Why God (the creator) should be pure actual (changeless)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter STT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You don’t believe humans are contingent beings with non-actualized potential?
I only believe that we are not contingent. We of course have potentialities.
Forgetting sustainer - how about a creator?
I have problem with the act of creation also. I have an argument against that too: Time is the fundamental variable of any dynamical theory therefore it cannot be the emergent property of the same theory. This means that there exist not a dynamical theory with time as an emergent property. Therefore the act of creation is impossible.
 
From mans perspective and comprehensive abilities it would seem that creation is change. Our reference frame is from inside creation. From Gods perspective creation just is. Because time is a factor within creation and change from our perspective but not Gods one cant say God existed and creation did not at any one point. This would take a measurement of time span between the two things. You can’t measure Gods age in the way man can understand using time since God is not subject to it. You cant meaningfully distance Gods existence from creations existence with a measurement of time since there is no reference frame for time to exist in outside creation. You cannot age creation externally since times reference frame only applies to creation internally. God created and yet didn’t change because change implies time yet time applies only to creation internally. The best we can do I believe is be silent concerning understanding these seemingly paradoxical statements. Our minds are not equipped to comprehend change in a changeless state of existence outside of time.
I don’t agree with that (bold part). What we understand as paradox is a paradox and indicates a problem in our belief.
 
I only believe that we are not contingent. We of course have potentialities.

I have problem with the act of creation also. I have an argument against that too: Time is the fundamental variable of any dynamical theory therefore it cannot be the emergent property of the same theory. This means that there exist not a dynamical theory with time as an emergent property. Therefore the act of creation is impossible.
You seem to be saying that physical reality cannot exist without changing, but how does this equate to the idea that the creation of change is not possible?
 
According to scientist (you can read more here):
Thus the known laws of nature can in principle explain where the matter and energy in the universe came from, provided there was at least a tiny seed of energy to begin with.

That’s a very big provision. Nothing to a pea is infinitely times greater than a pea to the current known and unknowm universe.

But again, whether or not this pea of energy ever had a beginning, or whether the universe has been expanding and contradicting for an infinite amount of time, it doesn’t get past the cosmological arguments and God as pure actuality, given that those arguments don’t care whether or not the universe had a beginning or an infinite past.
 
Yes. And you can go back to see how evolution made its job, longer before earth got form from derbies, and much longer there was big bang.
You said that humans are non-contingent, but even if you think we evolved from non-human species, our existence depends upon a prior actuality.
 
I am not saying that (bold part).
Then what do you mean exactly? Change is what physical systems are doing. Time is not distinct from physical systems and neither is time something that precedes physical systems. So what do you mean when you say that time is fundamental?
 
Then what do you mean exactly? Change is what physical systems are doing. Time is not distinct from physical systems and neither is time something that precedes physical systems. So what do you mean when you say that time is fundamental?
He believes that God had to change from not creating to creating, and from indecision in will to decision in will, and that this requires time, and if so, the idea that God could create time is therefore contradictory, because it can’t factor into the equation before it exists.

Of course, God never changed from not creating to creating, or from indecision to decision, nor is there a reason why God’s knowledge and will require time to be, given that it has no physical processes or “processes” at all and God does not know or act discursively or ratiocinately. But as often as it’s been mentioned, it doesn’t sink in.
 
Then what do you mean exactly? Change is what physical systems are doing. Time is not distinct from physical systems and neither is time something that precedes physical systems. So what do you mean when you say that time is fundamental?
Any dynamical system needs time as a variable to tell us what would be the state of a system at a given time knowing the initial state of the system. Time in that sense is fundamental since the theory without it is meaningless. The act of creation requires a dynamical theory with time as an emergent property which is problematic since time is fundamental variable of any dynamical theory. This means that the act of creation is impossible.
 
Any dynamical system needs time as a variable to tell us what would be the state of a system at a given time knowing the initial state of the system. Time in that sense is fundamental since the theory without it is meaningless. The act of creation requires a dynamical theory with time as an emergent property which is problematic since time is fundamental variable of any dynamical theory. This means that the act of creation is impossible.
Think of it as if there’s a limit at t=0, presuming a beginning. That is, there is no actual t=0 or prior. It’s (0, infinity), not 0, infinity).
 
Any dynamical system needs time as a variable to tell us what would be the state of a system at a given time knowing the initial state of the system. Time in that sense is fundamental since the theory without it is meaningless. The act of creation requires a dynamical theory with time as an emergent property which is problematic since time is fundamental variable of any dynamical theory. This means that the act of creation is impossible.
No. Change is the actualization of potential. You need to show why a potential being necessarily requires an actualization of potential in its creator. Its already be explained that a cause can exist simultaneously with its effect without change.
 
Or at least, the start of the universe is the initial state chronologically.
 
The two have to go together. A pure being has to actuate all potentialities. The ability to create is a potentiality, so a pure wholeness of being must possess it and it must be pure act.
The problem with your statement is that God by definition according to Catholicism, has no potential. Being a “perfect” what ever God is cannot enact a potential without changing the perfection he is in some manner. Anything God can do has been done in his perfection since God is not subject to time. There is no…“I think I’ll make something today.”…to God. Today is tomorrow is yesterday for God. Do you agree with this? That being said,
You must qualify what you mean by “create”. Men create all the time…things which do not nor have ever existed in the natural world. If mankind comes along and creates a new material which has never before seen properties and does not exist in the natural world haven’t they created something which did not exist prior to their creating it? This type of creation is not ex nihilo since the materials used in its creation already existed and this would be the primary difference between men and God when creating. However, what about the idea of the thing, where did the idea of the creation of the thing come from? Humans or God? Are humans mere surrogates for the ongoing creativity of God? It can be said that the idea of the thing is already existing in God and therefore was not brought about ex nihilo in the mind of man but can bringing the idea of the thing together with its actualization within the natural world be considered an ex nihilo conceptualization by humans? Did humans create the uniqueness within the natural world ex nihilo like creating a so called free will choice ex nihilo? Since mankind’s free will choice to act must be ex nihilo from the chooser or else the act of the will is not actually free. God may sustain the choice but the choice must be made ex nihilo by the free will. This brings up the question of where our ideas come from. Do they come from our selves ex nihilo as our own or from God. Where does our will come from then? From where does the next sentence we will speak to our friends come from? Are they already there somewhere in the mind waiting for our souls to bring them forth into our conscious awareness to use? Surely if our thoughts are not our own then neither can it be said that our will is. If our will originates within God then we can never be truly free and thus no thing can truly be created ex nihilo by an imperfect thing. I wonder? Do you think this could be true?
 
I don’t agree with that (bold part). What we understand as paradox is a paradox and indicates a problem in our belief.
That depends. If you define paradox as 2 “a self-contradictory and false proposition” then yes it would indicate a problem with our reasoning. I’m more inclined to go with def. 1 “a statement or proposition that seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a possible truth.” according to dictionary.com.
This definition #1 is demonstrated by quantum mechanics in which things can be in multiple states at the same time. Theories like quantum mechanics can be demonstrated as truths Mathematically but conceptually the human brain cannot comprehend them. We are wired to believe either a thing is black or it is white for instance but cannot be both at the same time. You cannot conceptualize this reality yet it can be mathematically demonstrated to be true within the theory and yes the model of reality this theory represents actually demonstrably works in our “world”. LED lights for instance work because of the principles discovered and modeled by Quantum Physics…along with many other devices we use. The famous physicist Richard Feynman has said “Its safe to say nobody understands quantum mechanics.” Einstein famously refused to believe in it because he just couldn’t wrap his head around quantum entanglement–“spooky action at a distance” he called it. Yet there it is…consistently being proven correct in its predictions through experimentation. If the worlds most intelligent beings cannot understand, that is mentally comprehend, the reality they are living in what hope to comprehend what’s beyond our reality in the realm God dwells in?
 
The problem with your statement is that God by definition according to Catholicism, has no potential. Being a “perfect” what ever God is cannot enact a potential without changing the perfection he is in some manner.
Interesting comment. On the above, God creates from eternity, not in time. So, there’s no before and after - thus, no change in perfection. His idea, action and will are united as one.
Anything God can do has been done in his perfection since God is not subject to time. There is no…“I think I’ll make something today.”…to God. Today is tomorrow is yesterday for God. Do you agree with this?
Yes
You must qualify what you mean by “create”. Men create all the time…things which do not nor have ever existed in the natural world. If mankind comes along and creates a new material which has never before seen properties and does not exist in the natural world haven’t they created something which did not exist prior to their creating it? This type of creation is not ex nihilo since the materials used in its creation already existed and this would be the primary difference between men and God when creating. However, what about the idea of the thing, where did the idea of the creation of the thing come from? Humans or God?
Both. It came from the person, who created the idea. But the person came from God, who created that human being.
It can be said that the idea of the thing is already existing in God and therefore was not brought about ex nihilo in the mind of man but can bringing the idea of the thing together with its actualization within the natural world be considered an ex nihilo conceptualization by humans?
Well, the idea itself is an actualization of potentiality within the human. It comes from the human mind, so not really ex nihilo. We could say “it comes from the human’s being, just God does with ideas” - and that is true, except that the human mind is created, not eternal.
Did humans create the uniqueness within the natural world ex nihilo like creating a so called free will choice ex nihilo? Since mankind’s free will choice to act must be ex nihilo from the chooser or else the act of the will is not actually free. God may sustain the choice but the choice must be made ex nihilo by the free will. This brings up the question of where our ideas come from. Do they come from our selves ex nihilo as our own or from God.
Ok, but even still - no matter how you answer that, the human being is contingent. The human is not pure act, but rather, is potentiality needed to be actualized by that which preceeds it, in this case, God. So, we could say that God creates all human acts and ideas because God created each human soul. However, because of free will, the human can create from his own being, but it’s not ex nihilo. When God creates, it is from no pre-existing entity. The difficulty is understanding that His creation is not an actualization of potentiality, but an expression of His wholeness of being. He is not changed by creation,
Where does our will come from then? From where does the next sentence we will speak to our friends come from? Are they already there somewhere in the mind waiting for our souls to bring them forth into our conscious awareness to use?
We generate ideas freely - drawing together experriences and knowledge and arriving at conclusions that did not exist before. But it’s the same as building a house. The house didn’t exist before, but the wood and materials did. It’s the same with an idea, but instead of wood and materials, we have our own immaterial, spiritual processes that create the idea.
Surely if our thoughts are not our own then neither can it be said that our will is. If our will originates within God then we can never be truly free and thus no thing can truly be created ex nihilo by an imperfect thing. I wonder? Do you think this could be true?
We would say that our free will is our own and not determined directly by God. We are free to make choices and to create things that did not exist before. But the only way we can do that is to actualize potential - using that which pre-exists.
 
40.png
STT:
Let me ask the question another way: Can something which is not pure create?
Not ex nihilo.
I concur.

STT, if by ‘create’, you mean “take existing materials and transform them into some other object”, then yes, one can do this without ‘purity’ (however, I’d have to understand the implications of what you mean by that term, as well; I think you mean “pure actuality”).

On the other hand, if you mean true creation – that is, creation of things from nothing (i.e., “ex nihilo”), then I would respond that the only one who has the power to do that is God (for a variety of reasons).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top