Is God still creating today?

[Assyrian]

It is quite dangerous to be satisfied with not knowing and to abandon the thinking, particularly in today's environment.

I give you a summary of what the church father thought and waffle on about the possibility of the soul and spirit being an emergent property and you call it abandoning thinking?

If you do not think about the answer, someone may give you an answer and you do not know if you should accept it or not, because you think God does not tell you anything about it.

Again a very odd comment from someone who has swallowed the creationist answer that create only means ex nihilo, and builds on that, ignoring what God tells us about what it means when he creates.

God gives us the fruit of wisdom (thanks to Eve who ate it). We are able to think like God does. He does not have to tell us everything explicitly.

No problem with that, apart from the Eve bit as Glaudys pointed out, I am all for enquiry and speculation as long as we have the humility to realise our speculations are just that. I don't see that in your determination to hold onto you speculations about creation in spite of all scripture says.

The thing strikes me is that each of our spirit MUST BE brand new. Otherwise, we will have history and we are not a 100% independent person anymore. If that were the case, then when God sees you, He would not only see you, but also see somebody else before you. That is terrible.

Is our DNA brand new? If not does God hold us responsible for our fathers' sins? "She has her mother's temper, and red hair..." We can get our temperament from our parents, does that mean we are are not a 100% independent person?

This is a simply logic thinking and we SHOULD KNOW from reading the Genesis. You may argue that the spirit is not really anything independent, but is a "function" of material. If so, you are seriously poisoned by evolution and, basically, are not a Christian any more.

And here is your biggest problem, you want to think and use your God given wisdom and intelligence to wonder about things we do not understand, but creationism has you bound by fear and condemnation. Ebia was right, you are stuck in sub biblical dualism.

We could discuss what the bible teaches about soul and spirit, but you have shown you don't care what scripture actually says about creation, and defend you Greek dualism with condemnations rather than scripture. I told you I don't know the nature of the soul and spirit, it could be a substance in a completely different mode of existence to the material, but your condemnations don't seem a very convincing argument.

What do you mean by a spirit being 'independent' anyway? You mean like in spiritualism and Caspar? Why wouldn't you consider a story independent from a book? Can't it also be read, heard, understood, memorised, transferred to CD, broadcast on the radio? Wasn't the Hebrew concept of the soul and spirit much more holistic anyway? We are a whole person rather than made up of independent parts, surely this is one of the lessons we learn from Genesis, that Adam needed body and soul to be a complete living person.

 

[juvenissun]

I give you a summary of what the church father thought and waffle on about the possibility of the soul and spirit being an emergent property and you call it abandoning thinking?

Again a very odd comment from someone who has swallowed the creationist answer that create only means ex nihilo, and builds on that, ignoring what God tells us about what it means when he creates.

No problem with that, apart from the Eve bit as Glaudys pointed out, I am all for enquiry and speculation as long as we have the humility to realise our speculations are just that. I don't see that in your determination to hold onto you speculations about creation in spite of all scripture says.

Is our DNA brand new? If not does God hold us responsible for our fathers' sins? "She has her mother's temper, and red hair..." We can get our temperament from our parents, does that mean we are are not a 100% independent person?

And here is your biggest problem, you want to think and use your God given wisdom and intelligence to wonder about things we do not understand, but creationism has you bound by fear and condemnation. Ebia was right, you are stuck in sub biblical dualism.

We could discuss what the bible teaches about soul and spirit, but you have shown you don't care what scripture actually says about creation, and defend you Greek dualism with condemnations rather than scripture. I told you I don't know the nature of the soul and spirit, it could be a substance in a completely different mode of existence to the material, but your condemnations don't seem a very convincing argument.

What do you mean by a spirit being 'independent' anyway? You mean like in spiritualism and Caspar? Why wouldn't you consider a story independent from a book? Can't it also be read, heard, understood, memorised, transferred to CD, broadcast on the radio? Wasn't the Hebrew concept of the soul and spirit much more holistic anyway? We are a whole person rather than made up of independent parts, surely this is one of the lessons we learn from Genesis, that Adam needed body and soul to be a complete living person.

Each one of us is a 100% independent person means: when facing the Great White Throne Judgement, one can not argue: "this mistake is not all my fault". If spirit could be partially inherited, then this excuse would be too strong to reject. As a result, you are 100% you, and have nothing to do with your parents and your children in any sense. You are a 100% brand new creation and has zero history.

Obviously this is not true in biology. That is why we are not a product of evolution.

 

[Assyrian]

Each one of us is a 100% independent person means: when facing the Great White Throne Judgement, one can not argue: "this mistake is not all my fault". If spirit could be partially inherited, then this excuse would be too strong to reject. As a result, you are 100% you, and have nothing to do with your parents and your children in any sense. You are a 100% brand new creation and has zero history.

Obviously this is not true in biology.

Yes, it is clearly completely untrue in biology. We inherit all our DNA from our parents. Even the hundred or so single point mutations in our DNA come from their egg and sperm, and the rest of the 3 billion base pairs we received directly from our parents. Yet no one ever suggests we are not independent persons in our own right because we share their DNA. Yet for some bizarre reason you think the human spirit has to be a complete new creation or we are not independent people. Why couldn't a new and separate spirit form from the spirits of our parents when they become one flesh? Do you know so much about the nature of human spirits?

That is why we are not a product of evolution.

I fail to see any link. Even if our spirits are a new creation imparted to each fetus, and that is one of the traditional understandings of our spirit, why can't our DNA which we receive from our parents trace back further over billions of years to a common ancestor with apes?

 

[Breckmin]

No no. Creation is only meaningful to human, not to God. (of course).

Creation is not meaningful to God? Then why did God create if it was not
meaningful to Him? Perhaps my point is incongruous to yours? Can you
clarify?

If you mean that the concept of "creation" is only meaningful "NOW" because
God "already" created, then perhaps we are missing a point here...

Let me ask you a question. "Will" God create a new heaven and
a new earth?

It appears to me that this is not the strongest way to refute universal
common descent theory. It seems somewhat of a weak point to me,
but perhaps I am missing your point. ?

Is "new idea" from human an example of creation? I don't think so. Instead, we call that "discovery". The content of the "new" idea must have existed.

Since I believe that God the Father is transcendant and timeless I would
concede that there is nothing new under the sun (or "above" the sun or
outside of the solar system).

This is particularly true in the field of science. Creation is not a word in the dictionary of science. That is why I always think the use of creation in a non-science description is an abusive use of the word.

I have serious problems with the nomenclature of ex nihilio but not
necessarily what the phrase actually means historically. Clearly
"nothing comes from nothing" is a logical axiom. Matter may have
come from God's Infinite Power, God's Infinite Order, God's "Mind"
(no way to assert such a limited concept), God's Infinite ability
to create such matter/enery, so the creation did not come from
"nothing" so the latin nomenclature is misleading and needs to
be updated.

I still don't see where you are coming from, however, in how this
refutes Darwinian evolutionary theory. The theory is based on
mutation, and natural selection as a continuing processes. Perhaps
you are addressing the fact that "new information" does not come
from "nothing." If this is your point, then you should address the
mechanism of DNA and the genome itself rather than God resting
on the seventh day which is inductive in and of itself.

Will there not be a new heaven and a new earth after God has
rested? Are you a post tribulationist who believes in the
7000 year theory?

 

[Breckmin]

OK, good. I will change the question in the OP:

Is God still creating ex-nihilo today?

Am I right to say human is created ex-nihilo, but animal is not.

Wasn't Adam formed from the dust?

 

[juvenissun]

Wasn't Adam formed from the dust?

Yes. But that was only a clay doll .

 

[juvenissun]

Creation is not meaningful to God? Then why did God create if it was not
meaningful to Him? Perhaps my point is incongruous to yours? Can you
clarify?

If you mean that the concept of "creation" is only meaningful "NOW" because
God "already" created, then perhaps we are missing a point here...

Let me ask you a question. "Will" God create a new heaven and
a new earth?

It appears to me that this is not the strongest way to refute universal
common descent theory. It seems somewhat of a weak point to me,
but perhaps I am missing your point. ?



Since I believe that God the Father is transcendant and timeless I would
concede that there is nothing new under the sun (or "above" the sun or
outside of the solar system).



I have serious problems with the nomenclature of ex nihilio but not
necessarily what the phrase actually means historically. Clearly
"nothing comes from nothing" is a logical axiom. Matter may have
come from God's Infinite Power, God's Infinite Order, God's "Mind"
(no way to assert such a limited concept), God's Infinite ability
to create such matter/enery, so the creation did not come from
"nothing" so the latin nomenclature is misleading and needs to
be updated.

I still don't see where you are coming from, however, in how this
refutes Darwinian evolutionary theory. The theory is based on
mutation, and natural selection as a continuing processes. Perhaps
you are addressing the fact that "new information" does not come
from "nothing." If this is your point, then you should address the
mechanism of DNA and the genome itself rather than God resting
on the seventh day which is inductive in and of itself.

Will there not be a new heaven and a new earth after God has
rested? Are you a post tribulationist who believes in the
7000 year theory?

Evolution apparently explained the change of life in morphology and in process. But all that is only on the material side. There is no non-material part involved in any sense.

But, my main argument is that human is more a non-material identity than individuals characterized only by material, such as DNA. The non-material part separates me from you, and from anyone else.

My question is: where does the non-material part of us come from?
My suggested answer is: it comes from God's creation ex nihilo.
I don't have any other way to explain it. And I don't want to say "I don't know" before this one is stricken out, because we are talking about theology, but not about science.

Here is the trap: If a Christian argued that the spirit is, in fact, an unique function hidden in our DNA, then I would say that the Christian is, in essence, an atheist. [another name of the same game is: do we have free will?]

 

[Assyrian]

Yes. But that was only a clay doll .

"only"?

It never ceases to amaze me how creationists devalue God's awesome handiwork.

 

[juvenissun]

"only"?

It never ceases to amaze me how creationists devalue God's awesome handiwork.

Yes, only.
Adam was like Pinokio, who was only a wood doll. I can also make a clay statue.
Adam needs the "breath" to become a human. And I don't think the breath is made of any material similar to those of clay. It has some non-material "thing" comes from God.

 

[Assyrian]

Yes, only.
Adam was like Pinokio, who was only a wood doll. I can also make a clay statue.

I am sure your clay statue would be nice enough, but it wouldn't hold a candle to a Michelangelo, well not unless you moulded the hand the right way to grip one, the human form is amazingly beautiful and while Michelangelo could represent it, God came up with the idea. Then you have the amazing complexity of the architecture of our brains, our cardiovascular system and all the systems that make up our physical bodies. We are fearfully and wonderfully made. You are not wandering over into gnosticism are you Juv? Creationism can have that effect on people.

Adam needs the "breath" to become a human. And I don't think the breath is made of any material similar to those of clay. It has some non-material "thing" comes from God.

All we have is from God, and the fact is you haven't a clue how God formed our soul and spirit.

 

[juvenissun]

I am sure your clay statue would be nice enough, but it wouldn't hold a candle to a Michelangelo, well not unless you moulded the hand the right way to grip one, the human form is amazingly beautiful and while Michelangelo could represent it, God came up with the idea. Then you have the amazing complexity of the architecture of our brains, our cardiovascular system and all the systems that make up our physical bodies. We are fearfully and wonderfully made. You are not wandering over into gnosticism are you Juv? Creationism can have that effect on people.


All we have is from God, and the fact is you haven't a clue how God formed our soul and spirit.

Again, I don't know how. But I think something "should not" happen:

God will not use other's spirit to make mine.
God will not use a material which we know to make my spirit.
My spirit is given, then it is mine and will not be taken away.

To me, that is pretty much creation ex nihilo is.

 

[Assyrian]

Again, I don't know how. But I think something "should not" happen:

So it is basically personal opinion, reminds me a bit of Creationist squeamishness over being descended from early apes.

God will not use other's spirit to make mine.

Yet he used other's DNA to make yours. Why shouldn't he form your spirit from spirit he formed before? How many times do you think God breathed into man? Why could God not make every spirit from the first one he gave?

God will not use a material which we know to make my spirit.

Though you beleive he used the known material dust to make our bodies. What does it matter how God makes our spirits? surely the point is they are his handiwork, made in his image?

My spirit is given, then it is mine and will not be taken away.
To me, that is pretty much creation ex nihilo is.

You realise you still have your DNA after you have kids? Bit more frayed at the edges but still all yours.

 

[juvenissun]

So it is basically personal opinion, reminds me a bit of Creationist squeamishness over being descended from early apes.

Yet he used other's DNA to make yours. Why shouldn't he form your spirit from spirit he formed before? How many times do you think God breathed into man? Why could God not make every spirit from the first one he gave?

Though you beleive he used the known material dust to make our bodies. What does it matter how God makes our spirits? surely the point is they are his handiwork, made in his image?

You realise you still have your DNA after you have kids? Bit more frayed at the edges but still all yours.

You seems to be deaf or blind. I explained this a number of times in this thread.

If your spirit were recycled by God, then where will you be in the eternity.

 

[ebia]

You seems to be deaf or blind. I explained this a number of times in this thread.

If your spirit were recycled by God, then where will you be in the eternity.

If one's body were recycled by God then where will you be after the resurrection of the body?

 

[peacebwithu2]

God is not creating in the same way but he is still creating through Grace and the Holy Ghost

 

[Assyrian]

You seems to be deaf or blind. I explained this a number of times in this thread.

If your spirit were recycled by God, then where will you be in the eternity.

It didn't make sense then and it still doesn't make sense now. If God made my body from the bodies of my parents why am I not in the same body with them? They have died why am I still alive? What is the special characteristic of spirit that makes it impossible for God to form new spirits out of ones he made before? You do not know how God forms spirits, but you know he could not make them capable of being reproduced the way he formed bodies?

 

[Assyrian]

God is not creating in the same way but he is still creating through Grace and the Holy Ghost

Hi Peace, welcome to the forum, I hope you enjoy you time here.

You probably haven't had time to read through this thread, but back at the start I posted a list of verses that describe how God's work of creation is still continuing. http://www.christianforums.com/t7397452/#post52784374 I wonder what you make of them? Of course God does create through grace and the Holy Spirit, as you say. We are all new creations. But God old creation is still being created too and the bible uses the same word to describe it as it does in Genesis.

 

[juvenissun]

God is not creating in the same way but he is still creating through Grace and the Holy Ghost

Example?

 

[juvenissun]

It didn't make sense then and it still doesn't make sense now. If God made my body from the bodies of my parents why am I not in the same body with them? They have died why am I still alive? What is the special characteristic of spirit that makes it impossible for God to form new spirits out of ones he made before? You do not know how God forms spirits, but you know he could not make them capable of being reproduced the way he formed bodies?

Your body is not made from those of your parents.
Your parents do not share their spirits with you.
It is a definition problem. We do not need to know the process to make definitions.

 

[juvenissun]

Hi Peace, welcome to the forum, I hope you enjoy you time here.

You probably haven't had time to read through this thread, but back at the start I posted a list of verses that describe how God's work of creation is still continuing. http://www.christianforums.com/t7397452/#post52784374 I wonder what you make of them? Of course God does create through grace and the Holy Spirit, as you say. We are all new creations. But God old creation is still being created too and the bible uses the same word to describe it as it does in Genesis.

It is very surprising that you become so literal now.