To act on nothing is to do something?

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Causality requires a material and efficient cause. Creatio ex nihilo, if it is possible, would occur for no reason and with no cause, and could not be an event in causality.

What does "ex" stand for?
 
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Right. He is basically just asserting that anything which comes into existence requires a material cause. The only reasoning seems to be, "I've never seen creatio ex nihilo and I don't even understand how it would work!"

Of course Christians don't claim to have seen creatio ex nihilo themselves, nor do they claim to have an understanding of how it works. Christians don't claim to be God, after all.

The charge that it is a logical or analytical contradiction doesn't go very far, precisely because the metaphysics of causation are not so well defined to exclude such activity as impossible, particularly when it comes to God. You already pointed this out. It is not controversial that God can do things which do not occur naturally, and it is obvious that not everything which does not occur naturally is logically impossible. Creatio ex nihilo doesn't occur naturally, but God can do it. End of story.

So you have problems with me asserting things, then cap it off with "God can do it, end of story."

The question is whether God actually solves the problem of existence. He doesn't.

If God acted on nothing, what did he do?
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,012
25,179
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,718,556.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Causality requires a material and efficient cause. Creatio ex nihilo, if it is possible, would occur for no reason and with no cause, and could not be an event in causality.
Obviously it doesn’t require material. Or even our understanding.

But our God is in the heavens;
He does whatever He pleases.
— Psalm 115:3

Looking around it pleased God to create out of nothing.
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,012
25,179
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,718,556.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Basically. I am glad other folks have seen through it as well. The OP is simply claiming as a truth what he needs to prove, and his only "proof" is that he has never seen something before. The rest of his "argument" is simply semantics and word-play to cloud the matter.

If you don't think there needs to be a material cause for causality, can't there also be causality with no efficient cause? If not, why not? If so, then your God serves no purpose in creation. The whole universe can literally come out of nothing.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
If you don't think there needs to be a material cause for causality, can't there also be causality with no efficient cause? If not, why not? If so, then your God serves no purpose in creation. The whole universe can literally come out of nothing.

Genesis 1
"1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2Now the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters. 3And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light"
 
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
To be totally honest, I feel like I'm in over my head here. I don't know the subject matter of causality all that well. But it seems to me that if you're saying I might come up with a logical framework, and that the burden is on me to do so, you haven't really made a case. If you can't explain why it's impossible without any input from me, then your argument falls flat. I tell you what, talk to me like I'm 9. I won't hold any barbs or sarcasm against you as long as you make a sincere attempt at explaining why it's logically contradictory.

Contradiction is not the right term. The problem is your idea is not well-defined.


Exactly. Maybe I'm just not up to snuff on my four causes, but why does there have to be a material cause? Is this conception of causality the only possible conception? If so, why?

The spoken language is too casual for the scrutiny you're applying. We have to encode this into the formal language. Functions encapsulate causality. Functions require an input.


See, you keep saying "not well-defined", and then asking me to define it. Is it impossible to define, or can you simply not think of a way to define it?

f(x)=y

f is the efficient cause, x is the material cause, and y is the effect.

You have rejected my claim that causality requires an input, so you have rejected the idea that it can be encoded into a function. Because I think I'm already right, and I can't conceive of how else this works, I'm asking you to provide a definition.

Because it looks like it simply isn't defined, not that it is poorly defined, or impossible to define. So I'll just say it now, I personally can't think of a way to define it either. What does that mean? I don't know and you don't know, so what conclusion should our ignorance lead us to?

I'm not sure what else I can say.
 
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Obviously it doesn’t require material. Or even our understanding.

But our God is in the heavens;
He does whatever He pleases.
— Psalm 115:3

Looking around it pleased God to create out of nothing.

Not sure how that is supposed to be helpful.

That’s not relevant. The point was that forgiveness costs.

Half of the key elements in your analogy don't map onto anything at all. That makes it a poor analogy.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,012
25,179
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,718,556.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Not sure how that is supposed to be helpful.



Half of the key elements in your analogy don't map onto anything at all. That makes it a poor analogy.
That’s fine. Bottom line, there is a living Savior who, because He died and rose again, is sufficient to save you and indeed each and every person who comes to Him in faith. There is fullness of grace in Christ crucified. And you, too, may find salvation in His name.
 
Upvote 0

Moral Orel

Proud Citizen of Moralton
Supporter
May 22, 2015
7,379
2,641
✟476,748.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
The question is whether God actually solves the problem of existence. He doesn't.

If you don't think there needs to be a material cause for causality, can't there also be causality with no efficient cause? If not, why not? If so, then your God serves no purpose in creation. The whole universe can literally come out of nothing.
I agree with all of this. If this is your point, I'm on board. I think I would need to accept that causality is as you've defined it in all contexts to agree there's a contradiction though. I can't do that though because I'm not sure causality works that way outside of my everyday human experience. Once we get out to the origins of the universe, and the depths of the quantum level, I don't think the Four Causes are going to make much sense.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Shimokita

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2019
599
260
PA
✟17,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
If you don't think there needs to be a material cause for causality, can't there also be causality with no efficient cause? If not, why not? If so, then your God serves no purpose in creation. The whole universe can literally come out of nothing.
I haven’t attempted to prove the existence of God in this thread, but someone might need to disprove the possibility you suggest, depending on whatever argument he used.

I am not particularly concerned with trying to convince you that God exists, by the way. I think you already know that God exists, but are just playing a game and pretending that he does not as a way of rejecting his authority. I think the fact that you have employed such illogical arguments and gone to such great length to try to get people to agree with you, on a Christian forum, is evidence of this. If you truly believed that God did not exist you would be getting on with your life instead of spending half the weekend on the Internet arguing otherwise.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tone
Upvote 0