Ax. 1. {P(φ)∧□∀x[φ(x)→ψ(x)]}→P(ψ)
Ax. 2. P(¬φ)↔¬P(φ)
Th. 1. P(φ)→◊∃x[φ(x)]
Df. 1. G(x)⟺∀φ[P(φ)→φ(x)]
Ax. 3. P(G)
Th. 2. ◊∃xG(x)
Df. 2. φ ess x⟺φ(x)∧∀ψ{ψ(x)→□∀y[φ(y)→ψ(y)]}
Ax. 4. P(φ)→□P(φ)
Th. 3. G(x)→G ess x
Df. 3. E(x)⟺∀φ[φ ess x→□∃yφ(y)]
Ax. 5. P(E)
Th. 4. □∃xG(x)Abstract Kurt Godel’s ontological argument for God’s existence has been formalized and automated on a computer with higher-order automated theorem provers. From Godel’s premises, the computer proved: necessarily, there exists God. On the other hand, the theorem provers have also confirmed prominent criticism on Godel’s ontological argument, and they found some new results about it. The background theory of the work presented here offers a novel perspective towards a computational theoretical philosophy.