Friday, September 21, 2012

To Being or not a Being!

(A philosophical conundrum) In recent years, some powerful existential thinkers like Martin Buber, a Jewish theologian and Paul Tillich have stated that in our world of observation and science – being finite does not certain God. The paradox about proving the existence of God is that God is said to be a “necessary being”, necessity is legitimately used with the stipulated definitions of symbols only. Any existing think can be contingent only and of anything existing, we can always imagine it to be otherwise, than what it is and even possibility of it not existing at all. If God exists, then he can also be imagined not existing at any time. If he is necessary, then he is not a being and if is a being, then he is not necessary. To say that God is a necessary being is as contradictory as the idea of a square circle. There are several arguments offered for the existence of God, ontological, cosmological and teleological. The ontological argument is that existence is the very essence (Ontos) of the idea of God. Its argument is a priori, since from the mere analysis we are deducting existence. This holds that the world is contingent; implying what is necessary and the idea are of if necessary implies existence. As Plato stated “Doubt implies the knowledge of truth that it is, or exists. -Religious philosophy- MLBD-

No comments:

Post a Comment