Triangle
Full Member
Posts: 356
Likes: 134
|
Post by Triangle on Jul 11, 2021 3:45:06 GMT
There are kinds of presence, in which we can detail what we are feeling, but a imaterial and concrete presence can be only purely knowed. So, there is God and he is a imaterial and concrete being entity.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Jul 11, 2021 22:13:09 GMT
There are kinds of presence, in which we can detail what we are feeling, but a imaterial and concrete presence can be only purely knowed. So, there is God and he is a imaterial and concrete being entity.
Its a paradox that works.
A fair metaphor for this is an electric field.
In the one sense it is immaterial - it passes through all things,
and yet its effects are 'concrete'.
Much like radio waves or gravity,
They are invisible such that many would not believe in their existence.
But a wider perspective shows them to be real.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 16, 2021 13:52:54 GMT
As I previously said that God was Spirit.
To this I want to add that God is concrete, yes, I also believe in this.
Being a Person (not some kind of a blind force, as some the ancient thought),
God has His own rule over the universe. He personally decides what to happen,
and what to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Jul 16, 2021 14:24:49 GMT
As I previously said that God was Spirit. To this I want to add that God is concrete, yes, I also believe in this. Being a Person (not some kind of a blind force, as some the ancient thought), God has His own rule over the universe. He personally decides what to happen, and what to be. How do you know this? Its seems to me that you are repeating a doctrine that Christian theologians concocted long ago. Why is God conceived as a person? because,since we are persons and know ourselves, what we call God becomes intelligible. Anaxagoras, an old friend of mine, said it: people make the gods in their own image; that is, man-like. But if God is the author of what happens in the universe, then men have only the illusion that they are causes/agents. On the contrary you can rephrase Sartre's argument that if man is free, then such a God does not exist -- which is logically correct. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 17, 2021 5:26:07 GMT
As I previously said that God was Spirit. To this I want to add that God is concrete, yes, I also believe in this. Being a Person (not some kind of a blind force, as some the ancient thought), God has His own rule over the universe. He personally decides what to happen, and what to be. How do you know this? Its seems to me that you are repeating a doctrine that Christian theologians concocted long ago. Why is God conceived as a person? because,since we are persons and know ourselves, what we call God becomes intelligible. Anaxagoras, an old friend of mine, said it: people make the gods in their own image; that is, man-like. But if God is the author of what happens in the universe, then men have only the illusion that they are causes/agents. On the contrary you can rephrase Sartre's argument that if man is free, then such a God does not exist -- which is logically correct. I believe in what Credo says: The Creed: The Symbol of Faith I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of light; true God of true God; begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, by Whom all things were made; Who for us men and for our salvation came down from Heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man. And He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried. And the third day He arose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into Heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; Whose Kingdom shall have no end. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father; Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; Who spoke by the prophets. In one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen Then, anti-Sabbelian: It's not true that – "God is said to be only one person who reveals himself in different ways called modes, faces, aspects, roles or masks..." Then, anti-Nestorianism: It's not true that – "In Jesus Christ God and Human parts were separated". And mainly, the Holy Trinity as one being has three persons as one – so, contrary to the Unitarians: not one deity as one person. ... Anyway, why personal? Actually, it's a good question, and I'd say it's like a challenge for my brain, because I was only supposed to, but never tried to think about it deeper. Firstly, I never liked Anaxagoras, yet it doesn't need here to show my antipathy to him. I didn't like him not only of his atheism, but for his really doubt claim of all in all (or homeomerija? Sorry, for not presenting the original term; I'm still confused about usage of certain terms in my answer). Unlike Empedocles in who's epistemology we have some abilities to accept or dis-accept things, the Anaxagoras one is really confusing: there's no need for any two things to have abilities to be conjugated, or else each thing would be like the other one, and finally, everything would be just one. I don't think that knowing God is the way strictly as Anaxagoras's way. Instead, God is able to create any matter or substance that may live by itself. World can exist without God if God will it. (He might provide it.) ... I think I still haven't answered, why personal... I guess it is ours duty to underline and to contour the God's uniqueness. (Considering three persons in the Holy Trinity.) He has His will, and He has made us, humans, according to His image: "Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them." (Genesis 1: 26-27) |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 17, 2021 5:38:17 GMT
As I previously said that God was Spirit. To this I want to add that God is concrete, yes, I also believe in this. Being a Person (not some kind of a blind force, as some the ancient thought), God has His own rule over the universe. He personally decides what to happen, and what to be. How do you know this? Its seems to me that you are repeating a doctrine that Christian theologians concocted long ago. Why is God conceived as a person? because,since we are persons and know ourselves, what we call God becomes intelligible. Anaxagoras, an old friend of mine, said it: people make the gods in their own image; that is, man-like. But if God is the author of what happens in the universe, then men have only the illusion that they are causes/agents. On the contrary you can rephrase Sartre's argument that if man is free, then such a God does not exist -- which is logically correct. There is also another response about it in as Xenophanes so Anaxagoras styles (which are quite similar to each other): Yes, we're projecting our views (literally, to look, to observe, to watch, to take, etc, as it closes to Plato's mimesis somehow) to God. I see nothing terrible here. Cataphatic way of understanding God is perhaps one good alternative to any other ways. Surely, we never know anything for certain, while should we give up? Locke's primary qualities seem to be more stable to use them for describing God as mathematics like Pythagoras or Plato tried to do. And personality seems to be the one of such category. I can say that what person is as a philosophical question isn't easy and clear to me. I some sense I take this concept as a citizen living in a society, and in another one – a unique action beginning. I'd like not to address the society's meaning to God, but since God is trinity, maybe it's not so impossible. What do you think about this? |
|
