In this chapter Hart focuses a lot on the definition of God. He attempts to explain what God is and what God is not. He says, "God is not composite and so is indissoluble, he is infinite and unconditioned and so is not dependent on anything else, he is eternal and so does not come into being, he is the source of his own being and hence in him there is no division between what he is and that he is, and so on" (114). Basically, this defines God as a necessary non-contingent entity. Hart points out that referring to God as a "being" is incorrect. A "being" suggests existence but also limitations. We as humans are beings, objects that exist from other human existence. We were brought into existence by something or someone else, and that existence has boundaries and limitations. God was not brought into existence but is existence itself. Since God is non-contingent, he is not an object nor does he have limitations. Hart says that God is actuality and consists of basically everything. We can't place God in a specific category as no category here can truly explain who and what God is. Hart says, "God, in short, is not a being but is at once "beyond being" (in the sense that he transcends the totality of existing things) and also absolute Being itself" (109). I agree mostly with this definition of God. I believe that God is beyond being. He is the beginning and the ending. The one that was, that is, and is to come. He is not bound by the barriers of finite existence or even by our understanding of such topics. He is limitless and therefore he is everywhere and necessary, we are not.
Udayana states that there are seven ways to prove that God is in existence; effects, atomic combination, suspension, human skills, authoritative knowledge, Revelation, and atoms. He also calls Him the "all-knowing, imperishable God." He is imperishable God because he is the only one who could create atoms because humans are not able to. Also, humans can not break atoms or destroy them and he is stating that the only person that can do that is God because he created atoms. He mentions the difference between the cause and effect to validate if there is a God. He brings up the argument that "Things like the earth must have a cause, because they are produced by a body (101)." Some deity had to have made the earth for their pleasure. He also relies on objections to prove that God is real. Udayana does bring up good ideas to prove that God is real. The best argument to me is that he created atoms. Humans are unable to destroy atoms or to create them; so they had to be...
I like how you mention that unlike us, God wasn’t brought into existence because he is existence itself. I would agree with you that God is beyond being, and is unbound by our finite barriers of understanding.
ReplyDeleteThis may be going off on a limb here, but what if another God created God? I agree that we can not say that he is a being because humans are being and someone created us and one day we will have to leave his earth, but God has been here since the beginning. I am sure that we can agree that he has no boundaries and he is so great that we can not place labels on him.
ReplyDelete"what if another God created God?"
DeleteThe question would still be asked, who created the God that created God and so on? It would be infinite regress and cycles with no answer. Its easier and more plausible (if you're a believer) to accept God just was and is. He has no beginning because He is the beginning. He is an intelligent, boundless energy that defies all logic and human understanding. He defies space and time in the way we understand space and time. His existence is something we do not possess the capacity to fully grasp. Such thought is exhausting and difficult to wrap ones head around for sure, yet, it is powerful. That's what makes believing so amazing and God such a wonder.