How does God create "the act of existing" out of nothing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Linux
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I reject the implied assumption you made when inserting the word “before”.

I generally accept the catholic dogma concerning God. However, consider that God (as defined) is unchanging. There is no before or after. The statement “I AM” is literal…
I didn’t mean God. You said, when referring to Hitchens that he "will exist again at some point " or at least as an alternative you offered

If he will exist again, in that existence would it be possible for him to become acutely aware he existed previously?
I guess it’s a question of consciousness?
 
Nice try. If one can’t counter a point, then throw out a book title (as if that proves something, I doubt you’ve even read it or correctly understood it) or just dismiss the premise using some pejorative comment. Or do both. At least you didn’t call me or my mother a name. That’s something.

Numbers and science don’t lie. They are what they are. They aren’t here to impress you. Numbers and facts merely exist. You can accept them. You can disprove them if they are wrong. Or, you can persist in a self imposed ignorance. I really don’t care either way.

I am in search of God’s truth. I will not be distracted by someone’s belief that the earth is flat and is the center of the universe.
It is not me speaking, it is the Church. " 293 Scripture and Tradition never cease to teach and celebrate this fundamental truth: "The world was made for the glory of God."134 St. Bonaventure explains that God created all things “not to increase his glory, but to show it forth and to communicate it”,135 for God has no other reason for creating than his love and goodness: "Creatures came into existence when the key of love opened his hand."136 The First Vatican Council explains:

This one, true God, of his own goodness and “almighty power”, not for increasing his own beatitude, nor for attaining his perfection, but in order to manifest this perfection through the benefits which he bestows on creatures, with absolute freedom of counsel "and from the beginning of time, made out of nothing both orders of creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal. . ."137 ( Quoted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church )

This is Defined Dogma. Catholics in good standing are required to believe what the Church teaches.

Whatever science is saying or is implying. Nothing is being created. Creation has taken place, it was an act of God, not of nature. If there is any truth in what you say science implies, in some manner these particles or waves are the products of prior existing matter of some sort, they are not examples of creation.

Linus2nd
 
You have made a statement. Congratulations. I do believe that that is what you assume.
I notice you list you religious affiliation as Catholic. I assumed you knew what that meant. Perhaps I assumed too much.

This is a Catholic site, I do not appolgize for defending the Faith.

Linus2nd
 
If he will exist again, in that existence would it be possible for him to become acutely aware he existed previously?
I guess it’s a question of consciousness?
Again, I reject “previous”. You are fixated on time. I don’t necessarily believe it exists in the sense you do. To me it is a dimension. The questions are why does time have an arrow that only allows travel in one direction? Further, even in this universe, one cannot definitely say “X occurred before Y”.

I would tend to ask… if many world’s (MW) is correct, can the various world share information with one another. I tend to think no. But really, I don’t know. One of the theories today is that perhaps gravity leaks though all the branes. Maybe this could carry information as an example. I consider it unlikely. The universe seems to jealously conserve and limit the dissemination of information. I tend to think of the universe in terms of information theory. This is merely another way to perceive things though.

In an unbounded or eternal universe, no. The copy (actually an infinite number of copies) all exist simply as random copies. Somewhere there is an exact copy of you and somwhere is a you with half a mustache and pink polka dot skin and a trophy wife riding a unicycle backwards.

I would say that the various unbounded universes are unlikely. Our universe is unstable and probably subject to proton decay at some point. Likely it decays or becomes an empty deSitter space long before the gods of random chance create a new copy of you (or anyone else). I believe natural abhors an infinitely and they don’t exist. As a practical matter, these are possibilities but exceedingly (and I mean really really exceedingly) unlikely ones.

Keep in mind we haven’t even started on more bizarre theories. The holographic principle opens up even more bizarre thing. For example, you may think you exist in a 3 dimension + time world. But, it may only be 2d + time. The 3d is merely the holographic projection of the the information stored on a 2d boundary. There is solid evidence for this principle and it’s acceptance is growing. It is a mind blowing concept. Everything we think is real is much like candle light shadows cast on a cave wall.
 
This is a Catholic site, I do not appolgize for defending the Faith.
Neither did the crusaders.

I respect anyone one who presents a cogent debate. I’m not interested in wasting breath with anyone mindlessly quoting supposedly authoritative sources with no context. Believe it or not, I can read just as well as the next person and I read voraciously.

The most pleasant way I can put this is that if you think 2+2=3 because it says so in bible or somewhere in vatican city, then please just ignore me or allow me to ignore you.
 
Again, I reject “previous”. You are fixated on time. I don’t necessarily believe it exists in the sense you do. To me it is a dimension. The questions are why does time have an arrow that only allows travel in one direction? Further, even in this universe, one cannot definitely say “X occurred before Y”.

I would tend to ask… if many world’s (MW) is correct, can the various world share information with one another. I tend to think no. But really, I don’t know. One of the theories today is that perhaps gravity leaks though all the branes. Maybe this could carry information as an example. I consider it unlikely. The universe seems to jealously conserve and limit the dissemination of information. I tend to think of the universe in terms of information theory. This is merely another way to perceive things though.

In an unbounded or eternal universe, no. The copy (actually an infinite number of copies) all exist simply as random copies. Somewhere there is an exact copy of you and somwhere is a you with half a mustache and pink polka dot skin and a trophy wife riding a unicycle backwards.

I would say that the various unbounded universes are unlikely. Our universe is unstable and probably subject to proton decay at some point. Likely it decays or becomes an empty deSitter space long before the gods of random chance create a new copy of you (or anyone else). I believe natural abhors an infinitely and they don’t exist. As a practical matter, these are possibilities but exceedingly (and I mean really really exceedingly) unlikely ones.

Keep in mind we haven’t even started on more bizarre theories. The holographic principle opens up even more bizarre thing. For example, you may think you exist in a 3 dimension + time world. But, it may only be 2d + time. The 3d is merely the holographic projection of the the information stored on a 2d boundary. There is solid evidence for this principle and it’s acceptance is growing. It is a mind blowing concept. Everything we think is real is much like candle light shadows cast on a cave wall.
I read all that, & I think you said no
Not because he couldn’t, though
 
Whatever science is saying or is implying. Nothing is being created. Creation has taken place, it was an act of God, not of nature. If there is any truth in what you say science implies, in some manner these particles or waves are the products of prior existing matter of some sort, they are not examples of creation.
I don’t want to have this 2+2=3 debate with you.

Whether you believe it or not and regardless of what catholic dogma teaches, the earth is more or less spherical. It is not, contrary to popular belief, the center of the universe. 2+2=4.

The Casimir effect has been scientifically ovserved in numerous experiments since ~1958 and results have conformed remarkably well with projected values. The Coulomb force, magnetic field between magnetic dipoles, electromagnetic induction, strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force, photon emission during decay, vacuum polarization, Lamb shift and Hawking radiation are all examples of physical processes explained remarkably well using a virtual particle model.

I suggest that if you want to convince me, you should then explain to me how catholic dogma explains them? And, failing to explain them, I humbly suggest that maybe you consider that 2+2=4 as opposed to 3.
 
I thought I said “not very likely, in my humble opinion”.
I was asking for your opinion 🙂 and actually when you say you aren’t looking at time the same way I am, you’re right. And so to the specific nature of my question, your humble opinion is kinda no.

All good though, I appreciate the information you provide
 
Linusthe2nd:

(Simplifying a great bit) When the federal reserve wishes to increase the money supply, they issue a bond, sell it, and then banks lend money and the multipler effect creates money to grease our economy. I would say “money supply has been created out of nothing”.

At some point in the future, the government needs to pay that bond back. So, the banks pay back the government who buys back the bond. The money supply is now destroyed.

Now, surely you don’t claim my characterization here somehow runs afoul of catholic dogma, do you? And yet, when the universe does essentially the same thing with virtual particles, suddenly I am a heretic merely for observing the Casimir Effect!

This is the universe functioning as God ordained it. Who should I believe? God himself and the universe he created? Or people who once said the earth is flat and is the center of the universe?

Matthew - Chapter 15:
This people honours me only with lip-service, while their hearts are far from me.
Their reverence of me is worthless; the lessons they teach are nothing but human commandments.

On the judgement day, I shall stand before the Lord and not the before the pedophiles and self-serving hypocrites of Rome. Certainly, I would rather stand next to Galileo than you.
 
The only reason i brought up being an atheist is that, even without faith I can dismantle that argument. It was poorly worded.

I can’t tell you why I can’t see what you see. Against the rules =P
I believed most of my life however, so I can easily see your position. & I can argue it’s defense so long as God is assumed.

Does that make sense to you, in a way?
Yes. At some times we may be left to fly blind (sort of). At such a time, we can choose either to continue believing or to not believe, as in your case. There are reasons why we choose one way or the other. For me, the biggest negative with believing (I’m speaking in human terms) is that living the Christian life is stressful and difficult. Rules, guilt, obligations. Going with the flow is quite appealing. It has the instant appearance of freedom, but it is quite the opposite in my opinion and in my experience. I hope you reconsider.
 
Yes. At some times we may be left to fly blind (sort of). At such a time, we can choose either to continue believing or to not believe, as in your case. There are reasons why we choose one way or the other. For me, the biggest negative with believing (I’m speaking in human terms) is that living the Christian life is stressful and difficult. Rules, guilt, obligations. Going with the flow is quite appealing. It has the instant appearance of freedom, but it is quite the opposite in my opinion and in my experience. I hope you reconsider.
You’re just stating reasons I disliked theism, not deism. Or agnostic, which I was for years as well.

Atheist does not run in hand with challenge of authority.
Well, I’d wager some new young are rebelling against their parents, or the church, or both.
I never had this issue. I was essentially left to figure this out, with an ever so slight Catholic upbringing. Non-practicing, as my Mother used to put it
 
Going with the flow is quite appealing. It has the instant appearance of freedom, but it is quite the opposite in my opinion and in my experience.
Counter point… many people who claim to be practicing catholics are simply “going with the flow”. They follow mindless rules for the sake of rules. They honor authority for authority’s sake.

As a case in point, I point out the practice of not eating meat on Friday’s in Lent. Fish? Ok. Cow? Noope. Cow’s milk? Yup, fine. Frog? Yeah, why not. Chicken? … you’re going to hell. Chicken’s egg (essentially a small chicken embryo)? Open up the pearly gates. Go out to Red Lobster for an nice expensive meal cause all you got at home is hamburger? Sure, we ain’t got a problem with that.

My church honors this rule with an artery clogging breaded deep-fat fish fry and tops it off with unlimited quanties of beer for those so inclined. Explain that one to me! Real money maker tho.

And, hey, apparently the rules about going to heaven and hell change at international boundaries. Well, at least there are different rules for different countries. I wonder if that was God’s idea or man’s?

By the way, anyone ever read of an apostle having to pass up meat on Friday. Apparently, it wasn’t a sin then. It only became one later on. Probably about the time they thought up using indulges to generate revenue. Had to fund the crusades you know. Our brothers and sisters of the eastern church needed some sacking in Constantinople. And, some muslims needed killing (ok… yeah… I went overboard on the sarcasm… sorry about that)

Seriously though! The church wonders why it loses people? Boringly repetitive monotous droning on Sunday mornings. Mindless rules. Corruption (ask the vatican about their bank) and criminality (no need to elaborate here).

It’s seriously hard to look JohnMichaels right in the keyboard and say “Hey, you should come back to the church.” I think he should. I think he would fall over laughing if I told him so. Besides, I’m not certain I’m a better man than either him or Gunga Din.
 
It’s seriously hard to look JohnMichaels right in the keyboard and say “Hey, you should come back to the church.” I think he should. I think he would fall over laughing if I told him so. Besides, I’m not certain I’m a better man than either him or Gunga Din.
Funny you bring that up. I was just musing earlier…When they make you Pope, I’d have to seriously consider it!
 
…When they make you Pope, I’d have to seriously consider it!
I’ll take it as a complement but Francis seems to be more or less the perfect man… except I wish he were younger. I did question his comments that “only a political solution would work in Syria”. I think that’s more or less what Neville Chamberlain said before heading to Munich in '38.

I’ve no illusions about my failings. I’m on a journey. I think my greatest flaw is perhaps that I don’t gladly suffer fools along the way. Well, that and I like to wield sarcasm like a sharp pointed sword.
 
I’ll take it as a complement but Francis seems to be more or less the perfect man… except I wish he were younger.
I like that guy too so far based on what I’ve read. Not too shabby.
I’ve no illusions about my failings. I’m on a journey. I think my greatest flaw is perhaps that I don’t gladly suffer fools along the way. Well, that and I like to wield sarcasm like a sharp pointed sword.
What I meant to say, your idea of Theism is one I could get behind.

This is the universe functioning as God ordained it. Who should I believe? God himself and the universe he created? Or people who once said the earth is flat and is the center of the universe?
On the judgement day, I shall stand before the Lord and not the before the pedophiles and self-serving hypocrites of Rome.


CAN I GET AN AMEN!!! 👍
 
This is not a thread about Aquinas. And if you think he has demonstrated logically how God can create existence or power out of the negation of existence and power without contradicting the absolute distinction between existence and nothing, then feel free to demonstrate it logically. However, merely stating that God has infinite power does nothing in the way of demonstrating rationally that having such power means that God can create the act of existence out of nothing or that God can give creatures their own act of existence or power from nothing.
And if you can find a way to apply finite reasoning to the Infinite God, then please do so as well. What you are asking for, a logical demonstration of how God creates something from nothing, is clearly impossible for finite minds which after all, can produce only provable reasoning that applies to finite things. By your putting it the way you do, you are confining God to the physical, finite world where everything is finitely provable. If you want to think of God in finite terms, be my guest, but for me that makes Him no more than a larger version of you and me. I can make something out of something; am I therefore God? It would seem so.
 
Yes. At some times we may be left to fly blind (sort of). At such a time, we can choose either to continue believing or to not believe, as in your case. There are reasons why we choose one way or the other. For me, the biggest negative with believing (I’m speaking in human terms) is that living the Christian life is stressful and difficult. Rules, guilt, obligations. Going with the flow is quite appealing. It has the instant appearance of freedom, but it is quite the opposite in my opinion and in my experience. I hope you reconsider.
Why should he place faith in something you do not really believe in?
Why as someone to believe is the teachings of Church, if you are convinced to that it is O.K. whichever of those teachings you happen to disagree with? Faith means either everything or nothing.

Linus2nd
 
Counter point… many people who claim to be practicing catholics are simply “going with the flow”. They follow mindless rules for the sake of rules. They honor authority for authority’s sake.
What does that have to do with anything? Implicit in my remarks was that the individual was a practicing person of faith. Therefore, “going with the flow” meant putting aside the teachings of the faith, which I admit can be done without physically leaving the Church, and in fact,is a common occurrence. BTW, I personally honor the Church’s authority because I believe it comes from God, not for authority’s sake.
As a case in point, I point out the practice of not eating meat on Friday’s in Lent. Fish? Ok. Cow? Noope. Cow’s milk? Yup, fine. Frog? Yeah, why not. Chicken? … you’re going to hell. … Sure, we ain’t got a problem with that.
It’s a rule made by a Church that saw the need for at least a very small acknowledgement of the commemoration of Christ’s death on Friday by its members. It is not sinful in and of itself to eat meat on Friday. The sin is in disregarding the authority given to the Church by Christ who entrusted it with the role of shepherding souls from this life to the next. If a person cannot obey Christ’s Church in even a small matter of abstinence from meat on Friday, they are far from the discipleship required of a member of Christ’s body. As far as I am concerned, when a person disobeys the Church, they disobey Christ Himself, who said that whatever they would bind on earth would be bound in heaven.
My church honors this rule with an artery clogging breaded deep-fat fish fry and tops it off with unlimited quanties of beer for those so inclined. Explain that one to me! Real money maker tho.
A moderate amount of breaded deep-fat fried fish is not life threatening. A steady diet is another thing. We should try to live healthy lives, but that can become an idol like everything else. When we die and stand before the judgment seat, I doubt we will be asked why we didn’t take our vitamin pills. If you already have too much fat in your diet, I suggest you don’t partake of the Church fish fry. Otherwise, we all need fat in our diets and the human body is wonderfully designed to tolerate Friday fish frys. When I fry I use olive oil. My HDL/LDL balance is helped by this. I try not to overdo it, however. BTW, the money maker remark was uncalled for.
And, hey, apparently the rules about going to heaven and hell change at international boundaries. Well, at least there are different rules for different countries. I wonder if that was God’s idea or man’s?
That was man’s idea. If you didn’t know it, Christ gave his Apostles and their successors the right and duty to shepherd the faithful. He gave them the power to bind and loose on earth in His name. He said He would honor whatever they decided. This is the basis for Church authority over its members. I myself would not be a Catholic if I did not believe this.
By the way, anyone ever read of an apostle having to pass up meat on Friday. Apparently, it wasn’t a sin then. It only became one later on. Probably about the time they thought up using indulges to generate revenue. Had to fund the crusades you know. Our brothers and sisters of the eastern church needed some sacking in Constantinople. And, some muslims needed killing (ok… yeah… I went overboard on the sarcasm… sorry about that)
The selling of indulgences did not come from the central authority of the Church. It was a wrongful local practice espoused by certain prelates that many in the Church were fighting against and which Martin Luther rightly stood up against. Learn a little more about it and you will change your attitude about the Church.
Seriously though! The church wonders why it loses people? Boringly repetitive monotous droning on Sunday mornings. Mindless rules. Corruption (ask the vatican about their bank) and criminality (no need to elaborate here).
Try putting your heart into those “**oringly repetitive monotonous droning” and they will take on new meaning. They are full of meaning, and it is a fact that spiritual things do not sink into the depths of the human heart and soul unless they are repeated over and over again.

I’m sure you must feel the same about the Rosary, but I can assure you that the more you say it the more the Spirit is able to open up to you the profound mysteries of God’s incarnation, life and death. We are so rooted in the earth that spiritual things do not come easy, even for those who are dedicated to prayer. Being close to God is far more difficult than people realize. Even Christ Himself spent countless hours in prayer. Read Luke; he emphasizes how much Christ was given to prayer. For example, the day before Christ chose His Apostles he spent the entire night praying. Now, if Christ had to pray so much, and He did, just think how much we need to.**
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top