How to answer Buddha's question on how there can be a God who is the first-cause creator?

[fisherman_carl]

hinduwebsite.com/buddhism/buddhaongod.asp

It’s not very convincing. They basically believe that everything is in flux. This is like one of the ancient Greek philosophers who thought that everything was in a state of change. And then there was another ancient Greek philosopher (Permindes) who thought that nothing changes and change was actually an illusion. And then came Aristotle who successfully demonstrated that in order for there to be change at all there must be an unchanged changer. For anything to change it must have something actual that can be changed. You can’t just have change without something of permanence, some foundation for which change is possible. And you can’t have just permanence because that does not correspond to observed reality or reason. And that change must come from something else that has the ability to change it. If you trace back all the causes of these changes we must necessarily come to a first cause of change, an unchanged changer. Something that requires nothing from anything else, that is fully actualized in itself, and gives everything else both its actuality and potentiality.

 

[STT]

If “creator” is timeless, then creation is also timeless.

Why?

 

[rossum]

Why?

How can you have a creator if nothing has been created? If nothing has been created, then there is no creator.

The two are mutually conditioned: you cannot have one without the other.

If a creator exists for all time, then there is some created which also exists for all time. If the creator only exists for part of time, then the created only has to exist for that same part of time.

rossum

 

[STT]

How can you have a creator if nothing has been created? If nothing has been created, then there is no creator.

The two are mutually conditioned: you cannot have one without the other.

If a creator exists for all time, then there is some created which also exists for all time. If the creator only exists for part of time, then the created only has to exist for that same part of time.

rossum

I meant why creation must be timeless? We could have block universe though which is timeless.

 

[Randy_Carson]

The following is a question made by Buddha:

*"It is not convincing that the Absolute created us, because that which is Absolute, can’t be a cause. *

Why not?

This is just an assertion.

All things here arise from different causes.

 

[Randy_Carson]

How can you have a creator if nothing has been created? If nothing has been created, then there is no creator. The two are mutually conditioned: you cannot have one without the other.

Can the artist exist before the canvas receives the first brush stroke?

Can the composer exist before the first note of the symphony is written on the score?

:yup:

The potential for creating the art or the music exists before the art or music are actualized.

If a creator exists for all time, then there is some created which also exists for all time. If the creator only exists for part of time, then the created only has to exist for that same part of time.

Nope. First, we theists are talking about God who existed for all time before creation. Now, if He had not created, then He would still exist even though we would not. Because creation exists, it is reasonable to refer to this maximally great being as the Creator.

 

[STT]

It’s not very convincing. They basically believe that everything is in flux. This is like one of the ancient Greek philosophers who thought that everything was in a state of change. And then there was another ancient Greek philosopher (Permindes) who thought that nothing changes and change was actually an illusion.

Actually he is right in the case of the block universe and eternal God.

 

[STT]

Can the artist exist before the canvas receives the first brush stroke?

Can the composer exist before the first note of the symphony is written on the score?

:yup:

The potential for creating the art or the music exists before the art or music are actualized.

Nope. First, we theists are talking about God who existed for all time before creation. Now, if He had not created, then He would still exist even though we would not. Because creation exists, it is reasonable to refer to this maximally great being as the Creator.

Catholic God is not bounded to time so your response is not accurate.

 

[rossum]

I meant why creation must be timeless?

Creation, as described in the Bible, is not timeless. It happened at a specific point in time: “In the beginning…” Other actions by God, such as parting the Red Sea, also happened in time; those actions are not timeless.

We could have block universe though which is timeless.

I am not clear what you mean here.

rossum

 

[rossum]

Can the artist exist before the canvas receives the first brush stroke?

Can the composer exist before the first note of the symphony is written on the score?

But someone who has not painted a painting cannot correctly be called “painter”. Someone who has not written a note of music cannot correctly be called “composer”. Both the “painter” and “composer” designations are contingent. The person Pat Smith may exist, but is is false to call that person “painter” or “composer” prior to their actual painting or composing. Would it be correct to call the newborn Pat Smith “composer”?

God cannot be “creator of the universe” until after He has actually created the universe. Before then He was obviously not the creator of the universe, since there was no universe.

The potential for creating the art or the music exists before the art or music are actualized.

A potential painting is not a painting. A potential symphony is not a symphony. A potential million dollars will not buy me much in a shop.

Nope. First, we theists are talking about God who existed for all time before creation. Now, if He had not created, then He would still exist even though we would not.

If He had not created then He would still exist, but He would not be “Creator”. He would be something else.

Because creation exists, it is reasonable to refer to this maximally great being as the Creator.

No. It is reasonable to infer the existence of a powerful non-omnipotent being capable of creating one universe, but not necessarily of creating two universes. The question of whether we can infer a different non-omnipotent being capable of creating the first being, but not capable of creating a single universe remains open. Your logic incorporates a great many assumptions.

rossum

 

[Milestone]

Creation, as described in the Bible, is not timeless. It happened at a specific point in time: “In the beginning…”

rossum

We don’t interpret all of the Bible literally. The Bible isn’t a single book, but a collection of many books of different genres. Two different accounts of creation are in the book of Genesis, one presented after the other. What this would suggest is that not everything in these stories was meant to be interpreted as historical fact. We can determine what the stories mean and what truths they were trying to convey by appealing to the larger context of Scripture and Tradition.

 

[rossum]

We don’t interpret all of the Bible literally.

Both a literal and a metaphorical interpretation say that the created world had a beginning. If there was a beginning, then before that beginning there was no creator.

Are you saying that there was no beginning to the universe?

rossum

 

[Wesrock]

So, the created universe has lasted for all time? That is not what either the Bible or science say. All you are doing here is reinforcing my point that “creator” is contingent, and so not compatible with the Absolute.

If God is the creator for all time then either the created universe has also lasted for all time, or God was making a false claim in the distant past.

Both St. Thomas and yourself are right to bring up the question of the cause of God’s actions. How an unchanging being can act within time is indeed a big problem. We can imagine the dialogue:

Moses: “Lord! We are being chased by the Egyptians. Please part the sea in front of us to we may escape from them.”

God: “I’m sorry Moses. I am unchanging and I did not part the sea yesterday so I cannot part the sea today; that would mean that I would have to change and I can’t do that.”

The God described in the Bible changes.

rossum

Er… yes. Time has existed for all time. Time did not exist before time. There was a beginning. There was no before. Glad we covered that.

 

[Wesrock]

Both a literal and a metaphorical interpretation say that the created world had a beginning. If there was a beginning, then before that beginning there was no creator.

Are you saying that there was no beginning to the universe?

rossum

No, we’re saying it’s nonsense to speak of a before. Time itself came into existence at the beginning.

To quote Saint Augustine’s Confessions, Book XI (fifth century):

Lo, are they not full of their old leaven, who say to us, “What was God doing before He made heaven and earth? For if (say they) He were unemployed and wrought not, why does He not also henceforth, and for ever, as He did heretofore? For did any new motion arise in God, and a new will to make a creature, which He had never before made, how then would that be a true eternity, where there ariseth a will, which was not? For the will of God is not a creature, but before the creature; seeing nothing could be created, unless the will of the Creator had preceded. The will of God then belongeth to His very Substance. And if aught have arisen in God’s Substance, which before was not, that Substance cannot be truly called eternal. But if the will of God has been from eternity that the creature should be, why was not the creature also from eternity?”

Who speak thus, do not yet understand Thee, O Wisdom of God, Light of souls, understand not yet how the things be made, which by Thee, and in Thee are made: yet they strive to comprehend things eternal, whilst their heart fluttereth between the motions of things past and to come, and is still unstable. Who shall hold it, and fix it, that it be settled awhile, and awhile catch the glory of that everfixed Eternity, and compare it with the times which are never fixed, and see that it cannot be compared; and that a long time cannot become long, but out of many motions passing by, which cannot be prolonged altogether; but that in the Eternal nothing passeth, but the whole is present; whereas no time is all at once present: and that all time past, is driven on by time to come, and all to come followeth upon the past; and all past and to come, is created, and flows out of that which is ever present? Who shall hold the heart of man, that it may stand still, and see how eternity ever still-standing, neither past nor to come, uttereth the times past and to come? Can my hand do this, or the hand of my mouth by speech bring about a thing so great?

…

But if any excursive brain rove over the images of forepassed times, and wonder that Thou the God Almighty and All-creating and All-supporting, Maker of heaven and earth, didst for innumerable ages forbear from so great a work, before Thou wouldest make it; let him awake and consider, that he wonders at false conceits. For whence could innumerable ages pass by, which Thou madest not, Thou the Author and Creator of all ages? or what times should there be, which were not made by Thee? or how should they pass by, if they never were? Seeing then Thou art the Creator of all times, if any time was before Thou madest heaven and earth, why say they that Thou didst forego working? For that very time didst Thou make, nor could times pass by, before Thou madest those times. But if before heaven and earth there was no time, why is it demanded, what Thou then didst? For there was no “then,” when there was no time.

Nor dost Thou by time, precede time: else shouldest Thou not precede all times. But Thou precedest all things past, by the sublimity of an ever-present eternity; and surpassest all future because they are future, and when they come, they shall be past; but Thou art the Same, and Thy years fail not. Thy years neither come nor go; whereas ours both come and go, that they all may come. Thy years stand together, because they do stand; nor are departing thrust out by coming years, for they pass not away; but ours shall all be, when they shall no more be. Thy years are one day; and Thy day is not daily, but To-day, seeing Thy To-day gives not place unto to-morrow, for neither doth it replace yesterday. Thy To-day, is Eternity; therefore didst Thou beget The Coeternal, to whom Thou saidst, This day have I begotten Thee. Thou hast made all things; and before all times Thou art: neither in any time was time not.

At no time then hadst Thou not made any thing, because time itself Thou madest. And no times are coeternal with Thee, because Thou abidest; but if they abode, they should not be times. For what is time? Who can readily and briefly explain this? Who can even in thought comprehend it, so as to utter a word about it? But what in discourse do we mention more familiarly and knowingly, than time? And, we understand, when we speak of it; we understand also, when we hear it spoken of by another. What then is time? If no one asks me, I know: if I wish to explain it to one that asketh, I know not: yet I say boldly that I know, that if nothing passed away, time past were not; and if nothing were coming, a time to come were not; and if nothing were, time present were not. Those two times then, past and to come, how are they, seeing the past now is not, and that to come is not yet? But the present, should it always be present, and never pass into time past, verily it should not be time, but eternity. If time present (if it is to be time) only cometh into existence, because it passeth into time past, how can we say that either this is, whose cause of being is, that it shall not be; so, namely, that we cannot truly say that time is, but because it is tending not to be?

 

[rossum]

Er… yes. Time has existed for all time. Time did not exist before time. There was a beginning. There was no before. Glad we covered that.

Then time was not created: “There was no time when time did not exist.” Time is eternal, and that which is eternal cannot be created.

rossum

 

[rossum]

No, we’we saying it’s nonsense to speak of a before. Time itself came into existence at the beginning.

The Einsteinian universe is a four dimensional manifold: three dimensions of space and one dimension of time. If that model is correct, then there was no time when the universe (the 4-D space-time manifold) did not exist – it has existed for all time. Hence the universe is eternal and hence uncreated. Therefore God cannot have been the creator of the universe, though He may have created other things.

rossum

 

[Wesrock]

Then time was not created: “There was no time when time did not exist.” Time is eternal, and that which is eternal cannot be created.

rossum

There were no humans when humans didn’t exist. That does not mean humans are eternal.

 

[Wesrock]

The Einsteinian universe is a four dimensional manifold: three dimensions of space and one dimension of time. If that model is correct, then there was no time when the universe (the 4-D space-time manifold) did not exist – it has existed for all time. Hence the universe is eternal and hence uncreated. Therefore God cannot have been the creator of the universe, though He may have created other things.

rossum

And the best model of this four dimensional manifold is that it is expanding, but at one time was a singularity with no dimensions at all.

 

[STT]

Creation, as described in the Bible, is not timeless. It happened at a specific point in time: “In the beginning…” Other actions by God, such as parting the Red Sea, also happened in time; those actions are not timeless.

I am not clear what you mean here.

rossum

Block universe is a kind of universe that any instant of it is created by one eternal act. There is no time in block universe but changing the perspective of conscious agent which causes motion.

 

[Milestone]

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines time as a nonspatial continuum that is measured in terms of events which succeed one another from past through present to future. Space and time exist in continuity as space-time. Time can’t exist apart from space, but space didn’t exist until after the Big Bang. That must mean time didn’t exist before the Big Bang because there was no “before” in the first place.