Existence of God in essence or in being?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Questioning_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

Questioning_1

Guest
I started a thread earlier on motion and someone mentioned Aquinas’ understanding of God as a being and then his essence.

What does this mean?
and
How can this move forward to prove the existence of God?

Where does this fall into the talk of metaphysics?

I can fathom that God is some type of being but is his essence different from his being?

Is his essence different than my being or essence?

What is the essence and being of a human being?
 
I just read a great book of Aquinas; Hooked on Philosophy Thomas aquinas made easy by robert o’donnell. maybe it would help if you got a book on philosophy?
 
To put is as briefly and simply as is possible for me, the idea is that God’s very essence is “to be” eternally, and to be the source of His own being.

To better understand this it’s helpful for us to look at how we (and everything else) are different. The essence of Ghosty is “maybe to be”, not in the sense that I only maybe exist, but in the sense that sometimes I’m here, and sometimes I’m not. There was a time when I didn’t exist, though there will never be a time when I no longer exist, so my essence doesn’t have the trait of existing absolutely.

What’s more, God’s essence IS His being which is also different from us. I “am”, but not absolutely due to my essence. The being, or existence, of my essence finds its source outside of me; my parents, the Earth, God, a whole chain of events and causes. You can’t look at me and say “the reason Ghosty exists is because he’s Ghosty,”; my existing is distinct from my essence.

With God, on the other hand, His being and essence aren’t separate at all. His essence is “to be”, and He is nothing other than His essence (He’s not made up of extraneous traits or causes like you and me). Since He is nothing but His essence, He doesn’t change or fluctuate, and this also plays into Him being His own being. If God changed, He couldn’t be the source of His own being because there wouldn’t be the “same” God from moment to moment, and His existence would be founded on something that wasn’t there. Since out being comes from outside ourselves, in God, we can change without losing ourselves precisely because God DOESN’T change and fluctuate.

So to briefly answer your questions, it’s important to metaphysics because we know philosophically that at the root of all “somethingness” there must be an absolute being who doesn’t change, and is its own essence and being. This is knowledge that can be arrived at without Divine Revelation, and we call this “entity” God; combined with Divine Revelation we can actually come to know this entity personally, but the point is simply that you don’t even need Faith to know this much.

God’s essence is His being, and visa versa. He is what He is because that’s what He is, and that’s all that He is.

His essence is SO different from ours in how it “functions” that it’s actually beyond our comprehension. Human understanding unaided by Grace can only make analogies based on how God must be different from us and all creatures, but it doesn’t give us much insight into what God is like. In other words, it’s like a blind person saying “that door is green”; it’s true, but they have no concept of what they are describing.

The essence of being a human being is too great to quantify here, and is possibly also incomprehensible to the human mind. There are certain features that stand out that are relevant to this topic, however, such as our rationality and our contingent existence.

Does that make things clear as mud for you?😛

BTW, I STRONGLY recommend “Theology and Sanity” by Frank Sheed for a strong and accessible layman’s introduction to these concepts. 👍

Peace and God bless!
 
isn’t God’s essence described conceptually as the word Godness?
 
isn’t God’s essence described conceptually as the word Godness?
Not really, because “Godness” is a trait that something can have, whereas God IS His own essence. Therefore “God” is the best description of God’s essence, since it implies both being and essence in the same category.

On the other hand, when we participate in the Divine Nature we are said to be Divine, or have Divinity, and other such expressions, but we are not said to BE Divinity as God Himself is.

Peace and God bless!
 
Not really, because “Godness” is a trait that something can have, whereas God IS His own essence. Therefore “God” is the best description of God’s essence, since it implies both being and essence in the same category.

On the other hand, when we participate in the Divine Nature we are said to be Divine, or have Divinity, and other such expressions, but we are not said to BE Divinity as God Himself is.

Peace and God bless!
Thank you:) That made complete sense
 
maybe it would help a little more if I knew the exact definition of essence, existence and being.

Are they different or the same?

God’s essence is his existence or vice versa?
 
maybe it would help a little more if I knew the exact definition of essence, existence and being.

Are they different or the same?

God’s essence is his existence or vice versa?
actually after re-reading it again and again it kinda made sense but if you still want to reply you may
 
maybe it would help a little more if I knew the exact definition of essence, existence and being.

Are they different or the same?

God’s essence is his existence or vice versa?
You said it’s making more sense now, but I’ll see if I can clarify for anyone who might still be confused. It took me a couple years to fully grasp the distinctions, so I know it’s not immediately obvious.

Essence is the whole definition of something. So the essence of humanity is the sum of defining characteristics of humans. This includes that we have bodies, rational souls, we are capable of Grace, ect.

Being is the driving force that gives things their “is-ness”. It’s an abstract concept for the most part, and can be broken down into potential being and actual being. A potential being is something that COULD be, like human nature, whereas actual being is something that IS, like a human being (notice the use of the term “being” there).

Not all essences actually “are”, and in fact all of them are potentially “not”, and at one time were actually “not”. God alone has always been, and is the source of being for everything that actually is, and He is in fact the source even of “potential being”, since everything is from His “ideas” to use an inappropriate but illustrative term (in other words, the “potential being” of everything is in the “mind” of God, which of course is not at all a mind as we know it, but is actually His Essence itself; the Person of the Son, the Word, is typically identified with this aspect of the Divine Essence, though it’s wrong to say that the Word IS that aspect while the other two Persons are not).

Peace and God bless!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top