Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

enummaelish

Deification in the Bible

Recommended Posts

You forgot to check your Lexicon again johnny. In Genesis 1 and Colossians 1, "heaven' is the sky and outer space so Jesus (Jehovah, who is the God spoken of in both places) created everything visible and invisible in the physical universe, not the place where God dwells. 
You forgot to read the complete Catholic teaching in my earlier post:

Catholic teaching does not match what the Bible says, which is why I checked the various Lexicons and encourage you to do the same.

The Scriptural expression "heaven and earth" means all that exists, creation in its entirety. It also indicates the bond, deep within creation, that both unites heaven and earth and distinguishes the one from the other: "the earth" is the world of men, while "heaven" or "the heavens" can designate both the firmament and God's own "place" - "our Father in heaven" and consequently the "heaven" too which is eschatological glory. Finally, "heaven" refers to the saints and the "place" of the spiritual creatures, the angels, who surround God. [Pss 115:16; 19:2; Mt 5:16] (CCC326).

None of this addresses the verses in question, Gen 1 and Col 1.

There are multiple words translated as 'heaven' in the Bible. Almost everyone of them can mean the sky OR the place where God dwells. Your problem is going to be that the primary definition and usage of the words translated as 'heaven' in Gen 1 and Col 1 is the sky and outer space whereas the words used other verses not related to the creation refer specifically to the place where God dwells.

Still no creation ex nihilo.

Share this post


Link to post
BCSpace writes,

Catholic teaching does not match what the Bible says, which is why I checked the various Lexicons and encourage you to do the same.

Check you lexicon what is says about "heaven and earth".

Your point was about "heaven" ... my point was "heaven and earth".

None of this addresses the verses in question, Gen 1 and Col 1.

It address Gen 1 ... Gen 1:1 is talking about "heaven and earth" ... my point was about "heaven and earth"

There are multiple words translated as 'heaven' in the Bible.

Again what is the usage "heaven and earth" ... not just "heaven".

Still no creation ex nihilo.

What was before Gen 1:1?

Share this post


Link to post

Another Bible written by Micheal the Arch angel. :P

The Bible never tells us where God came from.. he just was.

Share this post


Link to post
You forgot to read the complete Catholic teaching in my earlier post:

Okay Johnny, either it's teachings that are found in the Bible or teachings found in Catholic teachings and "THEIR" interpretation of the Bible.

Johnny, do you understand the physics behind time? I don't, but I do know a little.

Time in a dimension, and we live in a four dimensional universe. Height, width, depth, and time are the dimesions (Three spatial and one temporal).

Now suppose, there is a three dimensional universe (Two spatial and one temporal.) that existed in our universe somehow. It's spatial dimension isn't necessarily the same spatial dimension that we have and are influenced by and it's even plausible that we could interact with their temporal dimension the same way we interact with one of our spatial dimension. We could go forward in their temporal dimension or even go backwards in it. In a way, their past, present, and future would be all before our eyes.

Now, how many three dimensional universes could we stack on top of each other until we fill up our universe? Theoritically, we could stack an infinite amount and it would not take up any space in the stacking direction and each of these universes would be totally independent from each other, each with their own laws of physics and their own temporal dimension. If we could take an inhabitant from one of these universes and transported him to another compatible universe and then some time later take him back, in our time, a year might have passed, in his original universe, a billion years might have passed, and in the new universe, three seconds might have passed.

Now, suppose God the Father lives in a five dimensional universe, four spatial and one temporal, His temporal dimension would be totally different from ours and He would probably be able to treat our four dimensional universe much like we could treat a three dimensional universe.

So, our universe could have a beginning and God still be subject to time, His own temporal dimension.

Some of the latest theories in dimensional physics have it that our universe came from a partial collaspe of an at least, eleven dimensional universe.

So, God, in my opinion, is completely outside of our temporal dimension, but is still subject to a temporal dimension, how else could He say something or even do something without being subject to a temporal dimension. In order for there to be any type of change, a change in time has to occur.

In order for God to have created the our universe, He had to do something and without being subject to a temporal dimension, how could He decide to do that something or, in fact, anything?

Share this post


Link to post

The problem Johnny, is that if the first act of creation is the creation of light, then by definition, everything that existed before that first act of creation is uncreated (or else creation would have begun with its creation).

The other questions are largely meaningless. Time begins when it is defined. We might note, for example, that "the beginning" demarcates a finite boundary of creation. And if so, then God (whose existence you believe is infinite) has been creating for only a finite period of time. Since you indicated earlier that you believe that creation is a defininf attribute of God, then this indicates that God has only been God (as indicated by his creative attributes) for only a finite period of time, and thus only became God when He began to create.

Of course, an infinite existence relative to a finite period of creation suggests that God has been a creator for approximately none of his existence (that is, a finite period divided by an infinite period equals zero). So, while the questions are clever, they really don't have much meaning. How long ago do you believe the "in the beginning" was? And do you believe that it marks the beginning of the creative acts of God?

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
urroner writes,

In order for God to have created the our universe, He had to do something and without being subject to a temporal dimension, how could He decide to do that something or, in fact, anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Theoritically, we could stack an infinite amount and it would not take up any space in the stacking direction and each of these universes would be totally independent from each other, each with their own laws of physics and their own temporal dimension. If we could take an inhabitant from one of these universes and transported him to another compatible universe and then some time later take him back, in our time, a year might have passed, in his original universe, a billion years might have passed, and in the new universe, three seconds might have passed.
Of course, an infinite existence relative to a finite period of creation suggests that God has been a creator for approximately none of his existence (that is, a finite period divided by an infinite period equals zero). So, while the questions are clever, they really don't have much meaning. How long ago do you believe the "in the beginning" was? And do you believe that it marks the beginning of the creative acts of God?

Ben and Urroner - it was so good to read your posts! I sometimes wondered if others shared some of the ideas I did on these subjects. Urroner your post was a very good description of my views on God having power and dominion over higher states of existance (higher dimensions). It makes so much sense when one reads of how Christ was able to appear to the eleven gathered in a locked room after His resurrection. Or how Moses was able to be "lifted up" and see all the creations of God before him.

Ben your post reflects my thinking as to why we can not have any meaningful existance without an afterlife. No matter how long we live, if death was the end, all of our mortality would mean nothing in the face of the eternities.

Share this post


Link to post
TOmNossor writes,

he problem with your quotes are that they derive from what LDS would call apostate developments. Clement of Rome and Justin Martyr support creation ex materia. Before Justin Martyr you do not find creation ex nihilo ideas.Charity, TOm

Do you see any problem where these quotes contradict that what is revealed in Bible?

I do not believe ex nihilo is taught in the Bible.

I believe the Bible is better understood as teaching ex materia creation.

However, I do not believe that ex nihilo is necessarily unbiblical. It is not as good of a read as ex materia, but the Bible may be stretched to such a view.

This if fine for the Catholic Church because you have tradition and authoritative interpretation. It is a greater problem for the Catholic Church that Clement of Rome, Justin Martyr, and every pre second century source points to ex materia. It could be suggested that this is a departure from traditions.

I do not go so far as to say this. Instead, I believe that Justin Martyr was a single Christian who very clearly embraced ex materia. Other than his words there is little explicitly said. So in the absence of hard theological statements the Catholic Church (seeking to elevate the sovereignty of God) developed ex nihilo creation. This was not made dogma until the 4th Lateran council.

For me this is a very critical issue. LDS and Catholic deification are largely similar (in their best understanding) with only one irreconcilable difference. That is the initial creator/creature dichotomy. You introduce additional restraints upon Catholic views of deification that I believe David Waltz does not. Many critics of the LDS introduce additional aspects into LDS deification that I believe are speculative and do not adequately account for the concept of unity. We will not become Gods besides, above, ... GOD. We will become united with God. That does not mean that we will not create, and perhaps we will. But unity with God will be an aspect of our divinity.

When critics (and any LDS who might think we become separate from God if any still exist and have not become ex-Mormons) LDS deification as a uniting with God, and when Catholic, Protestants, and EOs begin to define deification in more clear terms (rather than anti-LDS terms) I believe we will find that we are more similar than different. Again the key issue derives from ex nihilo and the radical creator/creature dichotomy. LDS do not embrace this, non-LDS uniformly and completely (to my knowledge) do. This is a development. If it is a true development we should become Catholics. If it is a perversion of the original gospel, you should become a LDS. The fact that it is a development and Joseph Smith restored previously held ideas I think should give non-LDS reason to pause.

Charity, TOm

Share this post


Link to post
The first act of his creation is "the heavens and the earth" ... And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep ... And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

This is incorrect. You cannot ignore the formula presented in Genesis 1 for creation:

Share this post


Link to post
TOmNossor  writes,

However, I do not believe that ex nihilo is necessarily unbiblical.

I would agree that ex nihilo is not unbiblical.

It could be suggested that this is a departure from traditions.

Or it could be suggested that it is a clarifcation of tradition.

LDS and Catholic deification are largely similar (in their best understanding) with only one irreconcilable difference.

I see the differences between LDS and Catholic deification as much larger.

I believe we will find that we are more similar than different.

I believe we are very different in our beliefs. I have presented some of these differences at my web site:

http://comparing-views.com/book/toc.htm

If it is a true development we should become Catholics.

I believe it is a true development and that is one reason why I am a Catholic.

If it is a perversion of the original gospel, you should become a LDS.

I believe Mormonism is a perversion of the original gospel.

The fact that it is a development and Joseph Smith restored previously held ideas I think should give non-LDS reason to pause.

I have paused and have investigated the teachings of Mormon Church and the spirit of Truth has lead me to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Share this post


Link to post
Still no creation ex nihilo. 
What was before Gen 1:1?

In this universe? Matter unorganized as suggested by the Hebrew word translated as 'created' in Genesis 1.

Still no creation ex nihilo.

Share this post


Link to post
enummaelish  writes,

This is incorrect. You cannot ignore the formula presented in Genesis 1 for creation:

Share this post


Link to post
BCSpace  writes,

In this universe? Matter unorganized as suggested by the Hebrew word translated as 'created' in Genesis 1.

Are you saying that unorganized matter is not part of "the heavens and the earth" that was created?

Still no creation ex nihilo.

Clearly creation ex nihilo ...

Share this post


Link to post
Simply put ... I believe my reading is consistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Ok. But Catholic and Biblical theology remain two separate issues. Biblical theology, as has been shown, professes creation from unorganized matter.

Also, I suppose from your failure to address the specific issues I raised regarding II Maccabbees that you concede the point.

Share this post


Link to post
In this universe? Matter unorganized as suggested by the Hebrew word translated as 'created' in Genesis 1.
Are you saying that unorganized matter is not part of "the heavens and the earth" that was created?

Are you saying that there was matter unorganized BEFORE the creation mentioned in Genesis 1?

LOL! Checkmate.

Still no creation ex nihilo. 
Clearly creation ex nihilo ...

Not if, as you suggest, that unorganized matter was created before the creation mentioned in Genesis 1. Since that is the only creation mentioned in the Bible, it certainly isn't ex nihilo and therefore creation ex nihilo cannot be found or supported in the Bible.

Share this post


Link to post
enummaelish  writes,

Ok. But Catholic and Biblical theology remain two separate issues. Biblical theology, as has been shown, professes creation from unorganized matter.

How can they be seprate issues ... the teachings of the Catholic are consistent with what is revealed in the Bible.

Also, I suppose from your failure to address the specific issues I raised regarding II Maccabbees that you concede the point.

I just addressed it see my earlier post ...

2Macc 7 says "God did not make them out of things that existed" ... sounds like out of nothing ... I do not concede your point.

Share this post


Link to post
BCSpace  writes,

Are you saying that there was matter unorganized BEFORE the creation mentioned in Genesis 1?

I am saying their was nothingness before God created.

Not if, as you suggest, that unorganized matter was created before the creation mentioned in Genesis 1. Since that is the only creation mentioned in the Bible, it certainly isn't ex nihilo and therefore creation ex nihilo cannot be found or supported in the Bible. 

I am not talking about unorganized matter ... I am talking about nothingness.

Clearly ex nihilo is found in the Bible because their was nothingness or their was no "heavens and earth" ... "the heavens and the earth" are matter.

Share this post


Link to post

Johnny,

Did you forget the first post on this thread:

Now, I assume that your comment refers to II Maccabees 7:28, an Apocryphal book included in the Catholic cannon, but not in Protestant Bibles. People unfamiliar with the Hellenized doctrine of creation ex nihilo have frequently misread this verse:

Share this post


Link to post
enummaelish  writes,

It is quite clear to scholars who specialize

The Catholic scholars who wrote the Catholic Catechism are clear ...

The key to understanding the statement in verse 28

The key to understanding is read the words "Look at the heaven and the earth and see everything that is in them, and recognize that God did not make them out of things that existed."

The words "Did not make them out of things that existed" sounds like nothingness.

Share this post


Link to post

Johnny who has the right to interpret their own scriptures. Catholics... or Jews?

Share this post


Link to post

Ok.

Well, thanks for playing.

I didn't think you could ever be reasoned with.

But I tried.

I still love you and so do the Gods.

Share this post


Link to post
Zakuska  writes,

Johnny who has the right to interpret their own scriptures. Catholics... or Jews?

The Catholic Church has the authority from Christ to interpret holy scripture.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...