Anselm's ontological argument is how he explains God as a necessary cause. Spinoza is a modern thinker who explains God as a cause as well. Spinoza is a monist who believes everything is one. Therefore, he believes God is the only substance and existence there is. Spinoza states that "by God I understand a being absolutely infinite, that is, a substance consisting of an inf... ... middle of paper ... ...s and material.
This is why the Bible refers to God as Spirit (John 4:24). 2. The Creator and Sustainer of Everything Else that Exists. In classical theism, all reality is contingent on God — that is, all reality has come into existence and continues to exist because of Him. Unlike a god who forms the universe out of preexistent matter, the God of classical theism created the universe ex nihilo (out of nothing).
Another important definition to define is what Spinoza defines as God. God in Spinoza's mind is a substance that has infinite attributes, or an infinite being. This substance must have the qualities of being absolutely eternal and absolutely infinite. Spinoza does not argue for a specific God of any religion, but instead defines God and nature as being the same thing. With all of this Spinoza's see’s all animals, plants, humans, etc.
Spinoza’s method of proving one substance relies upon his definitions and reason. I take further issue with this method because God cannot be proven through reason alone. Through this same reasoning Spinoza gives life too much meaning. In his argument, he claims that since God is the only substance all things flow from God. Meaning that everything in existence is a part of
Proof For the Existence of God From the diversity of men and creatures on this earth, there has always been one unifying link. At the root of humanity’s existence, lies the root of all things natural and infinite, a hint of something supreme and purposeful, something incomprehensible; a glimpse of what is real and what is possible. Inspired by wonder one can easily be surprised by the doubts presented as to the existence and identity of this driving force. The Law of Causality properly states, “Anything which begins to exist must have been brought into existence by something distinct from itself.” Therefore, only something outside of the world could have created the world. Logic and natural law can easily prove that this Being is an All-Powerful God through four different arguments: the Cosmological, Historical, Moral, and Teleological arguments.
It is impossible for Him not to exist, and God’s existence does not depend on anything else; He is independent of all else. God is not just a being, but Being itself, his is existence Himself. His very nature is to be. God is also Creator of the universe, of all time and space. We, His creation only share in existence with God.
With the concept of God being the center of one’s life, it becomes perfectly natural to focus life events and circumstances on God, and to give God credit for accomplishment in life. Theocentrism holds to an entirely different view, which does not reflect the Christian belief. Theocentrism has a couple of different interpretations. One where God is still God, but he is attached to all creation (nature has the same value as humanity); the other where God is creation and human beings should worship God by witnessing and caring for all of creation. The bottom line is Theocentrism is a belief that God is everything and within everything.
Nothing is the source of its own existences, nothing is self-creating . The cosmological argument states at some point, the cause and effect sequence must have a beginning. This unexpected phenomenal being is god. According to the argument, god is the initial start of the universe as we know it. Though nothing is self-creating cosmological believers say god is the only being the is self –created.
Creatio ex nihilo advocates claim that God did this 'out of nothing;' creating all things out of absolutely nothing. Panentheists purport that God created by influencing a realm of 'non-divine actualities.' These non-divine actualities are comprised of 'moments of experience,' which have always been, and these actualities present the options from which the next moments are created. Panentheists believe a realm of actualities has always existed alongside God, although the individual actualities themselves are neither eternal nor do possess any divine power in, or of, themselves. Those on both sides of this debate profess God to be a sovereign, holy, omnipresent, and a personal being who interacts with the loving intent of bringing about the most possible good for all creation.
Pantheists cannot prove that everything is God. Pragmatists cannot prove that what will count for them in the future is what works for them now. Nor can agnostics prove that it is impossible to know one way or the other. Faith is unavoidable, even if we chose to believe only in ourselves. What is to be decided is what evidence we think is pertinent, how we are going to interpret that evidence, and who or what we are willing to believe in.?