Ontological Argument for the Existence of God

[Samuel_Maynes]

The following Ontological Argument is taken from my draft book (see Preview at www.religiouspluralism.ca).

“The prime assumption of metaphysics is that there must be some perfect systematic unity or there would be nothing (probably not even chaos). That perfect systematic unity is what we call the highest being or God, and there can only be one being in that position – One God.

The early Greek philosophers were obsessed with the question of ontology (what exists). Is reality one thing or many things? More recently, Kant and Hegel maintained that there must be some organizing principle of coherence, some synthesis of thesis and antithesis. Thus, the solution to the ancient ontological problem of the “one and the many” is their synthesis in the “all,” and the triunity of one, many, and all may be conceived as an archetype for expressing the Trinity of One God in abstract terms – the Deity Absolute, the Universe Absolute Supreme Being, and the Unconditioned Absolute Spirit of All That Is.

The idea of One God present in the three counter-balancing coordinates of the Trinity Absolute may be the first adequate and only necessary metaphysical vehicle for the creation of anything and everything, including the Trinity itself, out of nothing more than the ‘force’ of pure and practical reason.

Apparently, about 14 billion years ago the divine potential of this Trinity became so supercharged with energy that it exploded into actuality, and began to expand into the universe of universes as we know it.”

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.religiouspluralism.ca

 

[Linusthe2nd]

The following Ontological Argument is taken from my draft book (see Preview at www.religiouspluralism.ca).

“The prime assumption of metaphysics is that there must be some perfect systematic unity or there would be nothing (probably not even chaos). That perfect systematic unity is what we call the highest being or God, and there can only be one being in that position – One God.

The early Greek philosophers were obsessed with the question of ontology (what exists). Is reality one thing or many things? More recently, Kant and Hegel maintained that there must be some organizing principle of coherence, some synthesis of thesis and antithesis. Thus, the solution to the ancient ontological problem of the “one and the many” is their synthesis in the “all,” and the triunity of one, many, and all may be conceived as an archetype for expressing the Trinity of One God in abstract terms – the Deity Absolute, the Universe Absolute Supreme Being, and the Unconditioned Absolute Spirit of All That Is.

The idea of One God present in the three counter-balancing coordinates of the Trinity Absolute may be the first adequate and only necessary metaphysical vehicle for the creation of anything and everything, including the Trinity itself, out of nothing more than the ‘force’ of pure and practical reason.

Apparently, about 14 billion years ago the divine potential of this Trinity became so supercharged with energy that it exploded into actuality, and began to expand into the universe of universes as we know it.”

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.religiouspluralism.ca

It was Aristotle who solved the problem of the one and the many through his principles of potency and act.And perhaps there is a metaphysics that proposes the necessity of some " perfect systematic unity " or there would be nothing but chaos, but there is also a metaphysics ( Aristotle/Thomas Aquinas ) that there must be an uncaused cause.

I should also point out that the reality of the Trinity, according to Catholic teaching is only known by Divine Revelatin. It cannot be reasoned to. Ruther more your concept of the Trinity as a principle which " exploded " into the physical universe is reduces your Trinity to a part of the physical universe. Both concepts are condemned by Catholic teaching.

God, and the Persons of the Trinity, according to Divine Revelation and Catholic theaching are absolutely other than the physical universe. The two are absolutely separate and distinct.

Linus2nd

 

[Samuel_Maynes]

I should also point out that the reality of the Trinity, according to Catholic teaching is only known by Divine Revelation. It cannot be reasoned to.

Linusthe2nd… This is a “philosophy” sub-forum, so let us reason together.

The abstract laws of pure reason (e.g. mathematics and logic, including the laws of contradiction and sufficient reason, etc.) are immutable and eternal truths, existing before anything and after everything, made out of nothing but the power of ideas and the force of reason itself. Apparently, this existential realm of transcendent ideas, and the material universe with its experiential realm of mundane reality, create and reflect each other. Then, by the principle of the dialectical synthesis of great antinomies or contradictions, it is logically necessary that from the beginning, both of these ‘first’ two absolutes must have been associated with each other in a third absolute coordinate dimension – their totality – out of which they emerge, and into which they mingle and meld.

Preserving the law of the conservation of energy/mass, this totality synthesis acts as a reservoir of equilibrium or equipoise, constituting the necessary metaphysical source and sink of the individuality of the existential, and the plurality of the experiential, in their consummate identity. This “Spirit of All That Is” must be an active, breathing counterpart and vibrant counterbalance of the ideal and the real, compensating their development and growth with its own reciprocal and complimentary expansion, such that however large the system of polarizations becomes, the total energy always balances out to zero.

This closes the metaphysical circle of creation in a triunity of existential, experiential, and associative phases, manifesting each other out of nothing but the energy of the rational notion of each other, pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps, so to speak. In cosmological terms, these categories may be regarded as three necessary and co-eternal dimensions or absolutes of creation, forming the perfect systematic unity infinitely manifest in the Trinity Absolute – popularly spoken of as heaven, earth, and all that is. In abstract terms, the creative Trinity is One God united in three compensating Absolutes, i.e.: the noumenal Deity Absolute, the phenomenal Universe Absolute, and their coordinate Unconditioned Absolute Source/Synthesis or Spirit of All That Is.

What do you think?

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.religiouspluralism.ca

 

[Bahman]

It was Aristotle who solved the problem of the one and the many through his principles of potency and act.And perhaps there is a metaphysics that proposes the necessity of some " perfect systematic unity " or there would be nothing but chaos, but there is also a metaphysics ( Aristotle/Thomas Aquinas ) that there must be an uncaused cause.

Could you please provide a link to Aristotle proof?

 

[KingCoil]

Could you please provide a link to Aristotle proof?

No, need.

I will tell you what from my stock knowledge is the ontological proof for the existence of God as creator of the universe, even without bringing in Aristotle.

Start with your nose, there is static and dynamic order and stability in your nose, and it exists; there, that is the proof of God as creator of the universe, which universe also includes the nose in your face.

Next question you should ask me or anyone like me, what is proof in relation to God as creator of the universe?

Go ahead and ask.

By the way, the nose in your face also is the proof that you came from your parents.

KingCoil

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Let me know if St. Anselm ever gets into the discussion!

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Linusthe2nd… This is a “philosophy” sub-forum, so let us reason together.

The abstract laws of pure reason (e.g. mathematics and logic, including the laws of contradiction and sufficient reason, etc.) are immutable and eternal truths, existing before anything and after everything, made out of nothing but the power of ideas and the force of reason itself. Apparently, this existential realm of transcendent ideas, and the material universe with its experiential realm of mundane reality, create and reflect each other. Then, by the principle of the dialectical synthesis of great antinomies or contradictions, it is logically necessary that from the beginning, both of these ‘first’ two absolutes must have been associated with each other in a third absolute coordinate dimension – their totality – out of which they emerge, and into which they mingle and meld.

Preserving the law of the conservation of energy/mass, this totality synthesis acts as a reservoir of equilibrium or equipoise, constituting the necessary metaphysical source and sink of the individuality of the existential, and the plurality of the experiential, in their consummate identity. This “Spirit of All That Is” must be an active, breathing counterpart and vibrant counterbalance of the ideal and the real, compensating their development and growth with its own reciprocal and complimentary expansion, such that however large the system of polarizations becomes, the total energy always balances out to zero.

This closes the metaphysical circle of creation in a triunity of existential, experiential, and associative phases, manifesting each other out of nothing but the energy of the rational notion of each other, pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps, so to speak. In cosmological terms, these categories may be regarded as three necessary and co-eternal dimensions or absolutes of creation, forming the perfect systematic unity infinitely manifest in the Trinity Absolute – popularly spoken of as heaven, earth, and all that is. In abstract terms, the creative Trinity is One God united in three compensating Absolutes, i.e.: the noumenal Deity Absolute, the phenomenal Universe Absolute, and their coordinate Unconditioned Absolute Source/Synthesis or Spirit of All That Is.

What do you think?

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.religiouspluralism.ca

I think you are a clever, intelligent fellow who is wasting his talents chasing a red herring for unstated ideological reasons. The Divine Trinity has nothing to do with science or philosophy, it is a fact of Divine Revelation, period.

Linus2nd.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Could you please provide a link to Aristotle proof?

Don’t have time now but you can find it here: [dhspriory.org/thomas/english/Physics.htm/U]](http://dhspriory.org/thomas/english/Physics.htm/U])

and here: dhspriory.org/thomas/english/Metaphysics.htm

Will keep you busy for awhile .

I may try to explain it to you some day when I have time.

Linus2nd

 

[anixx]

Let me know if St. Anselm ever gets into the discussion!

I’m waiting for it, too.

I think you are a clever, intelligent fellow who is wasting his talents chasing a red herring for unstated ideological reasons. The Divine Trinity has nothing to do with science or philosophy, it is a fact of Divine Revelation, period.

Linus2nd.

For that specific fact, it has nothing to do with revelation either. The triune God exists, period.
We received this knowledge through revelation, that doesn’t mean we cannot explore deeper in this mystery. If we would have stopped at the raw information we got from Jesus, we wouldn’t have even gotten a name for the triune God: the Trinity.
It is a subject, first of theology, then of philosophy, and if we still have time , of science.
Revelation is a living aspect, which though it does not evolve (ie doesn’t change), it allows us to delve into the mysteries of God.

Let me give you an example:

One God: the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit. This is direct revelation.
One God is Trinity, and the three are persons, is theology.
Theology interprets revelation. And, according to an ancient principle, Philosophia est ancilla theologiae, philosophy is the servant of theology.
So, we use philosophy to better express theology to better interpret revelation.

 

[KingCoil]

Let me know if St. Anselm ever gets into the discussion!

Didn’t I touch on that subject with my thread on God from concept to existence?

My argument is simple:

First, you start with existence of yourself and the whole universe studied by scientists.

Next, you speculate on the idea that as scientists tell us the universe has a beginning some 13.7 billion years ago, then it has need of a cause.

Third, now you have the concept of a cause of the universe, that gives the universe the beginning of its existence.

Fourth, you start from the concept of God, in your mind, mind you, and infer from the thought that as the universe exists which has a beginning, then the concept of a cause of the beginning of the universe has a corresponding entity in objective existence corresponding to the concept.

Fifth: Ergo! God creator of the universe exists!!!

How is the transition effected, from concept to object?

Simple, imagine that you are just a police detective, and you have to solve the possible foul play involved in the death of a human under socalled mysterious circumstances.

Now, you notice a bullet wound in the chest of the subject cadaver, so you got the pathologist to extract the slug, and he did so, and handed it over to you.

You as an intelligent thinker grounded on logic and facts speculated on the concept of a human agent who fired a bullet into the subject now a cadaver.

So, from concept of a human agent to the existence of the human agent, that is just a matter of the search for the identity of the human agent at present just in concept.

In the case of God in concept as the cause of the universe, it has to do NOT with foul play involved in the death of a human, but with the pageant of a universe beginning to exist some 13.7 billion years ago.

From the concept of a cause of the beginning of the universe to the search for the identity of that cause, it is just a jiffy.

Namely: this cause of the universe is identified as huge, as huge as to cover the whole universe, and subtle as subtle as to be inter-penetrating into every nook and corner of the sub-atomic particle, field, force, etc. of the universe.

How is that? a cause so huge as to cover the whole universe and so subtle as to be inter-penetrating within every cranny and crevice of the sub-atomic particle universe?

And why not, unless you have suppressed your imagination.

That is the trouble with hard core skeptics, self-emasculated imagination.

KingCoil

 

[empther]

From post 1 ( including signature promotional )\

Apparently, about 14 billion years ago the ***divine potential of this Trinity became so supercharged with energy that it exploded into actuality :takethat: :slapfight: ***, and began to expand into the universe of universes as we know it.”

Samuel Stuart Maynes
www.religiouspluralism.ca

:bigyikes: :bigyikes: :bigyikes:

Oh brother! Always another new idea being dreamed up for questionable motives. :banghead:

I will definltely not read that book.

 

[Bahman]

No, need.

I will tell you what from my stock knowledge is the ontological proof for the existence of God as creator of the universe, even without bringing in Aristotle.

Start with your nose, there is static and dynamic order and stability in your nose, and it exists; there, that is the proof of God as creator of the universe, which universe also includes the nose in your face.

Next question you should ask me or anyone like me, what is proof in relation to God as creator of the universe?

Go ahead and ask.

By the way, the nose in your face also is the proof that you came from your parents.

KingCoil

You are not making any sense.

 

[Bahman]

Don’t have time now but you can find it here: [dhspriory.org/thomas/english/Physics.htm/U]](http://dhspriory.org/thomas/english/Physics.htm/U])

and here: dhspriory.org/thomas/english/Metaphysics.htm

Will keep you busy for awhile .

I may try to explain it to you some day when I have time.

Linus2nd

Thank you for the links.

 

[anixx]

divine potential of this Trinity became so supercharged with energy that it exploded into actuality

This actually is the ground for new age spirituality. That God, or a baby god, exploded and became the universe. it’s soooooo stupid and against reason, for it wouldn’t even require mentioning, not being for the fact, that many would believe just about anything. :coffeeread:

 

[oldcelt]

This actually is the ground for new age spirituality. That God, or a baby god, exploded and became the universe. it’s soooooo stupid and against reason, for it wouldn’t even require mentioning, not being for the fact, that many would believe just about anything. :coffeeread:

That statement is accurate in so many ways.

 

[anixx]

That statement is accurate in so many ways.

Yes, but there is only one truth. There can never be more than one truth. Only from a philosophical stand point this can be asserted. So, what is truth?

 

[oldcelt]

Yes, but there is only one truth. There can never be more than one truth. Only from a philosophical stand point this can be asserted. So, what is truth?

~Truth involves belief…fact is reality regardless of belief.

 

[anixx]

~Truth involves belief…fact is reality regardless of belief.

True. Reality is a fact. We believe for it is real. There is nothing more real than what God says. God spoke reality into existence. So if his in charge, he must know what is real and what is not. I adhere to the Word of God. The word Logos, which you can find it in the Prologue of John, can also be translated as reality. Through the Logos of God, through the Reality of God, all things came to be. So, what God says is more real than any puny human mind can conceive.
Reality can be applied, first and foremost, to God. And in a way he is the only reality. All other things get their reality from him. His essence is to be. He cannot not be. He is.
As Thomas Aquinas put it: He is ipsum esse, the very existence, the very substance of to be.
God designates himself as YHWH: I am who I am. Jesus refers to himself many times with I am. God is the very foundation of reality and existence, without him nothing can be.

 

[empther]

anixx, post 14

Quote:
divine potential of this Trinity became so supercharged with energy that it exploded into actuality

This actually is the ground for new age spirituality. That God, or a baby god, exploded and became the universe. it’s soooooo stupid and against reason, for it wouldn’t even require mentioning, not being for the fact, that many would believe just about anything. :coffeeread:

Shakespeare pointed it out long ago.
Macbeth’s first line in Macbeth is, “So foul and fair a day I have not seen”. An ordinary comment on the weather. Macbeth is a great soldier, but otherwise an ordinary man, and rather stupid. He lacks imagination, and therefore has no faith in God. This makes him credulous. He believes the three witches’ predictions for him, although his friend Banquo standing next to him is mocking the witches.

When the Soviet Union fell, and there was freedom to think whatever you wanted to believe in,
the media reported that people were believing in all kinds of ridiculous things. Like alien visitations, ESP, and magic. This was not just fun and games like in the U.S. The Russians really believed in these things and let them guide their lives. So when religious faith is dead or anemic, superstition takes over.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

This thread is truly mistitled!