"Elsewhere Eriugena's asserts that God is the ‘essence of all things’ (essentia omnium) and the ‘form of all things’ (forma omnium). In the thirteenth century, expressions such as these led to the accusation of heresy, i.e. that Eriugena is collapsing the difference between God and creation. It must be noted, however, that although Eriugena asserts the identity of God and creation, he explicitly rejects the view that God is the ‘genus’ or ‘whole’ (totum) of which the creatures are ‘species’ or ‘parts’. Only metaphorically (metaforice, translative) can it be said that God is a ‘genus’ or a ‘whole’. Assertions concerning the immanence of God in creation are always balanced in Eriugena's writings by assertions of God's transcendence above all things. God is both ‘form of all things’ and also is without form, formless. Since God cannot be said to be anything, God cannot be simply identified with any or every creature either."
I know that Spinoza could have gotten it from other sources, but this seems to be exactly the same way Spinoza distinguishes God from the modes.
Possible Scottus influence on Spinoza
Moderator:Metacrock
Forum rules
(1) be interesting (2) be nice.
(1) be interesting (2) be nice.
- mdsimpson92
- Posts:2187
- Joined:Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:05 pm
- Location:Tianjin, China
Julia: It's all... a dream...
Spike Spiegel: Yeah... just a dream...
Spike Spiegel: Yeah... just a dream...