anselmian God, a God Who than which nothing greater can be conceived.
A Philosophical Case for a Maximally Great God
First, a philosophical case can be made for a maximally great Being—that is, an Anselmian God for which nothing greater could be conceived. There are several avenues we could take at this juncture. We could show how that for God to exist as Creator, He would necessarily possess all the maximally great characteristics. We could use the moral argument to show why God must hold all the maximally good characteristics. But to keep ourselves within the restraints of this brief project, let us consider how Thomas Aquinas distinguished between four categories of ontological existence—pure act, act mixed with potentiality (spiritual and physical), and pure potentiality. In Aquinas’s understanding, act speaks of existence and potentiality speaks of a being or thing not existing, but one that potentially could at some point.
Pure Act: Aquinas describes God as pure act. That is, God is pure existence.[3] For God to be God, God must be the First Mover of all creation. Nothing could move upon God to force God to create. If so, the thing that moved upon God would be God. But God—by necessity—must be pure existence. God cannot not have existed. As such, God would—by necessity—exist beyond the scope of creation and time. Therefore, God would necessarily hold the attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence regarding creation, because everything would have been created by God’s Being. Because God created human beings for relationship and offered us knowledge of the good, the true, and the beautiful, then God must—by necessity—be Good (omnibenevolent).
Act Mixed with Potentiality: Aquinas also speaks of beings that are act mixed with potentiality.[4] In this section, he divides two living beings into two subcategories: angels, who exist as spirits with no bodies, and humans, who exist as spirits within bodies. It is important to note that beings in both categories were created by God, as there was a point that both angels and humans did not exist. Thus, their existence is attributed to God. Aquinas states, “It is impossible for anything which is not pure act, but which has some admixture of potentiality, to be its own actuality.”[5] That is, nothing that has a beginning could have created itself. Everything that has a starting point—whether angels, humans, or creation itself—must have been created by something that exists (act). Therefore, everything must owe its ultimate existence to God.
Pure Potentiality: Things that exist as pure potentiality are ideas that exist only in the mind or prime matter. Prime matter could be understood as pure potentiality since it has no actual existence until it is united with a living thing. This category is only added for educational purposes. It is the exact opposite of God, Who exists as pure act, since it is completely dependent on living things.
A Theological Case for a Maximally Great God
Second, a theological case could be made for God existing as a maximally great Being. While many theological avenues could be taken, let us focus our attention on two particularly: revelation and the problem of evil.
Revelation:
When it comes to theological discourse, often conversations devolve into one party saying, “Well, my God is like this” and the other party saying, “That may be your God, but my God is like this.” Ultimately, there can only be one God, even though views about the one God are multifaceted. Only one divine God could hold the characteristics found for a maximally great Being.
While views about God are many, the more important question is, what does God say about Himself? Has God revealed anything about Himself to the world? There are two ways that God communicates His attributes to the world: through general revelation—what we can know about God through the world He created, and specific revelation—what God reveals about Himself through direct communication. We will cover specific revelation in our biblical case for a maximally great God. For general revelation, Paul reveals that God’s “invisible attributes, that is, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen since the creation of the world” (Rom. 1:20, CSB). Knowing that creation must have come from something or someone greater than ourselves, creation itself speaks of a maximally great God. He is one Who must be greater than space and time. Therefore, God could not be one Who is subject to creation. Rather, all of creation is subject to God’s might and wisdom.
Problem of Evil:
One of the great pushbacks against a maximally great God is the problem of evil. If God is a maximally great being Who knows all, sees all, and is over all, then why is there so much pain and evil in the world? Two responses can be offered to this charge. First, God can use tragedies and difficulties to bring about a greater good. That truth is not necessarily comforting when someone recently loses a loved one or experiences great hardship. There is a time for mourning and grieving loss (Ecc. 3:1). However, even during the difficulties and hardships we experience, God is able to bring something good even out of human evil. It must be emphasized that God did not bring about the evil, pain, or difficulties. Evil is a privation of the good. In other words, evil comes about by a denigration of something good God intended. (It is best not to push this into a small, myopic box. A lot needs to be unpacked here, and it would take us beyond the scope of our article.) God made something good out of Joseph’s hardships in the book of Genesis. Lest we forget, God used the sacrifice of Jesus to bring salvation to the world. He redeemed history’s worst moment to make it a great blessing to all who receive.
Second, does the idea that God is less than maximally great offer any real solutions to the problem of evil? In theological systems like process theology, open theism, panentheism, and finite godism, God is viewed as one Who changes with the physical world. God is limited by time since He cannot see future events. Or God is restricted by the physical world and human choices. In other words, God evolves with creation. But there is a fatal flaw with these concepts. In all of these conceptions of God, whether it is human choices, the limitation of seeing knowing future events, or God’s inability to change certain things, creation is placed on a higher sphere than God. Therefore, creation assumes the throne that God only should possess. Therefore, creation becomes an idol. God then becomes a hapless, inept, hippy Who sings Kumbaya while Rome burns to the ground. Such iterations of God make Him powerless. What hope is found in such a concept of God? God is no longer the conqueror who brings ultimate good to His creation. Rather, God becomes a demigod Who falls victim to the woes of humanity’s sin and falls prey to Satan’s deception. Thankfully, that is not the biblical depiction of God.
A Biblical Case for a Maximally Great God
Most important to our discussion is seeing what God has revealed about Himself. Our third and final case for a maximally great God comes from biblical revelation. Does the Bible present God as a maximally great Being? Most assuredly! As previously mentioned, it is of critical important to understand what God reveals about Himself. The Bible is God’s revelation. As such, we learn about Who God is through the pages of Scripture. Let us take a look at four of the most essential divine characteristics as laid forth in this article—omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, and omnibenevolence.
Omnipotence (Gen. 1; Ps. 61:11; Ps. 21:13; 71:18; 115: 3; Nah. 1:3):
Omnipotence is understood to describe God’s unlimited power (omni=all; potent=power).[6] Or, in other words, God can do “whatever is possible to do.”[7] J. A. McHugh notes that the Old Testament contains “more than 70 passages in which God is called El Shaddai (i.e., omnipotent).”[8] The title El Shaddai combines the words El, meaning “God,” and shaddai, meaning “almighty, likely tied to the mountain of the cosmos.[9] In the New Testament, the term pantokrator means “almighty” or “all-powerful.”[10]
Several biblical passages speak of the omnipotence of God. As noted, El Shaddai is used as a title for God, speaking of His omnipotence (Gen. 17:1; 28:3; 35:11; 43:14; 48:3; Exod. 6:3; Eze. 10:5). In most cases, the title is used when God issues a covenant with someone, declaring God’s omnipotent power to keep His end of the bargain. In the New Testament, the term pantokrator, meaning “almighty,” occurs in several places (2 Cor. 6:18, Revelation 1:8; 4:8; 11:17; 15:3; 16:7, 14; 19:6, 15; and 21:22). God is shown to operate from a position of supremacy (Job 31:2), with power to perform miracles (Rev. 15:3), and is limitless in his power and knowledge (Ps. 147:5). The biblical portrayal of God’s omnipotence is without parallel and is evident beyond reasonable doubt.
Omnipresence (1 Kgs. 8:27; Ps. 95:3-5; 139:7-10; Matt. 6:6; Col. 1:17):
Divine omnipresence means that God is everywhere at once. In other words, as Geisler states, “there is nowhere that God is absent.”[11] Numerous verses speak of God’s omnipresent nature. In 1 Kings 8:27, it is asked if the earth is the complete dwelling place of God since even the heavens cannot contain the presence of God. The psalmist reflects that “The LORD is the great God, the great King above all gods. In his hands are the depths of the earth, and the mountain peaks belong to him. The sea is his, for he made it, and his hands formed the dry land” (Ps. 95:3-5, NIV94). The psalmist also asks, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” noting that no matter where he goes, God’s presence is already there (Ps. 139:7-10, NIV94). Since creation belongs to God and God is greater than creation, it stands to reason that creation cannot restrain the amazing presence of Almighty God.
Omniscience (Gen. 6:5; Job 21:22; 36:4; 37:16; Ps. 139; Matt. 6:8; 10:29-30; Acts 15:17-18; Rom. 8:29; Eph. 1:11; Heb. 4:13):
Omniscience is understood as God’s complete knowledge of everything—past, present, and future. God knows the actual, the possible, and counterfactuals. Here again, numerous passages of Scripture address God’s unlimited knowledge. In Job 21:22, it is asked, “Can anyone teach God knowledge?” Again, in Job, God says, “Be assured that my words are not false; one perfect in knowledge is with you” (Job 36:4, NIV94). The psalmist shows how God is not restrained by time by saying, “You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar. You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O LORD” (Ps. 139:2-4, NIV94).
Paul states, “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths are beyond tracing out!” (Rom. 11:33, NIV94). The writer of Hebrews also acknowledges that “there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him to whom we must answer” (Heb. 4:13, NASB20). Lastly, Proverbs notes that “The eyes of the LORD are in every place, watching the evil and the good” (Prov. 15:3, NASB20; also see 2 Chron. 16:9). No one can escape the knowledge of God.
Omnibenevolence (Deut. 10:15; Isa. 61:8; Jer. 31:3; Hos. 3:1; Zeph. 3:17; Lk. 6:35; Rom. 5:5; 8:35-39):
Lastly, the Bible has a lot to say about God’s omnibenevolence. Omnibenevolence is understood as the all-goodness of God. Omnibenevolence literally means “all-good.” The terms chesed in the Old Testament and agape in the New speak of God’s goodness, affection, goodwill, lovingkindness, and sometimes sacrificial love. Worded another way, God’s omnibenevolence speaks of God’s “infinite and unlimited goodness.”[12]
Conclusion
As this lengthy article has shown, a strong case for God’s existence as a maximally great Being can be made from various strains of argumentation. First, a philosophical case can be made that God necessarily exists as pure being, since all space and time flowed from God, and not the other way around. As such, God necessarily is a maximally great Being because He is pure existence and the Creator of all that exists.
Theologically, it stands to reason that God is a maximally great Being because of His divine revelation. Both general and specific revelation speak to God’s maximally great characteristics. Additionally, the greatest rebuke against God’s maximally great attributes is the problem of evil. However, it was shown that lessening God’s traits to account for evil and suffering worsens the problem, as God is made into a weak, inept hippy rather than One Who brings victory over evil and suffering.
Finally, in perhaps what is the greatest strain of evidence of all, a biblical case can be made for God as a maximally great Being. Numerous passages defend God’s omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence.
Given the weight of evidence for God’s existence as a maximally great Being, I ask you: What benefit comes by lessening God’s attributes? Does it make our problems more palatable? I really don’t think so. Does it make God more relatable? Possibly. But it offers no assurance of God’s victory over evil and does not warrant a God that deserves to be worshiped. As is normally the case, revelation, history, tradition, and experience show a great deal of truth. All four strains reveal that God is maximally great. For me, I find great assurance in God’s existence as a maximally great Being. I hope it does for you, too.
About the Author
Brian G. Chilton, M.Div., Ph.D.:
Dr. Brian G. Chilton (PhD, Liberty University) is the founder of Bellator Christi Ministries and the co-host of the Bellator Christi Podcast. He serves as a hospice chaplain and an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics for Carolina College of Biblical Studies, a Dissertation Mentor/Adjunct Professor for Liberty University in the PhD in Applied Apologetics program, and an Adjunct Professor/Dissertation Reader at Carolina University in the DMin program. Dr. Chilton's primary area of research is on early Christianity, oral traditions, NT creeds, the blend of divine sovereignty and human freedom, and near-death experiences (NDEs).
Notes
[1] Sidney Norton Deane with Saint Anselm, Proslogium; Monologium; An Appendix, In Behalf of the Fool, by Gaunilon; and Cur Deus Homo (Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company, 1939), 8.
[2] David Baggett and Jerry L. Walls, Good God: The Theistic Foundations of Morality (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2011), 51-52.
[3] See Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica I.q3.a1.
[4] See Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica I.q54.a1.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Two: God, Creation (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany, 2003), 158.
[7] Ibid.
[8] J. A. McHugh, “Omnipotent,” Catholic Encyclopedia (New York: Robert Applelton, 1911), in Carl F. H. Henry, 307God, Revelation, and Authority (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1999), 307.
[9] Allen C. Myers, “El,” Eerdmans Bible Dictionary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987), 332.
[10] Geisler, ST: God, Creation, 158.
[11] Ibid., 169.
[12] Geisler, ST: God, Creation,
