The Ontological Observation of God

[Proselyte of Yah]

As this is the only Christian discussion thread I can post in on this site, I am posting here.

I wanted to share my article, of which I have written on the "Ontological Observation of God" for the encouragement of others and to inspire thought.

In this article I break down just "what ontological" observation is, and how the very conception of God in our minds as an idea, can support proof for his existence.

https://proselytiserofyah.wordpress.com ... on-of-god/

This is a concept I had in my mind for a long time and never fully expressed until now, but only in more recent times did I realise it had a "name" (ontology), and that others too had thought of it (which was a nice discovery).

But I find personally that the conscious conception of a Deity, is something which points to it being true. My explanations may not be perfect or as well refined as others who have put forth this style of argument, but nevertheless I wanted to share.

 

[disciple Clint]

As this is the only Christian discussion thread I can post in on this site, I am posting here.

I wanted to share my article, of which I have written on the "Ontological Observation of God" for the encouragement of others and to inspire thought.

In this article I break down just "what ontological" observation is, and how the very conception of God in our minds as an idea, can support proof for his existence.

https://proselytiserofyah.wordpress.com ... on-of-god/

This is a concept I had in my mind for a long time and never fully expressed until now, but only in more recent times did I realise it had a "name" (ontology), and that others too had thought of it (which was a nice discovery).

But I find personally that the conscious conception of a Deity, is something which points to it being true. My explanations may not be perfect or as well refined as others who have put forth this style of argument, but nevertheless I wanted to share.

looks much like what the early church called natural law, our ability to observe our surrounding and reason that a higher power exists. Our internal need to find God.

 

[Proselyte of Yah]

looks much like what the early church called natural law, our ability to observe our surrounding and reason that a higher power exists. Our internal need to find God.

Similar, yes, I suppose. Though I'd associate natural law with teleological reasoning, over ontological. Teleological is external observation (ie; Intelligent design), whilst ontological is internal and metaphysial, but reasons that the internal observations are evidences that such things must be in some form "external", as the mind receives things first and foremost from the outside world.

So, the same coin, different sides, you might say.

 

[disciple Clint]

Similar, yes, I suppose. Though I'd associate natural law with teleological reasoning, over ontological. Teleological is external observation (ie; Intelligent design), whilst ontological is internal and metaphysial, but reasons that the internal observations are evidences that such things must be in some form "external", as the mind receives things first and foremost from the outside world.

So, the same coin, different sides, you might say.

"This kind of unity seems to have no intrinsic limit. The susceptibility of form to intrinsic unification (as if the forms were created to be unified; created to complement one another; created as radically incomplete anticipating a home in their highest unifications – like mathematics) this
kind of anticipatory completion, this perfect anticipatory unity of incomplete form, seems to have as its base “Unity itself” or “Beauty itself.” As the notes are combined with other notes, as musical forms are combined with architectural, artistic, and natural forms, the origin of these partial manifestations of perfection is revealed, and so, at once, we resonate with (we say “we feel”) Unity itself, Perfection itself, and Beauty itself. When we resonate with Perfection itself, we feel at once in ecstasy and at home, in a flurry of activity and at a still point. It seems that all forms have an ideal complementarity with all other forms, revealing yet another kind of ideal or perfect unification within the phenomenon of beauty. This ideal or perfect complementarity among diverse forms suggests yet another manifestation of perfect unity (in
addition to perfect Truth, Goodness, and Love).
Recall once again that there can be only one perfect unity – one perfect inclusivity -- one absolute simplicity -- because there can be only one unrestricted reality. Thus, inasmuch as perfect beauty is a perfect unity, it must belong to the one absolutely simple unrestricted uncaused reality existing through itself as an unrestricted act of thinking (God). Therefore, perfect beauty is an attribute of God – as well as perfect being, perfect mind, perfect love, and perfect justice/goodness.
VI.
Conclusion
Back to top
The logical proofs for perfect being and perfect mind have considerable probative force, because the denial of these qualities results in either a contradiction of fact (the denial of all reality – including oneself) or an intrinsic contradiction (an impossible state of affairs) -- as shown above in the Thomistic metaphysical proof and the Lonerganian proof of God. However,
the reasoning process leading to the attribution of perfect love, perfect justice/goodness, and perfect beauty to God (the one unrestricted uncaused reality existing through itself as an unrestricted act of thinking) is less probative because it requires a recognition of the unlimited unifying power of love, justice/goodness, and beauty. This recognition is somewhat subjective,
and so the certitude with which we ascribe perfect love, justice/goodness and beauty to God is more tenuous. Nevertheless, if our subjective recognition of the unlimited unifying power of these attributes is correct, then the above reasoning implies strongly that God is perfectly loving, good, and beautiful."
Big Book - Credible Catholic

 

[BobRyan]

But I find personally that the conscious conception of a Deity, is something which points to it being true. My explanations may not be perfect or as well refined as others who have put forth this style of argument, but nevertheless I wanted to share.

Thanks - -

The idea that a rock, or that dust, gas, water and sunlight would one day acquire the ability to think, to know themselves as rock, or to conclude something about God... is itself not even thinkable -- indeed God must have created man rather than rocks doing it over time.

 

[Clare73]

As this is the only Christian discussion thread I can post in on this site, I am posting here.

I wanted to share my article, of which I have written on the "Ontological Observation of God" for the encouragement of others and to inspire thought.

In this article I break down just "what ontological" observation is, and how the very conception of God in our minds as an idea, can support proof for his existence.

https://proselytiserofyah.wordpress.com ... on-of-god/

This is a concept I had in my mind for a long time and never fully expressed until now, but only in more recent times did I realise it had a "name" (ontology), and that others too had thought of it (which was a nice discovery).

But I find personally that the conscious conception of a Deity, is something which points to it being true. My explanations may not be perfect or as well refined as others who have put forth this style of argument, but nevertheless I wanted to share.

How 'bout Romans 1:18-23?

 

[Proselyte of Yah]

How 'bout Romans 1:18-23?

Indeed yes. I quoted that scripture in my writing.