Changelss God and fate

[rinnie]

The reason you cannot respond to it is because the question assumes that “God’s knowledge of creation before creation” is a meaningful concept, which it isn’t. The implicit assumption in Bahman’s question is that possible worlds are things that are “spread out” before God in the act of creation and God chooses between them. But that is false. God’s knowledge of the actual world just is His act of creating it. The error is in thinking that to say that “Balto knows X” and “God knows X” uses the word “know” univocally. In reality the way that God knows X is only analogous to the way Balto knows X due to the distinction between primary and secondary causation.

Got it, thanks.

 

[rinnie]

Is there any reason He cannot be? I am not a necessary being so it stands to reason that if I exist then God as the source of being is present to me. There is no need to guess. God knows my act as my free act. You are assuming that the only logical possibilities are that God and creatures are two distinct realities, which erroneously assumes that God is an item in the created order, or that occasionalism is true, i.e. that everything is really God.

The “content of creation” is everything that actually exists that is not God. This includes free agents and their self-determined acts.

But yet you claim to be interested in God’s creative act. God moves by creating so it is relevant.

We’ve been over this already. God knows the future by being present to it. But there is nothing about God knowing the future that makes the future real right now unless you assume that God’s knowledge of my future acts are ontologically prior to Him knowing my future free willing of my acts. “Keeping things in motion” is what it means for God to create. It’s not the case that God creates and then keeps it in motion. God creating my free will is precisely to “keep it in motion” as a self-determining thing.

Now that I truly understand the question, Thanks by the way, I do not think there is any better answer then you have given.

God knows the future by being present to it. I cannot think of any other answer that one can give.

 

[Bahman]

Is there any reason He cannot be?

Well yes. Please read the following.

I am not a necessary being so it stands to reason that if I exist then God as the source of being is present to me.

I don’t agree that you are not a necessary being. You are consciousness and you have been always a being. This is what I believe but lets put it aside for sake of argument.

There is no need to guess.

I disagree. Either you are different from God meaning that your mental content is separate from his or you and God are same. How God could have access to your mental state without guessing if he is not you?

God knows my act as my free act.

How if he is not guessing?

You are assuming that the only logical possibilities are that God and creatures are two distinct realities,

Yes we are separate.

which erroneously assumes that God is an item in the created order,

I assume that God is separate from creation.

or that occasionalism is true, i.e. that everything is really God.

I didn’t say so.

The “content of creation” is everything that actually exists that is not God. This includes free agents and their self-determined acts.

You got me wrong. I meant how things has started. In another word what was the content of creation at the very moment of act of creation? It couldn’t be empty.

But yet you claim to be interested in God’s creative act. God moves by creating so it is relevant.

I am very interested to know what was the very content of creation at the time of creation, right after when there was nothing and then there was creation.

We’ve been over this already. God knows the future by being present to it.

How God could be present to future? We haven’t make our minds about future acts yet so how future could exist and God could be present to it. I haven’t yet accepted that God could be present to now knowing our action and you are talking about the future.

But there is nothing about God knowing the future that makes the future real right now unless you assume that God’s knowledge of my future acts are ontologically prior to Him knowing my future free willing of my acts.

How God could knows my future acts? I haven’t yet bought your very argument that God could know my current acts. I think this system of thinking leads to an illogical conclusion since we find no one if we rewind the time hence we are left with the knowledge of God about agents who do not exist. That is what I call it content of creation which I cannot understand how it could be real.

“Keeping things in motion” is what it means for God to create. It’s not the case that God creates and then keeps it in motion. God creating my free will is precisely to “keep it in motion” as a self-determining thing.

Now please rewind thing into the past when there was nothing but God. What was the content of creation at that very moment? You argue that God could know my free act in future as it present to him independent of the fact whether I do exist or not. So we are back to initial point, if God knows now and future because he is present to it at the time of creation then that define the very content of creation before the act of creation.

 

[rinnie]

Well yes. Please read the following.

I don’t agree that you are not a necessary being. You are consciousness and you have been always a being. This is what I believe but lets put it aside for sake of argument.

I disagree. Either you are different from God meaning that your mental content is separate from his or you and God are same. How God could have access to your mental state without guessing if he is not you?

How if he is not guessing?

Yes we are separate.

I assume that God is separate from creation.

I didn’t say so.

You got me wrong. I meant how things has started. In another word what was the content of creation at the very moment of act of creation? It couldn’t be empty.

I am very interested to know what was the very content of creation at the time of creation, right after when there was nothing and then there was creation.

How God could be present to future? We haven’t make our minds about future acts yet so how future could exist and God could be present to it. I haven’t yet accepted that God could be present to now knowing our action and you are talking about the future.

How God could knows my future acts? I haven’t yet bought your very argument that God could know my current acts. I think this system of thinking leads to an illogical conclusion since we find no one if we rewind the time hence we are left with the knowledge of God about agents who do not exist. That is what I call it content of creation which I cannot understand how it could be real.

Now please rewind thing into the past when there was nothing but God. What was the content of creation at that very moment? You argue that God could know my free act in future as it present to him independent of the fact whether I do exist or not. So we are back to initial point, if God knows now and future because he is present to it at the time of creation then that define the very content of creation before the act of creation.

There is no better answers to explain our faith then our faith itself. It will answer I believe, all that you are asking.

CCC. The Profession of faith. You can see it online and outlines clearly what we believe and why we believe it,

It pretty much answers all of your questions.

 

[Bahman]

There is no better answers to explain our faith then our faith itself. It will answer I believe, all that you are asking.

CCC. The Profession of faith. You can see it online and outlines clearly what we believe and why we believe it,

It pretty much answers all of your questions.

Can you answer them for me?

 

[balto]

I don’t agree that you are not a necessary being. You are consciousness and you have been always a being. This is what I believe but lets put it aside for sake of argument.

Well okay, but I’m kind of thinking our disagreement over this point is the reason we’re never going to agree on the topic of this thread.

I disagree. Either you are different from God meaning that your mental content is separate from his or you and God are same. How God could have access to your mental state without guessing if he is not you?

I’ve answered this already. He sustains it in being and makes it my mental state. If that is not true, then somehow I have being apart from Being itself, which is nonsense.

Yes we are separate.

I assume that God is separate from creation.

Okay, I should have qualified my position. Yes, God and creation are distinct, but where you and I differ is that you think that creation is self-sustaining and I deny this. Creation and God are distinct, but creation is ultimately dependent on God as pure Act/Being itself.

You got me wrong. I meant how things has started. In another word what was the content of creation at the very moment of act of creation? It couldn’t be empty.

From who’s viewpoint? God’s? From God’s viewpoint the “content of creation” was never empty.

I am very interested to know what was the very content of creation at the time of creation, right after when there was nothing and then there was creation.

There’s no such thing as “a time before creation and then creation happened.” I challenge you to produce the time when creation didn’t exist and God did. Time is only valid within creation. Otherwise you are implicitly assuming that God is subject to change, because He goes from a state of not creating to one of creating, which would imply that He has a potentiality that was actualized. Actualized by what? You’d have to posit a higher God that is pure Act and then we’d be back to the same situation again!

How God could be present to future? We haven’t make our minds about future acts yet so how future could exist and God could be present to it. I haven’t yet accepted that God could be present to now knowing our action and you are talking about the future.

God has to be present to it. It would not be real otherwise, unless you want to argue that this universe and everything that happens in it is absolutely necessary, which by all accounts it is not.

Now please rewind thing into the past when there was nothing but God. What was the content of creation at that very moment? You argue that God could know my free act in future as it present to him independent of the fact whether I do exist or not. So we are back to initial point, if God knows now and future because he is present to it at the time of creation then that define the very content of creation before the act of creation.

There is no such thing as a “time when there was nothing except God.”

 

[balto]

Now that I truly understand the question, Thanks by the way, I do not think there is any better answer then you have given.

God knows the future by being present to it. I cannot think of any other answer that one can give.

Thank you, I am glad to have helped!

 

[Bahman]

Well okay, but I’m kind of thinking our disagreement over this point is the reason we’re never going to agree on the topic of this thread.

I think so.

I’ve answered this already. He sustains it in being and makes it my mental state. If that is not true, then somehow I have being apart from Being itself, which is nonsense.

It is not about what is sustained as a mental state. It is about the very decision you make at the point. There is basically no person if even God does that too. How God could know about your decision?

Okay, I should have qualified my position. Yes, God and creation are distinct, but where you and I differ is that you think that creation is self-sustaining and I deny this. Creation and God are distinct, but creation is ultimately dependent on God as pure Act/Being itself.

Then you need to resolve the very important problem that how a sustained thing can decide on its own.

From who’s viewpoint? God’s? From God’s viewpoint the “content of creation” was never empty.

So creation is eternal?

There’s no such thing as “a time before creation and then creation happened.” I challenge you to produce the time when creation didn’t exist and God did. Time is only valid within creation. Otherwise you are implicitly assuming that God is subject to change, because He goes from a state of not creating to one of creating, which would imply that He has a potentiality that was actualized. Actualized by what? You’d have to posit a higher God that is pure Act and then we’d be back to the same situation again!

So I formulate it differently. The very definition of God is the creator. The very act of creation involves a change in state of existence, absence to presence, which requires time. Hence the very act of creation is impossible with a timeless God.

God has to be present to it. It would not be real otherwise, unless you want to argue that this universe and everything that happens in it is absolutely necessary, which by all accounts it is not.

Good so future is real and God is present to it. Can we imagine God only when creation did not exist yet? What was the content of God’s mind about creation at that mode of existence?

There is no such thing as a “time when there was nothing except God.”

So I rephrase it for you, the state of existence in which there was only God.

 

[balto]

It is not about what is sustained as a mental state. It is about the very decision you make at the point. There is basically no person if even God does that too. How God could know about your decision?

Nothing exists outside of God’s sustaining cause. He knows our decision because He sustains it as I’ve said numerous times already.

Then you need to resolve the very important problem that how a sustained thing can decide on its own.

Simple, God creates it as a self-determining thing. Denying this seems to commit you to one of two options: either everything is necessarily determined from previous states or it isn’t but your actions are randomly uncaused. Free will is not satisfied in either because the actions are not determined by me.

So creation is eternal?

“Eternal” is defined as being outside of time and hence not subject to change. The universe is tensed and subject to change, so no, it is not eternal.

So I formulate it differently. The very definition of God is the creator. The very act of creation involves a change in state of existence, absence to presence, which requires time. Hence the very act of creation is impossible with a timeless God.

The bolded part is incorrect. There is no such thing as a “state of non-existence.” A state is a property of some thing, yet if you are speaking of non-existence there is no thing there for it to be a state of. You’re assuming that God creates by shaping matter out of pre-existing stuff.

Good so future is real and God is present to it. Can we imagine God only when creation did not exist yet? What was the content of God’s mind about creation at that mode of existence?

Can we conceptually conceive of God without creation? Yes, because it is logically possible for God to not have created. But that doesn’t mean you can think of a time or state of God not created when you’re already supposing that He does create. Times and states are not defined for nothingness.

It is not “Non-existence → Finite Universe → Non-existence”, it is just “Finite Universe.” There is no such thing as a state of being non-existent as that would be self-contradictory.

 

[Bahman]

Nothing exists outside of God’s sustaining cause. He knows our decision because He sustains it as I’ve said numerous times already.

What God holds is the situation is defined by circumstances now. Circumstance does not define the decisions. Do you believe in free will!? How do you define it?

Simple, God creates it as a self-determining thing.

This very act is ill-defined considering your last comment. A self-determined thing by definition has the ability to make conscious decision which is not determinable.

Denying this seems to commit you to one of two options: either everything is necessarily determined from previous states or it isn’t but your actions are randomly uncaused.

None. Your action simply could not be known. That is the very meaning of self-determined.

Free will is not satisfied in either because the actions are not determined by me.

Free will is not satisfied in your case either. How God could see the future if your decision is indeterminable? This is common sense.

“Eternal” is defined as being outside of time and hence not subject to change. The universe is tensed and subject to change, so no, it is not eternal.

Well, I was thinking of the definition which indicates a being without beginning and end, alpha and omega. But lets stick to definition of timeless God for now.

The bolded part is incorrect. There is no such thing as a “state of non-existence.”

There is and the bold part is correct. Well, I can simply say getting something out of nothing. I can then define state of non-existence as nothing. Simple. There is a change hence God needs to create the time first. Yet creating time needs time which is paradoxical.

A state is a property of some thing, yet if you are speaking of non-existence there is no thing there for it to be a state of. You’re assuming that God creates by shaping matter out of pre-existing stuff.

I didn’t say so. Please read the previous comment.

Can we conceptually conceive of God without creation? Yes, because it is logically possible for God to not have created. But that doesn’t mean you can think of a time or state of God not created when you’re already supposing that He does create. Times and states are not defined for nothingness.

I didn’t say to think of a time. I was asking whether we can imagine an existence state where only God exist. There is only God. And yet God has the knowledge of nothingness. Does that make sounds to you. It should be up to God. God can only make one decision in timeless state and that is about the very act of creation.

It is not “Non-existence → Finite Universe → Non-existence”, it is just “Finite Universe.” There is no such thing as a state of being non-existent as that would be self-contradictory.

We have this very concept in linear algebra. So it is relevant. At the end everything is matter of simple definition.

 

[balto]

What God holds is the situation is defined by circumstances now. Circumstance does not define the decisions. Do you believe in free will!? How do you define it?

Yes, I believe in free will. I’ve spent the whole thread arguing for its reality.

This very act is ill-defined considering your last comment. A self-determined thing by definition has the ability to make conscious decision which is not determinable.

How is a self-determining thing not determinable? It is by definition determinable.

None. Your action simply could not be known. That is the very meaning of self-determined.

I seem to be able to determine most of my actions and yet I know the reasons for my actions. There is no ambiguity there.

Free will is not satisfied in your case either. How God could see the future if your decision is indeterminable? This is common sense.

Because my decision is not indeterminable.

Well, I was thinking of the definition which indicates a being without beginning and end, alpha and omega. But lets stick to definition of timeless God for now.

Well timeless =/= no beginning and end. Timeless implies that there is no change in addition to having no beginning and end, whereas simply having no beginning and end doesn’t preclude the possibility of real change.

There is and the bold part is correct. Well, I can simply say getting something out of nothing. I can then define state of non-existence as nothing. Simple. There is a change hence God needs to create the time first. Yet creating time needs time which is paradoxical.

You cannot define “nothingness” as there is nothing to define. You can only have a logical concept of the possibility of God not creating anything by noting that only God’s existence is necessary. That is not to conceive of “nothingness” which cannot be conceived since it is no being.

I didn’t say to think of a time. I was asking whether we can imagine an existence state where only God exist. There is only God. And yet God has the knowledge of nothingness. Does that make sounds to you. It should be up to God. God can only make one decision in timeless state and that is about the very act of creation.

God wouldn’t have knowledge of nothingness: He would only have necessary knowledge of Himself, as opposed to having necessary knowledge of Himself and contingent knowledge of creatures.

 

[Bahman]

Yes, I believe in free will. I’ve spent the whole thread arguing for its reality.

Cool. What is the nature of decision? We know well that decision is not determinable prior to act of decision. In fact it is meaningless to say that my decision is clear to me always. We have to always wait until the moment of decision.

How is a self-determining thing not determinable? It is by definition determinable.

Why we should make decision if our decision are determinable. Our decisions are indeterminable until the moment of decisions. We have create them.

I seem to be able to determine most of my actions and yet I know the reasons for my actions. There is no ambiguity there.

Yes, but your action is determinable at the moment you decide. You perform the act after and your decision is not determinable before the act of decision.

Because my decision is not indeterminable.

They are at the moment of decision only and not before. Why you should make a decision if your action was determinable?

Well timeless =/= no beginning and end. Timeless implies that there is no change in addition to having no beginning and end, whereas simply having no beginning and end doesn’t preclude the possibility of real change.

Ok. So the timeless God is not the one who is described in scripture?

You cannot define “nothingness” as there is nothing to define. You can only have a logical concept of the possibility of God not creating anything by noting that only God’s existence is necessary. That is not to conceive of “nothingness” which cannot be conceived since it is no being.

I can define it: it is absence of existence of anything but me, in God framework before act of creation.

God wouldn’t have knowledge of nothingness: He would only have necessary knowledge of Himself, as opposed to having necessary knowledge of Himself and contingent knowledge of creatures.

How do you define the act of creation from God perspective? We are not contingent by definition if you cannot define the act which require a change in state of existence.

 

[balto]

Cool. What is the nature of decision? We know well that decision is not determinable prior to act of decision. In fact it is meaningless to say that my decision is clear to me always. We have to always wait until the moment of decision.

Yeah but you are the one deciding. You’re speaking as though the moment of decision is something that happens randomly which it doesn’t. If it does, then it’s hard to see how you are defending a model of free will.

Why we should make decision if our decision are determinable. Our decisions are indeterminable until the moment of decisions. We have create them.

They are not indeterminable prior to the decision, they are just not determined yet. They are in the process of being determined for the subject’s own reasons.

Yes, but your action is determinable at the moment you decide. You perform the act after and your decision is not determinable before the act of decision.

I’ve explained this above.

They are at the moment of decision only and not before. Why you should make a decision if your action was determinable?

Your action is determinable before it occurs. It is determinable by you. Prior to your decision it is not determined to some end, although it is determinable.

Ok. So the timeless God is not the one who is described in scripture?

Yes He is. Humans have a changing relationship with God. God does not change, humans do. Hence supposed changes in God’s attitude is due to us changing our relationship with God, not any real change in God.

How do you define the act of creation from God perspective? We are not contingent by definition if you cannot define the act which require a change in state of existence.

The act of creation from God’s perspective is his making creatures that do not exist by nature real at all times. The definition of contingency makes no reference to change at all, let alone change in existence. It is simply something that does not exist through its nature but depends for its existence on something else.