Plantinga examines the nature of God's existence around the issues related to the necessity of existence and the sovereignty of God. In the ontological discussions, he follows four methods, which are: the untruth of our ideas about God, through the teaching of Thomas Aquinas about the absolute simplicity of God. Through nominalism and Descartes possibilities, he tries to prove the non-existence of God. Plantinga faces problems by stating each stage and then goes to the next stage, but he cannot solve the problems except confusion. Mulla Sadra bases his ontology on the basis of the originality of existence and improvisation of existence, because unless we believe in the originality of existence, we cannot deny the existence of obligatory nature. Plantinga's reasons for proving the non-existence of God's nature are not complete and complete, Plantinga's lack of attention to the originality of existence and the lack of criteria for improvisation are among his weak points, but Mulla Sadra, through the proofs of the originality of existence, reasoning through the objectivity of divine attributes and nature, The simplicity of existence, the multiplicity of existence over essence, and the fact that he considered existence to be the first over essence, he argued for the non-existence of the Supreme Being, with these reasons, he acted more successfully than Plantinga.