L
lmelahn
Guest
I made it myself. In a program called Inkscape, which is quite handy.
- Status
J
John_Martin
Guest
Aquinas uses this phrase to describe “knowing” - “The object known is in the knower”.
If I am thinking of a ball rolling along the ground, in my thoughts I can visualize a ball rolling in the grass. That thought may have begun by actually seeing a tennis ball rolling in front of my dog who was chasing it. It was a real object outside of me, but it is also an object to my thoughts.
With God, the whole of creation is an object within his knowing, similarly to the ball in the grass that is in my thoughts. He knows the whole of creation from beginning to eternity as a complete image.
Unlike my thought of the ball, which became an image in my thought because I saw it, with God, all creation started and is actualizing right now in order to be what God knows. In Genesis we see with individual things how God spoke and being was created (“Let there be light”), but it is actually more like one Word and all creation is. “Let there be What I Know”. Since he knew it in his understanding as a temporal, changing and contingent creation, then that is what there is, a temporal, changing, and contingent creation. Creation is under a single “command” to “be” in actual conformity with its form and various forms, a single eternal Word. And this is actualized in time for us, that we contingently actualize until we are complete in Him, and conformed to the image of His Son.
I would like to say this better, but this is what I have at the moment.
A
Aloysium
Guest
:twocents:
The way I conceptualize it. At the core of existence is a relationship with God. I exist because He creates me, now and for my entire life. Of course, I actively participate through my free will in my own creation, choosing whom I become in this voyage that is time.
I get what you mean but words are very difficult to find, especially tenses when speaking of eternity and the Divine. When you say “Since he knew it in his understanding . . .”, it’s a little more complicated because He is within and beyond time. The fact is that He knew through His being with us in time, but He knows in eternity. What we know, besides this right now, is either is frozen in the past or uncertain potential in the future. Everything would be newly “created”, as we experience this moment, for God.
Trying to clarify, I may have made it worse.
S
Servant19
Guest
.
In order for this question to be answered reasonably it is important to distinguish between an eternally created EMANATION from God and an ancient, everlasting MANIFESTATION of that emanation.
Does Catholic teaching elaborate on the difference between emanation and manifestation at all?
I can elaborate further but I would be interested to read Catholic teaching on this if anyone knows it…
.
In order for this question to be answered reasonably it is important to distinguish between an eternally created EMANATION from God and an ancient, everlasting MANIFESTATION of that emanation.
Does Catholic teaching elaborate on the difference between emanation and manifestation at all?
I can elaborate further but I would be interested to read Catholic teaching on this if anyone knows it…
.
J
John_Martin
Guest
Actually, I don’t believe it is necessary to consider this, since we are indeed “here”, and this question is not precisely “how are we here, mechanistically”, but “how long?”, and whether the “how long” can be said to match the “eternal-ness” of God, which it cannot if we are and have always been a “caused creation”..
In order for this question to be answered reasonably it is important to distinguish between an eternally created EMANATION from God and an ancient, everlasting MANIFESTATION of that emanation.
Does Catholic teaching elaborate on the difference between emanation and manifestation at all?
I can elaborate further but I would be interested to read Catholic teaching on this if anyone knows it…
.
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
I think these are teachings peculiar to the Ba ahai’ faith. But I would like it explained. But perhaps it should go on another thread unless it can be related to the O.P..
In order for this question to be answered reasonably it is important to distinguish between an eternally created EMANATION from God and an ancient, everlasting MANIFESTATION of that emanation.
Does Catholic teaching elaborate on the difference between emanation and manifestation at all?
I can elaborate further but I would be interested to read Catholic teaching on this if anyone knows it…
.
Linus2nd
S
Servant19
Guest
I’m not sure it is fully peculiar to the Baha’i Faith alone. There are components of emanation and manifestation found in all religions.
I will try and stick to Catholicism and we can explore it from there maybe?
This can all definitely be tied in to OP for sure. In order to start this exploration we must first explore if God is within creation in His entirety, or is there an Ultimate Reality which exists separate from His creation? Just as the the true reality of the painter is separate from his painting.
I think Catholicism acknowledges this separation in many ways.
We can study the following:
strobertbellarmine.net/wilhelm_scannell_09.html
Similarly, St. Gregory of Nyssa in his Sermons on the Beatitudes (Sermon 6) states:
So would it be reasonable to state that the essence of God is separated from creation, just as the painter is separate from his painting?
.
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
There are none in the Catholic faith.
As the link points out the Catholic Church teaches that God’s creation is entirely separate from his Essence, it is entirely other than himself and that even his creative act is outside of his Essence. At the same time the Catholic Church teaches that God is present to his creatures, by his Essence, most intimately, sustaining them in existence and guiding them to their proper ends - himself. ( It is interesting that you picked a Sedevaticatist site. No matter, the theology is correct. ).
O.K.
Yes. But there is no " emanation " or " manifestation " in any of the theology you have cited here. For the Catholic Church, God’s creation is no " emination, " nor a " manifestation " of his being or thought. His creation is from nothing, absolutely - even if his creation has existed forever. Even then they would be caused by him and would be from nothing. ( As an asside, the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus Christ is God, and no mere emanation, no mere manifestation. He is the Second Person of the Trinity, he is God. )
Linus2nd
S
Servant19
Guest
Fantastic, so we have a foundation by which we can always rely on to be truth
"God’s creation is entirely separate from His Essence"
What you have posted above is the dichotomy that all religions have struggled with for millennia. How exactly does God stay essentially separated from His creation (implying that He is the only Absolute Reality, a kind of monist view), yet has an expressible and intimate relationship with His human creation, (a theistic view) “present to His creatures” as you put it?
By the way, I’m not sure if it was intentional, but what you posted above, you contradicted yourself in some ways because you say that “God’s creation is entirely separate from His Essence”, and then you stated “God is present to his creatures, by his Essence…”
Would you mind sharing if this was a mistake, or if not, how is this dichotomy ironed out in Catholic teaching?
In Baha’i theology, it is clear then that as God in His Essence is entirely separate from His creation, there must be an eternal means by which He can be “present” and through whom the physical universe is created. That means is the Word of God, His Primal Will and First Emanation, which came about through an “essential movement of love” within His Hidden Essence.
If God is eternally loving within His Essence, then there has to be a means by which this eternal love can find expression. If there is an eternal Beloved, there has to be an eternal “lover of the Beloved”.
Baha’u’llah reveals:
If God is to remain “essentially” separate from His Creation, what is the Catholic view as to how this separation is resolved into a Creation, as we know of it?
.
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
I didn’t make a mistake. To understand it, you have to close your mind to Baha’i teaching for a moment.
Fantastic, so we have a foundation by which we can always rely on to be truth
"God’s creation is entirely separate from His Essence"
What you have posted above is the dichotomy that all religions have struggled with for millennia. How exactly does God stay essentially separated from His creation (implying that He is the only Absolute Reality, a kind of monist view), yet has an expressible and intimate relationship with His human creation, (a theistic view) “present to His creatures” as you put it?
By the way, I’m not sure if it was intentional, but what you posted above, you contradicted yourself in some ways because you say that “God’s creation is entirely separate from His Essence”, and then you stated “God is present to his creatures, by his Essence…”
Would you mind sharing if this was a mistake, or if not, how is this dichotomy ironed out in Catholic teaching?
For aeons only God existed. But his Divine Intellect and Will determined to create a universe, in time, out of nothing. So now two things exist, God and the universe. But since God created the universe in time and out of nothing, that means his Nature or Essence is in the sphere of Eternity while his creation is in the sphere of time. So they are absolutely separate. Further, we know ( from philosophy and from Divine Revelation ) that God created the universe out of nothing. So because the universe exists in time and was made out of nothing, it is absolutley other than God, who exists in the sphere of eternity.
Yet the Chruch teachs ( and philosophy teaches ) that God is most intimately ( by his Essence and Nature ) present to his creation, sustainin its existence and guiding it. Imagine a Mother carrying a child. She gave birth to the child, she sustains it, cares for it, guides it, carrys it. Yet they are entirely separate beings. Just so, God, by his Almighty power and Essence, is present to his creatures. He does not mingle his Essence with theirs, he carrys them, protects them, etc.
And since he created them out of nothing, they are not emanations or manifestations of himself. Although they can be thought of as the concrete images of the thought of them he has eternally held in the Divine Intellect. In this way they can be compared to the Pieta of a Michelangelo. The Pieta is a concrete image of the thought of the Pieta Michelangelo had in his mind. Yet, the two are entirely separate.
Now how God can create something out of nothing, out of no prior existence, is a mystery only kown to God. We do know that this act of creation is an act of his will. He willed it and it was done. And though God’s will is immaterial and spiritual, we can say that God " touches " his creation by his will, causing it to exist.
And Catholics ( and most Christians ) would say this " Word " is actually God, working through each of the Divine Persons. We attribute creation to all three of the Divine Persons, since each possesses the Divine Essence or Nature. And of course creation can be regarded as an act of love since love or charity does reside in the will. We do not call any of the Divine Persons an " emanation. " Each is a Person, known through their origins and relationship with eachother.
In Christian theology, the " Beloved " is the Divine Person of the Son, and the " lover " is two fold, the Father who begets the Son Eternally, and the Holy Spirit who is the Love between the Father and the Son. So in God there is an eternally communion of love between three Persons.
But how could Baha’y’llah " reveal " anything, he was a mere man. Only God can Reveal?
It sounds like a corruption of Catholic Scriptures. Yet it is incomplete. It should be pointed out that Islamic Scriptures are known to be a corruption of Catholic Scriptures obtaind through one of the heretical sects Muhammad encountered on his travels. Heresy was rampant in both the East and the West at the time and it has only gotten much worse since the 7th century - as you well know.
As I noted above, it is by an act of the Divine Will. And how this act results in a concrete creation is a mystery no man can ever know. And I would point out that the Baha’i theology does not explain it either. " Emanation " and " Manifestation " are only words and they don’t explain how either. It still remains a mystery.
Linus2nd
B
Bahman
Guest
No, an eternally created universe is not possible.
- God is in state of timeless hence he has only one eternal act
- This means that the act from time perspective is singular
- This act however should manifest itself in all diverse form as we experience
- This means that the eternal act must be uniform from time perspective
- (2) and (4) contradict each other
- Hence, no eternally created universe is possible
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
As I have pointed out to you before, just because God is eternal does not mean he cannot create a universe where time is experienced and do so eternally. In fact though, he created a universe that had an absolute beginning in time. But the latter cannot be demonstrated conclusively through reason, it can only be known through God’s Revelation.
The point is that whether the universe had a beginning or not, it still required the creative act of God. This is because the universe is composed of contingent beings which cannot cause their own existence. This situation holds whether or not the universe had a beginning - it is still a contingent universe!.
Linus2nd
B
Bahman
Guest
You liked lmelahn’s picture. Don’t you think that something is wrong with that picture considering my argument.
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
C
ChainBreaker
Guest
Aquinas never actually argues that the universe has no beginning, even though as far as he understood arguments against an infinite regress fail.
He argued that even if the universe did not have a beginning it would still be dependent on God for its existence which he emphasizes with the esse-essence distinction.
However, all time and space exists simultaneously/instantaneously with the first cause which in a sense means the universe is eternal with God despite having a beginning.
B
Bahman
Guest
Yes, all acts comes out of one act which is eternal one. This clearly show that this theory has a singularity/anomaly.
I
inocente
Guest
Did you mean that? Surely if for aeons only God existed then God existed in time and has an age. And if He determined to create a universe then He changed - for aeons He didn’t say let there be light until eventually He did.
Isn’t it more that if God is unchanging then He is outside of time and so has always and will always be saying let there be light?
S
Servant19
Guest
Hi there Linus,
I think this dialogue would progress if we were to contemplate how the Divine Essence (which is completely separate from Creation) can through an act of love bring creation into existence through the joining of the letters B and E?
This mediator between the Essence of God and Creation is termed the Logos, or Primal Will, First Mind or First Emanation, and is familiar to Judaism and Christianity.
Logos is the means by which the universe was created. In the Bahai Writings this is termed the Primal Will, or First Emanation. Logos was actually used as a term before Jesus to signify this “intermediary” between the transcendent Essence of God and creation. Heraclitus (who St. Justin called the first Christian) and the Stoics used this term well before Christ appeared.
(newadvent.org/cathen/09328a.htm )
In the New Advent link, it goes on to say:
In the New Testament, this Logos is both differentiated from God (is “with” GOD) and is equated with God (and “is” GOD). In the Baha’i Scripture, this is affirmed.
For the Essence of God cannot “manifest” into creation, like the waves of the sea manifest themselves in the ocean and partake in its nature, but rather the Essence of God “emanates” into its Primal Will, His Word, like the rays of the sun, and through that means, and that reality, all creation is then manifested, as active attributes of the Word.
So you see, all descriptions of God, historically recorded in the all the Holy Books, such as All-Knowing, Omnipotent, Omniscient, All-Loving, All-Wise (remember Wisdom in the OT?) are all actually descriptors of the Word, not of the Essence of God. God is far far far far removed from such human language. According to the Baha’i Writings, were any human to say that the “Essence of God is…(such and such)” they are showing their human ignorance, for God is automatically none of those things, since a description implies comprehension, and His Essence is beyond human comprehension.
A full understanding of this concept of Logos will enable us to determine the eternal or non-eternal nature of the universe…
.
S
Servant19
Guest
Maybe not this one, but there is a tradition in Islam which is affirmed in the Bahai Writings:
.
B
Bahman
Guest
Are you making an argument?
- Status