Month: March 2010

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters where we are diving into the ocean of truth. I hope the rest of you had a weekend as enjoyable as mine was. As we wind down this Sunday afternoon, we’re going to be continuing our look at the doctrine of God. Our textbook, as it were, for this study is the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas, which can be read at newadvent.org. We are studying God’s existence in things, or as it is known at newadvent.org, his omnipresence. First, I have some prayer requests. I ask that you all pray for my Christlikeness, which can be constantly hampered by my incessant introspection. Second, I ask for prayers for my financial situation. Finally, I ask that you pray for a third related are in my life.

The question tonight is if God is everywhere by essence, presence, and power. Let’s go through these one at a time? For an interesting exercise, if you’re not reading the Summa along with me, when the objections come, spend a few minutes thinking about the objection and see if you answer like Thomas does.

Is God in things by essence? For something to belong to a thing, it must belong essentially to that thing. If there is something essential to being a human, then as long as I am a human, then I must have that thing. However, God is not in anything essentially, therefore he cannot be in things by essence.

The answer? The fallacy is in how you think about essence. God is not in things by the essence of the things themselves, but by his own essence. It is his essence that says that he is in all things. It is not based on what the things themselves are, but if he is not in all things, then he cannot be God. Therefore, God is essentially in all things.

What about presence? Isn’t that the same. After all, if he is in all things by his essence, then there is nothing that he is absent from. However, if he is not in all things by essence (Assuming the prior objection had not been answered), then he is not in all things by presence. In fact, to say he is is superfluous.

Thomas answers that this is not superfluous. A thing can be present to another when it is present by sight. I see outside of where I sit a river and a building. These things are present to me in my line of sight, even if I am not walking through the river or am at or in the building that I see in my sight.

God is the cause of all things by his power, however, he is also the cause by his knowledge and his will. However, it is not said that he is in things by knowledge and will. Therefore, it cannot be said that he is in them by power.

Aquinas says that knowledge and will requires that the thing known and the thing willed be in the thing that knows and wills. The idea of the painting must be in the mind of the artist first and the will must be in the artist in order to bring about that thing. Thus, by knowledge and will, it is better to say that things are in God.

However, power is an acting principle. By power, the agent acts on that which is external to itself, although the agent can also act on itself. In this case in philosophy, what the agent acts on can be called the patient. The conclusion however is that God is indeed in all things by his power.

Tomorrow, we shall continue our study.

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters. Right now, we’re going through the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas which can be read at Newadvent.org if you do not own a copy. If you don’t in fact, I’d say you could not really be hurt by ordering one. We’re going through in an attempt to study the doctrine of God. I do ask that you remember me in prayer however. First, for my Christlikeness as I am noticing many things that need to be changed in me. Second, I ask for your prayers for my financial situation. Finally, I ask for prayers for a third related area in my life. For now, let’s get to the question.

Is God omnipresent? After all, that would mean that God is in every place. However, how can an incorporeal being be in a place? Note that word “place.” It describes an area of location. The ancients did not speak of “space.” When they spoke of the world beyond the Earth, they spoke of the heavens. What we call space is an area filled with several places.

The reality is that God is in every place as the cause of the existence of that place. It does not mean however that the place that he is in contains him. Rather, if God was not, then we could say that that place was not. How could it be that a place exists, that is, participates in being, but was totally unconnected from the source of all being?

Also, God is in every place in that if something is in that place, God is the source of that being’s existence. If I am in one place, it keeps me from being in many other places. I cannot be here and be in a separate city on the opposite side of the planet. I can move from place to place which means that I can be contained by place.

So another question we could ask then is how much of God is in every place? Once again, we can be thankful we started with divine simplicity. Since we have that, we know the answer ultimately to the question. The answer is that the question itself is a nonsense question.

Since God is simple, it cannot be the case that part of him is in any place. After all, he has no parts. Thus, the conclusion must be that all of God is in every place that exists. Where I am sitting right now, all of God is here right now. Where you are sitting, rather it be just down the street, in the same city, or on the other side of the world, all of God is present there as well.

The applications of this are enormous. That means that when you pray, you can be sure that God is an ever-present audience to your prayers. It also means that when you are thinking of sinning, God is also an ever-present audience to that. You cannot escape his eye. The old saying has been “Wherever you go, there you are.” Pertinent to us is “Wherever you go, there he is.”

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters where we are diving into the ocean of truth. We’ve been going through the doctrine of God right now and our guide for this has been the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. If you are wanting to view the questions being discussed, go to Newadvent.org. Right now, what we’re talking about tonight is under the topic of omnipresence, which I find interesting and that’s for a later comment. Before we begin tonight’s entry, I have my prayer requests. First, I ask for prayers for my Christlikeness and in this case I think a strong point would be to realize the forgiveness of God and the transforming power he gives, but then to ask to be like Christ is already a realization of that power to a degree. Second, for my financial situation. Third, I ask for prayers for the third related area of my life. For now, let’s go to the text.

To begin with, let’s consider that this is under the topic of omnipresence. I had said yesterday that we would be writing about the existence of God in things. Since I do not have my book with me tonight, I had to go to newadvent.org and lo and behold, I find that this is referred to as omnipresence there. I noted yesterday that omniscience was not based so much on God knowing all things, which he does, but how God knows all things. The same could apply to omnipresence.

God is in all things however according to Aquinas. This does not mean that he is in them however as part of them either essentially or accidentally. Because we as Christians have Christ in us, that does not mean Christ is a part of us. In this case, he is relationally in us and he is the cause of all righteousness that takes place within us.

Readers by now should know that Aquinas stresses much on the being of God and this is the way that God is in all things. There can be no being that God is not the cause of. If something exists, then God is the cause of that which exists. Note that we are referring to the beings themselves and not their actions.

This also does not mean that God is contained by the beings that he is in neither more than Aquinas believes that the soul is contained in the body. Quite the reverse in fact. The body is contained in the soul as the essence of the soul limits the matter that the body is tied to.

What about demons? Aquinas answers this as well. God is in demons as the cause of their being, but he is not the cause of their deformity or their fall, although there is no doubt he allows it. The reason the demons exist is that God allows it. Inasmuch as they are beings, God is in them. While this may sound strange to us, the same applies to us as well, for we are not always acting the way we ought, yet inasmuch as we are what we are meant to be, God is in us and the more he is in us, the more we will become what we are meant to be.

Which brings us to application. God is in us and all that is good in us is that which comes from him. Are we as Christians going to take the time to look at our fellow man and see the good in him? Note that for the medievals, this would also include seeing truth and beauty in that person as well.

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello everyone. It’s good to be back and writing regularlyl again for Deeper Waters. We are studying the doctrine of God right now and the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. Those who do not have a copy can go to newadvent.org and read one there. Right now, we’re studying the infinity of God. We’re going to close up that topic tonight but first, prayer requests. First, I ask for prayers for my Christlikeness. Today has been a good day and I’ve got a good friend who’s working with me on a lot of issues especially in relation to my third prayer request. Second, for my financial situation. Third, for the area in my life related to both of these. For now, let’s get to the question.

Can an infinite multitude exist? Does there seem to be anything inherently impossible about the concept? After all, we can think of the adage that there is one angle at which a man may stand straight and an infinite number by which he may fall. When we say that, are we not making a truth statement? If we say the possibilities are endless, are we not pointing to an actual infinite?

This is done with math also. We can multiply numbers by infinity and we have all sorts of fun word games involving infinity. There is, for instance, the hotel with an infinite number of rooms and they clear out all the people who are in even numbered rooms and there’s still the same number of people in the hotel.

This is the point where we have to realize that because we can imagine something, that doesn’t mean it can be actualized. This is a situation I wish skeptics would realize concerning the Problem of Evil. So many think they can imagine all of these perfect scenarios where evil would not happen. Well you can imagine it, but that does not mean that those scenarios can be actualized.

Of course, as soon as we’re talking about created realities, Aquinas again says that these are limited by matter. They can be comprehended for they are made by their creator for a purpose. Since they are limited, they cannot be infinite. Now Aquinas has no problem with a potential infinite, but he does have a problem with an actual one.

What does all of this have to do with anything? I think for one thing, this will be important when we come to the question of God’s knowledge, which is a future topic. I’ll just try to whet your appetite a little bit here with the idea of “Does God know an infinite number of things?” This question will bear a relation to that one.

Furthermore, this helps us understand the nature of infinity. When we understand that better, we can understand God better for God’s nature is infinite. Yes everyone. Studying mathematics can help you come to a better understanding of God. All truth is God’s truth and the more we learn, the more we can come to know our God.

We shall start tomorrow on the existence of God in things.

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters! I see that we’ve had readers come to the blog while I’ve been away which is good. I will give warning however that I am thinking my grandmother in another state is likely to pass away soon. If that happens, I will be going out of town and not posting then so if you don’t see any posts consistently again soon, you’ll know what has happened. For now, let’s continue our study of the doctrine of God using the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. That can be read at newadvent.org. Before getting into that however, I wish to list my prayer requests. First off, I ask that you all pray for my Christlikeness. I am in the crucible as it were I believe and it is a painful place, but I expect to shine when I come out. Second, for my finances. Third, for a related area in my life to both of these. For now, let’s get to tonight’s question.

Can a magnitude be infinite? Thomas says no. This is a topic tonight that is largely mathematical and this brings out an important distinction. Mathematics does not depend on matter for its existence. However, matter is needed to understand its existence. You can imagine a triangle easily enough, but for real triangles to exist, there must be matter.

In math, something can be potentially infinite. Picture the number line. You can always add one more to whatever number you’re thinking. However, there will never come a point where you will add one number and say “Ah! I have reached infinity.” We can think about infinite numbers in idea, but I do not believe they can exist in actuality.

Aquinas also says that this is because of matter as well. Matter is a limiting principle to a thing and if a thing possesses matter, then it is by nature limited. If something is limited by something external to itself, then it can in no way be infinite. Magnitude is a measure of quantity and matter and so in that case, something cannot be an infinite magnitude.

What about geometric figures? It’s when we look at this that we can begin to appreciate also the deep education of the medieval period as Aquinas can talk about many areas of knowledge in his studies. He says an infinite body will not work in a straight line because nothing moves naturally unless it is out of its place, but if something was infinite, it would be in every place.

Why not a circle? It could not be since a circle requires that would require that the body move to a place that had already been occupied by another part. However, a circle has lines drawn from the center and thus two spots would be an infinite distance apart and thus one could never reach the other place.

Yes. It’s complicated.

Why is this important? Aquinas is showing that God alone is infinite and that he does not have a body. Mathematics is not the enemy of Christianity nor is any other branch of learning and the sooner Christians learn that, the better off they’ll be. We can enter any area of study without fear.

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters. First off, I want everyone to know there might not be a new post for the next few days. I’m moving again and I’m not sure when I’ll have internet access. If you come here for awhile and there’s no new entry, don’t panic! I assure you I want to get connected back to the internet world as soon as I can. Now our topic tonight will be still the infinity of God. Our guide is the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas that can be read at newadvent.org. First, I ask for prayers however in my Christlikeness. Moving does put me under some stress and probably really tries my character as well. Second, I ask for prayers for my finances. Third, I ask for prayers for the related area in my life.

Tonight’s question is if anything can be infinite besides God. One objection to look at is that God has infinite power and the power determines the effect. If the cause is infinite, then ought not the effect be capable of being infinite? If there cannot be another infinite thing, maybe it’s because God’s power isn’t infinite?

To begin with, let’s remember that infinite is simply a way of saying not finite. Now Aquinas does believe in a relative infinity. For instance, take a piece of wood. This piece of wood could be made into a limitless number of objects. However, by virtue of it being wood and of it being material, it can only have one form at a time. The wood will not be both a bed and a table. Now you could use a bed as a table or vice-versa or maybe find some mix, but I’m using a bed as a bed properly understood and the same for a table.

God is uniquely infinite because of, and we should all know by now, his simplicity. His being is not received into anything else and it is subsisting being alone. Because of that, it cannot be contained by any form. As was said earlier, form can limit matter and vice-versa. There is a possible difference with angels as they could be relatively infinite, however, they are not their own being and have been determined to have the form that they have.

This is the problem with the objection as well. A thing cannot be its own being. It is a combination of being + existence and thus is in some way limited. If it is limited, it cannot be infinite. One important point to note here is that Aquinas says that God cannot do something contradictory, which would be making here something that is finite and infinite both. In fact, this is the answer Aquinas would give to the question of “Can God create a rock so big he can’t lift it?” There is nothing new under the sun.

God alone is infinite and he is infinite in all that he is. Of course, we haven’t got to all that he is yet, but as we go further through this study, we will come to appreciate why Aquinas goes through in the order that he does.

We shall continue this next time.

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters. We are diving into the ocean of truth and learning what we can about the doctrine of God. Our guide for this is the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. Those of you who do not have a copy are free to go to newadvent.org and read a copy of the Summa online. First, I wish to offer my prayer requests. I ask first for my Christlikeness as I’m noticing a number of attitudes that I seem to have that I don’t wish to have and I’m asking the divine surgeon to remove those from me. Second, I ask for prayers for my financial situation. Finally, I ask for prayers for the third related area in my life. For now, let’s get to tonight’s question.

Is God infinite? Thus, we begin our study of the infinity of God with this one and since we’re studying the infinity of God, it must follow that God is infinite for Aquinas. However, like any other great medieval philosopher, he will be answering the question first. As I’ve stated earlier, the medievals did not simply take things on faith. They analyzed their arguments.

The objections largely come from Aristotle. Aristotle said that everything that was infinite had parts and matter. However, it was shown earlier that God has no parts and no matter. Therefore, it cannot be the case that he is infinite. Second, infinite is related to quantity, but in God there is no quantity. He does not possess X amount of something. Therefore, God cannot be infinite.

One aspect to keep in mind is that to say God is infinite is really to exclude him from the category of finite things. We cannot comprehend the infinite. For the medievals, this was the via negativa way of understanding God. It is that we realize how different God is from the creation and we largely know more about what God is not than about what he is.

Aquinas says that the ancients did think the first principle was infinite, but they thought matter was the first principle as well. They assumed that it must be a material infinite and that an infinite body must then be behind all things. Aquinas has already argued however that there is a first principle, vis a vis the five ways, and through the argument of simplicity has shown that he is free of matter.

However, Aquinas says that any form is limited by the matter that it takes. In turn, matter is made finite by the form it receives. Matter has the potential to be many things but once it receives a form, it is terminated by that form as it were. Once matter clings to my form, in a sense, it is limited to being me if it must be something.

God however has no matter to him and his form is being. His being is also not received in anything, which is what is important as well about the argument we looked at last night, and is therefore not limited in anything. The conclusion that Aquinas reaches then and rightly so is that since God is not limited, he is without limits, i.e. infinite.

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello everyone. It’s good to see you back here at Deeper Waters where we dive into the ocean of truth and if this is your first visit, welcome aboard. I hope you’ll be a regular. We’re studying the goodness of God and we’re going to wrap that up tonight. Our guide has been the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. You can read it online at newadvent.org. Before that however, I ask for prayer requests. First off, I ask for prayer for my Christlikeness and realizing what I really need to spend my time thinking on. Second, I ask for prayers for my financial situation. Finally, I ask for prayers for a third related area of my life.

Are all things good by the divine goodness? This is an interesting one because I think for most of us, our first inclination is to say “Yes.” However, as I examine this question, I can see why Aquinas actually says no to this. Of course, he does clarify that no, but I believe in the way that he answers that he is wanting to avoid having a pantheistic belief.

For instance, let’s suppose that all had not their own being, but simply the divine being. In that case, they would in fact be included in the nature of God, which is something that Spinoza would have agreed with. The being that you and I possess in that case would of course be the divine being as we would not have any being outside of that being to have.

If that is the case, then why do the same with goodness? If all we have in us is divine goodness, then we do not have any goodness of our own. If we do not have any goodness of our own, then we do not have any being of our own. Our being is not ours, but is simply the divine being in us. We are not pagans however. We realize that we are not God.

Now I said that Aquinas does qualify the answer. He does say that we are good by the divine goodness as the exemplar cause. That is the cause after which something is. We could only have goodness if there was a divine goodness that our goodness was based on just as we could only have being if there was a divine being that our being was based on.

This is important because my being is my own. I am a human being. I am not an angel being. I am not a God being. I am not a dog being or cat being. I am human. I need to be that which I was meant to be. Humans are not meant to be angels and we’re not meant to be animals and we’re not meant to be God either.

Too often, we tend to move in such a way. We tend to act like animals in our morality often. Some of us in the Christian world try to act like angels in a bad way, in that we think the material world doesn’t matter. Now angels don’t really think that I believe, but we think its angelic to focus solely on spiritual matters.

We are humans. We are part material and part spiritual. We have a body and a soul. It is our being and it is a gift from God. We need to embrace it. Let’s pray the prayer of Soren Kierkegaard. “And now Lord, with your help, I will become myself.”

We shall start discussing the infinity of God tomorrow.

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters where we continue diving into the Ocean of Truth. We’re going through the Summa Theologica where we are studying the doctrine of God. For those who do not have this fine work of Thomas Aquinas, you’re free to go to NewAdvent.org. We’re right now studying the goodness of God. Before we begin, I wish to present my prayer requests. First, I ask for prayers in Christlikeness and I have seen the change again as I am working on overcoming some inhibitions and embracing all of life as Christ would have us do. Second, I ask for prayers with finances. Finally, I ask for prayers in a third related area in my life.

Is God alone essentially good? Aquinas has some objections to this. First off, haven’t we said goodness is just another way of understanding being? If goodness and being are really the same, then it seems that all beings are essentially good simply by virtue of the fact that they are beings.

Also, if good is what is desired, then the being of each thing is its good. However, everything is a being essentially, therefore everything is essentially good.

Finally, if something is not essentially good, then its goodness must come from something else. However, we cannot have an infinite regress and in order to do that then, we must have everything be good essentially.

I hope astute readers who have been paying attention to our doctrine of being thus far are already making the connections and seeing the problems.

Aquinas of course says that to God alone belongs the property of being essentially good. After all, God is the ultimate perfection and there is nothing lacking in him and he is goodness by his very nature. Of course, some of you might be wondering what is the answer to the objections. Why aren’t all other beings the same way?

The objections are ignoring that God alone is not just essentially good but essentially being. God is what we call a necessary being. It is impossible for him by nature to not be. If God was not, nothing else would be. This is one reason good metaphysics is so important. When you understand more of the doctrine of being, you see why the existence of God is so important and how nothing else exists necessarily by its own nature.

This is also why Spinoza can be seen as a challenge to Aquinas as he equated God with the universe and had everything necessary. Of course, I believe the Thomistic thought can triumph over Spinoza, but it is still a challenge that we ought not neglect. Every philosopher should rise to defend the philosophy that he embraces.

Thus, we conclude that other beings aren’t beings essentially but beings by participation. In the same way, they are not good essentially then but good by participation. Insofar as they have being, they are good essentially, but that being that they have is not essential but contingent. The answer to the third objection should be obvious then. You end the infinite regress by a being who is good essentially and not by participation, namely God.

We shall continue this doctrine tomorrow.