A thing whose existing is other than its essence has its existence caused by another. God is the first efficient cause, and therefore his essence cannot be distinct from his existence.
Existence is the actuality of every form and nature. Goodness and humanity do not signify actual things unless they refer to existents. Existence, therefore, is related to essence as actuality to potentiality. Since there is nothing potential in God, for he is motionless, his essence is not distinct from existence: on the contrary, his essence is his existence. That which has existence, but is not existence, is a being by sharing. Were the divine essence not the divine existence, God would be an existent by borrowing and not by owning. He would not be the first being. WALLACE STEVENS to his wife, 19 July 1916 *Eminent Vers Libriste Arrives in Town Details of Reception* St Paul, Minn. July 19, 1916. Wallace Stevens, the playwright and barrister, arrived at Union Station, at 10:30 o'clock this morning. Some thirty representatives of the press were not present to greet him. He proceeded on foot to the Hotel St. Paul, where they had no room for him. Thereupon, carrying an umbrella and two mysterious looking bags, he proceeded to Minnesota Club, 4th & Washington-Streets, St. Paul, where he will stay while he is in St. Paul. At the Club, Mr Stevens took a shower-bath and succeeded in flooding not only the bath-room floor but the bed-room floor as well. He used all the bath-towels in mopping up the mess and was obliged to dry himself with a wash-cloth. From the Club, Mr. Stevens went down-town on business. When asked how he liked St. Paul, Mr. Stevens, borrowing a cigar, said, 'I like it'. Dear Bud: The above clipping may be of interest to you. Note my address. I am waiting for some papers to be typed--ah! Give my best to the family. With love, Wallace --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, khazana108 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Look, you are annoying. Don't you realize that. > > They're trying to be. Don't you realize that? :-) > > The Judy-Robin-raunchy-oxcart game yesterday was to > KEEP YOU ARGUING WITH THEM. > > There was no other purpose to it. The way they think, > if they can keep you wasting your time dealing with > their nitpicks and their crap, they "win." None of > the content of what they say matters a bit; it's > just a ploy to keep you interacting and arguing > with them. > > In a very real sense, they're using you to masturbate > with. You're the batteries in their vibrator. > > If that image doesn't disgust you enough to stop > playing their game, nothing will. :-) :-) :-) >
