Absolute Quotes

“For Milesian philosophers Thales (c. 626/623—c. 548/545 BC), Anaximander (c. 610—c. 546 BC), and Anaximenes (c. 586/585—c. 526/525 BC) there was an ultimate principle they called arche. For Thales, this ultimate principle from which everything originated was water; for Anaximenes, it was air; and for Anaximander, it was Apeiron (limitless), whereas, for the Pythagoreans, the number was the ultimate principle.

For Heraclitus (c. 540—c. 480), arche was fire from which everything originated, but Logos was the ultimate principle uniting everything and connecting opposites.

For Anaxagora (c. 500—c. 428 BC), a hundred years after the Milesians, the ultimate principle was the mind (nous), which is limitless because it is not material.”
― Dejan Stojanovic

“According to Plato (428/427 or 424/423—348 BC), God is a perfect Being, eternal itself, shaping the universe through eternal forms (eide [form: eidos]). The imperfections in the world result from the material nature of the universe.

According to Aristotle (384—322 BC), God is an unmoved mover, a primary cause, and a possessor of a divine mind (nous).”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“According to Plotinus (c. 204/5—270 CE), God is Intelligence or Mind (Nous), and the world is created out of God (ex deo) and not from nothing (ex nihilo). “The power of the One is to provide a foundation (arkhe) and location (topos) for all existents. The foundation provided by the One is intelligence. The location in which the cosmos takes objective shape and determinate, physical, form is the soul.” … “The being of intelligence is thought, and the thought of intelligence is Being.” … “No idea is different from intelligence but is itself intelligence.” Plotinus accepted the Stoic’s idea of logoi spermatikoi; for him, logoi spermatikoi is a bridge between the soul and the material.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“According to St. Augustine of Hippo (354—430), “The highest good, than which there is no higher, is God … And consequently, if He alone is unchangeable, all things that He has made, because He has made them out of nothing, are changeable.” Augustine also used the idea of logoi spermatikoi in the context of seminal reasons (rationes seminales, Latin from the Greek λόγοι σπερματικοὶ or logoi spermatikoi), or “seedlike principles,” “causal principles.” Based on this theory, God created the world by inseminating the void with seed. Other Christian thinkers accepted the idea, including Justin Martyr (100—165), Athenagoras of Athens (133—190), Tertullian (155—220), Gregory of Nyssa (335—395), Bonaventure (1221—1274), Albertus Magnus (1200—1280), and Roger Bacon (1219/20—1292).”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“According to St. Anselm (1033/4—1109), God is a "being than which no greater can be conceived." As we can see here, this is a reformulated idea of St. Augustine, who thought similarly centuries earlier, not to mention ancient Greek philosophers.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Thomas Aquinas (1225—1274) states that God is a simple being. Although God is eternal, a material world, Universe, is not eternal. For Aquinas, God’s existence is his essence, the basis of Divine simplicity. For anything else, there is a distinction between existence and essence. Aquinas defined his five arguments for the existence of God in his book Summa Theologica:

1. The First Way: Motion. (The argument from "first mover.")
2. The Second Way: Efficient Cause. (The argument from universal causation.)
3. The Third Way: Possibility and Necessity. (The argument from contingency).
4. The Fourth Way: Gradation. (The argument from degree.)
5. The Fifth Way: Design. (The argument from final cause or ends [Teleological argument].)”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Spinoza’s (1632—1677) Ethics starts with a clear framework, explanation, and definition of his terms. In that way, the philosophical inquiry becomes more accessible and precise for a reader or interpreter to understand and grasp. When Spinoza, in his definitions, uses the term substance, we understand that it is God. But when the term substance reappears under point III and then again under VI, which treats God, we must question why. For Spinoza, there is substance and substance. What is the difference between the substance under III and VI? We would say that, according to Spinoza, the ultimate, infinite substance is God, and everything formed is of the same substance. If that is the case, all substance is God or Nature. If all substance is God, then the question is, why separate substance from substance?

Spinoza wanted to highlight the difference between the infinite substance of the ultimate Being, God, and the substance that makes Nature in all its forms. But nature, or anything in nature, is substance “which is in itself and is conceived through itself and does not need another “thing” to form it.” Nature is just a manifestation or mode of God or Substance.

Substance (substantia) is not a new term and has been used since Aristotle, if not earlier. Perhaps the substance is interchangeable with terms like arche, aether …. fifth element, proton archon (first principle), Plotinus’ Divine mind (nous), or intelligence. Here are Spinoza’s definitions:

Of God
DEFINITIONS

I. By cause of itself I understand that whose essence involves existence, or that whose nature cannot be conceived unless existing.

II. That thing is called finite in its own kind (in suo genere) which can be limited by another thing of the same nature. For example, a body is called finite because we always conceive another which is greater. So a thought is limited by another thought; but a body is not limited by a thought, nor a thought by a body.

III. By substance I understand that which is in itself and is conceived through itself; in other words, that the conception of which does not need, the conception of another thing from which it must be formed.
IV. By attribute I understand that which the intellect perceives of substance as constituting its essence.

V. By mode I understand the modifications of substance, or that which is in another thing through which also it is conceived.

VI. By God I understand Being absolutely infinite, that is to say, substance consisting of infinite attributes, each one of which expresses eternal and infinite essence.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“God in the major monotheistic religious books is a “stolen” God. This way, the church fathers tried to establish the right to God and the truth. They told us we have to abide by the words of God they received directly from Him. We never obtained proof, nor can we question the validity of this “truth;” we just have to accept it at face value and take their word for granted. However, God is Truth, and the truth belongs to everybody equally to the degree of availability.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“There can be no right to truth except recognition and knowledge of truth. Once we try to establish the right to truth and God, we leave the territory of truth and enter the domain of demagogy and deceit. The truth is an almost absolute category, and the same applies to God. What is indisputable or nearly absolute can only be partially known. Still, major monotheistic religions not only steal God, but they steal him (It) absolutely, not somewhat.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“God is, first and foremost, an idea. Nobody has the right to God, to claim God, even though people throughout ages claimed it, and probably always will be, by religion. But this God is only a stolen God, made in the human's image (the image of the human race), wearing the colors of his creators and not his own. This God wears not the colors of truth but of deceit. Deceitful simplicity is neither simplicity, truth, nor God. A stolen God is not God at all because it is, above all, an instrument of a human being in the service of a human being and not of God.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“We must reevaluate and enrich the idea of God to encompass all inquiries, including scientific and philosophical, to fit reality and the truth instead of serving our more or less sophisticated but still poor or poorly presented and imposed ideas. This enriched idea of God is not only the ultimate goal but an ultimate reality we shall strive to understand fully or get closer to.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Atheists got so trapped that they forgot that God is not necessarily what religious books say. We have to redefine the word God to encompass everything. If God is the Creator of everything, then God is Everything. If God is Everything, then God is the truth. Why not believe in truth and refuse the partial truths sold as truth? The truth does not care about human-biased decisions and their fights or who first claimed the truth.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Regardless of whether the world is predetermined, there can be no Devil. The Devil is not only the antithesis of God but is also impossible. The idea of the Devil as the result of chance, free will, rebellion, or sin is also impossible. The only possibility, philosophically, is that God is the Devil. The Devil, as understood in religions, was invented to cover up all unjustifiable evils, all misunderstandings, all sufferings, and all “sins” of human beings. The Devil is a scapegoat of religions. All that is bad we can attribute to the Devil, and all that is good to God. The invention of the Devil is the biggest fraud of all.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Why would God create the Devil in the first place? If free will is the excuse, why would the omnipotent God allow the Devil to rebel, and why “he” would not predict this rebellion? Why would God allow Eve to sin? Are animals capable of sinning? What is sinning? Is suffering possible only within the realm of human beings? Although animals do not possess or understand the morality of humans, they can suffer. Even if they cannot suffer all human suffering, they can still suffer pain. Does God predict the pain and suffering throughout the animal kingdom? If not, why not? Why would this suffering or distress of animals be less sympathetic to God than human suffering? Who determined that humans are not animals, and is this definition, or generally accepted view, only arbitrary?”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“No main monotheistic religion offers satisfying answers to many important questions. No religion is concerned with the well-being of the animal kingdom, and no religion proposes or establishes sin in the animal kingdom. Religious books strictly reserve sin for human beings. No religion offers or predicts either hell or paradise for the animal kingdom, only for human beings. No religion even tries to explain, in a reasonable manner, the absurdity of eternal punishment and its “ethics.” What horror can equal the monstrosity of eternal punishment, eternal hell? There is no bigger pain, no bigger monstrosity, no bigger immorality, and no bigger cruelty than the eternal punishment, eternal hell. And only an imperfect, mortal human deserves this eternal measure, eternal punishment. How monstrous is this?”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Where is the logic behind the idea that something mortal, fickle, imperfect, weak, could deserve such eternal measure, eternal punishment in its absolute force, which would be too harsh even for the Devil if it existed? Only absolute crime deserves absolute punishment, and Hell, being eternal, is the absolute punishment for its inhabitants. But what possible crime deserves absolute punishment except if a man was capable of killing God, which would be the absolute crime, deserving absolute punishment and Hell? In that case, there would be no God to execute the punishment. Therefore, absolute crime is impossible. Even if God survived, this omnipotent and benevolent God would still have mercy over such a weak and wicked creature as a human being, to exercise his grace and absolute power instead of revenge and save the soul of a lost human being from eternal pain.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Where can we find anything so cruel invented by the Devil in any religious book that would equal the evil majesty of the last judgment, eternal hell, and eternal punishment? It is hard to imagine or invent anything more powerful, more painful, and cruel than hell. It is also hard to imagine that the evil Devil would be able and capable of creating anything as monstrous as the Hell “invented by God,” not the Devil, according to the scriptures. Where is the difference, then, between God and the Devil? And if there is any difference, by what criteria is the evil Devil more “malevolent” than the “benevolent” God, based on what we read? If we correctly read and make common sense conclusions, there is no more immense evil than the Hell invented by the benevolent God.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Is it possible that a benevolent God would punish eternally weak and wicked creatures as human beings are, and probably must be, based on their limited powers? We answer that it is impossible. A benevolent God would not do all this in this world or the afterlife. It is inconceivable that the omnipotent being, characterized by mercy and grace, among other things, would be so cruel. The all-powerful, benevolent, and all-knowing God would, at least to a certain extent, save human beings from their sins and his “future son” from suffering if all this was a matter of free will and the original sin. All this sinning and suffering could have been easily prevented by the omnipotent and benevolent God without the infringement on free will, without the possibility for sin and eternal hell for the millions of people in the “afterlife life.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“The main problem is not God or the Devil but a human being incapable of resolving affairs without “sinning.” The biggest source of continuous sinning and misunderstanding is not God’s word but a word uttered by a human being who sold it as God’s word. These and similar deceits throughout history are the highest forms of the enslavement of human beings, the highest forms of insincerity, and the highest forms of disrespect to a benevolent human being. Skillful and often evil human beings act (enjoy acting), using a benevolent God as the means for malevolent human causes. Even if the reasons were benevolent and often based on ethics, the ends did not justify the means. To trade the souls of millions of people in this life, not in an afterlife, to accomplish either political goals or to provide grounds for easier rule, “ethics” and “legislature” are the best examples of evil will that can be best described as inspired by the “Devil” itself.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“The omnipotent God, regardless of free will, would predict the Devil himself and save not the human race but himself from this possibility, which undermines his omnipotence. No Devil can exist as a creation of God unless intended by God. If God did not intend the Devil, then it either does not exist or is God himself. Nothing in the universe, even evil, can be ascribed to anything else except God. No Devil can accept the world’s sins, which are God’s sins. No Devil can sacrifice himself for the sins of the world or human beings, which are ultimately God’s sins. If the Devil would be offered, or serve as an excuse and scapegoat, for the world’s sins or human sins, which are, ultimately, God’s, then the Devil’s sacrifice would exceed in nobleness God’s benevolence and again prove that the Devil is a higher Being who must pay a higher price than God for the existence of all.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“God is even what we hate in him. There is more goodness in the Devil than there could be evil in God. God and the Devil are the same. Both are words that describe the same thing. The act of creating is more devilish than anything else. Maybe the creation itself is the primordial sin for which we all pay the price. Maybe Eve did not commit the original sin but the Devil-God himself. Maybe God-Devil himself wanted the fruit of knowledge, the fruit of creation. Perhaps he challenged the absolute peace of the Absolute, the absolute peace of nothingness. Maybe the original sin stems from this provocation of the Absolute Being. Perhaps the absolute emptiness, the ultimate Garden of Eden, was disturbed by this interference, and God threw a challenge into the face of nothingness and the face of the Absolute. And maybe for this sin (God’s rebellion), the Absolute Father, the Absolute Being, had to expel God from the absolute garden of peace and Paradise into the Hell of Existence, the Hell of Life.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Who is the first rebel, the first warrior, the first sinner? Who disturbed the first and universal peace of the Absolute? God himself. Who pays the price of the original sin of God himself, not Adam’s sin? The world itself. The Devil is all we don’t recognize in ourselves. God is all we don’t understand. But what we don’t understand, we ascribe to the Devil. Evil is what we don’t recognize, and what we don’t recognize, we don’t understand. If God is the Creator, his only legitimate son is the World (Christ can only be a grandson, among myriad others in the Universe). But God and the World are the same. Since God is the World, through the World, God creates and recreates himself—the God-World.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Existence is the noblest task for the noblest being. There is no real existence without real life. Real life is impossible in absolute comfort and perfection. Absolute perfection and comfort in real life, or of real life, would undermine its value. The value of life is manifested, among other things, through the efforts of every single being in a universal scheme of things. Without effort and action, there would be no real beauty, and even if there were real beauty, this beauty would be less beautiful because we would take it for granted; it would be too easy and, therefore, less enjoyable.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“The highest beauty is life itself. The measure of life is not suffering but existing. The purpose of existence is life. The measure of existing is not absolute comfort but absolute strife for absolute beauty, absolute perfection. The hardship of life, even innumerable suffering, is proof of life as it is and not as it should be, according to us. We can only dream of producing a more perfect existence, a more perfect life, a more perfect eye or jaw, but we are incapable of making life. In this sense, we are incapable of judging, in absolute terms, what good or bad design is, and we are incapable of escaping a given reality, which we may improve and approve of but in no way disprove.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Even if we create a better human eye (biologically), a better leg, a better heart, and a better jaw, this will prove nothing except our drive to continue and improve ourselves and live within the given frame. An idea of creation in terms of fundamental creation of what we see as the Universe (or anything in it) will always be beyond human reach. Whatever we create can only be the modification or mutation of whatever exists. We can explore our potential for novelty within scientific discoveries and arts and not in the realm of primordial original creation beyond human comprehension and reach.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“The real question should be—what is perfection? Suppose there is only the Universe and the idea of the Universe-World as atheists would see it. In that case, the answer must explain, possibly prove, what the absolute perfection of the Universe is, or should be, concerning its potential.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Creation of the world does not necessarily imply the all too simplistic idea of design (poor or otherwise) because evolution is not entirely compatible with determinism, which means that only in a predetermined world perfect intelligent design (as defined in religions) would be possible (which is impossible in reality).”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“The idea of evolution, proving itself before our eyes at every moment, is even less compatible with the simplistic notion of design. Anything designed is static in a way. On the other hand, if design predicts evolution, then evolution must be a crucial part of the design, but what kind of evolution? If design predetermines evolution itself, then evolution must develop as planned and only in one way; otherwise, there would be no possibility for chance or free will.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“Most likely, the world was not predetermined to evolve deterministically but following its unlimited, infinite potential. The world's potential contains infinity. It is the potential and capacity of the world for variety through chance. Without chance, conditionally speaking, there would be no free will, among other things.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE

“To celebrate the world would be the most honorable task. If the World is the work of God or emanation of God, this celebration would be the celebration of both the World and God at the same time. This God is not the God from religious books. No book can claim God, and no people hiding behind holy books can be God’s representatives on Earth and be its sole interpreters and definers. The church needs thorough transformation. The church's task is not to claim or steal God but to promote and celebrate life in its purest form.”
― Dejan Stojanovic, ABSOLUTE