Questions on Neo platonic proof

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mickey3456987
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mickey3456987

Guest
For those who already read 5 proof for existance of God will know what I mean.

Why can’t absolute simple be space-time itself?

And

Isn’t God already consist of 3 person then how can he be absolute simple?

Thank you:)
 
Mickey3456987 said:
For those who already read 5 proof for existance of God will know what I mean.

Why can’t absolute simple be space-time itself?
Click to expand...
The first of the 24 Thomistic (St Thomas Aquinas) theses states thus:
Potency and Act so divide being that whatsoever exists either is a Pure Act, or is necessarily composed of Potency and Act, as to its primordial and intrinsic principles.

Only God is Pure Act and his own existence and all his other attributes and thus absolutely simple. Creatures are composites of potency and act. Space or the ‘heavens’ is a creature and creation of God and is a composite of potency and act in a number of ways. The heavens or space is not its own existence but has participated existence which for Aquinas is a metaphysical principle of created things and it is also I believe following Aquinas, a body, a composite of form and matter. Space has parts. There is that part of space in our solar system, other parts of space in our galaxy, and other parts of space outside our galaxy containing other galaxies. Something absolutely simple doesn’t have parts especially quantitative or dimensional parts like space.

Time has parts too and which is also a creation of God. There is past, present, and future to time as well as before and after. The heavens or space and time are two different things in my understanding. The heavens are what we see when we look up into the sky. Time is a measure of change, for example, of the earth’s motion rotating on its axis in space or its orbit in space around the sun.
Isn’t God already consist of 3 person then how can he be absolute simple?
Click to expand...
The three divine persons are not parts of God but they are God and they possess one divine and undivided nature or substance. God is his own existence, his own being, goodness, wisdom, love, etc. He is pure act and not a composite of potency and act.
 
Last edited:
Mickey3456987 said:
Isn’t God already consist of 3 person then how can he be absolute simple?
Click to expand...
The Father is 100% God and there is no other God.
The Son is 100% God and there is no other God.
The Holy Spirit is 100% God and there is no other God.
Mickey3456987 said:
Why can’t absolute simple be space-time itself?
Click to expand...
I (my material body) take up a portion of Space in a temporal stream of ‘now’ for a duration that will hopefully equal the temporal stream of the earth revolving around the sun 90 times.
This means that I am a part of space-time, which means, since two material objects may not occupy the same space at the same time, that God is not 100 % of space-time, which mean “NOT SIMPLE”. Further, since space-time is a stream of now, where the past IS NOT and the Future IS NOT, and Now has no duration, then ‘what is’ can only be known after it IS NO LONGER, in Memory. However, God’s Name is ‘I AM’ (אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה), therefore Simple ‘I AM’ cannot be said of Space-Time which is only known in Memory, after it is no longer.

John Martin
 
Last edited:
Mickey3456987 said:
Why can’t absolute simple be space-time itself?
Click to expand...
Because space time is not absolutely simple. It’s made up of moving parts and processes. It changes. It has quantity and moves from potential to actuality.

It is not simple.
 
As far as the Trinity and God’s simplicity, the distinction is that there are three “whos” but only one what. What the Father is is the same as what the Son is is the the same as what the Holy Spirit is. I know what can have a broader meaning in English, but in by this “what” I am referring to the essence or substance of God. There is only one simple substance. There is a Trinity of “persons” as this one simple substance subsists as three relations. The distinction is only relational. There are no parts or separate beings. St. Thomas Aquinas, following Saint Augustine of Hippo, thought if it in the following (but grossly simplified) way:.

God knows himself and is known by himself. Knowing and being known are distinct.

God loves and is loved by himself. Loving and being loved are distinct.

It is God’s simple substance, that he knows and loves from and as his essence, that leads us to be able to understand these relationships as being distinct hypostases or persons, whereas even though I may know myself and love myself I am only one person of many parts.

It takes some reading and meditating on.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top