Do Catholics Believe God Follows Laws

[zebbediahdaniel]

I have been following this forum for some time now and would like to get the Catholic perspective regarding the how your this existence and your God interrelate. Specifically, do you believe God works within a frame work of laws. Spinoza’s pantheistic view suggests this to be the case. I refer to Spinoza’s idea that God is limited only by the necessity of HIs Existence. Thomas said, "Hence God wills His own goodness necessarily, even as we will our own happiness necessarily, and as any other faculty has necessary relation to its proper and principal object, for instance the sight to color, since it tends to it by its own nature. But God wills things apart from Himself in so far as they are ordered to His own goodness as their end.. This would seem to correlate to Spinoza’s idea, specifically, that God can only of necessity will something according to Goodness (not capital ‘G’ denoting a specific necessary attribute of God).
-Zeb

 

[vera_dicere]

I’m not sure if its official Catholic teaching or what not, but I believe there are in place certain biological and physical laws that God will obey. So, He’s not going to stomp His well pedicured foot down in front of a lava flow because the sudden appearance of God’s foot is going to remove the faith of those who see it. How can you choose God willingly if you’re under a form of duress seeing His big foot?

I also accept that nature responds to physical laws, such as gravity, and tectonic plate movement without interferance from God (again due to removing faith and choice).

Essentially, God obeys laws not because He has to, or because He can’t break them, but because He wants to.

 

[frindro]

God is not unwillingly bound by any laws, since he is the Lawmaker. For example, God is not bound by time, since he exists outside of time and created time. Also, God is not bound by space, since he exists outside of space and created space.

 

[didymus]

God binds Himself to the laws of His own creation as a matter of His integrity which makes it possible for us to know Him thru His handiwork.

This is why real science only took hold in the Christian west – other cultures; China, India, Persia, Islam, all did “natural philosophy” but it was Christianity, integrating the Greek philosophical heritage that brought about modern science.
Islam failed to make the jump because Allah could not be bound by laws and if he felt like making the sun rise in the west or water not freeze at 32F he could.

I read on another blog (wish I could remember) a comment from a man who taught school in Egypt. When he posed a problem like “If you drop a weight from a 100 meter high tower how long till it hits the ground?” his students would freeze. They could do the math, but the only “correct” answer they could give was inshallah – “as God wills”.

 

[zebbediahdaniel]

God is not unwillingly bound by any laws, since he is the Lawmaker. For example, God is not bound by time, since he exists outside of time and created time. Also, God is not bound by space, since he exists outside of space and created space.

God binds Himself to the laws of His own creation as a matter of His integrity which makes it possible for us to know Him thru His handiwork.

Frindro-
Didymus seems to differ somewhat. Do you thing rather that God established all the laws and we either don’t have access to all of these laws, or don’t know how to access them? For example, the early israelis (before moses) did not have access to electricity, so they could not have any of the wonderful technology we enjoy, but that doesn’t mean God didn’t. Or to use your example, in QM there is in use QM Communications where paired electrons are used to communicate instantaneously across any distance, but God would have access to these laws because he is Omnipotent, thus using space and time laws more fully.

 

[didymus]

Frindro-
Didymus seems to differ somewhat. Do you thing rather that God established all the laws and we either don’t have access to all of these laws, or don’t know how to access them? For example, the early israelis (before moses) did not have access to electricity, so they could not have any of the wonderful technology we enjoy, but that doesn’t mean God didn’t. Or to use your example, in QM there is in use QM Communications where paired electrons are used to communicate instantaneously across any distance, but God would have access to these laws because he is Omnipotent, thus using space and time laws more fully.

Okay, I was not disagreeing with Frindro that God exists outside time & space – indeed He created the whole time, space & whatever else there is continuum.

I don’t know about us not “having access” to all the laws of Creation. God gave us intellect and reason, so I’m sure we’ll keep discovering more and more but probably never all.

One thing I’ve always found interesting (though it’s far over my head). Scientists have found that the more “aesthetic” the math used to describe a theory, the more likely it is true, even if the data don’t initially favor it.

 

[sidbrown]

God is not unwillingly bound by any laws, since he is the Lawmaker. For example, God is not bound by time, since he exists outside of time and created time. Also, God is not bound by space, since he exists outside of space and created space.

What about the laws of logic. Would not God be bound by he laws of logic?
Or the laws of mathematics, say 1+1 = 2?

 

[didymus]

What about the laws of logic. Would not God be bound by he laws of logic?
Or the laws of mathematics, say 1+1 = 2?

Maybe it’s a mistake to speak about “laws” or I’ve been expressing myself badly.
It might be more accurate to say that God cannot violate His own nature. Having endowed His creation according to certain laws He does not violate them will-nilly (excepting miracles).

I assume that He could (and may) create universe with totally different laws where 1+1 does not equal 2. In fact, even in our own universe there are all kinds of logic systems and maths where 1+1 may be up for grabs

 

[Langdell]

God binds Himself to the laws of His own creation as a matter of His integrity which makes it possible for us to know Him thru His handiwork.

This is why real science only took hold in the Christian west – other cultures; China, India, Persia, Islam, all did “natural philosophy” but it was Christianity, integrating the Greek philosophical heritage that brought about modern science.
Islam failed to make the jump because Allah could not be bound by laws and if he felt like making the sun rise in the west or water not freeze at 32F he could.

I read on another blog (wish I could remember) a comment from a man who taught school in Egypt. When he posed a problem like “If you drop a weight from a 100 meter high tower how long till it hits the ground?” his students would freeze. They could do the math, but the only “correct” answer they could give was inshallah – “as God wills”.

I agree (and that’s a highly illuminating story).

.

 

[Langdell]

Maybe it’s a mistake to speak about “laws” or I’ve been expressing myself badly.
It might be more accurate to say that God cannot violate His own nature. Having endowed His creation according to certain laws He does not violate them will-nilly (excepting miracles).

I assume that He could (and may) create universe with totally different laws where 1+1 does not equal 2. In fact, even in our own universe there are all kinds of logic systems and maths where 1+1 may be up for grabs

I agree again. The “laws” of math and logic are more like the rules of golf than they are like physical laws. God could certainly change them, IMO.

.

 

[frindro]

I am in agreement with Didymus, in that God is above laws like mathematical laws, which he created, but that God does not betray his own nature. God also freely chooses to limit his actions, as he allows himself to be bound in covenants. My point was merely that God is not bound by any law that God does not wish to be bound by.

 

[sidbrown]

I agree again. The “laws” of math and logic are more like the rules of golf than they are like physical laws. God could certainly change them, IMO.

.

No. I don’t see how the law of non-contradiction in logic could be changed in any universe. It can’t be done.

 

[Langdell]

No. I don’t see how the law of non-contradiction in logic could be changed in any universe. It can’t be done.

Well, a lot of people agree with that. There is a contrary view, however, (to which I subscribe) that the truths of logic are definitional or linguistic truths, like those of math. The law of non-contradiction, for example, is a rule about what constitutes permissible use of language and permissible construction of arguments. IOW, it’s a rule that came to be accepted because it helps us simplify reality in our own thoughts and in communications with others. But the conventions exemplified by the law of non-contradiction do not limit what can exist in reality.

.

 

[zebbediahdaniel]

Wow. I am pleasantly surprised at the response…

What about the laws of logic. Would not God be bound by he laws of logic?
Or the laws of mathematics, say 1+1 = 2?

I suggest that not to the laws of logic. There are logical arguments that are sound but not true. On the other hand…

Maybe it’s a mistake to speak about “laws” or I’ve been expressing myself badly.
I don’t believe you mispoke…

It might be more accurate to say that God cannot violate His own nature. Having endowed His creation according to certain laws He does not violate them will-nilly (excepting miracles).

So much more refreshing a conversation than I have had with members of the southern baptist convention.

No. I don’t see how the law of non-contradiction in logic could be changed in any universe. It can’t be done.

True enough. The epitome of this would be that God can and cannot exist. I would suggest that part of God’s nature, a basic law is that contradictions cannot exist. An unstoppable force and an immovable object cannot both exist.

But the conventions exemplified by the law of non-contradiction do not limit what can exist in reality.

Sure, but are you saying God can violate the law of non-contradiction? What if God’s nature includes the fact that such cannot exist?

 

[zebbediahdaniel]

I think I may not be clear…referencing

I suggest that not to the laws of logic. There are logical arguments that are sound but not true. On the other hand…

Quote:
Originally Posted by didymus View Post
Maybe it’s a mistake to speak about “laws” or I’ve been expressing myself badly.

I don’t believe you mispoke…

By this I mean, perhaps Spinoza’s assertion God is limited only by the necessity of His existence is those limits are what we would call ‘natural laws’, or 'the Fullness of the Gospel"?

 

[sidbrown]

Well, a lot of people agree with that. There is a contrary view, however, (to which I subscribe) that the truths of logic are definitional or linguistic truths, like those of math. The law of non-contradiction, for example, is a rule about what constitutes permissible use of language and permissible construction of arguments. IOW, it’s a rule that came to be accepted because it helps us simplify reality in our own thoughts and in communications with others. But the conventions exemplified by the law of non-contradiction do not limit what can exist in reality.

.

However, according to Avicenna:“Anyone who denies the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until he admits that to be beaten is not the same as not to be beaten, and to be burned is not the same as not to be burned.”

 

[Bran_Stark]

There’s a superb C.S. Lewis quote on this. In The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, when Lucy has just uttered the spell to “make hidden things visible”, she sees the Great Lion appear.
*“Oh Aslan. It was kind of you to come.”
“I have been here all the time, but you have just made me visible.”
“But Aslan. Don’t make fun of me. As if anything I could do could make you visible.”
“It did. Do you think I wouldn’t obey my own rules?” *

I think this might be compared to the Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist - when the priest is able to “make Jesus appear” when he utters the “magic words” and the bread and wine are transformed into Christ’s body.

 

[Langdell]

Sure, but are you saying God can violate the law of non-contradiction? What if God’s nature includes the fact that such cannot exist?

What I have in mind is that, simply by posing the question to ourselves, we are setting up categories that must be mutually exclusive by definition, but those categories may not correspond to anything real.

For example, under the law of non-contradiction, the propositions (1) God exists, and (2) God does not exist, cannot both be true. That’s a very useful rule for purposes of reasoning. But it involves a simplification of reality that is true by definition. It requires us to define God, define what it means to exist, and define what negation is. Once you’ve defined those things, then of course (1) and (2) can’t both be true. It’s inescapable because that’s what we’ve decided the terms mean.

But God is not subject to the limitations of human language or human reasoning power. He does not need to simplify reality in order to understand it, nor does He need to reason to the truth. He knows the truth immediately, without any intermediate reasoning.

I agree that God can’t not exist. The law of non-contradiction is one way of expressing that truth. But that truth is not (in my view) governed by the law of non-contradiction.

.

 

[sidbrown]

What I have in mind is that, simply by posing the question to ourselves, we are setting up categories that must be mutually exclusive by definition, but those categories may not correspond to anything real.

For example, under the law of non-contradiction, the propositions (1) God exists, and (2) God does not exist, cannot both be true. That’s a very useful rule for purposes of reasoning. But it involves a simplification of reality that is true by definition. It requires us to define God, define what it means to exist, and define what negation is. Once you’ve defined those things, then of course (1) and (2) can’t both be true. It’s inescapable because that’s what we’ve decided the terms mean.

But God is not subject to the limitations of human language or human reasoning power. He does not need to simplify reality in order to understand it, nor does He need to reason to the truth. He knows the truth immediately, without any intermediate reasoning.

I agree that God can’t not exist. The law of non-contradiction is one way of expressing that truth. But that truth is not (in my view) governed by the law of non-contradiction.

.

It depends on how you define governed.

 

[Langdell]

It depends on how you define governed.

I was using “governed” in the sense of “controlled.” I.e., the truth that God cannot not exist is true not because the law of non-contradiction forces it to be so.

To give a different example, waves take certain shapes that match certain mathematical models. The mathematical models can serve as an expression of the wave shapes, but the models don’t cause waves to take those shapes. Waves would take those shapes whether the models existed or not.

.