The Nature of God The actual nature of God (since He exists as the First Cause) is always held by most Christians. Furthermore, numerous questions arise about the nature of God. We all know that, at some point, we will indeed die; however, we constantly reject the causes that operate within us and that examine the real outcome of what happens after a person loses their life. It is much easier for humanity to accept that they will leave for a safe home in Heaven and be forgiven of all their sins by a supreme being, rather than to question the existence of an extremely omnipotent being. Fortunately, some of us usually wonder about this existence and the development of mankind; also, the spiritual lessons gained from our mothers and fathers, community and religion. This essay investigates the two logical justifications for and against the nature of God; according to the opinions of some outstanding researchers and philosophers. Through two classic arguments for God; After the ontological argument and the teleological argument, I will show that there is no adequate evidence or ample justification for the true nature of God. According to the ontological argument, God usually represents a superior, sacred, and omnipotent being, the celestial unity of the greatest truth and spiritual benefits. Saint Anselm of Canterbury conceived the ontological argument by saying that even a deceived person can understand or appreciate the concept of an omnipotent being from whom nothing superior can be created. Anselm constantly stated that a deceived person claims that the nature of this being is only in his thoughts and in the brains of other people other than reality. With words like perfect, necessary and existent, which are constructed in its d......middle of paper......world. Our ideas do not determine the true nature of God. Unfortunately, it is shockingly obvious to me that God's nature of blind trust is no longer an appropriate habit to adhere to. In the course of my analysis, I expected to discover some evidence-based way to maintain the direction of trust in God instilled in me by my religion. Unfortunately this was not the case; ontological and teleological arguments have never connected the perceived world with a supreme God. On the one hand, teleological argument has developed misleading results from analogies with scientific claims, and materialists have offered solutions that may be rationally legitimate. On the other hand, the ontological argument was unsuccessful because it was misleading due to terms that could not broaden the truth. Therefore, there is no adequate evidence or ample justification for the nature of God.