The 5 Attributes of God

The Divine attributes are the qualities or characteristics of God. God can do what He wills to do, and no one can oppose Him. (Ps.115:3 - Our God is in the heavens; he does whatever he pleases.)

1. Omniscience – (Lat. “Omnis” – all; “scire” – to know; all-knowing). God knows all things past present and future. The primary object of His knowledge is Himself. The secondary objects are all created things, visible and invisible which can be purely possible, eal and conditionally future.

2. Omnipotence – (Lat.omnis + potentia “being all-powerful”). God can do everything that does not deny His nature or that which would not contradict Himself.

3. Omnipresence – (Lat. “everywhere present”). God is simultaneously present wherever He is. He has a two-fold omnipresence: by nature and by grace.

4. Eternity – God’s attribute which makes Him without beginning, succession or ending. Created being like angels and human being only participate in God’s eternity since they have beginning, but with God’s will, they will live without end.

5. Immutability – Absolute changelessness of God.

The problem of Evil

"Evil" has a wider range of definitions than that for which human or supernatural agents are responsible.

There are two main types of evil:
Moral evil - This covers the willful acts of human beings (such as murder, rape, etc.)
Natural evil - This refers to natural disasters (such as famines, floods, etc.)

Of these two types, we may further divide both of them into the following two classes:
Physical evil - This means bodily pain or mental anguish (fear, illness, grief, war, etc.)
Metaphysical evil - This refers to such things as imperfection and chance (criminals going unpunished, deformities, etc.)

The problem itself arises because of certain qualities which religious believers grant to God, and the consequences of these given certain observations about the world.

To illustrate these consider three qualities that most religious believers would not want to deny tothe deity, the single deity and Supreme Being, the God: absolute goodness (omnibenevolence), absolute power (omnipotence) and absolute knowledge (omniscience). Now, add to this the observation that there is evil in the world. Setting aside for the moment the question of how a good God could create a world with evil in it, ask yourself why such a deity does not do something to help combat such evil. Many theologians and philosophers over the centuries have asked this question and we will now look at some of the answers they have given.

According to the history of this issue and contemporary concerns it is moral evil that is the crux of the problem more than natural evil. Natural evil may be conceived of as simply part of nature and not evil at all. However, there are those who think that it may be possible to accept that God accepts moral evil and such evil may have a purpose or explanation consist with the existence of a supreme being but that there could be no good reason for God to have natural evil in the Universe.

There is therefore the argument against the existence of God based on Natural Evil.

Argument:

1) If God exists, then there exists a being who is omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good.
2) If there existed a being who were omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good, then there would be no natural evil.
3) But there is natural evil.
(Conclusion) God does not exist.

St. Thomas Aquinas

The Existence of God can be proved in five ways.
Argument Analysis of the Five Ways

The First Way: Argument from Motion

Our senses prove that some things are in motion.

Things move when potential motion becomes actual motion.

Only an actual motion can convert a potential motion into an actual motion.

Nothing can be at once in both actuality and potentiality in the same respect (i.e., if both actual and potential, it is actual in one respect and potential in another).

Therefore nothing can move itself.

Therefore each thing in motion is moved by something else.

The sequence of motion cannot extend ad infinitum.

Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

The Second Way: Argument from Efficient Causes

We perceive a series of efficient causes of things in the world.

Nothing exists prior to itself.

Therefore nothing is the efficient cause of itself.

If a previous efficient cause does not exist, neither does the thing that results.

Therefore if the first thing in a series does not exist, nothing in the series exists.

The series of efficient causes cannot extend ad infinitum into the past, for then there would be no things existing now.

Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.

The Third Way: Argument from Possibility and Necessity (Reductio argument)

We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, that come into being and go out of being i.e., contingent beings.

Assume that every being is a contingent being.

For each contingent being, there is a time it does not exist.

Therefore it is impossible for these always to exist.

Therefore there could have been a time when no things existed.

Therefore at that time there would have been nothing to bring the currently existing contingent beings into existence.

Therefore, nothing would be in existence now.

We have reached an absurd result from assuming that every being is a contingent being.

Therefore not every being is a contingent being.

Therefore some being exists of its own necessity, and does not receive its existence from another being, but rather causes them. This all men speak of as God.

The Fourth Way: Argument from Gradation of Being

There is a gradation to be found in things: some are better or worse than others.

Predications of degree require reference to the “uttermost” case (e.g., a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest).

The maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus.

Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.

The Fifth Way: Argument from Design

We see that natural bodies work toward some goal, and do not do so by chance.

Most natural things lack knowledge.

But as an arrow reaches its target because it is directed by an archer, what lacks intelligence achieves goals by being directed by something intelligence.
Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.

10 Proofs for the Existence of God

1. Universal Belief in the Existence of God
Historical and anthropological studies show that from time immemorial, people everywhere of all cultures and races have believed in a Supreme Being or in the existence of supernatural beings. If there is any race that tends to be an exception to this rule, we reason that just as normal eyesight is the natural endowments to living beings, blindness is accidental and an abnormality.

2. The argument from Cause (Cosmological Argument; Gk. “kosmos” = universe; world order)
If a certain house exists in the midst of the desert, then we instinctively conclude that there must be a builder. Just as the house cannot cause itself to exist, in the same way, this whole universe cannot exist by itself unless caused by the ultimate cause of everything who is God. “For every house is built by some one, but the builder of all things is God” Heb. 3:4.
“The world: starting from movement, becoming, contingency, and the world's order and beauty, one can come to a knowledge of God as the origin and the end of the universe” (CCC 32).
St. Augustine poses this challenge: “Question the beauty of the earth, question the beauty of the sea, question the beauty of the air distending and diffusing itself, question the beauty of the sky. . . question all these realities. All respond: ‘See, we are beautiful.’ Their beauty is a profession [confessio]. These beauties are subject to change. Who made them if not the Beautiful One who is not subject to change?” (St. Augustine, Confessions 1,1.)

3. The Argument from Design and End (Teleological Argument; Gk. “telos” = end)
A watch that is in one’s wrist does not only exist but it was designed by a designer. The universe believed by some atheistic scientists to have come to existence by a matter of chance, is well-ordered and intelligently designed. All scientific evidence and calculation, however, cannot prove that the universe came by chance or random. Many scientists today assert that this well-ordered universe was made only by an infinitely intelligent Being who is God.
In the same way, this infinitely intelligent being caused everything in existence to have a purpose, a goal, an end. The living and non-living things are related to support life and existence.

4. Argument from the Hierarchy of Beings (Ontological Argument; Gk. “on” = to be )
This is the argument advanced by St. Anselm of Canterbury in the 12th century against the monk Guanilo. “That in which nothing greater can be conceived of, must exist. God is that which nothing greater can be conceived of. Therefore, God exists”. We human beings always have an idea of an infinite or perfect being, whereby all beings participate in different degrees of perfection. That infinitely perfect Being is God.

5. The Moral Argument (Anthropological Argument; Gk. “anthropos” = man)
Man was created by God with intellect and will. “Let us make man in our own image and likeness” (Gen. 1:26). As such man is a moral being who judges what is right and what is wrong. Where does this judgment come from but from the moral Being who is the Lawgiver and Judge? Each man and woman is patterned after God.

6. The Life Argument
Life comes from life and the source of all life is the Supreme Being who is the author of life. “For with You is the fountain (source) of life” (Psalm 36:9). Jesus said to Martha whose brother Lazarus died, “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 11:25). To His disciples he said “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life” (John 14:6). To his followers he assured, “And I give them eternal life” (John 10:28). Life could not evolve from the lifeless matter, no matter how much atheistic textbooks will endeavor to convince people, since that opinion cannot be proven by science itself.

7. Argument from Congruity
The philosophy of atheism is full of inconsistencies and multiplies doubts and unsolvable problems in life. Faith in the Supreme Being who created the universe in proper order gives us a holistic view of life and opens our minds to understand our ultimate purpose in life. While atheists confront life’s evils and sufferings without answers and hopes, believers encounter the same daily vicissitudes of life with rationally congruent answers and eternal hopes. Such is a colossal difference indeed.

8. Argument from creation
“The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims his handiwork” (Psalm 19:1). The beauty and perfection of the whole creation only reflect the grandest beauty and perfection of God, just as a magnificent painting is produced by a magnificent artist.
“Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).The painting is not to be admired more than the painter who produced it.

9. Proof from Conscience
Conscience is the judgment of an action whether the act is good or evil. Non-Christians who, in the Old Testament times have not heard of the Law of Moses, and who in the New Testament times, have never heard of the Gospel of Christ, will be judged by God according to their God-given conscience. There is no escape from the all-knowing judgment of God for both believers an unbelievers.
When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them. (Romans 2:14-15 )
For as I passed along, and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, 'To an unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, (Acts 17:23-24)

10. God’s Existence is simply assumed by the Scriptures
Since widespread atheism was rarely heard of in the time immemorial, it is surprising to note that it was a human invention which started during the 18th century Enlightenment period when God was replaced by the Goddess of Reason. The 19th and 20th century, particularly, have shown the terrible bloodshed of millions of innocent lives sacrificed in the altars of Godless communism and atheistic materialism. Yet, this was not so in the very beginning of human existence. The scriptures simply assume God’s being and sovereignty even at the time of creation. “In the beginning, God… “(Gen.1:1). “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none that does good” (Psalm 14:1/53:1).

Ich und Du

Martin Buber’s I and Thou, 1923 presents a philosophy of personal dialogue, in that it describes how personal dialogue can define the nature of reality. Buber’s major theme is that human existence may be defined by the way in which we engage in dialogue with each other, with the world, and with God.

According to Buber, human beings may adopt two attitudes toward the world: I-Thou or I-It. I-Thou is a relation of subject-to-subject, while I-It is a relation of subject-to-object. In the I-Thou relationship, human beings are aware of each oher as having a unity of being. In the I-Thou relationship, human beings do not perceive each other as consisting of specific, isolated qualities, but engage in a dialogue involving each other's whole being. In the I-It relationship, on the other hand, human beings perceive each other as consisting of specific, isolated qualities, and view themselves as part of a world which consists of things. I-Thou is a relationship of mutuality and reciprocity, while I-It is a relationship of separateness and detachment.

Buber explains that human beings may try to convert the subject-to-subject relation to a subject-to-object relation, or vice versa. However, the being of a subject is a unity which cannot be analyzed as an object. When a subject is analyzed as an object, the subject is no longer a subject, but becomes an object. When a subject is analyzed as an object, the subject is no longer a Thou, but becomes an It. The being which is analyzed as an object is the It in an I-It relation.

The subject-to-subject relation affirms each subject as having a unity of being. When a subject chooses, or is chosen by, the I-Thou relation, this act involves the subject’s whole being. Thus, the I-Thou relation is an act of choosing, or being chosen, to become the subject of a subject-to-subject relation. The subject becomes a subject through the I-Thou relation, and the act of choosing this relation affirms the subject’s whole being.

Buber says that the I-Thou relation is a direct interpersonal relation which is not mediated by any intervening system of ideas. No objects of thought intervene between I and Thou.1 I-Thou is a direct relation of subject-to-subject, which is not mediated by any other relation. Thus, I-Thou is not a means to some object or goal, but is an ultimate relation involving the whole being of each subject.

Love, as a relation between I and Thou, is a subject-to-subject relation. Buber claims that love is not a relation of subject-to-object. In the I-Thou relation, subjects do not perceive each other as objects, but perceive each other’s unity of being. Love is an I-Thou relation in which subjects share this unity of being. Love is also a relation in which I and Thou share a sense of caring, respect, commitment, and responsibility.

Buber argues that, although the I-Thou relation is an ideal relation, the I-It relation is an inescapable relation by which the world is viewed as consisting of knowable objects or things. The I-It relation is the means by which the world is analyzed and described. However, the I-It relation may become an I-Thou relation, and in the I-Thou relation we can interact with the world in its whole being.

In the I-Thou relation, the I is unified with the Thou, but in the I-It relation, the I is detached or separated from the It. In the I-Thou relation, the being of the I belongs both to I and to Thou. In the I-It relation, the being of the I belongs to I, but not to It.

I-Thou is a relation in which I and Thou have a shared reality. Buber contends that the I which has no Thou has a reality which is less complete than that of the I in the I-and-Thou. The more that I-and-Thou share their reality, the more complete is their reality.

According to Buber, God is the eternal Thou. God is the Thou who sustains the I-Thou relation eternally. In the I-Thou relation between the individual and God, there is a unity of being in which the individual can always find God. In the I-Thou relation, there is no barrier of other relations which separate the individual from God, and thus the individual can speak directly to God.

The eternal Thou is not an object of experience, and is not an object of thought. The eternal Thou is not something which can be investigated or examined. The eternal Thou is not a knowable object. However, the eternal Thou can be known as the absolute Person who gives unity to all being.

Buber also explains that the I-Thou relation may have either potential being or actual being. When the I-It relation becomes an I-Thou relation, the potential being of the I-Thou relation becomes the actual being of the I-Thou relation. However, the I-Thou relation between the individual and God does not become, or evolve from, an I-It relation, because God, as the eternal Thou, is eternally present as actual Being.

Buber contends that the I-Thou relation between the individual and God is a universal relation which is the foundation for all other relations. If the individual has a real I-Thou relation with God, then the individual must have a real I-Thou relation with the world. If the individual has a real I-Thou relation with God, then the individual’s actions in the world must be guided by that I-Thou relation. Thus, the philosophy of personal dialogue may be an instructive method of ethical inquiry and of defining the nature of personal responsibility.

Reflections on Man

Man is the measure of everything.
Protagoras

That which does not kill you makes you stronger.
Friedrich Nietzsche

All men are bad and ever ready to display their vicious nature, whenever they may find occasion for it.
Nicolo Machiavelli

Man when perfected by law is the best of animals, but when separated from law, he is the worst of all.
Aristotle

No man is free who cannot command or control himself.
Pythagoras

Man is the master of his fate and the captain of his soul.
Henley, Poet

Man is the only being on earth who can know himself and knows that he knows,and even knows that he knows not.
Felix Montemayor, Social Philosopher

Before the cosmos, Man is but a dot, yet he thinks and loves, while the world cannot.
F.M., Social Philosopher

Man is the only being that changes constantly yet remains unchanged by change.
Felix Montemayor, Social Philosopher