It’s possible, depending on how they set up their definitions. If they see time as an axis that precedes creation, then even if there isn’t anything that exists in space, then there is something that exists along the temporal axis that would, technically speaking, preclude the notion of ex nihilo.
It is a Defined Dogma that the univrse was created by God ex nihil. That would include time which is a measure of change in created things. I don’t know what " B " theory is and I don’t care. Anyone who says time did not arise with God’s creation is nothing but a crack pot even if he has 50 Phd’s after his name and if he can walk on his hands all the way from Los Angeles to New Yourk. Why are you reading thes nut jobs?
I’m not familiar with B-theory either. But Catholic theology asserts that God creates the universe from nothing, and that means he didn’t start with space, time, energy, or matter. All of those are created ex-nihilo. (In fact, a Catholic theologian would assert correctly that even a universe which extends infinitely in time in both directions, would still require creation ex-nihilo by God, since it would only be He who could create that kind of universe.)
The fellow who told me that the B-theory of time precludes creatio ex nihilo also told me Thomas Aquinas got most things wrong. I didn’t think that quite right. Anyways, here is a description of the B-theory of time: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-theory_of_time
Thank you.
You might consider reading William Lane Craig’s article on time and the Kalam Cosmological Argument found here:
By the way… what’s their argument? How do they justify their claim?
“Time” is a measure of change.
Is this suppose to encourage understanding? This doesn’t look like anything I can learn from. Are you aware you are in the philosophy part of Catholic answers?
True change occurs when a potential or possible state becomes actual. 1 distinct irreducible point becomes two irreducible distinct points, so on and so forth. Every point, despite the apparent endurance of essences, is coming into being from non-existence. Its creatio ex nihilo. In other-words potency is continuously receiving esse in order for an essence to remain an actual thing at each distinct point of its existence.
I read it in a book about creatio ex nihilo and I am horrible at explaining things. So I can’t really repeat their argument per se here. Sorry.
The reason I do it is because many of the people who raise these questions or comment on them do not have the education or the facility which would allow them to discuss them safely. I want these folks to know that it is the teaching of the Church they must depend on for the truth in these matters. Especially on this question. It is a matter of charity to let them know they do not have to be trained philosophers or scientists to be certain about the truth about many things. This protects them from being prey to " false prophets. "
No problems. Can you provide a reference to the book?I read it in a book about creatio ex nihilo and I am horrible at explaining things. So I can’t really repeat their argument per se here. Sorry.
Telling them that such and such is against church teaching isn’t going to stop them from falling prey to erroneous ideas if those same ideas sound correct or seem irrefutable, hence the importance of philosophy.
The point is to limit the damage in so far as possible. I never questioned the value of philosophy for those who are qualified to engage in it and/or for those who can understand it. Linus2nd
But you are assuming a lot about people. Perhaps its also about the philosophers ability to express his ideas in a way that people can understand and not just about peoples ability to understand something. Like i said, having faith doesn’t make you immune to losing faith.
Creation Out of Nothing: A Biblical, Philosophical, and Scientific Exploration by William Lane Craig and Paul Copan. It was chapter 4: Understanding the Notion of Creatio ex Nihilo that discussed the argument.
Oh yes, I agree absolutely. There are many causes for the loss of faith and many of them have nothing to do with whether a person is capable of understanding philosophy or not. Yes, that is absolutely clear, some things cannot be prevented with the discussion of ideas or philosophy. Linus2nd