Theologians often argue for this formulation
This understanding of divinity is often argued for by religious institutions.
<
(2 of 2)
Next argument >
Context
The idea of God has long been debated; perhaps the only consensus is the incomprehensibility of God.
Philosophers and theologians have come to accept that God as a "divine substance" known to be "infinitely perfect ad unchanging" and the opposite of "created substance," which is " finite and imperfect" [1]. Good and evil are opposites but their differences, like many things, are relative. In contrast, the difference between divine and created substance is absolute and infinite, yet our only understanding of it is in relative terms.
Our understanding of God is, therefore, at best, an approximation [1].
The Argument
Counter arguments
If God is of a "divine substance" where he is infinitely perfect, there is always the age-old question of why there is evil, pain, and suffering in this world from malaria, droughts, starvation, slavery, and so much more.
There is also no evidence or proof of God's existence. We require evidence for almost everything else, from medicines to criminal charges.
And if God is "divine," why does he not show us beyond a shadow of a doubt that he exists. There is the argument for faith, belief, and free will but if God is "divine" and all-knowing- do we really have free will?[2]