Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice – The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

Is God Designed?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    My answer to your questions is that "nothing is made of nothing."
    I understand what it means. I don't understand how it addresses any of the questions I asked. (Unless you're begging some crucial questions, as I suspect you might be.)

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Jim B. View Post
      I understand what it means. I don't understand how it addresses any of the questions I asked. (Unless you're begging some crucial questions, as I suspect you might be.)
      You asked what is the stuff of existence made of, it's not, it's eternal. Otherwise it would be made of nothing, created out of nothing, spoken into existence, but nothing comes from nothing. Ex Nihilo Nihil fit!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by JimL View Post
        You asked what is the stuff of existence made of, it's not, it's eternal. Otherwise it would be made of nothing, created out of nothing, spoken into existence, but nothing comes from nothing. Ex Nihilo Nihil fit!
        When I refer to "made of" I mean "composed of," not "caused by." If there is God He would not be a "thing" ie an existent beside other existents, so He would be "No Thing." He would be the eternal and necessary reason for things.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Jim B. View Post
          When I refer to "made of" I mean "composed of," not "caused by." If there is God He would not be a "thing" ie an existent beside other existents, so He would be "No Thing." He would be the eternal and necessary reason for things.
          It, the substance, is made of, composed of, the same stuff this universe is composed of, which like your notion of god, is why it can be said to be eternal, and why, unlike your notion of god, it can be said that this universe didn't come from nothing.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by JimL View Post
            It, the substance, is made of, composed of, the same stuff this universe is composed of, which like your notion of god, is why it can be said to be eternal, and why, unlike your notion of god, it can be said that this universe didn't come from nothing.
            Your universe is merely a brute fact with no reason for its existence. It just is and has always been, a brute contingency. Essential to the concept of "God" for well over two millennia are aseity and necessity. "God" as in the concept, the Judeo-Christian concept, carries within Himself His own reason for being, unlike a physical universe. So a mere phyiscal universe did come from "nothing" ontologically or metaphysically speaking, unlike "God," even if it has been around for a infinite duration.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Jim B. View Post
              Your universe is merely a brute fact with no reason for its existence. It just is and has always been, a brute contingency. Essential to the concept of "God" for well over two millennia are aseity and necessity. "God" as in the concept, the Judeo-Christian concept, carries within Himself His own reason for being, unlike a physical universe. So a mere phyiscal universe did come from "nothing" ontologically or metaphysically speaking, unlike "God," even if it has been around for a infinite duration.
              But either way, whether eternal god, or eternal universe, whichever it is would be a brute fact, and that being the case, neither would have a reason for being.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                But either way, whether eternal god, or eternal universe, whichever it is would be a brute fact, and that being the case, neither would have a reason for being.
                God would not be a brute fact - this would be due to necessity and aseity. Essential to the Judeo-Christian concept of "God" is that God HAS to be, and that He carries within Himself His own reason for being. The universe does not have to be. It merely happens to be.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by JimL View Post
                  But either way, whether eternal god, or eternal universe, whichever it is would be a brute fact, and that being the case, neither would have a reason for being.
                  God would not be a brute fact - this would be due to God's necessity and aseity. Essential to the Judeo-Christian concept of "God" is that God HAS to be, and that He carries within Himself His own reason for being. The universe does not have to be. It merely happens to be.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Jim B. View Post
                    God would not be a brute fact - this would be due to God's necessity and aseity. Essential to the Judeo-Christian concept of "God" is that God HAS to be, and that He carries within Himself His own reason for being. The universe does not have to be. It merely happens to be.
                    I don't see the reason for that. It may be an essential belief to the Judeo-Christian concept of god, but neither an eternal universe nor an eternal god "would have to be" both the one and the other could just as well not be at all. The opposite would be true as well, if either the one or the other exists eternally, then they would obviously have had to exist. A brute fact.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by JimL View Post
                      I don't see the reason for that. It may be an essential belief to the Judeo-Christian concept of god, but neither an eternal universe nor an eternal god "would have to be" both the one and the other could just as well not be at all. The opposite would be true as well, if either the one or the other exists eternally, then they would obviously have had to exist. A brute fact.
                      It's the difference between "necessity" and "contingency." The one essential attribute of God is that he is "necessary," as in ontological necessity. If He exists, He carries the reason for His existence within Himself. "I am that I am." I am the fact that I am. My essence is to be. So God would not be brute. There's nothing about a physical universe that would be necessary or carry within itself its own reason for being. Even if that universe has existed for an infinite duration, its essence is not to exist.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Jim B. View Post
                        It's the difference between "necessity" and "contingency." The one essential attribute of God is that he is "necessary," as in ontological necessity. If He exists, He carries the reason for His existence within Himself. "I am that I am." I am the fact that I am. My essence is to be. So God would not be brute. There's nothing about a physical universe that would be necessary or carry within itself its own reason for being. Even if that universe has existed for an infinite duration, its essence is not to exist.
                        I think that the above simply assumes the necessity of a "reason" for being. Any eternally existing thing "is that it is" or "is the fact that it is" or would imply "it's essence is to be". I think that "Necessity" is simply the brute fact that it does indeed exists. I don't see how "reason" for being need apply to the eternal.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          I think that the above simply assumes the necessity of a "reason" for being. Any eternally existing thing "is that it is" or "is the fact that it is" or would imply "it's essence is to be". I think that "Necessity" is simply the brute fact that it does indeed exists. I don't see how "reason" for being need apply to the eternal.
                          Necessity and a reason for being are both implicit in the definition of "God" for millennia in the Abrahamic traditions and other traditions also. Those are ontological requirements of this concept called "God." This universe might not have existed or it might not have existed as it is today. There's nothing inherent in physical stuff that makes it necessarily existent or precisely the way that it is. Across all possible worlds, there's nothing about a physical universe that would require it to be exactly as it is right now or to be at all. But if there is a God, then God would be and would be exactly as He is across all possible worlds, IF he meets the definition of "God." If we discover a very powerful being who nevertheless is not necessary and who might not exist across all possible worlds, like a superhero or a Greek God, then that being would not fulfill the definition of "God," but would be A god.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Jim B. View Post
                            Necessity and a reason for being are both implicit in the definition of "God" for millennia in the Abrahamic traditions and other traditions also. Those are ontological requirements of this concept called "God." This universe might not have existed or it might not have existed as it is today. There's nothing inherent in physical stuff that makes it necessarily existent or precisely the way that it is. Across all possible worlds, there's nothing about a physical universe that would require it to be exactly as it is right now or to be at all. But if there is a God, then God would be and would be exactly as He is across all possible worlds, IF he meets the definition of "God." If we discover a very powerful being who nevertheless is not necessary and who might not exist across all possible worlds, like a superhero or a Greek God, then that being would not fulfill the definition of "God," but would be A god.
                            Yes, but the so called ontological requirements of this concept we call god are just that, requirements of a concept we call god. The concept is just a concept. But nothing that exists eternally has anything to do with the fact that it exists, that it exists would just be a brute fact and so would it's reason, if indeed it has a reason for being, be a brute fact. No?

                            But, at any rate, why should we assume that the eternal has a reason for being anyway?
                            Last edited by JimL; 12-29-2019, 11:46 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by JimL View Post
                              So, what is god made of, nothing?
                              God is pure actuality, He is existence. Asking what he's made of makes about as much sense as asking how many bricks you need in the number 2.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                                But, at any rate, why should we assume that the eternal has a reason for being anyway?
                                That is not an assumption, all classical theistic arguments argue by logical demonstration that God exists.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-15-2024, 10:19 PM
                                14 responses
                                75 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-13-2024, 10:13 PM
                                6 responses
                                61 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-12-2024, 09:36 PM
                                1 response
                                23 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-08-2024, 11:59 AM
                                7 responses
                                54 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Working...
                                X