Something from nothing and God

[MaxP]

In asserting something cannot come from nothing, some think I have run into an apparent contradiction - how can God create something from nothing if something cannot come from nothing?
For the sake of this thread, accept these two premises:
1) God exists as Creator
2) He is omnipotent

Now, something cannot come from nothing because nothing is absolute lack - lack of any actuality or potentiality. That which has no potential to exist will not, ever, exist. Thus nothing can only beget nothing.

God is something. He is omnipotent. There was no prior substance to His creation, "nothing," that we have now, but not absolute nothing as in the example above. Due to God's omnipotence, He can do anything - "logically" possible or not - and thus while God exists, everything is in the realm of potentiality. So, when God exists, you have potentiality from which things can move into actuality, but with absolute nothing, you have no such potentiality.

 

[b&wpac4]

In asserting something cannot come from nothing, some think I have run into an apparent contradiction - how can God create something from nothing if something cannot come from nothing?
For the sake of this thread, accept these two premises:
1) God exists as Creator
2) He is omnipotent

Now, something cannot come from nothing because nothing is absolute lack - lack of any actuality or potentiality. That which has no potential to exist will not, ever, exist. Thus nothing can only beget nothing.

God is something. He is omnipotent. There was no prior substance to His creation, "nothing," that we have now, but not absolute nothing as in the example above. Due to God's omnipotence, He can do anything - "logically" possible or not - and thus while God exists, everything is in the realm of potentiality. So, when God exists, you have potentiality from which things can move into actuality, but with absolute nothing, you have no such potentiality.

Peter Kreeft argues that God cannot do anything that is not logically possible. He cannot make round squares or a universe where free will exists but the possibility to sin does not, for example. There is no evidence to suggest that God can do the impossible, since it is by definition impossible.

 

[MaxP]

Peter Kreeft argues that God cannot do anything that is not logically possible. He cannot make round squares or a universe where free will exists but the possibility to sin does not, for example. There is no evidence to suggest that God can do the impossible, since it is by definition impossible.

If there was evidence for the impossible, it wouldn't be impossible, would it?
And making round squares isn't impossible, per se, but a paradox.
And yes, He wouldn't make free will - as we know it - and no possibility to sin. Although He could - eliminate any compulsion to sin. Omnipotence and the acts it could entail are rather difficult fro us to understand, given we live in a universe with rules and boundaries, but God does not.

And why would God be bound by the rules which He himself created? He may limit Himself to them in this universe, but perhaps not in its creation. The mechanism of creation may seem not understandable or illogical, but the concept isn't.
Anyway, omnipotence means the ability to do anything.

 

[b&wpac4]

If there was evidence for the impossible, it wouldn't be impossible, would it?
And making round squares isn't impossible, per se, but a paradox.
And yes, He wouldn't make free will - as we know it - and no possibility to sin. Although He could - eliminate any compulsion to sin. Omnipotence and the acts it could entail are rather difficult fro us to understand, given we live in a universe with rules and boundaries, but God does not.

And why would God be bound by the rules which He himself created? He may limit Himself to them in this universe, but perhaps not in its creation. The mechanism of creation may seem not understandable or illogical, but the concept isn't.
Anyway, omnipotence means the ability to do anything.

Can God sin?

 

[lawtonfogle]

In asserting something cannot come from nothing, some think I have run into an apparent contradiction - how can God create something from nothing if something cannot come from nothing?
For the sake of this thread, accept these two premises:
1) God exists as Creator
2) He is omnipotent

Now, something cannot come from nothing because nothing is absolute lack - lack of any actuality or potentiality. That which has no potential to exist will not, ever, exist. Thus nothing can only beget nothing.

God is something. He is omnipotent. There was no prior substance to His creation, "nothing," that we have now, but not absolute nothing as in the example above. Due to God's omnipotence, He can do anything - "logically" possible or not - and thus while God exists, everything is in the realm of potentiality. So, when God exists, you have potentiality from which things can move into actuality, but with absolute nothing, you have no such potentiality.

Something can come from itself if it also brings forth time and is able to violate causality.

If it were not to bring forth time, then the issue of it's existence or non-existence is non-nonsensical in reference to a beginning point for there is no time.

 

[MaxP]

Can God sin?

Big question - yes and no.

Yes in that He has the ability to.
No in that sin consists of not choosing God, and God is all good, so God will never sin. God, also being all-knowing and all-wise and unchanging, cannot sin. If He is not a sinner at one point, He can never be and never was a sinner. He cannot change.

 

[MaxP]

Something can come from itself if it also brings forth time and is able to violate causality.

If it were not to bring forth time, then the issue of it's existence or non-existence is non-nonsensical in reference to a beginning point for there is no time.

I applaud the irrelevance.

 

[b&wpac4]

Big question - yes and no.

Yes in that He has the ability to.
No in that sin consists of not choosing God, and God is all good, so God will never sin. God, also being all-knowing and all-wise and unchanging, cannot sin. If He is not a sinner at one point, He can never be and never was a sinner. He cannot change.

God does not have free will then?

 

[MaxP]

God does not have free will then?

Not as we understand it.

EDITED TO ADD: When God created free will for us, He created a thing separate from Him, as the soul.

 

[70x7]

Can God sin?

No.
James 1:13
"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man"


To the OP:

Most opponents of creation (or God for that matter) are trying to limit Gods abilites by the "rules" of logic and human understanding. Yes, in a materialistic world they are absolutley correct that nothing can come from nothing (this happens to be one of the biggest obsticles facing atheism). Something has to create. That something is God. God is the first "something" that created the next. He has no beginning and no end and was not created. He simply..was. He is "I AM".
God is not bound by our knowledge and thinking. He is outiside of space and time therefore not constrained to our physical definitions.

 

[MaxP]

Most opponents of creation (or God for that matter) are trying to limit Gods abilites by the "rules" of logic and human understanding. Yes, in a materialistic world they are absolutley correct that nothing can come from nothing (this happens to be one of the biggest obsticles facing atheism). Something has to create. That something is God. God is the first "something" that created the next. He has no beginning and no end and was not created. He simply..was. He is "I AM".
God is not bound by our knowledge and thinking. He is outiside of space and time therefore not constrained to our physical definitions.

Yes, God cannot change, but my purpose here was to show God's creation was not a true "something from nothing," merely something without prior substance, but potentiality.

 

[lawtonfogle]

I applaud the irrelevance.

Oh, sorry about thinking of letting others make connections and not pointing everything out to them.

Your premise of something cannot come from nothing is false.

Your whole second paragraph assumes time, and since we are speaking of nothing, if nothing begets nothing, it has thus beget causality, and some primitive form of time.

 

[MaxP]

Oh, sorry about thinking of letting others make connections and not pointing everything out to them.

Your premise of something cannot come from nothing is false.

Your whole second paragraph assumes time, and since we are speaking of nothing, if nothing begets nothing, it has thus beget causality, and some primitive form of time.

If there is not time, there is no progression unless acted upon by an outside force. There is not time in nothing. Nothing to nothing is not progression, and requires no time to facilitate the lack of any cause. Nothing has no continuance since it does not exist. And thus no need for time.
Nothing does beget nothing; there is no causality because nothing is caused. Nothing to nothing is the lack of cause and of result.

Understand?

 

[Washington]

In asserting something cannot come from nothing, some think I have run into an apparent contradiction - how can God create something from nothing if something cannot come from nothing?
For the sake of this thread, accept these two premises:
1) God exists as Creator
2) He is omnipotent

Now, something cannot come from nothing because nothing is absolute lack - lack of any actuality or potentiality. That which has no potential to exist will not, ever, exist. Thus nothing can only beget nothing.

God is something. He is omnipotent. There was no prior substance to His creation, "nothing," that we have now, but not absolute nothing as in the example above. Due to God's omnipotence, He can do anything - "logically" possible or not - and thus while God exists, everything is in the realm of potentiality. So, when God exists, you have potentiality from which things can move into actuality, but with absolute nothing, you have no such potentiality.

To make this "nothing" work one has to exclude god from the class of existing things, which would then make it empty. Setting god aside is like saying there was nothing in the room . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . except me. So this "nothing" really isn't a true nothing at all, but a nothing + god.

 

[MaxP]

To make this "nothing" work one has to exclude god from the class of existing things, which would then make it empty. Setting god aside is like saying there was nothing in the room . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . except me. So this "nothing" really isn't a true nothing at all, but a nothing + god.

That was the point. God's creation was not a true "something from nothing."
I was explain how it's possible for Him to have made it without any prior substance and for it not to be something from nothing; God existing and being omnipotent means everything is in the realm of potentiality, and can move into actuality when He moves it.

 

[Corey]

And...this thread's relevance to Ethics and Morality is....?

 

[MaxP]

And...this thread's relevance to Ethics and Morality is....?

Um, was it ethical for God to create the universe?


I honestly just posted it here because this is where I got asked this anyway, and it's where all the atheists hang out.

 

[Garyzenuf]

To the OP:

Most opponents of creation (or God for that matter) are trying to limit Gods abilites by the "rules" of logic and human understanding. Yes, in a materialistic world they are absolutley correct that nothing can come from nothing (this happens to be one of the biggest obsticles facing atheism). Something has to create. That something is God. God is the first "something" that created the next. He has no beginning and no end and was not created. He simply..was. He is "I AM".
God is not bound by our knowledge and thinking. He is outiside of space and time therefore not constrained to our physical definitions.

Hi 70x7-

This is exactly why many (including myself who is not an atheist ) have a problem with God being the Alpha, if a thing cannot rise from nothing then wence came God? Saying he has always been answers the riddle for many of Origin, but opens the same question wide for infinite regress. If God exsisted forever, then why not matter itself, getting rid of God as an explanation for anything. (In the beggining at least).

*

 

[MaxP]

Hi 70x7-

This is exactly why many (including myself who is not an atheist ) have a problem with God being the Alpha, if a thing cannot rise from nothing then wence came God?

Well, God is existence. Asking from whence He came is asking from whence existence came. Not really a question we can do.

Saying he has always been answers the riddle for many of Origin, but opens the same question wide for infinite regress. If God exsisted forever, then why not matter itself, getting rid of God as an explanation for anything. (In the beggining at least).

*

Because matter becomes disordered after time. Infinite time means infinite disorder.

 

[tcampen]

Hi 70x7-

This is exactly why many (including myself who is not an atheist ) have a problem with God being the Alpha, if a thing cannot rise from nothing then wence came God? Saying he has always been answers the riddle for many of Origin, but opens the same question wide for infinite regress. If God exsisted forever, then why not matter itself, getting rid of God as an explanation for anything. (In the beggining at least).

*

And let the special pleading begin in response to this well articulated statement.

Because this is getting more into Philosophy than E&Ms, I'll try to bring it back around.... If God created the universe from nothing, meaning God could have created anything within his power to do so, then did God create the most perfect universe he could have? In other words, is this the best God could have done, morally speaking. If I could imagine a more perfect world, then doesn't that cut against god creating it - at least from a standard of being a moral being?