That if we think of God as a thing, a being that exists in time and space, it constrains God to OUR own little world world. God is being itself, not A being. What do you think?
Isn't this a better idea of God, than some sky daddy? Or is the idea too hard? And what do you think this statement really means?
2007-07-24 08:24:49 · 8 answers · asked by ladyren 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I think a definition of god such as this one has great appeal to anyone who has flushed the idea of a super daddy, who answers prayers, and kills off people as we see in the Old Testament. Even an evolutionist can accept this idea... Got then is anything that is, that exists, that lives, and thus therefore dies.... God then could be DNA, and the process of adaption... I like it. Where did you find the quote?
2007-07-24 08:28:15 · answer #1 · answered by April 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Paul Tilich did not come up with that notion all on his own, he learned it from the long tradition of theology received through the scholastsic philosophy of the middle ages that at its turn built on the philosophies of Aristotle and the neoplatonists to give a rational sustentation to the revealed truths of the scriptures.
This is the real and true idea of the true God, and the God to whom true religious people pray and whom they see in all the phenomena and in the order of the universe. The first mover, necesary being, summum perfectum and summun bonum, Father Omnipotent. God is His own existence, His essence equates existence. He is His own essence which is his own existence, only He IS in the true sense of being, That is why in the hebrew scriptures he revealed himself to be "I AM WHO AM"
The conception of a located super being in time and space "somewhere" in heaven is an infantile conception of God, not the mature knowledge of those inmersed in advanced stages of the spiritual life. This is the God they contemplate when they engage in pure contemplation and the goal of all their spiritual exercises: the beatific Vision, i.e. The unmediated contemplation of the essence of God in aeternum.
2007-07-24 08:31:21 · answer #2 · answered by Dominicanus 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't know where you atheists are getting this "sky daddy". Perhaps there are fundies that still think that way,but the Church has long since stopped imagining God as residing above the clouds. It's idiotic.
2007-07-24 09:19:27 · answer #3 · answered by Galahad 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Einstein proved time is a flexible reality....but to answer the deeper question of limited vernacular, the element of the Trinity is re-enforced if ,in fact ,we are using basic vocabulary to explain a complex relationship....such as "Jesus is the visible presense of God", so, we say "Son of God" to communicate that fact.
2007-07-24 08:31:59 · answer #4 · answered by Thomas Paine 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What I see here is what I have often said; people tend to make God over into their own image.
.
2007-07-24 08:28:01 · answer #5 · answered by Hogie 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
God created "OUR own little world world" and there for pre-exists and exists outside this universe. Please, when you quote some one as saying something have the respect to quote them exactly as it was stated or written instead of given us your interpretation.
2007-07-24 08:49:44 · answer #6 · answered by ronald s 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think, in our human capacity, we cannot fully comprehend God at this time. We put Him "in a box" no matter how hard we try not to do so.
2007-07-24 08:28:55 · answer #7 · answered by Halfadan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree. " The first duty of love, is to listen "
2007-07-24 08:33:58 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋