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.
There was an initial creation, a beginning, but all creation is present now for God who is eternal, outside time. He brings it all into existence in every moment. For us in time who view it as a linear progression, we speak of it as a sustenance but within eternity, creation is a brilliant forthcoming from the one central Font that is God, the Father from whom all goodness comes, the Son through whom it is created and the Holy Spirit, by whom we are united in love.
 
Jaaanosik said:
The Trinity is a mystery.
God does not change but He moves.
To say that God does not move is not biblical.

“The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and** the Spirit of God was moving **over the surface of the waters.”

I’ll leave it with you. “Let it bake.” 🙂
Click to expand...
It’s baked:) The metaphysics of which I state is implicit in the Bible. And one would have to understand metaphysics to apply it. St. Paul states that one can know of God’s existence, and power by contemplating His creation. Those of simple faith do not do a lot if any, of third degree of objective abstract thinking. But theologians and metaphysicians like St. Thomas Aquinas have penetrated some of the truths of our Faith to enlighten, defend, and explain it. The Holy Spirit guides, and sanctifies the Church. The Church defends it’s faithful from heresy and uses reason, and faith to do it. St.Aquinas has synthesized reason with faith by the use of scholastic metaphysics, and it is contained in some doctrine such as the mystery of the Transubstantiation. There is no conflict with the words of the Bible and objective metaphysics, God is the author of all truth, from reason and also from Faith. How else would people know, except to communicate in the language they know, not the language they do not know. That is why God gave us His Church to guide us, and to interpret the Bible for us. If left to us, you know what would happen, for each person would have his own interpretation, and as a consequence we have many beliefs and churches. Is God so divided?
 
Jaaanosik said:
The Trinity is a mystery.
God does not change but He moves.
To say that God does not move is not biblical.
Click to expand...
God does not change: True
but He moves: false, God moves others, not Himself

because if He moves, He changes. The only logical why to understand it is to call Him “The Unmoved Mover.” He moves everything, but does not move Himself. Movement always leads to completeness, to being, to perfection. God is all of these things, He is Pure Being, Absolute Perfection He is Pure Act, not Potency and Act, He is one with His Attributes. Mis-applying motion to God in the metaphysical understanding. There is no need for movement in God.
 
Tomdstone said:
Is this a limitation on the power of God who is omnipotent?
Click to expand...
No, God can not contradict Himself, He can not create another god, to subsist without a cause is God. Everything created has a cause, and I repeat (as usual) if it has a cause, then existence was given to it, and maitained, sustained because it can not subsist by itself.
 
Tomdstone said:
Why does an atom need to be continually held in existence by God?

The act of being of an atom or any creature is not the act of being or the act of existing itself. It is a created participation in God’s act of being who is the act of being itself. The very essence or nature of God is to be. There is no creature who’s nature it is to be, this is proper to God alone. The following illustration may help.
Air of itself does not have the nature of light. Air is made luminous by participation in the light from the sun, the source and principle of light. As long as the sun is present, the air participates in the nature of light from the sun. When the sun sets, the air becomes darksome. In the same way, the act of being of creatures is not their essence or nature. Creatures participate in the act of being or the act of existing through God who is the cause of their being. If God were to withdraw his action or influence upon creatures they would return to nothingness in an instant just as when the sun is not present, the air is darksome and no longer participates in the nature or form of light.
Can God create something physical that that continues to exist without sustenance?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
40.png
ynotzap:
Everything created has a cause, and I repeat (as usual) if it has a cause, then existence was given to it, and maitained, sustained because it can not subsist by itself.
Click to expand...
What is the evidence for or justification that something, once it has been created, needs something outside itself to sustain it and maintain its existence?
 
ynotzap said:
God does not change: True
but He moves: false, God moves others, not Himself

because if He moves, He changes. The only logical why to understand it is to call Him “The Unmoved Mover.” He moves everything, but does not move Himself. Movement always leads to completeness, to being, to perfection. God is all of these things, He is Pure Being, Absolute Perfection He is Pure Act, not Potency and Act, He is one with His Attributes. Mis-applying motion to God in the metaphysical understanding. There is no need for movement in God.
Click to expand...
All this metaphysical stuff.
Can it explain how God creates spacetime?
How would you connect metaphysics to physics?

There is a negative charge, God’s creation, there is a positive charge, God’s creation. There is an attraction between them. That’s the truth. Can the metaphysics help to understand how it’s done?

God is God. What good comes from saying He is Pure Act.
 
Jaaanosik said:
All this metaphysical stuff.
Can it explain how God creates spacetime?
How would you connect metaphysics to physics?

There is a negative charge, God’s creation, there is a positive charge, God’s creation. There is an attraction between them. That’s the truth. Can the metaphysics help to understand how it’s done?

God is God. What good comes from saying He is Pure Act.
Click to expand...
Pure act because God is the first mover. See St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Part I, Question 2. The existence of God, Article 3. Whether God exists?

I answer that, The existence of God can be proved in five ways.

The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm#article3
 
Vico said:
It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion.
Click to expand...
The problem here is that motion is relative to the frame of reference.What is in motion in one frame, may not be in another frame.
 
Tomdstone said:
The problem here is that motion is relative to the frame of reference.What is in motion in one frame, may not be in another frame.
Click to expand...
It is an example to give the idea, however some things are not physical (angles for example) and also have a first cause.
 
Richca said:
The act of being of an atom or any creature is not the act of being or the act of existing itself. It is a created participation in God’s act of being who is the act of being itself. The very essence or nature of God is to be. There is no creature who’s nature it is to be, this is proper to God alone. The following illustration may help.
Air of itself does not have the nature of light. Air is made luminous by participation in the light from the sun, the source and principle of light. As long as the sun is present, the air participates in the nature of light from the sun. When the sun sets, the air becomes darksome. In the same way, the act of being of creatures is not their essence or nature. Creatures participate in the act of being or the act of existing through God who is the cause of their being. If God were to withdraw his action or influence upon creatures they would return to nothingness in an instant just as when the sun is not present, the air is darksome and no longer participates in the nature or form of light.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Vico said:
Pure act because God is the first mover. See St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Part I, Question 2. The existence of God, Article 3. Whether God exists?

I answer that, The existence of God can be proved in five ways.

The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm#article3
Click to expand...
How this helps in the explanation of the way how God is the first mover. How does He do it?
Is there a motion in God or not? Are there creations in God that can move in Him or not? How does it work?
 
Jaaanosik said:
How this helps in the explanation of the way how God is the first mover. How does He do it?
Is there a motion in God or not? Are there creations in God that can move in Him or not? How does it work?
Click to expand...
Mover means cause. Creations do not move God. Creation is not contained in God (Christianity is not pantheism nor panentheism nor emanationism.)

Creatures are secondary causes, because their efficiency is always dependent and derived. God the First Cause is an ever active cooperator but is transcendent.
 
Vico said:
Mover means cause. Creations do not move God. **Creation is not contained in God **(Christianity is not pantheism nor panentheism nor emanationism.)

Creatures are secondary causes, because their efficiency is always dependent and derived. God the First Cause is an ever active cooperator but is transcendent.
Click to expand...
So you do not trust the St. Paul’s testimony: “For in him we live, and move, and have our being;”
 
Vico said:
Mover means cause. Creations do not move God. Creation is not contained in God (Christianity is not pantheism nor panentheism nor emanationism.)

Creatures are secondary causes, because their efficiency is always dependent and derived. God the First Cause is an ever active cooperator but is transcendent.
Click to expand...
Vico,
Could you tell me what you think panentheism means and why it is not Christianity?
Yppop
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top