Is there a way to prove that God is eternal and permanent?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BenSinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BenSinner

Guest
Is there a way to show that it would be impossible for God could be impermanent? What is the proof that he is eternal, permanent, and unchanging?
 
If God were mutable, then by definition, He wouldn’t be ‘God’. 😉
 
If you can accept God as Creator of all that is. I think the rest follows.
 
I would recommend that you check out the bottom of this webpage where the article quotes from the book entitled Five Proofs of the Existence of God by Edward Feser. It is an excellent book. The article quotes a portion of the book where Feser lays out the Aristotelian argument for the existence of God. I believe that it adequately addresses your concerns over proofs for God being eternal, permanent, and unchanging. I would have just provided you with the argument on here, but there is a character limit for posts and it is exceeded.

https://thesocraticcatholic.com/2017/09/22/the-aristotelian-argument-for-the-existence-of-god/

Regards,
tstor
 
To move means to change from a state of imperfection to a state of perfection, since there is no reason to move unless there is some need for something. But God is perfect, and there is no imperfection in Him. Therefore, it is impossible that God could be in the state of imperfection that movement implies. Therefore, he is immutable (unchanging).

The same reasoning shows that He is eternal (since to go from non-existence to existence is movement) and permanent (since to go from existence to non-existence is movement).
 
Gorgias said:
If God were mutable, then by definition, He wouldn’t be ‘God’.
Click to expand...
But the God of Genesis is mutable. An immutable God would have a different version of Genesis:
On the first day God said “let there be light,” and on the second day God said “let there be light,” and on the third day God said “let there be light,” and on the fourth day …
Click to expand...
An immutable God cannot change, and many of the things that the Christian God does involve change, like parting and then closing the Red Sea for Moses.

The God of the Bible changes and so is not immutable.

rossum
 
Not really.
Nothing changes in God, so to speak.

Your claim seems to be saying that action implies change.
But this is only if there is change in the potential to act.
But indeed, I believe it is said that God is wholly act, and not potential. Indeed, He “knows the end from the beginning”
 
Last edited:
YES.

SEE this STRING in THIS Forum and my multi-post reply to it

PJM [Patrick]

Catholic dogma on the ‘certainty of knowing God’ question
 
rossum said:
40.png
Gorgias:
If God were mutable, then by definition, He wouldn’t be ‘God’.
Click to expand...
But the God of Genesis is mutable. An immutable God would have a different version of Genesis:
On the first day God said “let there be light,” and on the second day God said “let there be light,” and on the third day God said “let there be light,” and on the fourth day …
Click to expand...
An immutable God cannot change, and many of the things that the Christian God does involve change, like parting and then closing the Red Sea for Moses.

The God of the Bible changes and so is not immutable.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, @rossum, I believe we’ve already had this discussion a little while back, and you seem to continue to be misconstruing what is said of God.

If God existed within creation, then your take would have merit: there would be change in God, and therefore, He couldn’t be ‘God’. However, God exists outside of creation (and therefore, outside of time), and as a result, there is no change in God. His will is eternally manifest (even if it is experienced by us, within the context of time, as occurring as if it were time-bound.

With respect to the creation account in Genesis 1, let me gently remind you of the literary genre of the narrative: it’s in the genre of the ‘epic poem.’ Therefore, there’s a rhythm and flow to the text, as well as repetition of words, phrases, and events. The account walks us through the extent of the act of creating (both creating the universe and then filling it with life) in a way that fits the form of poetry. I appreciate that, from the outside, it would be easier for you attempt to interpret it as if it were a scientific or historical account, but the Church does not require such an interpretation of that account.

All in all, the “God of the Bible” doesn’t change, although His people and their understanding of Him certainly do. God remains – “yesterday, today and tomorrow” – immutably, and therefore, there is not the set of implications that you attempt to assert. 😉
 
Kei said:
Nothing changes in God, so to speak.
Click to expand...
Then God did not speak the word in Genesis, because those words change. Then God did not part the sea for Moses because that was a change.

God’s actions are indeed impermanent: the Red Sea parting was temporary, not permanent. Since one single entity cannot be both permanent and impermanent, we must have two separate entities: God and Actions-of-God, the first being permanent, unchanging and so unable to act, while the second is impermanent, changing and able to act.

Now you have to address the question of the origin of the impermanent entity Actions-of-God. To start with, you might want to look at the Jewish Sefirot of the Gnostic system of Demiurges. The question is not a simple one.
Kei said:
Your claim seems to be saying that action implies change.

But this is only if there is change in the potential to act.
Click to expand...
Effective action does imply change, the change is in the effect. Potential is not actual. In order for potential to become actual there must be a change, a change from potential to actual. You cannot escape the presence of change by diverting into potential.

rossum
 
Gorgias said:
If God existed within creation, then your take would have merit: there would be change in God, and therefore, He couldn’t be ‘God’. However, God exists outside of creation (and therefore, outside of time), and as a result, there is no change in God.
Click to expand...
God acts within creation, as with the parting of the Red Sea. That act was not random and uncaused, it had a cause. What was that cause? Why was the cause (or possibly causes) only active during Moses’ lifetime and not during Abraham’s lifetime or Solomon’s lifetime?

There is a difference here between God and God’s actions. You need to be more specific about the connection between the two.

rossum
 
You mean with Sophia and their ilk? No thanks, I’ll stick with a much more Orthodox answer.

I am saying there is no potential in God. As in, He is all act.
I.e., to Him, the parting of the Red Sea already happened since the beginning.
It is not an act later or a change. It already was like that since the beginning.
It required no change.

Hope that helps.
 
Kei said:
I.e., to Him, the parting of the Red Sea already happened since the beginning.
Click to expand...
If we cannot agree on the definition of “change” then this discussion is useless. By definition “change” means that something at time T1 is different from something at T2. In this case, the sea is different at two times.

Your God is unchanging, so is the same at time T1 (during Abraham’s life) and at T2 (during Moses’ life). Hence we can deduce that your God is not a sufficient cause for the parting of the sea since the sea was not parted at T1 while God was present. God might be a necessary cause, but on His own He is not sufficient. There has to be some other necessary, and temporary, additional cause for the sea to part.

What was that temporary additional cause, and what caused it to come into existence?

rossum
 
It was the sea that changed, not God.
The act of parting the sea, was already done since the beginning at that specific, particular point in the time of this Universe.
Remember, God is timeless.
 
Last edited:
Kei said:
It was the sea that changed, not God.
Click to expand...
Did the sea change itself or was the change caused by something other than the sea? What does the Bible say about the cause of the sea parting?
Kei said:
The act of parting the sea, was already done since the beginning at that specific, particular point in the time of this Universe.
Click to expand...
That I will not accept. The sea was not parted in Abraham’s time, so it was not already parted before Moses. The cause of the parting was not operative when Abraham was alive. The cause was operative when Moses was alive. Hence, the cause was not permanent.

The effect is within time, not outside time. Hence you need a cause within time, not outside time.

rossum
 
But there’s no reason to deny this.
At the beginning of time, God knew the Israelites at a specific point in their history, would need the red sea parted, and that He Himself would cause the parting.
Since the beginning.
So, since the beginning, the cause of the parting is active, as it was God’s Will.
To illustrate my point, imagine a line.
This line is my creation.

______£
This line is also my creation. From the beginning of its being published as a comment on this website, it has had this unique feature about it that I myself personally (name removed by moderator)ut into it, £. The normal way the creation works is as just a line.
This comment did not change. It had that unique change from its maker since the beginning. This is not a sufficient analogy for multiple reasons but I believe it can serve as an illustration.
 
Kei said:
At the beginning of time, God knew the Israelites at a specific point in their history, would need the red sea parted, and that He Himself would cause the parting.
Click to expand...
I know that at some point in the future I will die. However, I am not currently dead, so my knowledge is not a sufficient cause of my death. There must be another, necessary, cause that is currently absent, but will be present when I die.

Similarly for the sea parting. God’s knowledge is not a sufficient cause. Some other necessary cause is also required for the action to take place.

rossum
 
How about, from the beginning of Creation it was made in such a way. Time exists for us, but time doesn’t exist to God.
Imagine that £ represents God’s actions in Creation, and that ___ represents Creation.

From the beginning all of Creation has been known, indeed, perhaps we should rather say has been done, experienced.
Including all the actions in human or natural history.
__£__£_£_£__£_£__£__£______£_£_£_£££_£_£__£_££
but this line has always existed forever, and has always been, all at once, even the £.

You may say, what, are you saying creation has always been?
The universe certainly had a beginning, but to God, who experiences all of everything at the same time, it has always been in a certain sense.
 
I know the answer to this question, but i’m not telling you. knowledge is power.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top