I would say neoplatonist1 is a classical theist, as am I, except I reject the notion that God is unchanging, replacing that with saying that God is (as is all conscious activity) the mumorphism of permanence and change. And we both regard the universe as a contingent creation, sustained in existence by Divine power.Simon Adams wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 12:43 am A lot of this discussion went over my head, so forgive my philosophical baby talk, but in my simplistic reading it seems that Scott is talking about god as the conscious universe, and Neoplatonist is talking about the god as the absolute, that which created and sustains the universe.
So a question @ScottRoberts , what makes you think that mind can sustain itself?
If by "mind" you mean "conscious activity", I consider it fundamental. All else is sustained by it.
Quite the contrary. I consider the undivided/divided polarity to be fundamental, as I describe in my Tetralemmic Polarity essay, and, like classical theists, consider God to be "simple" (it is equal to what we would call its properties(love, intellect, will, etc.), all of which in God are equal to each other).Do you not think it’s possible that the source of everything has no polarity or properties at all, is just one undivided and unchanging whole?