In The Eternal Now, Paul Tillich intent is to answer a variety of questions that are concomitant with Ontology and Theology. It is written in a direct style that is free from the characteristic rhetorical frills of many religious works. Make no mistake Tillich is a sincerely religious man who frames his philosophical thinking in the weltanschauung of Christianity. Nonetheless, in Tillich’s mode of existentialist manifestation, ideation of "being" saturates the mundane milieu of religion.
Throughout the pages, Tillich provides an alternative ontological examination of the necessity in a belief of the Ultimate. The emblematic apologetic approach, as articulated in the works of St. Anselm, William of Ockham, and Duns Scotus, is destabilized by Tillich’s radical exposition that: If God is being – viz., the highest being-in-itself – then God cannot be the “Creator”. Consequently, God must be
…show more content…
As an example, Chapter Three, The Riddle of Inequality – incidentally, my favorite chapter – starts with the following verse from Mark 4:25:
“For to him who has will more be given; and from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away”
What Tillich then attempts to explicate, is the historical significance of this passage apropos to the expression of meaning. Through a cursory trace of self-reflection, Tillich layers the historical meaning onto modernity by exclaiming, “There are many things that we seemed to have, but that we really did not have, and that were therefore taken away from us”. As an example, Tillich uses the widespread belief in childhood innocence as something that cannot be used or increased. “The growth of our lives is made possible only by the sacrifice of the original gift of ignorance”. Hence, there are many things we had [have] that are constantly being taken away because of “taking them too much for
In this paper, I will explain how Descartes uses the existence of himself to prove the existence of God. The “idea of God is in my mind” is based on “I think, therefore I am”, so there is a question arises: “do I derive my existence? Why, from myself, or from my parents, or from whatever other things there are that are less perfect than God. For nothing more perfect than God, or even as perfect as God, can be thought or imagined.” (Descartes 32, 48) Descartes investigates his reasons to show that he, his parents and other causes cannot cause the existence of himself.
To begin, Anselm’s ontological proof functions from the essence of God to God’s existence. The argument
Peterson, Michael - Hasker, Reichenbach and Basinger. Philosophy of Religion - Selected Readings, Fourth Edition. 2010. Oxford University Press, NY.
Depending upon your definition of the present, it is hard to distinguish when the present time really is. Trying to pinpoint the exact time of “now” seems to be impossible because when we actually finish saying “now” it is already in the past. It is believed by many people that when a human dies for example, they cease to exist. In this essay I will be looking at two key concepts that relate to the topic of existence and the present time. These concepts are ‘Presentism’ and ‘Eternalism’. I will begin the essay by outlining what ‘Eternalism’ is and how its followers may see the present in a different way because of it. From here I will propose some of its weaknesses followed by objections to these weaknesses. The second main concept will be ‘Presentism’ which will be the opposing argument that suggests that things only exist in the present time instead of the past, present and future. After giving this argument, I will also be giving objections and counters to it. I, myself believe that there is a present time and existence, as we I find it difficult to believe that something exists in the same way once it has died and decomposed.
8- McDermid, Douglas. "God's Existence." PHIL 1000H-B Lecture 9. Trent University, Peterborough. 21 Nov. 2013. Lecture.
The Ontological Argument, which argues from a definition of God’s being to his existence, is the first type of argument we are going to examine. Since this argument was founded by Saint Anslem, we will be examining his writings. Saint Anslem starts by defining God as an all-perfect being, or rather as a being containing all conceivable perfections. Now if in addition of possessing all conceivable perfections t...
This paper is intended to explain and evaluate Descartes' proof for the existence of god in Meditation Three. It shall show the weaknesses in the proof, but also give credit to the strengths in his proof. It will give a background of what Descartes has already accepted as what he truly knows. The paper will also state Descartes two major points for the existence of God and why the points can easily be proven false. The paper will also show that if a God does exist that God can in fact be an evil deceiver. The paper will also show that the idea of a perfect being cannot be conceived by an imperfect being.
St. Thomas Aquinas presents five arguments to demonstrate the existence of God. However, this paper focuses on the fifth argument. The fifth argument is regarded as the Teleological Argument and states that things that lack intelligence act for some end or purpose. While the fifth argument satisfies God’s existence for Aquinas, some contemporary readers would argue that Aquinas neglects the laws of physics. Others argue that Aquinas allows a loophole in his argument so that the Catholic conception of God is not the only intelligent designer.
If God did not exist, he would not be the greatest being imaginable. He is the greatest thing imaginable. Therefore, he does exist. From this argument, God’s existence is viewed. as necessary (Ayer. A. J. 1973).
There are often many mixed views when discussing God’s existence. In Anselm’s works “The Proslogion” and “Anselm’s Reply to Gaunilo” and Gaunilo’s work the “Reply on Behalf of the Fool”, both of their philosophies on the matter are imparted. Anselm’s logic regarding God is correct as he sustains his argument even when it confronted with criticisms and it is comprehensible.
A wonderful description of the nature of God’s existence that includes the absolute possession of characteristics that have to be uniquely God was said, “First, God must exist necessarily, which means that God’s existence differs from ours by not being dependent on anything or anyone else, or such as to be taken from him or lost in any way. God has always existed, will always exist and could not do otherwise than to exist. Also, whatever attributes God possesses, he possesses necessarily” (Wood, J., 2010, p. 191).
Through Thomas Berry and Karl Barth we understand the existence of God within immanent theology and transcendent theology.
A Christian apologetic method is a verbal defense of the biblical worldview. A proof is giving a reason for why we believe. This paper will address the philosophical question of God’s existence from the moral argument. The presuppositional apologetic method of Reformed thinkers Cornelius Van Til and John Frame will be the framework. Topics covered here could undoubtedly be developed in more depth, but that would be getting ahead, here is the big picture.
1) Oxford Readings in Philosophy. The Concept of God. New York: Oxford University press 1987
Clifford, Richard J., A Commentary by… Proverbs, The Old Testament Library. Editorial Advisory Board; James L. Mays, Carol A. Newsom, David I. Petersen. Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky, 1999.