Out of nothing comes nothing, So how is creation exnihilo possible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ynotzap said:
IN my tiredness, knowing the forces and elements of the universe in general, no two things are exactly the same, (the principle of individuality) and this includes the speeds of two space craft. So using my capacity to know, if I exerted enough time and observation, and my observation was keen enough, I would notice a variable speed relationship between the two space crafts and reason that we were moving through space even if the difference of speeds was minute, as for friend, the observation would be much easier , they do it at NSA with telescopes and electronic equipment and yes there would be a passage from potency to act in both cases. Movement was detected.
Click to expand...
Whether or not there is a passage from potency to act is not an objective real fact. It is going to depend on the position of the observer. One observer will say yes, the other will say no.
 
Tomdstone said:
Whether or not there is a passage from potency to act is not an objective real fact. It is going to depend on the position of the observer. One observer will say yes, the other will say no.
Click to expand...
Why am I not surprised at your answer. You haven’t proved otherwise, so I can accept your position, we can not convince someone against his will, but at least you know where I stand and I know where you stand. I don’t think you conceded on one point, some dialogue, not even a possibility coming from you
 
ynotzap said:
Why am I not surprised at your answer. You haven’t proved otherwise, so I can accept your position, we can not convince someone against his will, but at least you know where I stand and I know where you stand. I don’t think you conceded on one point, some dialogue, not even a possibility coming from you
Click to expand...
In view of the fact that motion is relative to the observer, I just don’t see how passage from potency to act can be objectively true in the real world, and not something relative and subjective. Generally speaking whether something is observed to be in motion or observed to be stationary is going to depend on your frame of reference.
 
Tomdstone said:
In view of the fact that motion is relative to the observer, I just don’t see how passage from potency to act can be objectively true in the real world, and not something relative and subjective. Generally speaking whether something is observed to be in motion or observed to be stationary is going to depend on your frame of reference.
Click to expand...
It appears that you can not observe the obvious. You don’t even recognize the motion in your self, the potency to learn another language, french, to the actual learning (Potency and act) or you own growth, from infancy to adulthood, all involving change…as I said "self evident truths are not self evident to some, no proof needed, they shine by their own light. These are the facts.
 
Tomdstone said:
In view of the fact that motion is relative to the observer, I just don’t see how passage from potency to act can be objectively true in the real world, and not something relative and subjective. Generally speaking whether something is observed to be in motion or observed to be stationary is going to depend on your frame of reference.
Click to expand...
So you are suggesting the earth is truly standing still because it’s all relative, no change, no movement is happening. :rolleyes:
 
Aloysium said:
So you are suggesting the earth is truly standing still because it’s all relative, no change, no movement is happening. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
That is the notion of geocentrism. The problem with geocentrism is that it does not take into account the forces acting in the solar system.
 
ynotzap said:
It appears that you can not observe the obvious. You don’t even recognize the motion in your self, the potency to learn another language, french, to the actual learning (Potency and act) or you own growth, from infancy to adulthood, all involving change…as I said "self evident truths are not self evident to some, no proof needed, they shine by their own light. These are the facts.
Click to expand...
The truth always remains unchangeable, and all things created are relative to each other and only make sense when they have a permanent reference point, God The theory of relativity is like a ship in a storm with no anchor. A skeptic is one who denies the POSSIBILITY of any certain knowledge, there is not trust in some modern day scientists of ontological truth because they are skeptics in this regard
 
Aloysium said:
So you are suggesting the earth is truly standing still because it’s all relative, no change, no movement is happening. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

I just can’t believe it. Its too hilarious. In the end, it always comes down to a denial of change. And to make matters worse they make a straw-man out of the theory of relativity to prove their point. On behalf of all the atheists in the world somebody should make an apology to science.
 
ynotzap said:
The truth always remains unchangeable,…
Click to expand...
Not clear. For example, capital punishment and burning heretics at the stake was acceptable at one point in time, and in one culture, but now it is not.
At one point in time, slaves were told to obey their earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you. Now slaves are told that it is their right to be free men.
At one point in time, it was taught that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, at other times it was taught that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, now it is taught that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son.
At one point in time it was taught that the Blood was shed for All; at another point in time it was taught that the Blood was shed for Many.
Some teachings are relative to the time and the culture in which they are taught. Not all teachings remain unchangeable.
 
ynotzap said:
It appears that you can not observe the obvious. You don’t even recognize the motion in your self, the potency to learn another language, french, to the actual learning (Potency and act) or you own growth, from infancy to adulthood, all involving change…as I said "self evident truths are not self evident to some, no proof needed, they shine by their own light. These are the facts.
Click to expand...
Well we have passed from the topic of physical motion to the topic of learning a foreign language. What I said is that you will need to have a frame of reference to describe physical motion and that since there are no fixed frames of reference, the motion observed will be different depending on your frame of reference.
With reference to learning Mandarin Chinese, some people will be able to do so, others will not or at least have very great difficulty in learning it, both in speaking and in writing and reading it. How would you measure someone’s potency for learning and becoming fluent in reading, speaking and writing Mandarin Chinese?
 
Tomdstone said:
Not clear. For example, capital punishment and burning heretics at the stake was acceptable at one point in time, and in one culture, but now it is not.
At one point in time, slaves were told to obey their earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you. Now slaves are told that it is their right to be free men.
At one point in time, it was taught that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, at other times it was taught that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, now it is taught that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son.
At one point in time it was taught that the Blood was shed for All; at another point in time it was taught that the Blood was shed for Many.
Some teachings are relative to the time and the culture in which they are taught. Not all teachings remain unchangeable.
Click to expand...
The truth was always there, and because of change in man, it became known, the truth never changed, but man did in his knowledge. The Holy Spirit the Spirit of Truth is always with us, but we are not always with the Holy Spirit. As man had the capacity (potency) to advance in knowledge, it became POSSIBLE to know the truth. Even through the centuries some men did know a great deal of truth. It points to the fact that we are born ignorant, with the possibility to know the truth, but if men do not acknowledge that possibility there is no advancement. Advancement in science and technology will never satisfy that desire to know the ultimate truth.

The ultimate truth is God,and what He has revealed, and to know He exists, which is attainable by right human reasoning leads or predisposes one and brings him to the doorstep of Faith, and the rest depends on his response to grace. God gave man help along the way, His Church to guide them. Human reason will never result in Faith, it will show that faith is reasonable, but Faith is a divine gift of the Holy Spirit merited for us by Jesus Christ, true God, and true man. Has the Catholic Church ever changed one of her doctrines that were declared infallible? If you think so, name one. If you heard different, I don’t think you learned it from church teaching of doctrine, but from some opinions, and error in knowledge on the part of the informant, even catholics who do not wholly or mistakenly understand their faith .

There is always the possibility, and actuality of SCANDAL in the Church, Jesus Christ Himself predicted it, because human nature is weak, and whether you believe it or not, evil entities, called fallen angels, or devils do exist and conspire against man and God I personally know this for a fact from experience. Science will never give you these answers , at best they might treat it as hysteria, and why shouldn’t they, do they believe in God, or understand how to prove His existence, why should I and others expect different. Again I ask you, why are you on the philosophical forum, to learn, or to prove we are all wet, and out of contact with reality.
 
One thing that the Theory of Relativity points to is the importance of the observer, something which quantum physics confirms in slit experiments etc. The truth is not relative. The Uncertainty Principle speaks to the limits of our capacities, not the randomness of creation. A rational mind is required and the techniques employed are central to the understanding we garner of how the world works.

With respect to movement in space and time, what we may assume to be a constant is standing still; but there’s no such thing. The only constant is the speed of light which is the top rate of spatial change. All velocity in itself, not as we might otherwise mistakenly observe from a limited perspective, is relative to that. Everything in creation is always in movement, always in time.
 
Tomdstone said:
Well we have passed from the topic of physical motion to the topic of learning a foreign language. What I said is that you will need to have a frame of reference to describe physical motion and that since there are no fixed frames of reference, the motion observed will be different depending on your frame of reference.
With reference to learning Mandarin Chinese, some people will be able to do so, others will not or at least have very great difficulty in learning it, both in speaking and in writing and reading it. How would you measure someone’s potency for learning and becoming fluent in reading, speaking and writing Mandarin Chinese?
Click to expand...
There is something universally the same in all motion whether physical or mental. There has to be a capacity or potency for motion, and a filling or completing that capacity, called act. You will find this principle active in all motion that is the reference point. But your are skeptical to this universal truth. And you don’t realize why things do not move themselves but must be moved by another. These have been covered already, but as I stated, you are skeptical, and don’t really seek to know, because you are skeptical. Your mind is in empirical sciences, and I stated, they don’t transcend to a higher degree of abstraction, but remain in the mathematical degree of abstraction, measurement and try to solve truth by math formula, and theory. To answer your questions one has to do a lot of repeating that gets no where. You talk about measuring potency (mathematical abstraction at work) I’m talking about the nature of motion, metaphysical abstraction. You call it some outlandish elite knowledge, you manifested your thoughts about this clearly. You can measure someones potency for learning by the demonstration of his ability to learn a subject, if he can’t, then you know his limitations.
 
ynotzap said:
There is something universally the same in all motion whether physical or mental. There has to be a capacity or potency for motion, and a filling or completing that capacity, called act. You will find this principle active in all motion that is the reference point. But your are skeptical to this universal truth. And you don’t realize why things do not move themselves but must be moved by another. These have been covered already, but as I stated, you are skeptical, and don’t really seek to know, because you are skeptical. Your mind is in empirical sciences, and I stated, they don’t transcend to a higher degree of abstraction, but remain in the mathematical degree of abstraction, measurement and try to solve truth by math formula, and theory. To answer your questions one has to do a lot of repeating that gets no where. You talk about measuring potency (mathematical abstraction at work) I’m talking about the nature of motion, metaphysical abstraction. You call it some outlandish elite knowledge, you manifested your thoughts about this clearly. You can measure someones potency for learning by the demonstration of his ability to learn a subject, if he can’t, then you know his limitations.
Click to expand...
A lot of ad hominem comments here.
 
ynotzap said:
The truth was always there, and because of change in man, it became known, the truth never changed, but man did in his knowledge. The Holy Spirit the Spirit of Truth is always with us, but we are not always with the Holy Spirit. As man had the capacity (potency) to advance in knowledge, it became POSSIBLE to know the truth. Even through the centuries some men did know a great deal of truth. It points to the fact that we are born ignorant, with the possibility to know the truth, but if men do not acknowledge that possibility there is no advancement. Advancement in science and technology will never satisfy that desire to know the ultimate truth.

The ultimate truth is God,and what He has revealed, and to know He exists, which is attainable by right human reasoning leads or predisposes one and brings him to the doorstep of Faith, and the rest depends on his response to grace. God gave man help along the way, His Church to guide them. Human reason will never result in Faith, it will show that faith is reasonable, but Faith is a divine gift of the Holy Spirit merited for us by Jesus Christ, true God, and true man. Has the Catholic Church ever changed one of her doctrines that were declared infallible? If you think so, name one. If you heard different, I don’t think you learned it from church teaching of doctrine, but from some opinions, and error in knowledge on the part of the informant, even catholics who do not wholly or mistakenly understand their faith .

There is always the possibility, and actuality of SCANDAL in the Church, Jesus Christ Himself predicted it, because human nature is weak, and whether you believe it or not, evil entities, called fallen angels, or devils do exist and conspire against man and God I personally know this for a fact from experience. Science will never give you these answers , at best they might treat it as hysteria, and why shouldn’t they, do they believe in God, or understand how to prove His existence, why should I and others expect different. Again I ask you, why are you on the philosophical forum, to learn, or to prove we are all wet, and out of contact with reality.
Click to expand...
What is the truth with regard to burning someone alive at the stake for heresy. Is it morally right or morally wrong?
What is the truth with regard to torturing a suspected heretic to obtain a confession as in the Inquisition. Is it morally right or morally wrong?
 
Tomdstone said:
What is the truth with regard to burning someone alive at the stake for heresy. Is it morally right or morally wrong?
What is the truth with regard to torturing a suspected heretic to obtain a confession as in the Inquisition. Is it morally right or morally wrong?
Click to expand...
I think you already know the answers to your questions on morality, and I explained to you why these things happen, even quoted God, in Jesus Christ, but as usual, it doesn’t matter. So why continue answering your questions. I agree to disagree, and leave it at that.
 
ynotzap said:
I think you already know the answers to your questions on morality, and I explained to you why these things happen, even quoted God, in Jesus Christ, but as usual, it doesn’t matter. So why continue answering your questions. I agree to disagree, and leave it at that.
Click to expand...
I think he believes in objective moral truth
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top