Hi, I’m teaching a friend about a proof for the existence of God I found on Catholic Answers called A Proof for the Existence of God by James Kidd.
I just have a question about this. I’m taking it as a given that Aquinas proved that God is “ipsum esse subsistens”, Being itself subsisting. (And please correct me if I’m wrong —>) I also know that all of these terms are equivalent:
Being itself subsisting = Subsistent Being = Being Itself = Being = Esse (Latin for Being)
This article says “existence” exists, because that is its definition (cool makes sense ) Therefore it says Esse exists, in English: Being (wait hold on let’s take a look at this).
My question from this article is… Does “Existence” = Being? Or is more nuanced than that? If I can say that, does that mean God is “Existence Itself”?
You may say for example maybe “Existence” is the subsistent act of Being? But wouldn’t that = Being? Just trying to make sure my terms are kosher before I teach this. Thanks!