|
“Tell me how I got here again . . .” |
When pressed, the concept of [God as
causa sui] soon shows itself incoherent and dogmatically
precarious. At a purely formal level, it seems to suggest that God in some way
precedes himself as his own cause . . . The dogmatic difficulties are equally
serious. Talk of God as his own cause cannot easily cohere with teaching about
divine eternity or immutability, since it appears to introduce an actualist
concept of God’s ‘coming-to-be’ as the result of some causal process. Further,
it imperils divine simplicity, introducing distinctions between cause and that
which is caused, or between potentiality and act, which, by attributing
potentiality to God, undermine the all-important identity of essence and
existence in God . . . By suggesting that God produces himself, it seems to
require the possibility of God’s non-existence as a kind of background to his
being. In effect, a God who is his own cause lacks an integral element of
perfection. If the concept of
causa sui
is to be used, therefore, the notion of cause must first be stripped of any
associations with ‘becoming’ or ‘coming-into-existence’ – of anything that
might corrode the eternal fullness of God’s being.
All of which goes to show that Webster really does not have the slightest REAL clue as to what he is talking about - as this reference clearly demonstrates.
ReplyDeletewww.adidam.org/teaching/aletheon/truth-god
Further elaborations on Consciousness
www.consciousnessitself.org
I have to say that I find Webster far more coherent and compelling than what I found here: http://www.adidam.org/teaching/aletheon/real-god-is-not-cause/
Delete