Creatio Ex Nihilo vs. Creatio Ex Materia vs. Ordo Ab Chao

[Yekcidmij]

It is my understanding that the LDS church teaches creatio ex materia (http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.j...sourceId=c81d0bbce1d98010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____) and even Abraham 3 seems to say that the universe was created ex materia.

Is this your understanding as well? And if it is, do you think Genesis 1 describes creatio ex materia (creation out of matter) or creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing)?

By the way, so I don't bait anyone, I am going to reject both of those interpretations of Genesis 1 and opt for an Ordo Ab Chao, "order out of chaos" (and I'm going to label it that so I can have a Latin phrase too).

 

[Ran77]

The link did not take me to a page that worked properly.

However, LDS believe that God formed the physical world out of existent matter. I hope that answers your question.

 

[4godslove]

ex materia.

creatio ex materia creatio ex nihilo Ordo Ab Chao

...are we not men

we are devo

d. e. v. o.

 

[4godslove]

The link did not take me to a page that worked properly.

However, LDS believe that God formed the physical world out of existent matter. I hope that answers your question.

and then again, what is matter? isn't it mostly nothing? seems to me it is at least mostly energy. it will be interesting to learn more.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Thanks for the responses. The more I looked at Genesis 1, the more I became convinced there was a difference in our ontology and their ontology. Ontology meaning the study of being; what it means for something to exist. We make ontological assumptions, as did Moses, about what it means for something to "be". I think this is one of those things we never really raise in question, but if our ontology and the ontology of the ancient near easterners is different we are going to misunderstand each other. I think we (Americans/westerners in general) commit the same misunderstanding when we try to understand the Trinity as well.

 

[Ran77]

and then again, what is matter? isn't it mostly nothing? seems to me it is at least mostly energy. it will be interesting to learn more.

I'd read an interesting article that talked about the subject. They theorized that everything is made up of the same basic underlying matter. I think they called Space/Time Foam. I don't remember how this relates to the dark matter that scientists are now speculating makes up the empty parts of space, but it seems pretty similar. Something exists everywhere. How it is sculpted, in a way, determines what it becomes. And that includes energy.

Interestingly, the only thing they theorized that would exist before the universe or survive its destruction, was intelligence.

 

[Ran77]

Thanks for the responses. The more I looked at Genesis 1, the more I became convinced there was a difference in our ontology and their ontology. Ontology meaning the study of being; what it means for something to exist. We make ontological assumptions, as did Moses, about what it means for something to "be". I think this is one of those things we never really raise in question, but if our ontology and the ontology of the ancient near easterners is different we are going to misunderstand each other. I think we (Americans/westerners in general) commit the same misunderstanding when we try to understand the Trinity as well.

I think you make a good point.

Were you able to catch thekabalists comments about creation? Do you think that offers an explanation that would be more in line with Moses' thoughts on the matter?

 

[Yekcidmij]

I think you make a good point.

Were you able to catch thekabalists comments about creation? Do you think that offers an explanation that would be more in line with Moses' thoughts on the matter?

I didn't see what he said.

 

[gort]

and then again, what is matter? isn't it mostly nothing? seems to me it is at least mostly energy. it will be interesting to learn more.

You could start with a science book or dictionary to find that matter is not energy.

 

[4godslove]

You could start with a science book or dictionary to find that matter is not energy.

since i have an engineering background, think i may have actually cracked a science book or two.

show me a science book that can prove conclusively exactly what's inside an electron or a proton and how to build one.

and i think you will find that you and einstein are at odds.

 

[bbbbbbb]

since i have an engineering background, think i may have actually cracked a science book or two.

show me a science book that can prove conclusively exactly what's inside an electron or a proton and how to build one.

and i think you will find that you and einstein are at odds.

Pardon me if I sound confused, but I am, actually. Is it your position that Heavenly Father created the heavens and the earth out of nothing?

 

[4godslove]

Pardon me if I sound confused, but I am, actually. Is it your position that Heavenly Father created the heavens and the earth out of nothing?

i wouldn't rule it out as i am not all knowing regarding the true nature of matter.

when we talk about pre-existing matter, we don't know what that means exactly.

is it the degree of intelligence and obedience necessary for matter to perform according to established law or what?

certainly according to the current stance of today's science, matter is more not there than it is there. when i think of the a collision between two pieces of matter, for instance; seems to me that we are largely considering a condition of competing energy.

 

[angelmom01]

Pardon me if I sound confused, but I am, actually. Is it your position that Heavenly Father created the heavens and the earth out of nothing?

I'm surprised that 4godslove would say "I wouldn't rule it out" when Joseph Smith already has:

D&C 93: 33 For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;
​

According to LDS (at least historical LDS) theology; God did not "create" in the sense that mainstream Christianity understands creation; rather, he "organized" the matter that already existed.

I did a quick Google search to see if this has changed since I was a member and found this from a Primary lesson plan at LDS.org (#3 under Enrichment Activities):

Explain that the word create means to organize, not to make something from nothing. Discuss this statement from Joseph Smith when he was speaking of the creation of the earth: “Now, the word create came from the word baurau, which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship” (History of the Church, 6:308).

​

Also found this which is pretty interesting. I hope to go back and read the whole thing. It seems to touch on this as well as "intelligences" and a few other topics being discussed here. And it doesn't appear to be an "anti" source, but I can't say that for sure - have to go back and read the book (and check out the website, as I am not familiar with it; just found it when searching).

 

[4godslove]

I'm surprised that 4godslove would say "I wouldn't rule it out" when Joseph Smith already has:

D&C 93: 33 For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;
​

According to LDS (at least historical LDS) theology; God did not "create" in the sense that mainstream Christianity understands creation; rather, he "organized" the matter that already existed.

I did a quick Google search to see if this has changed since I was a member and found this from a Primary lesson plan at LDS.org (#3 under Enrichment Activities):

Explain that the word create means to organize, not to make something from nothing. Discuss this statement from Joseph Smith when he was speaking of the creation of the earth: “Now, the word create came from the word baurau, which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship” (History of the Church, 6:308).

​

Also found this which is pretty interesting. I hope to go back and read the whole thing. It seems to touch on this as well as "intelligences" and a few other topics being discussed here. And it doesn't appear to be an "anti" source, but I can't say that for sure - have to go back and read the book (and check out the website, as I am not familiar with it; just found it when searching).

the difficulty you are having is that you apparently glossed over this statement:

"when we talk about pre-existing matter, we don't know what that means exactly.

is it the degree of intelligence and obedience necessary for matter to perform according to established law or what? "

when i said that i wouldn't rule it out, i was speaking from the perspective that we experience matter and "nothing" in this realm. i suspect that the self-existent matter spoken of that the earth was made from is not as we know it now but more of a kind of spiritual nature.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I'm surprised that 4godslove would say "I wouldn't rule it out" when Joseph Smith already has:

D&C 93: 33 For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;
​

According to LDS (at least historical LDS) theology; God did not "create" in the sense that mainstream Christianity understands creation; rather, he "organized" the matter that already existed.

I did a quick Google search to see if this has changed since I was a member and found this from a Primary lesson plan at LDS.org (#3 under Enrichment Activities):

Explain that the word create means to organize, not to make something from nothing. Discuss this statement from Joseph Smith when he was speaking of the creation of the earth: “Now, the word create came from the word baurau, which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship” (History of the Church, 6:308).

​

Also found this which is pretty interesting. I hope to go back and read the whole thing. It seems to touch on this as well as "intelligences" and a few other topics being discussed here. And it doesn't appear to be an "anti" source, but I can't say that for sure - have to go back and read the book (and check out the website, as I am not familiar with it; just found it when searching).

Thank you for the clarification and sources. That has been my understanding. From your link I read the following:

[FONT=Verdana,Courier New,Courier,Monaco]A finite God follows logically from Mormon metaphysics. Since God is not the only entity existing necessarily, he is not the creator of all that is. In other words, he does not bring nonexistent entities into being; he organizes extant materials into new forms. The Mormon God is analogous to a builder and an architect rather than to a creator. This is not to say that Mormons do not speak of God as a creator, but that the Mormon concept of creation does not involve God creating the universe "out of nothing." He takes existing matter from which he "organizes," "prepares," and "forms" the objects of the universe. He creates the world the same way a builder creates a building. Using existing materials, he erects a structure.

[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Courier New,Courier,Monaco]In the Book of Abraham (3:24, in PGP), a Mormon revelation of the Creation, the Son of God is depicted as saying to a group of pre-existent spirits: "We will go down [p.60] for there is space there, and we will take these materials, and we will make an earth whereupon these [the pre-existent spirits of all human beings to inhabit the earth] may dwell." The gods, throughout the remainder of this account, "organize" the earth, "prepare" the waters, and "form" man. They never "create" anything. Though Mormon literature abounds in references to the Creation, it is not to the ex nihilo creation of classical Christianity.

[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Courier New,Courier,Monaco]In fact, Mormonism finds the ex nihilo creation absurd. Even so, the typical Mormon argument misconstrues the meaning and significance of this doctrine for traditional Christianity (see Roberts 1893, 317; cf. McMurrin 1965, 19-48). Most Mormon literature assumes that an ex nihilo creation is a creation from nothing in that nothing is presumed to be something (see J. Smith 1938, 350-51; see also Larson 1978; Cannon 1978; Hale 1978; Hale 1983). But to those familiar with traditional Christian theology, the ex nihilo creation has a different meaning. Its value involves a distinction between necessary and contingent being. God alone exists necessarily. He cannot not exist. All else—space, time, heaven, earth, human beings, etc.—owes its very existence to him. Without him, it could not exist; and at his will, it can be destroyed. To be contingent means to have one's existence dependent upon something else. Thus the real meaning of the ex nihilo creation is that the creature is contingent upon the creator. All creation owes its existence to the creator and without his sustaining support will cease to exist. The important point, then, is [p.61] not that God created the world out of nothing, but that everything that exists is completely dependent upon him for its being. Without God, it cannot exist.

[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Courier New,Courier,Monaco]If the meaning of the ex nihilo creation is frequently misunderstood by Mormons, it nonetheless profoundly contradicts fundamental tenets of Mormon theology when understood correctly. Mormonism denies that God alone has necessary being. For Mormon metaphysics assumes a pluralistic materialism in which all matter—including spirit, since even it is conceived of as purer and more refined matter—exists necessarily. A Mormon revelation proclaims that "the elements are eternal" (D&C 93:33), and Joseph Smith, in a polemic against the ex nihilo creation, declared that to create

[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Courier New,Courier,Monaco]means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship. Hence, we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos—chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and reorganized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning, and can have no end (1938, 350-52).

[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana,Courier New,Courier,Monaco]This metaphysical materialism not only assumes that God and the elements exist necessarily, but so do space and time. In contrast, traditional Christian orthodoxy maintains that space and time, along with everything else except God, exist only because God created them. They would not be if God had not willed their existence.

[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Courier New,Courier,Monaco][p.62] To most Mormons God exists within time and space; he is not their creator. Obviously the possession of a tangible body would place some spatial limitations upon God. Accordingly, the question of whether or not God can be in more than one place at the same time has received some attention in Mormon literature. Attempting to preserve divine omnipresence, James E. Talmage, the church's foremost conservative theologian of the early twentieth century, developed an argument anticipated by his predecessors and employed frequently by his successors, asserting that God's influence can be felt throughout the whole universe. However, God is spatially limited—a position which Talmage argued on the basis of biblical anthropomorphism, such as God's moving from one place to another (1955, 42-43). In the Book of Abraham creation scripture, cited above, the gods "go down for there is space there" to "organize" matter into the universe. Space is conceived as if it were primal matter through which other matter can pass or travel, while, at the same time, it is also conceived of as a location or place. Even before the universe was created, its future location was identified in terms of the "space" which "is there," where it could be organized. Yet this space is real. It is irreducible matter that can neither be created nor destroyed.

This, to me, seems quite clear and does seem to be at variance with what 4GL has been positing.
[/FONT]

 

[angelmom01]

the difficulty you are having is that you apparently glossed over this statement:

"when we talk about pre-existing matter, we don't know what that means exactly.

is it the degree of intelligence and obedience necessary for matter to perform according to established law or what? "

when i said that i wouldn't rule it out, i was speaking from the perspective that we experience matter and "nothing" in this realm. i suspect that the self-existent matter spoken of that the earth was made from is not as we know it now but more of a kind of spiritual nature.

JS said the elements ARE ETERNAL. Shall we just gloss over that because "when we talk about pre-existing matter, we don't know what that means exactly"?

Either the elements (matter??) have always existed or they haven't. That is not dependent upon whether or not you "understand" what all that means or what that matter or those elements "are".

Besides, I was neither agreeing nor disagreeing. I was simply pointing out what I have always understood the position of the church to be (which I documented), that God did not "create" so much as he "organized" the matter/elements/whatever that was already there.

Are you trying to claim that this is NOT the position of the church?

 

[4godslove]

JS said the elements ARE ETERNAL. Shall we just gloss over that because "when we talk about pre-existing matter, we don't know what that means exactly"?

Either the elements (matter??) have always existed or they haven't. That is not dependent upon whether or not you "understand" what all that means or what that matter or those elements "are".

Besides, I was neither agreeing nor disagreeing. I was simply pointing out what I have always understood the position of the church to be (which I documented), that God did not "create" so much as he "organized" the matter/elements/whatever that was already there.

Are you trying to claim that this is NOT the position of the church?

i never said it wasn't, and,as i explained above, my statements were not meant to infer any such a thing.

i'm sorry you are having such a hard time getting your mind around this.

 

[angelmom01]

i never said it wasn't, and,as i explained above, my statements were not meant to infer any such a thing.

i'm sorry you are having such a hard time getting your mind around this.

I have no problem getting my mind around the fact that bbbbbbb asked you if you believe that God created the heavens and the earth "out of nothing"

and you said "I wouldn't rule it out"

and JS said “Now, the word create came from the word baurau, which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship”

It doesn't matter what you meant. My comments were based on what you said.

If you want to argue over what "pre-existent matter" is or isn't... and if it's "more not there than it is there", then go ahead. But that was not the question you were asked and neither is it what I addressed in response to your answer.

 

[Rescued One]

Pearl of Great Price, Book of Abraham, Chapter Three
24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell;

Pearl of Great Price, Book of Abraham, Chapter Four
1 And then the Lord said: Let us go down. And they went down at the beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth.


Pearl of Great Price, Book of Moses, Chapter Three
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air;
6 But I, the Lord God, spake, and there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And I, the Lord God, formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul, the first flesh upon the earth, the first man also; nevertheless, all things were before created; but spiritually were they created and made according to my word.
8 And I, the Lord God, planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there I put the man whom I had formed.
9 And out of the ground made I, the Lord God, to grow every tree, naturally, that is pleasant to the sight of man; and man could behold it. And it became also a living soul. For it was spiritual in the day that I created it; for it remaineth in the sphere in which I, God, created it, yea, even all things which I prepared for the use of man; and man saw that it was good for food. And I, the Lord God, planted the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and also the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be. For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;(D&C 93:29, 33)

 

[4godslove]

I have no problem getting my mind around the fact that bbbbbbb asked you if you believe that God created the heavens and the earth "out of nothing"

and you said "I wouldn't rule it out"

and JS said “Now, the word create came from the word baurau, which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship”

It doesn't matter what you meant. My comments were based on what you said.

If you want to argue over what "pre-existent matter" is or isn't... and if it's "more not there than it is there", then go ahead. But that was not the question you were asked and neither is it what I addressed in response to your answer.

and he is correct.

stop trying to play games with my words. you can't just take one part of my statement and harp on it without the context of the rest of my qualifying remarks.

we can tell the difference between people who want to discuss who are rare. we can also tell those who just want to be troublemakers who are a dime a dozen. if you want to discuss, we will discuss. if you just want to be a troublemaker, we don't have time for you.