Is Creation ex nihilo

[shunyadragon]

In the Christian tradition, apophatic theology applies also to the attributes of God and not only to his ultimate nature. Thus it seems to me you are describing attributes of God's creation and not attributes of God, though we certainly believe that creation reflects the glory of God. Is that a specific view of Baha'i revelation/theology, ie, that humans can comprehend the attributes of God through revelation more so than what is thought in terms of the Christian apophatic tradition?

'seems to me . . .' has no meaning, unless you specifically cite me.

I am describing both the relationship between God and Creation and the attributes of God. I referred to the attributes of God specifically in my posts. I believe that Natural Laws are ultimately attributes of God, as well as attributes such as Love and Compassion. I referred to attributes of God as limitless. You cannot really discuss the Creation by God without discussing the attributes of God reflected in Creation.

ALL the Revelations of God reflect the attributes of God. I have also cited Bible scripture describing my view of ex materia. Yes the Baha'i Faith does described the relationship between God and Creation as creatio ex materia and in some aspects creatio ex deo. I believe the Baha'i Faith Revelation in scriptures are more comprehensive, inclusive, and more correct than individual ancient scriptures and world views, but not exclusive of their value in Revelation.

[shunyadragon]

Robrecht: You made an interesting claim as well as referencing third party unknown sources that voice non-specific objections to creacio ex materia.

I believe it is common for Christian theologians to have strong objections to ex materia and consider it false. I will present references to a few.

Actually those that believe in Creation ex nihilo often propose that this is the only way Creation could happen and alas put limits on how God Created. I don't know how often this claim is made; I have never heard it asserted by Christian or Jewish theologians or philosophers in all my years of formal study of philosophy and theology. Do you have any references to theologians or philosophers making this claim?

[robrecht]

'seems to me . . .' has no meaning, unless you specifically cite me.

I am describing both the relationship between God and Creation and the attributes of God. I referred to the attributes of God specifically in my posts. I believe that Natural Laws are ultimately attributes of God, as well as attributes such as Love and Compassion. I referred to attributes of God as limitless. You cannot really discuss the Creation by God without discussing the attributes of God reflected in Creation.

ALL the Revelations of God reflect the attributes of God. I have also cited Bible scripture describing my view of ex materia. Yes the Baha'i Faith does described the relationship between God and Creation as creatio ex materia and in some aspects creatio ex deo. I believe the Baha'i Faith Revelation in scriptures are more comprehensive, inclusive, and more correct than individual ancient scriptures and world views, but not exclusive of their value in Revelation.

This is not responsive to what I asked.

I did give you the context of why I said 'seems to me', ie, the Christian tradition of apophatic theology also considering the attributes of God subject to apophatic theology. See, for example, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite.

So, back to my question, do you or the Baha'i tradition consider the attributes of God perceived through Revelation as somehow not subject to apophatic theology?

Specifically, with respect to matter being an attribute of God, do the Baha'i scriptures reveal that matter is an attribute of God? If so, how is this expressed? I think I can understand why you say that matter is an attribute of the emanation of God that you describe as the eternal timeless zero-point quantum cosmos, but how is matter an attribute of God? If it cannot be explained, then I think you should agree with me that even the attributes of God (or at least 'matter' as an attribute of God) is indeed subject to apophatic theology, not just the ultimate nature of God.

[shunyadragon]

William Lane Craig also presents strong objections to any view other than 'creatio ex nihilo.'

See http://link.springer.com/chapter/10....73-8_10#page-1

From Creatio ex Nihilo by William Lane Craig.

[robrecht]

Robrecht: You made an interesting claim as well as referencing third party unknown sources that voice non-specific objections to creacio ex materia.

Your quotation of me mixes up a sentence written by you and a sentence written by me. Thus it may be that you are confusing something you are thinking of with what I said. I would certainly agree that the great majority of Christian theologians believe in creatio ex nihilo! What I have not seen, and which is also not included in your apologetic reference, is any Jewish or Christian theologians claiming a limitation upon God's power and greatness such that he is or was unable to create out of existing matter.

I believe it is common for Christian theologians to have strong objections to ex materia and consider it false. I will present references to a few.

[shunyadragon]

This is not responsive to what I asked.

I did give you the context of why I said 'seems to me', ie, the Christian tradition of apophatic theology also considering the attributes of God subject to apophatic theology. See, for example, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite.

So, back to my question, do you or the Baha'i tradition consider the attributes of God perceived through Revelation as somehow not subject to apophatic theology?

Yes I do not consider the attributes of God as positive kataphatic statements defining God. Revelation over the millennia Reveals the attributes of God.

For example: In the Baha'i Faith you would define; 'God is Love,' but you would describe Love as an attribute of God.

Specifically, with respect to matter being an attribute of God, do the Baha'i scriptures reveal that matter is an attribute of God? If so, how is this expressed? I think I can understand why you say that matter is an attribute of the emanation of God that you describe as the eternal timeless zero-point quantum cosmos, but how is matter an attribute of God? If it cannot be explained, then I think you should agree with me that even the attributes of God (or at least 'matter' as an attribute of God) is indeed subject to apophatic theology, not just the ultimate nature of God.

Yes, the attributes of God are subject to the apophatic theology.

Again . . .

Well, since I believe all creation represents attributes of God. When God Creates the universe, matter, energy, time, space and motion represent attributes of God, yes matter may be considered an attribute of God, but not God.

God's attributes are limitless, and emanate from the 'being of God' as reflected in our physical existence, and not that God is physical as the nature of our existence. Not any one of these attributes represents the reality of nor limits God, only Revealed attributes of God.

Example: Humans are Created in God's image, but that does not translate that God is human. Humans are Created as reflecting God's attributes.

This is also reflected in the apophatic view of God in that we can perceive and comprehend the attributes of God through Revelation, but not the ultimate nature of God.

. . . not defining the limits of the nature of God in positive terms.

[shunyadragon]

The following may help you understand the Baha'i view of an unknowable God.



http://www.bahai.org/beliefs/god-his...unknowable-god

In your view are the attributes of God subject to apophatic nature of God?

[robrecht]

Yes I do not consider the attributes of God as positive kataphatic statements defining God. Revelation over the millennia Reveals the attributes of God.

For example: In the Baha'i Faith you would define; 'God is Love,' but you would describe Love as an attribute of God.

Yes, the attributes of God are subject to the apophatic theology.

Again . . .

Well, since I believe all creation represents attributes of God. When God Creates the universe, matter, energy, time, space and motion represent attributes of God, yes matter may be considered an attribute of God, but not God.

God's attributes are limitless, and emanate from the 'being of God' as reflected in our physical existence, and not that God is physical as the nature of our existence. Not any one of these attributes represents the reality of nor limits God, only Revealed attributes of God.

Example: Humans are Created in God's image, but that does not translate that God is human. Humans are Created as reflecting God's attributes.

This is also reflected in the apophatic view of God in that we can perceive and comprehend the attributes of God through Revelation, but not the ultimate nature of God.

. . . not defining the limits of the nature of God in positive terms.

I am glad you agree with me that even the attributes of God (or at least 'matter' as an attribute of God) is indeed subject to apophatic theology, not just the ultimate nature of God.

So getting back to this statement of yours:

This is also reflected in the apophatic view of God in that we can perceive and comprehend the attributes of God through Revelation, but not the ultimate nature of God.

It seems like you are saying that the ultimate nature of God is more incomprehensible than the attributes of God. Is it the case that, like in some forms of Neo-Platonism, that there are many emanations with each successive emanation being more comprehensible by the limited human intellect?

[shunyadragon]

It seems like you are saying that the ultimate nature of God is more incomprehensible than the attributes of God. Is it the case that, like in some forms of Neo-Platonism, that there are many emanations with each successive emanation being more comprehensible by the limited human intellect?

Yes, The view of the Baha'i Faith and I are in agreement with some forms of Neo-Platonism, but not all. I am reluctant to put labels on these views and rely more on the descriptive ways of expressing my views.

[robrecht]

Yes, The view of the Baha'i Faith and I are in agreement with some forms of Neo-Platonism, but not all. I am reluctant to put labels on these views and rely more on the descriptive ways of expressing my views.

Here is my question for you:

It seems like you are saying that the ultimate nature of God is more incomprehensible than the attributes of God. Is it the case ... that there are many emanations with each successive emanation being more comprehensible by the limited human intellect?

[shunyadragon]

Here is my question for you:

It seems like you are saying that the ultimate nature of God is more incomprehensible than the attributes of God. Is it the case ... that there are many emanations with each successive emanation being more comprehensible by the limited human intellect?

Yes.

[robrecht]

Yes.

Any idea where in this successive number of increasingly comprehensible emanations that one would find the eternal timeless zero-point quantum cosmos? Somewhere closer to God or closer to our universe? Perhaps it is the most immediate emanation to the eruption of our universe from the multiverse?

[shunyadragon]

Here is my question for you:

It seems like you are saying that the ultimate nature of God is more incomprehensible than the attributes of God. Is it the case ... that there are many emanations with each successive emanation being more comprehensible by the limited human intellect?

One further comment on Neo-Platonism is the there are two views; I believe the dominant one where the continuous progressive emanations begin with creatio ex nihilo and the less common view that the emanations are eternal and timeless. This is true of Islamic philosophy and theology. The Koran is not specific, but references favor creation ex nihilo. It universally is believed it is understood that God is timeless and eternal, and the Creation of our universe is instantaneous and time began at the moment of Creation. Islamic philosophers relied heavily on Greek philosophy and tried to harmonize it with the Koran. Schools of philosophy varied in Islam, but Kindian philosophy dominated with an ultimate creation ex nihilo.

As far as I can tell creatio ex materia is fairly modern belief. The Baha'i Faith is the first, I believe, to clearly state that creatio ex materia is the relationship between God and Creation. The Church of Later Day Saints also believes in creatio ex materia. I believe the majority of Christian theologians and philosophers still believe in creatio ex nihilo. Many Christian theologians consider it a dominant atheist view that there exists an eternal timeless atheist, and also reject the LDS and Baha'i view that there is a Theistic eternal timeless unformed existence. I have noted some movement among Christian theologians to question creatio ex nihilo, and offer alternatives like creatio ex materia in light of trying to harmonize Theistic concepts with modern physics.

In early philosophy Parmenides and Lucretius did not believe in a moment of Creation, nor Divine Creation, but proposed that our existence was eternal without beginning.

Some interpret Justin Martyr as possibly endorsing creatio ex materia. The following is from a Mormon source.

[robrecht]

One further comment on Neo-Platonism is the there are two views; I believe the dominant one where the continuous progressive emanations begin with creatio ex nihilo and the less common view that the emanations are eternal and timeless. This is true of Islamic philosophy and theology. The Koran is not specific, but references favor creation ex nihilo.

No, medieval Islamic philosophers and theologians transformed Neo-Platonism into their view of creation ex nihilo. Prior to that Neo-Platonism commonly considered the emanations to be eternal. See, eg, Plotinus.

The Neo-Platonic God of Plotinus (204/5-270 A.D.) is the source of the universe, which is the inevitable overflow of divinity. In that overflow, the universe comes out of God (ex deo) in a timeless process. It does not come by creation because that would entail consciousness and will, which Plotinus claimed would limit God. The first emanation out of God (nous) is the highest, successive emanations being less and less real. Finally, evil is matter with no form at all, and as such has no positive existence. God is an impersonal It who can be described only in terms of what he is not. This negative way of describing God (the via negativa) survived well into the middle ages. Though God is beyond description, Plotinus (perhaps paradoxically) asserted a number of things, such as that virtue and truth inhere in God. Because for Plotinus God cannot be reached intellectually, union with the divine is ecstatic and mystical.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/god-west/

It universally is believed it is understood that God is timeless and eternal, and the Creation of our universe is instantaneous and time began at the moment of Creation. Islamic philosophers relied heavily on Greek philosophy and tried to harmonize it with the Koran. Schools of philosophy varied in Islam, but Kindian philosophy dominated with an ultimate creation ex nihilo.

As far as I can tell creatio ex materia is fairly modern belief. The Baha'i Faith is the first, I believe, to clearly state that creatio ex materia is the relationship between God and Creation.

No, see already the Demiurge in Plato's Timaeus in 'Western' thought and Enuma Elish and other creation myths in the East. It was also a common medieval Jewish interpretation of Gen 1,1-3, which, in my opinion, probably dates to the late 2nd Temple Judaism.

The Church of Later Day Saints also believes in creatio ex materia. I believe the majority of Christian theologians and philosophers still believe in creatio ex nihilo. Many Christian theologians consider it a dominant atheist view that there exists an eternal timeless atheist, and also reject the LDS and Baha'i view that there is a Theistic eternal timeless unformed existence. I have noted some movement among Christian theologians to question creatio ex nihilo, and offer alternatives like creatio ex materia in light of trying to harmonize Theistic concepts with modern physics.

In early philosophy Parmenides and Lucretius did not believe in a moment of Creation, nor Divine Creation, but proposed that our existence was eternal without beginning.

[robrecht]

Some interpret Justin Martyr as possibly endorsing creatio ex materia. The following is from a Mormon source.

Justin is merely citing Wisdom 11,17, which you yourself cited above: "For your all powerful hand was not at a loss, and having created the world from formless matter ..."

οὐ γὰρ ἠπόρει ἡ παντοδύναμός σου χεὶρ καὶ κτίσασα τὸν κόσμον ἐξ ἀμόρφου ὕλης ...