Difference between 'nothing' and a 'vacuum'

[MindOverMatter2]

What exactly do you think my argument is?

Ex-nihilo is not making a positive statement about how God created the universe, but rather the doctrine is stating what God didn’t do. In other-words the doctrine was developed or stated in order to counteract the idea that God created the universe out of pre-existing physical materials which existed separately from God. It is not saying that God can make something out of nothing.

 

[1holycatholic]

Ex-nihilo is not making a positive statement about how God created the universe, but rather the doctrine is stating what God didn’t do. In other-words the doctrine was developed or stated in order to counteract the idea that God created the universe out of pre-existing physical materials which existed separately from God. It is not saying that God can make something out of nothing.

Where exactly did I say all of that?

From Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (Ludwig Ott, Tan Books Rockford Il, 1974 PP 79):
All that exists outside God was, in its whole substance, produced out of nothing by God. (De fide.)

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Where exactly did I say all of that?

That’s not what you said. That’s what I am saying.

From Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (Ludwig Ott, Tan Books Rockford Il, 1974 PP 79):
All that exists outside God was, in its whole substance, produced out of nothing by God. (De fide.)

All that exists outside God was, in its whole substance, produced out of nothing physical.

3 questions.

1.When they say outside of God, you would agree that they don’t literally mean outside of God? Since that would make God finite and transcendable; and this is a contradiction.

1. If you agree, you would have to admit that when they say outside, they must mean this in a different context to what it seems to literally imply. Wouldn’t you agree?
2. Is it not therefore possible that, in respect of creation ex-nihilo, what they appear to be literally implying, is really limited to a particular context, and is in fact a response to the idea of God creating out of pre-existing physical materials; and is thus not meant to be taken positively as meaning that God can positively make something out of absolutely nothing.

The goal of the exnihilo doctrine is to express the dependency of the universe on Gods existence. It is not an affirmation that God can do the logically impossible given an infinite amount of power.

 

[1holycatholic]

That’s not what you said. That’s what I am saying.

When I read your responses to me I wondered who you were addressing.

All that exists outside God was, in its whole substance, produced out of nothing physical.

3 questions.

1.When they say outside of God, you would agree that they don’t literally mean outside of God? Since that would make God finite and transcendable; and this is a contradiction.

I have Ott’s book at my side and don’t care to cite the next two pages. It is true that God transcends and is not part of His creation.

1. If you agree, you would have to admit that when they say outside, they must mean this in a different context to what it seems to literally imply. Wouldn’t you agree?

“Outside” means not being part of something in the dictionary on my laptop and in common use.

1. Is it not therefore possible that, in respect of creation ex-nihilo, what they appear to be literally implying, is really limited to a particular context, and is in fact a response to the idea of God creating out of pre-existing physical materials; and is thus not meant to be taken positively as meaning that God can positively make something out of absolutely nothing.

God can make something from nothing (creation ex nihilo.)

The goal of the exnihilo doctrine is to express the dependency of the universe on Gods existence. It is not an affirmation that God can do the logically impossible given an infinite amount of power.

I never said God could do the logically impossible. Creation ex nihilo by God isn’t logically impossible.

 

[JDaniel]

Do you think the impossible is possible for God? For instance, do you think it is possible for God to cease His own existence? I’m just curious to see where you stand on this.

JK:

I think it is possible for God to do anything. The very fact that we exist, here and now, is sufficiently powerful enough rationale for me to believe that He has not pulled the plug on Himself. If He had ceased his own existence, we would not be having this discussion.

How can Omnipotence be stymied by impossibility? How can per se Existence extinguish itself? I think there are things God, by his Nature, wouldn’t do, but, NOTHING is impossible for Him.

Good to talk to you again. It’s been a while for me.

God bless,
jd

 

[MindOverMatter2]

JK:

I think it is possible for God to do anything. The very fact that we exist, here and now, is sufficiently powerful enough rationale for me to believe that He has not pulled the plug on Himself. If He had ceased his own existence, we would not be having this discussion.

How can Omnipotence be stymied by impossibility? How can per se Existence extinguish itself? I think there are things God, by his Nature, wouldn’t do, but, NOTHING is impossible for Him.

Good to talk to you again. It’s been a while for me.

God bless,
jd

God by nature is existence. Its not something that God can switch off when God feels like it. It is what God is. It makes no sense saying that could possibly not exist. Absolutely nothing cannot exist; thus there is necessarily that which is ultimate perfect reality. God would not be a perfect entity if there was even a slight possibility that God could fail to be, even if that possibility is dependent on Gods will.

Where are you guys getting these wild ideas from? It is impossible for God to will the non-existence of God.

 

[jkiernan56]

JK:

I think it is possible for God to do anything. The very fact that we exist, here and now, is sufficiently powerful enough rationale for me to believe that He has not pulled the plug on Himself. If He had ceased his own existence, we would not be having this discussion.

How can Omnipotence be stymied by impossibility? How can per se Existence extinguish itself? I think there are things God, by his Nature, wouldn’t do, but, NOTHING is impossible for Him.

Good to talk to you again. It’s been a while for me.

God bless,
jd

JD - I suggest you read up a little more on what St. Thomas Aquinas has to say about the Omnipotency of God. There are things GOD CANNOT DO. Only WHAT IS POSSIBLE - IS POSSIBLE FOR GOD - namely only that which is in the realm of possibility and NOT CONTRADICTORY TO HIS OWN NATURE. It is a misunderstanding of scripture and the power of God to think and say God can do what is logically impossible and contradictory to His own nature. God cannot do evil. God cannot cease His own existence. St. Thomas explains it much better than I ever could.

newadvent.org/summa/1025.htm

 

[jkiernan56]

JK:

I think it is possible for God to do anything. The very fact that we exist, here and now, is sufficiently powerful enough rationale for me to believe that He has not pulled the plug on Himself. If He had ceased his own existence, we would not be having this discussion.

How can Omnipotence be stymied by impossibility? How can per se Existence extinguish itself? I think there are things God, by his Nature, wouldn’t do, but, NOTHING is impossible for Him.

Good to talk to you again. It’s been a while for me.

God bless,
jd

Nice talking to you too. I come here when I get bored and feel like stirring up the bees nest a little … forgive me if at times I sound or seem a little brash - I probably am … lol

 

[JDaniel]

JD - I suggest you read up a little more on what St. Thomas Aquinas has to say about the Omnipotency of God. There are things GOD CANNOT DO. Only WHAT IS POSSIBLE - IS POSSIBLE FOR GOD and NOT CONTRADICTORY TO HIS OWN NATURE. God CANNOT DO EVIL. GOD CANNOT CEASE HIS OWN EXISTENCE. St. Thomas explains it much better than I ever could.

newadvent.org/summa/1025.htm

JK:

I am very familiar with what Aquinas has to say about God’s Omnipotency, and, it can have no limitations. Zero. None. The limitations on His capacity to do certain things are essentially self-imposed. If He is the maximum Good, for example, He can’t do evil. Not because He is limited in any forceful manner, but, only because He self-limits. God does not think things through, like a mere human. Such self limitings are instantaneous and accompany the maximum attribute under scrutiny.

In other words, He has the capacity, or, capability, but not the will, to contravene His maximum attributes. I would imagine that if anything is impossible for God, it would be the willingness to self-violate His Nature.

God bless,
jd

 

[JDaniel]

Nice talking to you too. I come here when I get bored and feel like stirring up the bees nest a little … forgive me if at times I sound or seem a little brash - I probably am … lol

Nope, you’re OK by me!

God bless,
jd

 

[jkiernan56]

JK:

I am very familiar with what Aquinas has to say about God’s Omnipotency, and, it can have no limitations. Zero. None. The limitations on His capacity to do certain things are essentially self-imposed. If He is the maximum Good, for example, He can’t do evil. Not because He is limited in any forceful manner, but, only because He self-limits. God does not think things through, like a mere human. Such self limitings are instantaneous and accompany the maximum attribute under scrutiny.

In other words, He has the capacity, or, capability, but not the will, to contravene His maximum attributes. I would imagine that if anything is impossible for God, it would be the willingness to self-violate His Nature.

God bless,
jd

Can you tell me where St. Thomas Aquinas said this about God self-imposing limitations? Thats not what I read that he said. What I read is that - only that which is POSSIBLE is possible for God.

 

[JDaniel]

Can you tell me where St. Thomas Aquinas said this about God self-imposing limitations? Thats not what I read that he said. What I read is that - only that which is POSSIBLE is possible for God.

JK:

Re-read the page you sent me to, with your link, especially, Article 5, I Answer That . . ., including Replies to Objections 1, 2, and 3. I didn’t use the exact words, but, rendered it in my own words.

I must point out again, that God does not work in past, present and future aspects of time, as there is no time for God. Everything He does is occurring in a moment. For God to contravene what He is immanently doing is to do and undo (perform two contradictory acts) at precisely the same Now - with no time-lag between the actions. I can’t imagine Him doing that. It would be like hammering two nails into each other, from opposite directions, simultaneously.

But, the answers do not indicate that St. Thomas thought God could only do what is possible. Possible to whom? Impossible to whom? Men can’t devise a scenario wherein God would entrap Himself

God bless,
jd

 

[MindOverMatter2]

JK:

I am very familiar with what Aquinas has to say about God’s Omnipotency, and, it can have no limitations. Zero. None.

God bless,
jd

God, as a meaningfully real entity, exists as he is defined by his attributes. If God is necessarily God, then what you are saying is necessarily false since if God could choose not to be perfectly good by nature, that would mean that God could choose not to be God; and nowhere in scripture or Catholic theology is this idea supported.The idea that God could possible do evil, but chooses not to, is a fallacy since it would suggest that the existence of good is not objectively real until it is chosen. If you are eternally (timelessly) real, then it is not something you choose but something you are by nature.

The context in which Aquinas argues is always in relation to that which is finite. God cannot be limited by any finite thing, in the sense that Gods existence is not dependent on the limitations of finite things. God cannot have any “finite physical limitations” ontologically speaking given the fact that God is Omnipotent. This has no bearing on whether or not God can do any conceivable thing or anything that is logically impossible, because not every conceivable thing is necessarily an expression of a perfect being. Being perfect, may very well exclude God from certain activities in which finite beings take part. The logically impossible is not a limitation on reality since logically impossible things do not exist and are thus meaningless. Reality is limited by its own nature and not by some real thing external to it. God is not limited by anything that is real, but God is limited in a logical sense.

Gods being is the root of all logical metaphysical truth. If God could fail to exist, this would contradict not only Gods attributes, but also any logical truth that we know to be necessarily true. For instance, that 2+2=4 or that all bachelors are unmarried, all this and any logical proposition would all cease to be true if God did not exist or could decide not to be perfectly existent. Thus logic would fail to exist, since its being true is conditional and is therefore not a necessary truth. But it is impossible that such truths can fail to be true, since the nature of truth is eternal and unconditional. Otherwise it cannot be true at all, and all Aquinas arguments become meaningless.

Secondly; we know God according to Gods attributes. By making Gods attributes arbitrary unnecessary expressions contingent upon the will alone, you make the concept of God as defined by those attributes contingent and potentially real depending on the will of some being that is really nothing more than a finite entity wishing to be omnipotent, but could have wished to be otherwise. I do not know this being you speak of that merely wishes to be perfect or omnipotent. It is not God.

This is why your concept about what God can do is false; since it is logically contradictory to think that something has the power to become a God rather than being necessarily God in the first place.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Impossible to whom? Men can’t devise a scenario wherein God would entrap Himself

God bless,
jd

God cannot both exist and not exist at the same time. God cannot make necessary truths contingent. God cannot make something out of absolutely nothing.

 

[1holycatholic]

God cannot both exist and not exist at the same time.

True.

God cannot make necessary truths contingent.

True.

God cannot make something out of absolutely nothing.

creatio ex nihilo sui et subiecti

 

[MindOverMatter2]

creatio ex nihilo sui et subiecti

I accept creation ex-nihilo. I reject your false interpretation of it as being a positive description of how God created the universe.

 

[1holycatholic]

I accept creation ex-nihilo. I reject your false interpretation of it as being a positive description of how God created the universe.

What does that even mean?

 

[MindOverMatter2]

What does that even mean?

I am sorry that you don’t know what it means. There is nothing I can do about that.

Peace.

 

[1holycatholic]

I am sorry that you don’t know what it means. There is nothing I can do about that.

Peace.

I’ll stick with what the Church teaches regarding the matter:
Compendium of the CCC #54:

God created “out of nothing” (ex nihilo) (2 Maccabees 7:28) a world which is ordered and good and which he infinitely transcends.

I have no idea what you are speaking about. I’ve asked you twice to explain what you mean, but you will not elaborate.

 

[JDaniel]

God, as a meaningfully real entity, exists as he is defined by his attributes. If God is necessarily God, then what you are saying is necessarily false since if God could choose not to be perfectly good by nature, that would mean that God could choose not to be God; and nowhere in scripture or Catholic theology is this idea supported.The idea that God could possible do evil, but chooses not to, is a fallacy since it would suggest that the existence of good is not objectively real until it is chosen. If you are eternally (timelessly) real, then it is not something you choose but something you are by nature.

My friend,

It is absolutely necessary, when we mere mortals attempt to attach our feeble determinants to God, that we never forget that we are not God. We cannot know what is possible, or not possible, for God. However, believing that He is all powerful leaves us in a quagmire, if we don’t at least try to grasp how. That being said, I will further say that I believe God has NO limitations. NONE. He could be immanently doing whatever He wants. He could be immanently altering everything we believe to be true or logical. He promises, though, that He won’t. In fact, the very combination of all-perfect Love and all-perfect Power is our assurance that He did not do that.

We are in the process of moving forward in our processing of the discoveries we view, as one might view a movie. The action of the movie has really already taken place, since it’s already in the can, so to speak, but, since we are just now seeing it for the first time, it appears new to us and is progressing through the scenes of action in a timely fashion. It didn’t happen that way for God. He thought of it and made it so. This all occurred at one now.

I use the word now because it is not really a part of time. The now connects past and future, for us, but, remains that which is within the innermost beginnings and endings of time past and time future. He is infinitely powerful so He can do this. He can change the outcome of logic - for us. He can change the sublime smoothness of the progress of time. He can make our lives horribly miserable - remember the Flood. Thanks be to God for not doing that again.

Logic is a very powerful aspect of human thought. But, logic cannot imprison God. He creates logic. He can make 2 + 2 = 5, if He so wants. That He doesn’t is proof that we have not upset Him like the pre-flood inhabitants of this planet must have done. That He doesn’t do terribly mean stuff to us is proof that He still Loves us, although it’s beyond me why!

The context in which Aquinas argues is always in relation to that which is finite. God cannot be limited by any finite thing, in the sense that Gods existence is not dependent on the limitations of finite things. God cannot have any "finite physical

Of course God has the power to become. He is immanently becoming. It is important to remember that creation to us is just an aspect of an eternal activity.

Tomorrow.

God bless,
jd