preview

Argument For Definition Of God: The Abrahamic God

Decent Essays

Reading: pp. 76-89 (Selected: pp. 76-82)
1. Thesis
God is one substance, and is entirely different from man. As a result of this, God cannot be described at all by man.
2. Terms
A. God: The Abrahamic God, as described in the Old Testament.
B. Essence: The nature of a thing that constitute what it means to be that thing.
C. Attribute: A characteristic pertaining to the sum of a things essence.
D. Quality: An accidental property not necessary to the things essence.
E. Action: Effect through material cause.
Propositions
A. Definition cannot be used to describe God.
B. Quality cannot be used to describe God.
C. Analogy cannot be used to describe God.
D. Action cannot be used to describe God.
Arguments
Argument for Proposition A: Definitions are an explanation of a thing. Explanations necessitate a previous cause. God does not have a previous cause as he is the cause of himself. Therefore, God cannot be defined and consequently cannot be described through the use of a definition.
Argument for Proposition B: Since qualities do not pertain to the essence of a thing, they are inherently accidental. Accidental properties or “qualities” are only applicable to finite things. God is infinite; therefore, God does not possess any qualities. …show more content…

His last two however are not, the fourth just rambles on about how different God is from everything else. Although God may be profoundly different from man, man was derived from God’s essence. Based on this, it seems intuitive to think that man would be able to offer at least broad descriptions of God. The fifth makes a claim that God’s effects are somehow different from all other effects because they emanate from his essence. I probably just don’t fully understand the fifth, but it doesn’t seem clear why his effects emanating from his essence as opposed to “any extraneous thing” prevents man from understanding him through his

Get Access