W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
because we belive that G-d exists outside the physical universe, as is implicated by the big bang theory, therefore he is not subject to the usual constraints of physical laws
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
crowonsnow
Guest
Allow me to summarize.Yes, I totally agree that the universe NEED NOT exist and that it only exists for one reason: because God willed it to be. How do I know this? Not from studying theology or reading books or talking to people. I know this firsthand from experience. Here is a little bit of my story for those who are interested:
In 1976 at a prayer service I met a Carmelite Priest who later became my spiritual director. At the time, he was a teacher of theology at Catholic University. Once I attended him on a trip to Louisville, Kentucky to visit his parents; and whenever this Priest visited home, he always helped out the local parish on the weekends by saying Mass. So before we got to his parents house, I was left alone in the car while he went into a Church to arrange his Mass schedule for the weekend. It was while I was sitting in the car by myself I had another one of God’s 2x4 moments; but this time God used a sledge hammer. It was similar to the scene in the Wizard of Oz movie when the curtain lifted to reveal the Wizard behind the curtain; all of a sudden I had a profound sense of God’s presence. God spoke His name to me; not with audible words I could hear but with an acute awareness of who God is – “I AM”. I became profoundly aware God had always existed and could have continued in BEING for all eternity without creating anything or anyone. It was like I had been in a dark room and all of a sudden the light was turned on which allowed me to see what was in the room. In this case, God allowed me to “see” creation through His eyes. God had no need of anything or anyone. The very fact of the universe and my own existence were sheer gifts of love. I cried out to God – “WHY, WHY, WHY did you bother to create the world? Why did you bother to create me?” I was completely overwhelmed because I knew the only reason I existed was because God wanted and willed me. Grace was no longer just as a concept for me but an actual experience; my life was a gift of God’s love – given freely without being deserved. Only God has to exist. This experience I believe was God’s answer to my earlier prayer “God, IF you exist, please help me to know it.” God had just lifted the curtain and smiled on me.
Your belief is that there’s a god. At this point the reason for there being this god is unimportant. Let’s just say it’s a brute fact. The universe to me exists in just the same way, it’s a brute fact. But in your case, this god then makes a universe. And the reason this god makes this universe is you.
You understand, of course, that this logically implies that the reason a god even exists is just for you? That in essence you are the only reason for there even being a god in the first place, and then a universe to follow.
You must perceive yourself to be a pretty important person. Do you think you are an important enough person that a god and all its trappings, and an entire universe would come to exist just on your behalf?
I certainly don’t see myself as being more important than any other part of the universe. I flatter myself to even consider that such could possibly be the case.
B
buffalo
Guest
That is pretty much correct. God wants to share His ultimate truth and love with His creatures.Allow me to summarize.
Your belief is that there’s a god. At this point the reason for there being this god is unimportant. Let’s just say it’s a brute fact. The universe to me exists in just the same way, it’s a brute fact. But in your case, this god then makes a universe. And the reason this god makes this universe is you.
You understand, of course, that this logically implies that the reason a god even exists is just for you? That in essence you are the only reason for there even being a god in the first place, and then a universe to follow.
You must perceive yourself to be a pretty important person. Do you think you are an important enough person that a god and all its trappings, and an entire universe would come to exist just on your behalf?
I certainly don’t see myself as being more important than any other part of the universe. I flatter myself to even consider that such could possibly be the case.
J
jkiernan56
Guest
No, I don’t believe for one second that the world was created just for me. But I do believe I was created for God AND I DO NOT DESERVE IT !!!Allow me to summarize.
Your belief is that there’s a god. At this point the reason for there being this god is unimportant. Let’s just say it’s a brute fact. The universe to me exists in just the same way, it’s a brute fact. But in your case, this god then makes a universe. And the reason this god makes this universe is you.
You understand, of course, that this logically implies that the reason a god even exists is just for you? That in essence you are the only reason for there even being a god in the first place, and then a universe to follow.
You must perceive yourself to be a pretty important person. Do you think you are an important enough person that a god and all its trappings, and an entire universe would come to exist just on your behalf?
I certainly don’t see myself as being more important than any other part of the universe. I flatter myself to even consider that such could possibly be the case.
And as for feeling important, I know I am just as important and special as you are in God’s eyes. Do I feel special - YES. Does that make me more special or important than anyone else? NO
God has a special and unique love for each one of us. You and I and the whole human race would not even exist unless He wanted us and saw something beautiful in us.
In fact I think you and I are so special that God in order to save us from the consequences of sin because of free-will, took upon himself our human nature and willingly allowed Himself to be put to death on a cross - an act of love in reparation for the sins of the world. Why did he do this? To deliver each one of us from sin and evil that has a grasp on the whole human race.
In fact, God did this so that you and I could become His adopted sons and daughters - a relationship with God even Higher than the Angels. What destroys that relationship? Sin
St. Paul says we have been blessed with EVERY spiritual blessing in the heavens. There is no higher blessing than to be a child of God and to call God my Father … or Abba as Christ told us to call Him.
C
crowonsnow
Guest
Not sure what “nothing” has to do with it but it’s hard to swallow the “love” argument. Too many sick and dying kids. If there was a god that made things for love it would see to this need. It does not. Therefore the love argument fails.No, I don’t believe for one second that the world was created just for me. But I do believe I was created for God AND I DO NOT DESERVE IT !!!
And as for feeling important, I know I am just as important and special as you are in God’s eyes. Do I feel special - YES. Does that make me more special or important than anyone else? NO
In fact I think you and I are so special that God in order to save us from the consequences of sin because of free-will, took upon himself our human nature and willingly allowed Himself to be put to death on a cross - an act of love in reparation for the sins of the world. Why did he do this? To deliver each one of us from sin and evil that has a grasp on the whole human race.
In fact, God did this so that you and I could become His adopted sons and daughters - a relationship with God even Higher than the Angels. What destroys that relationship? Sin
St. Paul says we have been blessed with EVERY spiritual blessing in the heavens. There is no higher blessing than to be a child of God.
But I digress.
B
buffalo
Guest
Sickness, death and corruption are part and parcel of failing the probationary test. However, God provides hope. There is what is known as redemptive suffering. Basically it purifies the soul. God requires souls to be pure to experiece the beatific vision. Suffering here on earth helps this along.Not sure what “nothing” has to do with it but it’s hard to swallow the “love” argument. Too many sick and dying kids. If there was a god that made things for love it would see to this need. It does not. Therefore the love argument fails.
But I digress.
The capacity to experience God is His fullness is dependent on one’s openness and purity. It is similar to how one here on earth can experience pleasure. If you have a negative outlook on life, it is harder to live life fully. If you have a more positive outlook, it is easier to live life more fully, despite sickness and death.
J
jkiernan56
Guest
O trust me, I don’t minimize your thoughts and feelings on the problem of evil at all one bit. But I do believe that my understanding of love and God’s understanding are completely different. I also can say from experience in my own life that God is able to bring good out of evil (which is the reason St. Augustine says that God even allows evil to exist in the first place). We see in time - God sees in eternity. He chose to give us free will and thus knew the consequences. But he also knows what the final result will be. I truly do believe that God’s LOVE is the greatest power and force in the world and is able to overcome ALL evil.Not sure what “nothing” has to do with it but it’s hard to swallow the “love” argument. Too many sick and dying kids. If there was a god that made things for love it would see to this need. It does not. Therefore the love argument fails.
But I digress.
J
jkiernan56
Guest
It should not exist because God does not need His creation to exist. It only exists because God wills it to exist. We need not exist.Why do you think the universe should not exist? This is nihilism.
C
crowonsnow
Guest
Stay with me.It should not exist because God does not need His creation to exist. It only exists because God wills it to exist. We need not exist.
If there is nothing this god needs or does not need, why does it have a will? Does it need a will?
Or does it will itself a will so that it can create things it does not need? Or does god just happen to have a will that it does not need?
J
jkiernan56
Guest
God has a will - it is not a case of “needing” it as you describe. It is in God’s nature to have a will. God is Spirit and two of the main faculties of Spirit is to KNOW and to ACT. God does not “need” a will. It is His nature to have a will. It is God’s nature to exist. God cannot will Himself to cease to exist. It is an impossibility because it is contrary to His nature. This does not contradict the scripture that is often quoted that “nothing is impossible to God.” There ARE things impossible for God - anything contrary to His nature. Since His nature is to exist, God cannot NOT exist. This is also the reason why God cannot do evil - it is contrary to His nature.Stay with me.
If there is nothing this god needs or does not need, why does it have a will? Does it need a will?
Or does it will itself a will so that it can create things it does not need? Or does god just happen to have a will that it does not need?
God does not will himself to have a will. God cannot also will himself NOT to have a will. It is His nature to have a will.
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
a will is an intregal part of being, we are saying that he does not need things external to himself.Stay with me.
If there is nothing this god needs or does not need, why does it have a will? Does it need a will?
your argument seems to be that we popped out of nothing, a complete violation of causality, how is that any better than a creation from a self existent, infinite G-d?
your argument lacks what aquinas’ would call ‘sufficient reason’
you say it just happened for no reason, we give the reason as G-d
as usual your arguments fail from a lack of understanding as to what we believe and why, then you endlessly argue in circles with faulty reasoning.
you offer the same defeated arguments to people that have not heard them yet, and still they are shown to be insufficient.
and ignore those people who have previously defeated those arguments.
youve been beating a dead horse for months, why dont you switch tactics?
the ‘i refuse to belive in a G-d who allows suffering’ is just a refusal to accept what scripture has said for thousands of years. that means its only your opinion, and not a premise for a logical argument, but i am sure that you will continue to ignore me
but frankly, if you believed ti yourself you would not spend so much time here trying to convince us it is true
D
davidv
Guest
God without a will is not God. Will is a necessary aspect of God’s essence.Stay with me.
If there is nothing this god needs or does not need, why does it have a will? Does it need a will?
Or does it will itself a will so that it can create things it does not need? Or does god just happen to have a will that it does not need?
J
jkiernan56
Guest
If you would like a better understanding of what I was trying to say about what is possible for God, St. Thomas Aquinas says it better than I ever could. This is taken from his Summa Theologica on Omnipotence:It is God’s nature to exist. God cannot will Himself to cease to exist. It is an impossibility because it is contrary to His nature. This does not contradict the scripture that is often quoted that “nothing is impossible to God.” There ARE things impossible for God - anything contrary to His nature. Since His nature is to exist, God cannot NOT exist. This is also the reason why God cannot do evil - it is contrary to His nature.
"Omnipotence is the power of God to effect whatever is not intrinsically impossible. These last words of the definition do not imply any imperfection, since a power that extends to every possibility must be perfect. The universality of the object of the Divine power is not merely relative but absolute, so that the true nature of omnipotence is not clearly expressed by saying that God can do all things that are possible to Him; it requires the further statement that all things are possible to God. The intrinsically impossible is the self-contradictory, and its mutually exclusive elements could result only in nothingness. “Hence,” says Thomas (Summa I, Q. xxv, a. 3), “it is more exact to say that the intrinsically impossible is incapable of production, than to say that God cannot produce it.”
See newadvent.org/cathen/11251c.htm
J
jkiernan56
Guest
Crowonsnow, I can only tell you that if you really want to know if God exists, sincerely ask God to please show you - that is if you truly want to know there is someone behind the “curtain of the universe” that you see.That’s because “nothing” is philosophical semantics. The universe is everywhere all the time. Somethingness is the rule. Nothingness is just an imagined pretend exception to the rule that cannot be observed, quantified or defended.
For some reason, and despite all observations to the contrary, creationists believe there shouldn’t be a universe. They’re just poor observers I guess.
C
crowonsnow
Guest
I’m not certain the historical personage, but that answer, about being in something’s “nature,” was once used to explain the phases of the moon. The point is that it doesn’t tell us anything. I could ask, for example, why cats have tails. Someone would answer, because it’s in the nature of cats to have tails. I could ask why there is a cat in front of the tail on my pet. Same answer. On one hand it’s an answer that explains everything, and of course any answer that explains everything doesn’t explain anything. That’s the problem with saying it’s in something’s “nature.”God has a will - it is not a case of “needing” it as you describe. It is in God’s nature to have a will. God is Spirit and two of the main faculties of Spirit is to KNOW and to ACT. God does not “need” a will. It is His nature to have a will. It is God’s nature to exist. God cannot will Himself to cease to exist. It is an impossibility because it is contrary to His nature. This does not contradict the scripture that is often quoted that “nothing is impossible to God.” There ARE things impossible for God - anything contrary to His nature. Since His nature is to exist, God cannot NOT exist. This is also the reason why God cannot do evil - it is contrary to His nature.
God does not will himself to have a will. God cannot also will himself NOT to have a will. It is His nature to have a will.
But thanks for the discussion. I don’t think we’ll get any further. We’ve gone from nothing, to universes, to gods to wills to needs to Aquinas, moons, cats and their tails. It appears that “nothingness” is as important to creationists as anything else in their theologies.
Q
quaestio
Guest
I think it’s disappointing if you leave the discussion at this point because you raise a good question about the idea of “natures” of things. I hope you stick around to exchange thoughts on this matter.But thanks for the discussion. I don’t think we’ll get any further.
J
jimmy
Guest
If the world is not created out of something then there are two possibilities. Either the world is divine, which is pantheism, or there was some material reality that existed previous to the world. The problem with the first option is that since there is evil in the world you would have to assume that God is the creator of evil. The problem with the second is that you have assumend immutability for the world as well. If nothing can come from nothing, even if God creates it, then you have made the first step toward immutability.I have read on this web site many times this theological statement that “God created the world out of nothing.”
I’m not sure I can really agree with that statement. My gut reaction to this is that only something can come from something and only nothing can come from nothing. God obviously does not come from something since His very nature is to exist and who is the first cause but is NOT caused. The whole universe including human beings are contingent beings while God is not.
It seems to me it would be better to say that God created the universe “out of His potentiality” rather than to say “out of nothing.”
Try to imagine the idea of absolute nothingness including the idea of even God not existing (which we know is an impossibility for God). Something cannot result from absolute nothingness. Now bring God who is pure spirit back into the equation before the world was created. Only God existed and it was God who thought and willed to create the universe. But out of nothingness? Isn’t it more accurate to say God created the world out of His own potentiality?
Your thoughts on this?
No, it is not more accurate to say God created the world out of His own potentiality because it results in the idea that the world is an emanation of God.
J
jkiernan56
Guest
I’m not so sure I agree with your conclusion. If you and I sat down to discuss the nature of a cat or a human being, I think we could agree or come to a common understanding. To understand the nature of something is not NOTHINGNESS .I’m not certain the historical personage, but that answer, about being in something’s “nature,” was once used to explain the phases of the moon. The point is that it doesn’t tell us anything. I could ask, for example, why cats have tails. Someone would answer, because it’s in the nature of cats to have tails. I could ask why there is a cat in front of the tail on my pet. Same answer. On one hand it’s an answer that explains everything, and of course any answer that explains everything doesn’t explain anything. That’s the problem with saying it’s in something’s “nature.”
But thanks for the discussion. I don’t think we’ll get any further. We’ve gone from nothing, to universes, to gods to wills to needs to Aquinas, moons, cats and their tails. It appears that “nothingness” is as important to creationists as anything else in their theologies.
We could start with the nature of a rock, then a cat, then a bird, then a fish and acknowlege similarities or differences (ie - the idea of classes in object oriented programming).
To say that the nature of God is to exist and that in God’s nature is WILL and THOUGHT is not nothingness. Nothingness exists if you and I cannot agree on any similarity between our nature and God’s.
J
jkiernan56
Guest
I’m not a theologian, but I guess I was trying to say that before creation God existed and has the ability to create out of nothing.If the world is not created out of something then there are two possibilities. Either the world is divine, which is pantheism, or there was some material reality that existed previous to the world. The problem with the first option is that since there is evil in the world you would have to assume that God is the creator of evil. The problem with the second is that you have assumend immutability for the world as well. If nothing can come from nothing, even if God creates it, then you have made the first step toward immutability.
No, it is not more accurate to say God created the world out of His own potentiality because it results in the idea that the world is an emanation of God.
That ability to create out of nothing is what I was referring to as His potentiality - probably not the right term to use. Most likely is just best to say that God is Omnipotent and is able to create out of nothing.
G
greylorn
Guest
Good. Then you might consider the notion that there is at least one law of physics not invented by God, namely the constancy of energy.I can’t understand ‘nothing’. I keep getting something when I am trying to get nothing.
You might also consider the notion that He created the universe from energy.
Or you might have entirely different ideas on the subject.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.