>Aquinas: God is Pure Act>also GodHow could God rest and come to a state of inaction or non-Being for 1000 years?
>>18665196What?
>>18665198What I said. It's simple. If God is actus purus, then he exists in the eternal present tense, being fully and completely actualized all the time. An absolutely immutable being cannot have a "before" and an "after." Changing from one state to another, that of active creation and that of rest, means that there must be a change in divine attitude. Therefore, until the seventh day, God had the potential for resting from His work. Since He actualized His potential on the seventh day, He cannot be pure act.
Trvke.Lol.
>>18665221Rest means finished. The act of creation was done.
>>18665263That means that when God was creating, he had the potential to be not creating, and then that potential was actualized when he was finished creating. So actus purus is false.
>>18665265You can call it nature if you like. Inertia or whatever. But I am pretty sure im not alive because of my own will, my body works on its own, same as yours. Whatever keeps this world going is because of Him continuing to sustain this world. The mechanism could be nature. But by that definition, our ongoing existence could be conceived as pure act. He is the background engine that sustains everything. He didnt boot the universe and then bailed out to leave us to fend for ourselves. He actively maintains it with His power.
>>18665270That's fine but actus purus must still be false.
>>18665196classical theism isn’t taken seriously for this reason only retaeds like cum genius will defend it
