Why does God exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scaun
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Scaun said:
Thank you for your advice.
That, well, doesn’t really make sense. His existence can’t be the reason of His existence.
Click to expand...
Why not? This actually makes perfect sense from an Aristotelian-Thomistic perspective. God (the prime mover) is pure actuality. In God existence and essence are identical. In Aristotelian terms the essence of something is equivalent to its substantial form. The substantial form or essence of Pope Benedict XVI is ‘being a man’ but in God, the substantial form is simply ‘being’ (or to be). God simply is. This makes perfect sense. God—being the greatest possible being does not fall under any genus, he cannot be defined or explained in terms of something else. He is being, he just is. That is why when Moses asked our Lord what is his name on Mount Sinai, Our Lord replied by saying “I am who I am.” He is who he is. He has no explanation for his existence, if he did then he wouldn’t be God.
 
Whadyamean said:
IS* IS*. I AM THAT I AM

A “reason” implies a cause and a result, as does existence. God doesn’t exist, God IS.
Click to expand...
Let’s not confuse people my friend. God does exist, and to say that he exists is just to say that God is. To exist is just to be. E.g., when I say that there is a car outside, I mean that there exists a car that is outside. The two phrases mean the same thing.
God Bless
 
VeritasSeeker said:
Let’s not confuse people my friend. God does exist, and to say that he exists is just to say that God is. To exist is just to be. E.g., when I say that there is a car outside, I mean that there exists a car that is outside. The two phrases mean the same thing.
God Bless
Click to expand...
Origin:
1595–1605; < Latin ex ( s ) istere to exist, appear, emerge, equivalent to ex- ex-1 + sistere to stand

It may be a subtlty, but as one Saint said “God is in the marmites” Or as someone else’s have said, “God is in the details.”
 
I would assume that it has something to do with being an inherent consummation of whatever the most basic inherent rules of reality are. If whatever “being” is in this absolute primal state is has no inherent marker differentiating it or a stopping point of how much / what exists, than the absolute most basic inherent form of this is “being” would be being stretched infinitely of every possible combination/conclusion/etc overlapping all at once. Note that this includes thought processes, which would make It in theory a single being, now also considered sentient, comprised of infinite qualities. though not in the way we understand sentience obviously.

The real question is why does anythign at all exist, rather than nothing, and a continuation of nothingness forever. But If it’s assumed it’s possible for things to exist, this simple mathematical realization is reasonably high evidence at least for something humans would come to see as a divinity. Ultimately, you would have to ask what additional rules would cause any other path to happen without this, and why from infinite “resource” of “void” as they say, this infinite conclusion wasn’t in order, but rather a limited one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top