How does the act of creation not imply a change in God?

[AtraMors]

God is said to be pure actuality, absolutely simple and unchangeable as in there is no movement from potentiality to actuality in him. However how can this be the case when we look at God before and after creation took place? Before creation God is not keeping the creation in existence whereas after creation he is, this implies that there was a potentiality in God before said act that was actualized at the moment of creation meaning a change ocurred in God then.

If there was no such potentiality then how could God even create in the first place? Seems like there would either be no creation or creation is eternal like God as Greeks like Aristotle believed.

 

[LilyM]

God is said to be pure actuality, absolutely simple and unchangeable as in there is no movement from potentiality to actuality in him. However how can this be the case when we look at God before and after creation took place? Before creation God is not keeping the creation in existence whereas after creation he is, this implies that there was a potentiality in God before said act that was actualized at the moment of creation meaning a change ocurred in God then.

If there was no such potentiality then how could God even create in the first place? Seems like there would either be no creation or creation is eternal like God as Greeks like Aristotle believed.

God does not exist “before” or “after” creation. He exists simultaneously in all possible points in time, or more accurately is outside of time itself. Time being a created construct.

I picture it as being a bit like an astronaut, from space, looking at Earth and seeing, say, the whole continent of Africa and all the people on it at once.

 

[AtraMors]

God does not exist “before” or “after” creation. He exists simultaneously in all possible points in time, or more accurately is outside of time itself. Time being a created construct.

I picture it as being a bit like an astronaut, from space, looking at Earth and seeing, say, the whole continent of Africa and all the people on it at once.

Yeah I know God exists outside of time but creation came into being or was created a fixed number of years ago and is not eternal so there was a state of affairs where God had not created and another where he created. It is to the transition between both states that my question is reffering to.

 

[Vico]

LilyM:

God does not exist “before” or “after” creation. He exists simultaneously in all possible points in time, or more accurately is outside of time itself. Time being a created construct.

I picture it as being a bit like an astronaut, from space, looking at Earth and seeing, say, the whole continent of Africa and all the people on it at once.

Yeah I know God exists outside of time but creation came into being or was created a fixed number of years ago and is not eternal so there was a state of affairs where God had not created and another where he created. It is to the transition between both states that my question is reffering to.

Until the clock is running there is no time. God is not a creature so it not subject to what He creates, which includes time.

 

[Wesrock]

There was no time before creation. It is not as if God sat around doing nothing for infinite time and then decided to create. There was no before his eternal act.

 

[AtraMors]

Vico
Until the clock is running there is no time. God is not a creature so it not subject to what He creates, which includes time.

[/QUOTE]

There was no time before creation. It is not as if God sat around doing nothing for infinite time and then decided to create. There was no before his eternal act.

Time isn’t really the main point here but rather: how a being who is pure actuality and absolutely simple and unchangeable can remain so between two states of affairs: no creation and creation. Saying that God is not subject to time seems to beg the question because time is the measure of change and whether or not God changed due to the act of creation is what is under consideration.

To put it in different terms: how was it not the case that a potentiality was actualized in God in the act of creation?

 

[Wesrock]

Vico
Until the clock is running there is no time. God is not a creature so it not subject to what He creates, which includes time.

There was no time before creation. It is not as if God sat around doing nothing for infinite time and then decided to create. There was no before his eternal act.

Time isn’t really the main point here but rather: how a being who is pure actuality and absolutely simple and unchangeable can remain so between two states of affairs: no creation and creation. Saying that God is not subject to time seems to beg the question because time is the measure of change and whether or not God changed due to the act of creation is what is under consideration.

To put it in different terms: how was it not the case that a potentiality was actualized in God in the act of creation?

God never went from not creating to creating. And the only passive potencies reduced to act in God’s act of creation was on the side of creatures.
[/QUOTE]

 

[irenaeuslyons]

Eternity is a state. There is no time. Time is just a way to measure change within the created order.

 

[JerryZ]

And how can we ascertain that “our” creation is the only one?
In the Bible it is revealed that “this” creation will end and a new one will replace it. But as you pointed out GOD does not change. HE sustains every thing, this creation now the next then. We simply do not have enough data to judge GOD. We can only go so far from our feeble intellect, logic and Philosophy.

 

[LilyM]

Vico
Until the clock is running there is no time. God is not a creature so it not subject to what He creates, which includes time.

There was no time before creation. It is not as if God sat around doing nothing for infinite time and then decided to create. There was no before his eternal act.

Time isn’t really the main point here but rather: how a being who is pure actuality and absolutely simple and unchangeable can remain so between two states of affairs: no creation and creation. Saying that God is not subject to time seems to beg the question because time is the measure of change and whether or not God changed due to the act of creation is what is under consideration.

To put it in different terms: how was it not the case that a potentiality was actualized in God in the act of creation?

It’s as if I were to say I went from not being female to being female when I hit puberty or had a child or something. I was always female, not merely in potentiality but in actuality. My femaleness does not depend on what I do (or indeed whether I ever do any typicially “feminine” things).
[/QUOTE]

 

[Vico]

Vico
Until the clock is running there is no time. God is not a creature so it not subject to what He creates, which includes time.

There was no time before creation. It is not as if God sat around doing nothing for infinite time and then decided to create. There was no before his eternal act.

Time isn’t really the main point here but rather: how a being who is pure actuality and absolutely simple and unchangeable can remain so between two states of affairs: no creation and creation. Saying that God is not subject to time seems to beg the question because time is the measure of change and whether or not God changed due to the act of creation is what is under consideration.

To put it in different terms: how was it not the case that a potentiality was actualized in God in the act of creation?

The act of creation is not done at a time, since there is no time yet.
[/QUOTE]

 

[AlNg]

The act of creation is not done at a time, since there is no time yet.

But the act of coming down from heaven and being made man was done in time about 2000 years ago?

 

[po18guy]

God was love in utter simplicity before creation.
He was love in utter simplicity after creation.

The physical realm was created, but God was not changed. If you have not already, look up “immutable”

 

[Vico]

Vico:

The act of creation is not done at a time, since there is no time yet.

But the act of coming down from heaven and being made man was done in time about 2000 years ago?

There is no change in God that occurs in the assumption of a human nature.

 

[AlNg]

There is no change in God that occurs in the assumption of a human nature.

But was it not done in time 2000 years ago. In the year 500 B.C., God did not have a human nature? Whereas 500 or so years later, God became man?

 

[Vico]

Vico:

There is no change in God that occurs in the assumption of a human nature.

But was it not done in time 2000 years ago.

What, the incarnation? The person of the Only Begotten Son and Word of God existed before all time, is the one that incarnated.

 

[AlNg]

The person of the Only Begotten Son and Word of God existed before all time is the one that incarnated.

True. But God did not become man until 2000 years ago. Before that God did not have a human body, is that correct?

 

[TK421]

God is said to be pure actuality, absolutely simple and unchangeable as in there is no movement from potentiality to actuality in him. However how can this be the case when we look at God before and after creation took place? Before creation God is not keeping the creation in existence whereas after creation he is, this implies that there was a potentiality in God before said act that was actualized at the moment of creation meaning a change ocurred in God then.

If there was no such potentiality then how could God even create in the first place? Seems like there would either be no creation or creation is eternal like God as Greeks like Aristotle believed.

Creation was realized by God from eternity to eternity.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

The person of the Only Begotten Son and Word of God existed before all time is the one that incarnated.

True. But God did not become man until 2000 years ago. Before that God did not have a human body, is that correct?

The human nature of Christ did not begin until the incarnation, though it existed in God’s eternal plan and was described in prophecy, e.g, Isaiah 52:13-53:12

 

[AlNg]

The human nature of Christ did not begin until the incarnation

The question of the OP concerns a change.
In the year 500 BC God did not have a human nature.
Five hundred years later, God became man and did have a human nature.
Is that not a change?