Occam's Razor And Creation

[seer]

They are distinct only in the sense that they are temporal forms immanating from one and the same substance. Everything in the universe is comprised of the same substance and is not distinct from that substance, but the substance itself, energy/matter, considered as a whole, is indivisible. What you are arguing is that the substance itself, or that which you identify with God, is itself divisible. In other words , you are arguing that God is just a part of the whole of the eternal and necessary existence. If God is just a part of eternal existence, then where did the other eternal parts come from.

No Jim, I'm saying that God (as intelligent energy) is necessary, not non-intelligent energy. Look at it this way, say we could remove some of my DNA and create another creature. That creature would be distinct from me and would owe its life and existence to me. There is no logical reason to suppose that God couldn't generate energy from His being that would become a separate and distinct entity like our universe.

[Leonhard]

I think its a rather heterodox idea within Christianity to say that God is made of some physical stuff.

[seer]

I think its a rather heterodox idea within Christianity to say that God is made of some physical stuff.

Yes, but ex nihilo never made sense to me - nothing comes from nothing...

[Leonhard]

Yes, but ex nihilo never made sense to me - nothing comes from nothing...

Have you ever considered that God could be 'not nothing', and also 'not something physical'?

[JimL]

Have you ever considered that God could be 'not nothing', and also 'not something physical'?

That would be the Christian understanding of creation, but if the creator and the created have of their natures nothing in common, then the created would still be coming from nothing. That, I think, is what seer is objecting to.

[Leonhard]

That would be the Christian understanding of creation, but if the creator and the created have of their natures nothing in common, then the created would still be coming from nothing. That, I think, is what seer is objecting to.

I don't see how that follows. As far as I have read Christian philosophers on this subject, its not that God takes 'nothingness' and fashions it into the world. That would be absurd. Its that in the beginning, there was nothing other than him, and he used the powers he had to create (where before there was nothing) the world.

Whether or not God's nature being different from the universe, means that he couldn't be the cause of it in some sense I find dubious. Its not clear to me at all how you'd make that argument. You could try for a meta inductive argument "All the things that cause things to exist that we know of are material, therefore, it is reasonable to suppose that only material things can cause material things". Might be a bit of a stretch. I'm a naturalist, but that doesn't mean I can't think about something that is alien to what we would call material substance, causing something.

[JimL]

I don't see how that follows. As far as I have read Christian philosophers on this subject, its not that God takes 'nothingness' and fashions it into the world. That would be absurd. Its that in the beginning, there was nothing other than him, and he used the powers he had to create (where before there was nothing) the world.

But unless he were creating the world out of his own substance then he would still be creating the world out of nothing. If his own substance is not material, then he would need make materiality come into existence, ipso facto, from out of nothing.

Whether or not God's nature being different from the universe, means that he couldn't be the cause of it in some sense I find dubious. Its not clear to me at all how you'd make that argument. You could try for a meta inductive argument "All the things that cause things to exist that we know of are material, therefore, it is reasonable to suppose that only material things can cause material things". Might be a bit of a stretch. I'm a naturalist, but that doesn't mean I can't think about something that is alien to what we would call material substance, causing something.

Well sure we can think about it, but I think the more reasonable conclusion is what you call the meta inductive argument, and I think that is seer's point as well. The only alternative is that God made the world, a new substance, magically appear out of nothing.

[seer]

Have you ever considered that God could be 'not nothing', and also 'not something physical'?

I'm not sure what that means...

[Leonhard]

I'm not sure what that means...

Something physical, is something that has position, mass, charge, etc... all the things we know from natural science, and postulate as extentions. You're not a materialist. At least I didn't think you were a materialist to such a degree, that you want to argue that God is made of physical stuff. In Christianity he's conceived of as some sort of utterly simple substance without any parts, spatiotemporal (look up the word) location. He doesn't have any physical properties, he has no weight, no mass, no size, no momentum, no velocity, no charge of any kind. He has the power to do anything that can be done. And creating something 'where before there was nothing' (which is what is meant by creation ex nihilo), is one of those powers which he exercised.

You might use the word 'energy' in a different sense than its typically used. Meaning instead some ephemeral ghost like thing perhaps?

[seer]

Something physical, is something that has position, mass, charge, etc... all the things we know from natural science, and postulate as extentions. You're not a materialist. At least I didn't think you were a materialist to such a degree, that you want to argue that God is made of physical stuff. In Christianity he's conceived of as some sort of utterly simple substance without any parts, spatiotemporal (look up the word) location. He doesn't have any physical properties, he has no weight, no mass, no size, no momentum, no velocity, no charge of any kind. He has the power to do anything that can be done. And creating something 'where before there was nothing' (which is what is meant by creation ex nihilo), is one of those powers which he exercised.

You might use the word 'energy' in a different sense than its typically used. Meaning instead some ephemeral ghost like thing perhaps?

Yes, I'm not sure if the classic view of God is biblical. It is true that God's power extends to every point in His creation and that he can do anything that is possible, but... The bible does say that He has "form" (physical in some sense?). And it speaks of the abode of God, it speaks of His throne, and there are other references that suggest that He is local. But these are just personal musings...