Dr. James Anderson of Reformed Theological Seminary, in company with a co-author Greg Welty, has composed one of the most readable versions of this rather recent (all things considered) argument for the existence of God. It can be found here: http://www.proginosko.com/docs/The_Lord_of_Non-Contradiction.pdf
The argument runs something like what follows:
- The laws of Logic exist
- the laws of logic are essentially thoughts
- thoughts always exist in a mind
- the laws of logic are necessary thoughts (which obtain in all logically possible worlds)
- the laws of logic must exist in a necessary mind (which exists in all logically possible worlds)
- A necessary mind is the mind of a maximally great being – a standard definition for God.
- Therefore, God exists.
This argument is especially clear and very candidly put forward in the paper. Of course, it has been criticized, and one of the persons who has earned the attention of Dr. Anderson in treating of the argument has been Ben Wallis.
Bracketing the discussion between Ben Wallis and Dr. Anderson, if I may, let me say that I am inclined to think that this is a good (sound) argument, and it invites Christians to reconsider something like the medieval doctrine of Exemplarism.