What is god?

[yablabo]

If i was to ask you what is a car, a human, a god? What would you reply?

Ok now onto the biggy…

What is god?
**
I don’t want a list of attributes like “god is love”. As that is not an answer. I do not want he is the creater of the universe, for that is NOT what IT is.**

Now tell me this… How can i believe or disbelieving in something, what i don’t even know what that thing I’m supposed to be believing in is?

WONDERFUL questions!

I think what you are looking for is what the essential definition of God is. Well…that’s the same as asking, “What is the essence of God?” Well, God’s essence is existence.

So…the answer to, “What is God?” is God is…or God is existence.

The answer to your other question…you can NOT believe in something that you do not know. That is like saying that you can hold something in your mind that you do not hold in your mind…it’s a contradiction. And…to say that God is unknowable is the same as calling him unclean.

– Nicole

 

[kk23wong]

WONDERFUL questions!

I think what you are looking for is what the essential definition of God is. Well…that’s the same as asking, “What is the essence of God?” Well, God’s essence is existence.

So…the answer to, “What is God?” is God is…or God is existence.

The answer to your other question…you can NOT believe in something that you do not know. That is like saying that you can hold something in your mind that you do not hold in your mind…it’s a contradiction. And…to say that God is unknowable is the same as calling him unclean.

– Nicole

WONDERFUL questions!

I think what you are looking for is what the essential definition of God is. Well…that’s the same as asking, “What is the essence of God?” Well, God’s essence is existence.

So…the answer to, “What is God?” is God is…or God is existence.

The answer to your other question…you can NOT believe in something that you do not know. That is like saying that you can hold something in your mind that you do not hold in your mind…it’s a contradiction. And…to say that God is unknowable is the same as calling him unclean.

– Nicole

Dear Nicole,

First, the God does not need a definition of “himself”. (As I used to say, “Male is a comfort, when you are an orphan.”) He/She is the manipulator of our world.

Second, principles of this world come from both him-/herself and us (his/her children). “Destiny and fates. They are different, but one.” Destiny comes from the God. Fates are in our hands.

Third, the main principle of this world is our co-existence with the God. Decisions are made by both the God and us. In the meanwhile, we influence each others in the civilizations. Common misconceptions of the God should be an “unchanged” type of “personality” of the God. The God is always changing as us. “Lives at different Levels.”, I must say.

History will prove. Reputations of a scholar must be from the God.

God Bless.

Teru Wong​

Check out “My academic portfolio” by visiting the link as follow: http://sites.google.com/site/teru382/my_publications/natural_sciences

 

[reggieM]

I agree that these were good questions and a good thread started by C.D. here. Learning about the nature of God is very important - otherwise, as he says, he couldn’t rightly believe or disbelieve in God if he didn’t know the nature of God.

So what is a human, what is a car?

Well a car is a wheeled mechanical device designed to transport people.They normally carry between 2-8 people. They have there own internal combustion engines, and wheels blah blah blah.

Here, you give some attributes of a car (it has wheels, it is mechanical). You give the functions of a car (it transports people, it carries 2-8 people). You give some components of a car (engine and wheels).

A human is a member of a species of bipedal primates in the family Hominidae.

Here you place a human being into a category. The categories themselves do not exist in nature – they cannot be found anywhere. These are merely a way of classifying this thing called a human being.

They are carbon based life forms which DNA contains the genetic instructions blah blah blah.

These are the physical components of a human being. But the problem has been that if we take all of the physical components of a human being (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorous, etc.) and mix them together it does not equal a human being.
“Life” is something more than this. So, it’s more difficult to describe than a car.

In a following question it was asked “where does God store information”?

We’d have the same problem asking about human beings. Is all the “information” of human life stored in the brain? So, when we dissect a human brain we will find all of the dreams, memories, imaginations, calculations and even unprocessed data that went into the life of that person?

Obviously not – human consciousness is not reducible to neurophysical activity. A thought is not captured by cellular storage.

To repeat what many others have said already …

Each thing in the universe possesses a quality known as “existence”. But they do not give this quality to themselves. Existence comes from a source – uncreated, uncaused, not-contingent, necessary.

So, what God is “made of” (He is not “made” has no parts and is indivisible, but to try to answer the question) … is existence itself. Pure being.

The attributes of God are (it is difficult to find a complete listing – I used St. Robert Bellarmine’s catechism, the Catholic encyclopedia and some theological websites for this list):

Infinite
Simplicity
Indivisible
Inconfusibility
Immensity
Eternal
Holiness
Impassable
Omnipotent
Invisible
Omnipresent
Omniscient
Immensity
Uncaused
Self-existing
Immaterial
Absolute Goodness
All Love
All Merciful
Absolute Perfection
Perfectly Just
Supreme Intelligence
Immutability
Unity
Truth
Goodness
Beauty

 

[kk23wong]

The attributes of God are (it is difficult to find a complete listing – I used St. Robert Bellarmine’s catechism, the Catholic encyclopedia and some theological websites for this list):

1. Infinite – Infinity does not exist, but only in our imaginations. (Please refers to my academic argument of the “Solutions to infinity in Mathematics”. A timeline is the key. As I used to say, “Conceptual mistakes are fatal.”)
2. Simplicity – As I used to say, “I am simple, but the word is not.” Look around and you have an answer.
3. Indivisible – Precisely, you cannot divide the God into half. As I used to say, “When Light is on, dark off. Dark switched off, light on. Light and Dark, both from birth. They are different, but one." (To philosophers, I kill “him” four times a day.)
4. Eternal – As I used to say, “Beginner the God and with her end, bring us ours.” She is eternal.
5. Invisible – She is everywhere when you are inside. You have her images on you.
6. Self-existing – The coexistence in-between the God and us is a certainty. She is an independent thought. “Lives at different levels.’, I must say.
7. Absolute Goodness – Good and evil, both from birth. The power of the God comes from birth.
8. All Love – It is a MAJOR concept of the God.
9. Absolute Perfection – Our world consists of thinking, emotion, desires, live and death.

I don’t think the Church can ignore my existence any more.
“Toleration is a merit.”, I must say.

Everyone has a mission, so do I.

God Bless.

Teru Wong​

Check out “My academic portfolio” by visiting the link as follow: http://sites.google.com/site/teru382/my_publications/natural_sciences

 

[JulieAA]

Appeals to emotion just don’t do it for me. I like that small inconvenient thing called evidence.

I truly and honestly feel pain for you, Charles. So far, you have rejected the one true and only meaningful gift that has been offered to you from God. God has given you a choice and He is lovingly and patiently waiting for your response. You can continuously send out your emails “demanding” proof of God’s existence; however you will not comprehend what others have been attempting to put into simple terms for you to understand. There are no words to explain God…you know Him and accept Him or you do not choose to accept Him. So far, you have been compative and stubborn and blind to seek for yourself. Seek Him with an open heart and he will reveal Himself, not as you think, but as He wills to show Himself to you.

Sent to you, Charles, in and with the love of God!

 

[liquidpele]

I truly and honestly feel pain for you, Charles. So far, you have rejected the one true and only meaningful gift that has been offered to you from God. God has given you a choice and He is lovingly and patiently waiting for your response. You can continuously send out your emails “demanding” proof of God’s existence; however you will not comprehend what others have been attempting to put into simple terms for you to understand. There are no words to explain God…you know Him and accept Him or you do not choose to accept Him. So far, you have been compative and stubborn and blind to seek for yourself. Seek Him with an open heart and he will reveal Himself, not as you think, but as He wills to show Himself to you.

Sent to you, Charles, in and with the love of God!

Well… that about sums it up. Allow me to paraphrase.

Charles, So far you have rejected our attempts to prove that you are wrong and we are right. God has given you a choice according to a book written my humans that never even saw the events described happen; however, you will not just accept what we tell you. There are no words to explain God because even we, his believers, can’t really understand it which makes it ironic that we are trying to impress belief on you. So far you have not just accepted our word for it and so you are blind and you need to stop thinking. Try to find God with your heart, and he will reveal himself to you once you’re open to anything being a sign of God including images on toast and tree stumps.

I don’t mean this condescendingly. I’m simply pointing out that your reasons are not good enough, and your logic is non sequitur. I don’t doubt that you fully believe, but you have to understand that most atheists don’t view the issue emotionally.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Darwin is asking a perfectly valid question and getting the predictable non-response.

When I was first asked if I believed that Jesus is the Son of God, I had to wonder. I had never thought about it. But then I realized that I really didn’t know what qualifies a person to be a “Son of God”. What does it mean to be a son of a god? Shortly I realized that I didn’t even know what it means to be a god. “What is a god anyway?”

The answers came to me in time. My response to their realization was typical, “Why don’t they just TELL us that!?”

Of course after you realize what A god is, you can easily see what The “God” must be. But then you also realize that their really is more than one qualified “God” concept (and thus the Trinity).

One of the valid answers to Darwin’s actual question was given;

God is absolute truth.

[34](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/34.htm’) The world, and man, attest that they contain within themselves neither their first principle nor their final end, but rather that they participate in Being itself, which alone is without origin or end. Thus, in different ways, man can come to know that there exists a reality which is the first cause and final end of all things, a reality “that everyone calls God”.10

This is saying that God == Truth itself or Reality itself which has been personified by followers.

But there are other perfectly valid answers. All perfectly logical and correct.

The religions are most profoundly distinguished by how their founders and descendant leaders perceived the nature of Reality and its true balance. It is always the balance aspect they seem to be incapable of getting right, but for understandable reasons.

Darwin, I used to ask this same question as a test question just to see into who I was talking to. Don’t expect people to be logical or even have any idea of “definition” despite their willingness to argue endlessly about things they never defined or understood (its that way for a reason).

 

[JulieAA]

Well… that about sums it up. Allow me to paraphrase.

Charles, So far you have rejected our attempts to prove that you are wrong and we are right. God has given you a choice according to a book written my humans that never even saw the events described happen; however, you will not just accept what we tell you. There are no words to explain God because even we, his believers, can’t really understand it which makes it ironic that we are trying to impress belief on you. So far you have not just accepted our word for it and so you are blind and you need to stop thinking. Try to find God with your heart, and he will reveal himself to you once you’re open to anything being a sign of God including images on toast and tree stumps.

I don’t mean this condescendingly. I’m simply pointing out that your reasons are not good enough, and your logic is non sequitur. I don’t doubt that you fully believe, but you have to understand that most atheists don’t view the issue emotionally.

There we go with “words” again. Never was it EVER my intentions to convey that “I was right and you are wrong”…that was not the point of my email. I also do not look for images on toasts or tree stumps. I guess what I am confused about is the reason you are on a Catholic site in the first place. Are you trying to convince us that their is no God? Are you honestly seeking the truth? I do not have to “explain” God to anyone, that is the Holy Spirit’s job. We tell the Good News of Jesus Christ to anyone open to hear it. If that soul is receptive, then praise the Lord!

 

[liquidpele]

There we go with “words” again. Never was it EVER my intentions to convey that “I was right and you are wrong”…that was not the point of my email. I also do not look for images on toasts or tree stumps. I guess what I am confused about is the reason you are on a Catholic site in the first place. Are you trying to convince us that their is no God? Are you honestly seeking the truth? I do not have to “explain” God to anyone, that is the Holy Spirit’s job. We tell the Good News of Jesus Christ to anyone open to hear it. If that soul is receptive, then praise the Lord!

Ah, on to the “why are you even here?” argument. I’ve answered it before in other threads, but honestly, does it matter? I was not trying to bash your beliefs, I was merely pointing out that your description of the situation was heavily influenced by your own preconceived notions, and thus wrote it from an alternate point of view.

 

[JulieAA]

Ah, on to the “why are you even here?” argument. I’ve answered it before in other threads, but honestly, does it matter? I was not trying to bash your beliefs, I was merely pointing out that your description of the situation was heavily influenced by your own preconceived notions, and thus wrote it from an alternate point of view.

Ah, now you are making assumptions…how do you know that I am/was influenced by my own “preconceived notions”?

Why are you here statement…well, yes, it does matter if your only intention is only to be compative, but Heaven forbid, receptive and open.

 

[liquidpele]

Ah, now you are making assumptions…how do you know that I am/was influenced by my own “preconceived notions”?

Why are you here statement…well, yes, it does matter if your only intention is only to be compative, but Heaven forbid, receptive and open.

Because you’re human. We all do it.

I’m not here to be combative (assuming that is the word you mean), if that answers your question.
I can’t speak for the Charles Darwin user of course.

 

[jmcrae]

If i was to ask you what is a car, a human, a god? What would you reply?

Would you say that a car is fast, good looking, a polluter?

Would you say that a human is caring, evil, pretty, strong?

Well if you did you would not have told me a single thing about what these things actually are.

If i asked you, what is Albert Einstein? Would you say he discovered relativity? Is that what he is? NO. Hes a human. So what is a human, what is a car?

Well a car is a wheeled mechanical device designed to transport people.They normally carry between 2-8 people. They have there own internal combustion engines, and wheels blah blah blah.

A human is a member of a species of bipedal primates in the family Hominidae.

Domain: Eukarya
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Superclass: Tetrapoda
Class: Mammalia
Infraclass: Eutheria
Order: Primates
Suborder: Haplorrhini
Infraorder: Simiiformes
Parvorder: Catarrhini
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae
Subfamily: Homininae
Tribe: Hominini
Genus: Homo

They are carbon based life forms which DNA contains the genetic instructions blah blah blah.

Now even before we had such detailed explanations of what a human is we still knew what a human was. We just did not know the intricate details.

Ok now onto the biggy…

What is god?
**
I don’t want a list of attributes like “god is love”. As that is not an answer. I do not want he is the creater of the universe, for that is NOT what IT is.**

Now tell me this… How can i believe or disbelieving in something, what i don’t even know what that thing I’m supposed to be believing in is?

Having not read any of the other replies yet …

God is pure spirit.

Okay, so what is “pure spirit”?

You have heard of “team spirit” - that intangible stuff that causes members of a team to be loyal to one another and to work together as a single unit, subordinating their own egos to the good of the team.

“Spirit” is that stuff - that completely intangible stuff that is absolutely necessary to the efficient and smooth functioning of the team. Without “team spirit” you actually don’t really have a team at all, do you?

“Team spirit”, unlike God, is not conscious by itself, though. It relies on the collective consciousness of the team members, and it can only exist for as long as the team itself exists, and for as long as the team members are willing for it to exist. So, it is also unlike God, in that sense, because, unlike team spirit, God doesn’t cease to exist when we decide we have better things to do with our time.

So, now we have kind of a partial sense of what God might be like, with a whole bunch of caveats about what He is not like.

So, God is a spirit, who has His own consciousness,and who continues to exist independently of human or other action or inaction.

Other attributes of God is that He pre-existed the created Universe. He, in fact, is the primal cause of the Universe, and of existence itself. He will continue to exist after everything else has ceased to exist. This is usually what we are describing when we say that God is “eternal.”

We also have another sense of the word “eternal” that also applies to God, which is that God actually exists outside of time - “in Eternity.” Perhaps He observes time in much the same way someone who is making a video might look at their video. He might create and look at the ending first, and then add in some sequences for the beginning, and then some sequences for the middle. He might review it several times, in a different order each time. This is a poor analogy, since obviously the created Universe is much more complex than a video. But God sees all that exists, in one glance, and He sees the whole of Time, from beginning to end, in that same glance. He does not move from where He is, and yet at the same time, He is everywhere, and in every nanosecond of time.

I hope this helps you in some way.

 

[JulieAA]

Because you’re human. We all do it.

I’m not here to be combative (assuming that is the word you mean), if that answers your question.
I can’t speak for the Charles Darwin user of course.

Some people do have pre-conceived notions, but then choose to search for themselves…

I apologize if I wrongly accused you of being combative…yes that was the word typed quickly without the use of spell check…LOL LOL

 

[warpspeedpetey]

G-d is the maximal state of being. simple, rational, and already mentioned.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Sorry, but i don’t respect the god of the bible.

You will learn to if you keep asking the right questions and honestly look past the unintentional ignorance of those trying to help you.

In every large organization, there are far more people who misunderstand the organization than the relatively few who truly understand it. At times, none within it truly understand it. But this does not make it invalid, merely difficult for you to get valid answers by asking the people.

Truth is what it is. You misunderstand it in similar ways that others misunderstand it, but merely in different directions. Your opinion is not superior to everyone else’s even if you accomplish more truthful understanding than the majority. Don’t be tempted by pride or ego.

I suggest looking upon Man from a higher perspective, above Man.

Do you look upon the grass and judge each leaf for crossing the path of another? Do you look at the forest and condemn one tree for unjustly offending its neighbor? Do you lecture them on proper behavior explaining that each should avoid overshadowing the lesser and thus cruelly starving it of light and life?

Each life can only perceive to a limited degree and every life behaves accordingly. Such it is with human kind.

You clearly can perceive much greater justice than vegetable matter, but is your idea of justice to be obeyed by the grass and the trees?

If the grass and trees are not to obey the dictates of a obviously superior human, then how is it that other much more equal humans are to obey your concept of justice?

If the trees grow into a forest and that forest over reaches its resources and thus spawns a decay, perhaps wiping out the entire forest, is it just to save that which spawned such a calamity? Such it is with human kind.

Man is the forest of humans and were first brought together in spirit and named Ahdam. But Ahdam, although good, was limited. So from his make another was formed, Eve. But just as the forest offends it’s own resource, so it was with Man. Is it just to save the humankind that spawned such a calamity? Or is it just to let Man (and thus humans) suffer as the dying forest for being exactly what they are?

You might choose to save the forest for your own purposes. That which is above Man might choose to save Man for its own purposes.

That which is above Man is Truth or Reality itself which Man can either deal with or suffer from, but cannot ignore or dictate to, rather merely rearrange as permitted.

Jesus proposed a rearrangement concerning how people treat each other so as to stop the “fall” of the forest to its utter extinction. But if the solution is not accepted, then the problem persists, the falling continues for those who cannot accept the solution for whatever reason they might perceive.

Reality/Truth/God brought every tree up from the ground and placed every leaf upon it exactly as it is. Reality/Truth/God brought you into this world to be just as you are and Reality/Truth/God will take you out of it for being what you have been.

You can of course choose to curse Reality/Truth/God for being so unjust (as your mind perceives it). A tree would perhaps curse Man for not being more just and ensuring that no tree suffer the offense of another. You believe that Reality has no “purpose” of its own. But that is your limited perception (happens to be incorrect, btw) just as a tree is unaware and cannot perceive of Man .

But curse and complain as you will about Reality/Truth/God. Reality/Truth/God does is it will. Until you work with what you are given, until you open your eyes to perceive what you have, until you learn to balance your life with that around you, justice will be that you suffer unto death as you bring such suffering to so very many around you.

You might want to reconsider the respect you hold for the God of the Bible (regardless of it being so terribly misrepresented and misunderstood by your fellow humans). It is the only one you have. Be glad of that.

 

[James_S_Saint]

If you don’t respect Reality, Reality really won’t respect you.

 

[Andrew_Baalman]

God is not a thing; but human, divine, eternal. Anyone in the world can worship something and call it a god; but that is not God. What you listed in your spot is false gods; items you worship; but things that will send you to hell. I know you don’t believe in heaven or hell; but one day if you do not find actual and absolute truth; you will be in hell.

God is a mystery. God has no end or begining. God has three divine persons in Him; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father is that he created and still creates; He loves all that he has and will create; He especially loves us; even if we do not believe that He does or even care. The Son is Him who is born incarnate of a Virgin; If you want to see the Son; find a picture of Jesus and then you will see the invisible image of God. The Holy Spirit is the love and mercy that the Father has for his Son.

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote 12 principals on God’s existence and no one can disprove them.

Yes we can have false wisdom, false hope, and false knowledge; just like you have; but where does that come from? Too much of the world and who controls the world? The evil one; am I saying you are influenced by the evil one to ask such a question, “What is a god?” Yes, because the evil one likes to lie and deceive people. True Wisdom, True hope, and True Knowledge comes from God. To have true hope; you must have true faith in the True God; who has three divine persons; The Father, The Son, and Holy Spirit; without Him; we can do nothing and we can think of nothing good; without Him our work and life is in vain. With Him we defeat all falsehoods started by the evil one and whoever the evil one has influenced to work for him. With God all things are possible and without God; we will fail and our faith will die and then we turn into you; worshiping false gods; which are demons.

May you find God and learn to love Him before it’s too late.

 

[James_S_Saint]

God is not a thing; but human,

A “human” is a single element of Man, as in a member of the “hue of Man”. If God is but a human, I suspect the universe is in serious jeopardy.

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote 12 principals on God’s existence and no one can disprove them.

I was kind of hoping no one would present such a challenge. I have yet to find any philosopher throughout the history of mankind that I can’t in logical error. But I don’t find pleasure in shooting down people’s hopes.

What do you think would be the outcome if I actually did find him in error? Yes, I know you think it is impossible. But I asked “what if…”?

Yes we can have false wisdom, false hope, and false knowledge; just like you have; but where does that come from?

Wise words to repeat in front of a mirror each morning.

 

[Andrew_Baalman]

"Article 1. Whether the existence of God is self-evident?

Objection 1. It seems that the existence of God is self-evident. Now those things are said to be self-evident to us the knowledge of which is naturally implanted in us, as we can see in regard to first principles. But as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. i, 1,3), “the knowledge of God is naturally implanted in all.” Therefore the existence of God is self-evident.

Objection 2. Further, those things are said to be self-evident which are known as soon as the terms are known, which the Philosopher (1 Poster. iii) says is true of the first principles of demonstration. Thus, when the nature of a whole and of a part is known, it is at once recognized that every whole is greater than its part. But as soon as the signification of the word “God” is understood, it is at once seen that God exists. For by this word is signified that thing than which nothing greater can be conceived. But that which exists actually and mentally is greater than that which exists only mentally. Therefore, since as soon as the word “God” is understood it exists mentally, it also follows that it exists actually. Therefore the proposition “God exists” is self-evident.

Objection 3. Further, the existence of truth is self-evident. For whoever denies the existence of truth grants that truth does not exist: and, if truth does not exist, then the proposition “Truth does not exist” is true: and if there is anything true, there must be truth. But God is truth itself: “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6) Therefore “God exists” is self-evident.

On the contrary, No one can mentally admit the opposite of what is self-evident; as the Philosopher (Metaph. iv, lect. vi) states concerning the first principles of demonstration. But the opposite of the proposition “God is” can be mentally admitted: “The fool said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 52:1). Therefore, that God exists is not self-evident.

I answer that, A thing can be self-evident in either of two ways: on the one hand, self-evident in itself, though not to us; on the other, self-evident in itself, and to us. A proposition is self-evident because the predicate is included in the essence of the subject, as “Man is an animal,” for animal is contained in the essence of man. If, therefore the essence of the predicate and subject be known to all, the proposition will be self-evident to all; as is clear with regard to the first principles of demonstration, the terms of which are common things that no one is ignorant of, such as being and non-being, whole and part, and such like. If, however, there are some to whom the essence of the predicate and subject is unknown, the proposition will be self-evident in itself, but not to those who do not know the meaning of the predicate and subject of the proposition. Therefore, it happens, as Boethius says (Hebdom., the title of which is: “Whether all that is, is good”), “that there are some mental concepts self-evident only to the learned, as that incorporeal substances are not in space.” Therefore I say that this proposition, “God exists,” of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject, because God is His own existence as will be hereafter shown (3, 4). Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature — namely, by effects.

Reply to Objection 1. To know that God exists in a general and confused way is implanted in us by nature, inasmuch as God is man’s beatitude. For man naturally desires happiness, and what is naturally desired by man must be naturally known to him. This, however, is not to know absolutely that God exists; just as to know that someone is approaching is not the same as to know that Peter is approaching, even though it is Peter who is approaching; for many there are who imagine that man’s perfect good which is happiness, consists in riches, and others in pleasures, and others in something else.

Reply to Objection 2. Perhaps not everyone who hears this word “God” understands it to signify something than which nothing greater can be thought, seeing that some have believed God to be a body. Yet, granted that everyone understands that by this word “God” is signified something than which nothing greater can be thought, nevertheless, it does not therefore follow that he understands that what the word signifies exists actually, but only that it exists mentally. Nor can it be argued that it actually exists, unless it be admitted that there actually exists something than which nothing greater can be thought; and this precisely is not admitted by those who hold that God does not exist.

Reply to Objection 3. The existence of truth in general is self-evident but the existence of a Primal Truth is not self-evident to us.

 

[Andrew_Baalman]

Article 2. Whether it can be demonstrated that God exists?
Objection 1. It seems that the existence of God cannot be demonstrated. For it is an article of faith that God exists. But what is of faith cannot be demonstrated, because a demonstration produces scientific knowledge; whereas faith is of the unseen (Hebrews 11:1). Therefore it cannot be demonstrated that God exists.

Objection 2. Further, the essence is the middle term of demonstration. But we cannot know in what God’s essence consists, but solely in what it does not consist; as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. i, 4). Therefore we cannot demonstrate that God exists.

Objection 3. Further, if the existence of God were demonstrated, this could only be from His effects. But His effects are not proportionate to Him, since He is infinite and His effects are finite; and between the finite and infinite there is no proportion. Therefore, since a cause cannot be demonstrated by an effect not proportionate to it, it seems that the existence of God cannot be demonstrated.

On the contrary, The Apostle says: “The invisible things of Him are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made” (Romans 1:20). But this would not be unless the existence of God could be demonstrated through the things that are made; for the first thing we must know of anything is whether it exists.

I answer that, Demonstration can be made in two ways: One is through the cause, and is called “a priori,” and this is to argue from what is prior absolutely. The other is through the effect, and is called a demonstration “a posteriori”; this is to argue from what is prior relatively only to us. When an effect is better known to us than its cause, from the effect we proceed to the knowledge of the cause. And from every effect the existence of its proper cause can be demonstrated, so long as its effects are better known to us; because since every effect depends upon its cause, if the effect exists, the cause must pre-exist. Hence the existence of God, in so far as it is not self-evident to us, can be demonstrated from those of His effects which are known to us.

Reply to Objection 1. The existence of God and other like truths about God, which can be known by natural reason, are not articles of faith, but are preambles to the articles; for faith presupposes natural knowledge, even as grace presupposes nature, and perfection supposes something that can be perfected. Nevertheless, there is nothing to prevent a man, who cannot grasp a proof, accepting, as a matter of faith, something which in itself is capable of being scientifically known and demonstrated.

Reply to Objection 2. When the existence of a cause is demonstrated from an effect, this effect takes the place of the definition of the cause in proof of the cause’s existence. This is especially the case in regard to God, because, in order to prove the existence of anything, it is necessary to accept as a middle term the meaning of the word, and not its essence, for the question of its essence follows on the question of its existence. Now the names given to God are derived from His effects; consequently, in demonstrating the existence of God from His effects, we may take for the middle term the meaning of the word “God”.

Reply to Objection 3. From effects not proportionate to the cause no perfect knowledge of that cause can be obtained. Yet from every effect the existence of the cause can be clearly demonstrated, and so we can demonstrate the existence of God from His effects; though from them we cannot perfectly know God as He is in His essence.