ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 0
Tue, 27-Nov-07 19:04:46
Quote:Medini:Existence from non-existence is not a temporal state, an after and a before, but an ontological condition that is the precisely the existential state of any truly free activity, any activity to which the actor is not bound in any way and in which the actor remains exactly the same as if he were not acting, as if the action did not exist. Hence, it is applicable to eternal activity just as to temporal activity, and means that even eternal activity cannot be G-d in any sense unless your G-d is existentially limited to the state of existence from non-existence.
Quote:Medini:No there is no must here, there is only absolute freedom from any nature or obligation or boundary at all. I have no concept of G-d, but allow certain concepts to open me to G-d (see more below).
Quote:Medini:There is no idea of G-d here at all; simply allowing certain special names (like Ekyeh or YKVK) or terms (like Absolute Infinity or Absolute Freedom) to open our minds to G-d through their own self-negation. Let me explain:These terms or names are intrinsically definition-transcending, definition-negating. All words are just sounds or letters, having no meaning without referents. Ordinary terms are meaningless unless they are defined by reference to the defined. By contrast, intrinsically definition-transcending terms are meaningless the moment they are defined or conceptualized, meaningless unless they remain truly undefined and referentially open. Such referential openness obviously requires them (as far as the sounds or visual letters that mark [denote], but dont conceptually or ontologically define, them) to entirely get out of the way. Unless they always push us beyond any conceptualization or definition, even their own defining sounds, letters or referential stance, they become completely meaningless self-contradictory gibberish. Their self-negation is intrinsic and complete. Thus, such a term always pushes us beyond itself, always eludes definition thereby opening the mind rather than closing it around any defined, hence finite, concept.
Quote:Medini:And what you miss here is that if G-d is truly Free, truly Infinite, then He is free from any nature or self to become bound or dependent even as He freely acts in bound or dependent (finite) ways. In this way, He can freely be all finites without ceasing to be free from every finite, meaning that all the finites He freely can be will not be Him, and that He will freely be them as not Him.
Quote:Medini:All of your examples are subject to this same truth, a truth that means that while G-d freely can be any finite, no finite will be or can be Him....
Quote:Medini: thereby refuting the Trinity or any other attempt to view any defined, distinguishable, finite as G-d.
Share This