Saint Thomas Aquinas on God

The argument that only seems to present God as self-evident is flawed but food for thought. It may appear that from the beginning the nature of God is innately implanted within us; thus we understand that God's existence is self-evident. Perhaps the most intriguing argument that provides God's existence as self-evident is the notion that that which exists actually and mentally is superior to that which exists only mentally. This concept seems logical because once we learn what God means mentally; it then must exist actually since we can conceptualize it. The most perplexing opinion is the argument of God as the 'truth,' and if truth is true, than God must be authentic as he is "the way, the truth, and the life."

Saint Thomas points out that the opposite to self-evidence exists and therefore cannot be specifically proven; he does however provide his view on the argument of God as self-evident. He exhibits his perspective by first noting that self-evidence can exist in two ways: that which is self-evident in itself to us and that which is self-evident in itself but not to us. Saint Thomas believes that we are all naturally implanted (even if in a mystifying way) with some sense that God exists; he goes on to offer examples that although God may appear to us, we may not know it is God even though it is because we only know of him mentally (theoretically, and not in a state to appear to us physically or actually). Perhaps the most conclusive opposition Saint Thomas provides is the perception that nothing greater (than God) can be thought. He reveals that there is no method to prove or disprove the conception that nothing greater can be processed in the human mind because humans have not the capacity to even conceptualize the infinite greatness of God. Because of this, we also have not the capacity to understand that anything else greater than God can exist or be mentally hypothesized. We can only come to realize that it can only be thought of mentally and not actually. His final objection to God's existence as self-evidence brings his argument full circle by providing that truth is clearly self-evident to humans but we can never fully understand original or primal truth.

My personal beliefs are appearing more and more clear as I read deeper into Saint Thomas' arguments. My hardest inner battle is with conceptualizing a greater being than God; it is far beyond my grasp as a human to ever fully understand how infinite God's grandness is or why his name is what it is. I have a problem with the ontological arguments because what is stated can only be corroborated with those that believe the same thing, but will never be understood by those who do not already uphold those beliefs. The problem exists is that no one can be convinced of it unless they already believe it, which proves to be a controversial argument. Also, if someone does not understand what 'God' means, but can only recognize the word, it cannot mean that He exists actually (only mentally can we understand it and only to a finite extent). We can never fully appreciate or comprehend the vastness of unbounded beings or ever come close to understanding.