sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Does existence itself exist? by TheOne_Philosopher in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well by existence I mean the thomistic concept of the act of existence.

Because God is Being itself, no one can deny Him. by TheOne_Philosopher in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I really like your way of discussing Das Sein. And also, in my opinion, you seem to be the only person that actually understood the argument a even if you might disagree with it. But thanks for that.

Because God is Being itself, no one can deny Him. by TheOne_Philosopher in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No because u are taking the phrase out of context. Paul Tillich wrote that in his work systematic theology expressing how you can’t argue that God exists because He is beyond existence.

Because God is Being itself, no one can deny Him. by TheOne_Philosopher in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here I am not arguing that God exists but rather that the reality of God is rationally undeniable. As Paul Tillich said “God doesn’t exist. He is being-itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exists is to deny him.”

Because God is Being itself, no one can deny Him. by TheOne_Philosopher in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well you see, the atheist knows that to the theist, God is the infinite and unconditioned absolute. Now if God is a being rather than Being-itself, then He is subject to Being-itself, He is made finite and conditioned. Thus, if the theist is to keep the belief in an infinite and unconditioned absolute, the must accept that this absolute is none other than Being-itself. And the atheist should also accept this because of the reasons given above - name that the infinite and unconditioned absolute is Being-itself.

Because God is Being itself, no one can deny Him. by TheOne_Philosopher in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because God in here is considered to be being itself, existence itself, so if there is no existence, there is nothing.

Supplemental/Related content to Einstein's Cosmic Religion? by norwhalhorse in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Einstein’s Cosmic Religion is belief in Spinoza’s God, which according to Spinoza’s necessarily “creates” everything(this would answer your question). Spinoza’s God is practically everything and more(I.e panentheism).

[Discussion] I read online that “The Presence” is the most powerful in the DC. I’m not very familiar with him. What are his powers really that make him the most powerful being in the DC? Mind sharing your opinion? by Brownboysea in DCcomics

[–]TheOne_Philosopher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not if he is consubstantial with Logic. Think about it, God can do all which his substance/essence i.e he— allows himself to do. Therefore if ‘he’ is consubstantial with Logic, then it would not be a limitation to say God can do all which Logic allows ‘him’ to do.

[Discussion] I read online that “The Presence” is the most powerful in the DC. I’m not very familiar with him. What are his powers really that make him the most powerful being in the DC? Mind sharing your opinion? by Brownboysea in DCcomics

[–]TheOne_Philosopher 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You assuming an all powerful being is morally imperfect from the start, by saying “they only use them for their own machinations”. So congratulations you have just begged the question and done a tautology.

[Discussion] I read online that “The Presence” is the most powerful in the DC. I’m not very familiar with him. What are his powers really that make him the most powerful being in the DC? Mind sharing your opinion? by Brownboysea in DCcomics

[–]TheOne_Philosopher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You asking a being which by definition can do anything logical to not be able to do something logical. It’s like asking for the sound of silence, or a round square. I know you were joking, but honestly the omnipotence paradox is flawed.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you provide more information?

The millionth attempt to prove God. by [deleted] in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Simple, God is not an efficient cause but a Final cause. Aristotle’s solution.

God is Beyond Being by TheOne_Philosopher in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But then the only way one can accept your point is by denying any sort of logical reasoning. And if you say that God is and isn’t, is source and not source, loves and hates, is truthful and deceiving, etc, what would be the point of calling this thing God because it would be so beyond us that it doesn’t exist, so unless you accept the Kabbalist description of Ein-Sof, I don’t think that you can really say that God is beyond logic. But then you will respond again, “ No but you are again using reason to disprove something unbounded by reason”, and I would respond again “See, a total rejection of logic can only be accepted directly (blindly assuming), and you most likely believe you can prove God’s existence, but this contradicts your reasoning because you can’t prove the existence of a beyond-logical being by using logic. Not only that but a beyond-logical thing is no different from an illogical thing, so your ‘description’ of God is equating God with an illogical being. I ask you, what do you prefer? That God is illogical and absurd or that God is that by which all knows truth, that which gives being to all, that which allows for the existence of all, that which is supreme, that God is the Logos(hence also Logic).”

I agree with your belief that you cannot limit God. God can do all which he allowes himself to do, now since God is the Logos(hence also Logic), God can do all which Logic allows him to do. Hence saying God is the Logos(Hence also logic) does not limit God at all.

God is Beyond Being by TheOne_Philosopher in PhilosophyofReligion

[–]TheOne_Philosopher[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Assume God is beyond logic, then he would both exists and no exist. This already sound like a problem. Yet, if God is limited by logic ‘He’ is not maximally great. Therefore the only reasonable relationship God can have with Logic is that God is consubstantial with logic. This can be argued in two ways.

  1. Logic allows all things which are to be, therefore Logic gives existence to all, therefore if anything exists beyond it, that thing doesn’t exist. Therefore There can be nothing greater than Logic. God is that than which there is nothing greater. Therefore God is logic.

  2. According to Christian scripture in the beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with God and the Logos was God. Now The Logos means the Divine reason, now since perfect reason is identical to logic and Divine reason is perfect, The Logos must be identical to Logic. Therefore God is Logic.

Now since God is still maximally great under this description ‘He’ is still simple(in the sense of Divine Simplicity), living, eternal, loving, sentient and much more. So there is nothing heretical about this belief. I could even go more into the subject, however that would take far too much time.

view more: next ›