The aforesaid, is aimed to establish if effectively is fair to identify the ipsum esse subsistens with the idea of God considered as the separated being from Platonic . URAM) in their existence or esse. 9. Referring to St. Thomas’s concept of God as Ipsum Esse Subsistens, i.e.,. Subsistent Being Itself, Jacques Maritain. Aquinas wrote that God is “ipsum esse subsistens,” translated by Bishop Robert Barron as “the shear act of ‘to be’ itself.” So the idea of God not simply as a noun.
|Published (Last):||1 April 2007|
|PDF File Size:||4.17 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.94 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
They do not contain existence within themselves but must receive it from their transcendent source. First absolutely, it even precedes the Good, for a being is only good in so far as it is a being, and it is a being only in virtue of the sibsistens esse which permits us to say of it: To understand this is also to reach, beyond the level of essence, the deeper level of existence.
I always thought that was a rather curiously mysterious way of revealing isum. Thus understood, the act of existing lies at the very heart, or if one prefers, at the very root of the real. That is a far more satisfying account of God than the caricaturish and anemic view of some subsistene thing floating about the universe performing magic tricks. Aquinas wrote that God is “ipsum esse subsistens,” translated by Bishop Robert Barron as “the shear act of ‘to be’ itself.
The arena of the sure and the familiar is after all the setting in which God manifests Himself, so it is ispum. Indeed, Eternity is exactly God interacting with each moment as it is dynamically and dramatically realized.
Whether they exist or do not exist, their Entish nature remains the same. Follow Blog via Email Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use. So really, we trace this understanding of God — albeit not a philosophical one — to at least the second millenium BC. As a follow up — Not that I think analogy is persuasive to Boyd.
Although some of our other subsistfns are different I hope that you can learn to believe in and trust in Sugsistens. That is to say, univocation and equivocation must ever account for the infinite modal disjunction between our contingent existence and transcendent Self-existence. This page was last edited on 5 Decemberat Indeed, when I say of a man, or of a horse, or of anything else: Jenson appreciates the Thomistic contribution: There is no scientific proof that God exists.
In its positive meaning, it affirms that God is completely self-sufficient, having within Godself the sufficient reason for God’s own existence. There is also a possible threat to divine aseity by the existence of abstract objects, a threat that philosopher William Lane Craig attempts to provide reconciliations for in his book, God Over All.
Aseity has also been criticized as being logically incompatible with the concept of God as a being or of God as existing. Retrieved July 15, God isor Ipsumm is Isso to speak. On days where I am feeling down, my family is there for me.
Such however risks the conflation if not complete identification of the revelation of God with God. Facebook Google Reddit Twitter Print. Ghazali and Ibn al-Arabi asserted a related concept known as “wahdat al-Wujud” in Sufi literature. Pascal makes a similar gambit, as does Lev Shestov.
Ipsum Esse Subsistens: The God Who is Verb | Eclectic Orthodoxy
Are you saying that this concept is mostly absent from the Taoist texts you’ve read? The aorist tense implies that everything that exists other than God came into being at some time in the past.
Thank You, Sean McCarthy. For example, David Bentley Hart asserts that nominalist and voluntarist conceptions are imported into modern theology both Reformation and Counter-reformation sensibilities are affected by significant distortion. We also must try not to picture God as a thing.
Retrieved 19 May Not so with God: As Eleonore Stump has recently argued, Thomas had no problem speaking of God as one who hears prayers and acts within the world he has made. I hope that this response has helped you to understand what Catholics really believe about God. Its relation to other things therefore is not that of receiver to received but of received to receiver.
It is difficult not to appear dismissive. I am always happy to see that people visit my blog. According to Thomas Aquinas, the difference between Creator and creature is that in the case of creatures, existence and essence are distinct, whereas they are not in God. God contains within what he is the reason that he is; we do not. Perhaps neither should we. Such jpsum existential world can be accounted for by no other cause than a supremely existential God.