saemo Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Why assume that it must have been created?ummmm, because uncreated-ness is a nature of God, so if you're saying natural law is uncreated, then you're saying natural law is a god, which then goes into the conversation Hughes is having re: the logical impossibility of two omni-anything beings existing simultaneously.
LeSellers Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 uncreated-ness is a nature of God, How do you know this?Uncreatedness is a "nature" of everything, if you mean it has always existed in some form or other. Lehi
saemo Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 If you re-read my statement I said nothing about the Bible's being moot. I said it was the issue of intepretation that is moot. It helps when one responds to the words at hand, rather than an assumed message that has nothing to do with the writer's thought.LehiSo, the interpretation of the Bible is moot, but the interpretation of what you say is not.Got it.
altersteve Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 ummmm, because uncreated-ness is a nature of God, so if you're saying natural law is uncreated, then you're saying natural law is a god, which then goes into the conversation Hughes is having re: the logical impossibility of two omni-anything beings existing simultaneously.CFR that "uncreated-ness is a nature of God," and that natural law is "a god" if it is uncreated.
LeSellers Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 So, the interpretation of the Bible is moot, but the interpretation of what you say is not.Got it.Somehow, I do not see that you have.Lehi 1
saemo Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) CFR that "uncreated-ness is a nature of God," and that natural law is "a god" if it is uncreated.GOD created all things in heaven and earth.You, being one of God's Creations, did you create something, someone, stars, what?It is rather obvious isn't it, that God Creates, and that which is created (you) does not.GOD CREATES, if God is uncreated, who/what, created God?You've only replaced this understanding of God with something else called natural law. Though, natural law as being defined here is not natural law as I understand it, but that would be another conversation. Edited July 25, 2011 by saemo
saemo Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Somehow, I do not see that you have.LehiWell, I can't really take seriously the idea that what you have to say is more important to understand than Scripture. Nothing personal against you, I just think that would be a mighty offense against God.
zerinus Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) So the LDS don't hold the doctrine of omnipresence? And what is the other false doctrine?David couldn't be more clear. He isn't talking about influence or his guilty conscious, rather he is specifically referring to God's presence.LDS believe that God is omnipresent, but not in the same way that you do. In the Psalm you quoted, it explains how:Psalm 139:7 Where can I go from your Spirit?Where can I flee from your presence?8 If I go up to the heavens, you are there;if I make my bed in the depths [Hebrew Sheol], you are there.9 If I rise on the wings of the dawn,if I settle on the far side of the sea,10 even there your hand will guide me,your right hand will hold me fast.11 If I say, “Surely the darkness will hide meand the light become night around me,”12 even the darkness will not be dark to you;the night will shine like the day,for darkness is as light to you.God is able to be everywhere present by the power of His Spirit. God is a corporeal being (think of Jesus), therefore he cannot be physically everywhere present. But He has a Spirit that proceeds from Him by means of which He is both able to be present everywhere (and be conscious of everything), as well as be able to exercise power and influence over everything. In other words, it is by means of that Spirit that He is able not only to be omnipresent, but also omniscient and omnipotent.The Gospel of John says that Jesus was the light that lights every man that comes into the world. It is by means of that same light, or Spirit, that God is able to be omnipresent as well as omnipotent and omniscient. What does it mean to be "present" somewhere anyway? It means that you are able to see the situation at all times, interact with it if need be, and influence it as you please. Well, if God has a power, an influence, or a Spirit emanating from Him that enables Him to do that everywhere and always, that makes Him omnipresent without being physically in that location. That is how omnipresence is defined in LDS theology. Edited July 25, 2011 by zerinus
Nathair/|\ Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Not sure I follow. Nature exists ex nihilo?No, because there was never (as much as we can speak of "time" at all) a time or state where nature did not exist. Ex nihilo implies a transition from a state of nothingness to a state where there is something. My linkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKM8rK0hZYI
Vance Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 ummmm, because uncreated-ness is a nature of God, . . . Why this presumption? . . . so if you're saying natural law is uncreated, then you're saying natural law is a god, . . . Only if I accept your unwarranted presumption. which then goes into the conversation Hughes is having re: the logical impossibility of two omni-anything beings existing simultaneously.Sorry, but the existence of one "uncreated" thing doesn't preclude the existence of another.
Vance Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 GOD created all things in heaven and earth.You, being one of God's Creations, did you create something, someone, stars, what?It is rather obvious isn't it, that God Creates, and that which is created (you) does not.GOD CREATES, if God is uncreated, who/what, created God?You've only replaced this understanding of God with something else called natural law. Though, natural law as being defined here is not natural law as I understand it, but that would be another conversation.I have created furniture, does that mean I created it from nothing?You are presuming that the word "create" means "ex nihilo". Which is just that, a presumption.
zerinus Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 I see now why LDS don't believe God is omnipresent, it would be logically impossible in a belief where there is something that has exists outside, or before (?), God. I don't see this "god' as Biblical.Peace.LDS believe that God is omnipresent. See my previous post.
zerinus Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 ummmm, because uncreated-ness is a nature of God, so if you're saying natural law is uncreated, then you're saying natural law is a god, which then goes into the conversation Hughes is having re: the logical impossibility of two omni-anything beings existing simultaneously.In LDS theology, both nature and natural law was created by God. We believe that the fundamental elements out of which the universe was created were eternal and were not created; but that is not the same thing as saying that the organized world is eternal and has not been created. By "nature" I understand to mean the organized world that we observe around us, such as the animal kingdom, the vegetable kingdom, and the mineral kingdom (including planets and stars). I don't understand it to mean the basic elements out of which organized world was made. That clearly was created.As for your contention that two beings cannot be omniscient at the same time, or that for something to coexist eternally with God would make that thing to be God, there is simply no logical basis for that assertion. You are building a false philosophical house of cards for yourself that has no scriptural foundation and falls down with the slightest push.
Anakin7 Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 LDS believe that God is omnipresent. See my previous post. Yes we believe that and True LDS Doctrine, Teaching, Thought, Practice, Walk is That GOD is Functionaly Omipresent by the Power of The Holy Ghost and His Creations Throughout the Universe. In his Debt/Grace,
saemo Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) I have created furniture, does that mean I created it from nothing?Are you God? Who/what created the wood?You are presuming that the word "create" means "ex nihilo". Which is just that, a presumption.The Bible is clear, God is the Creator of ALL things.I believe ALL means ALL, not everything except that one thing that Mormons think exists outside of God's Creation. Edited July 25, 2011 by saemo
LeSellers Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Well, I can't really take seriously the idea that what you have to say is more important to understand than Scripture. Nothing personal against you, I just think that would be a mighty offense against God.You have, yet again, failed to understand what I actually said. It's not interpreting scripture that is moot, it's anyone's particular interpretation. Given any passage of scripture, there will be several different ways of understanding it. Some will be in direct opposition to each other. They cannot all be true. Resorting to the Bible, because it does not and cannot speak for itself, will never resolve the question. The reason for this failure is that there is no one, a prophet excepted, can claim any authority to back his interpretation over that of another. That's why Bible bashing is a useless sport. It's fun for the spectators in the same way football or any other waste of time is: if your team's "winning", life is great. If not, it's the umpire's fault. Lehi
saemo Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 In LDS theology, both nature and natural law was created by God. We believe that the fundamental elements out of which the universe was created were eternal and were not created; but that is not the same thing as saying that the organized world is eternal and has not been created. By "nature" I understand to mean the organized world that we observe around us, such as the animal kingdom, the vegetable kingdom, and the mineral kingdom (including planets and stars). I don't understand it to mean the basic elements out of which organized world was made. That clearly was created.As for your contention that two beings cannot be omniscient at the same time, or that for something to coexist eternally with God would make that thing to be God, there is simply no logical basis for that assertion. You are building a false philosophical house of cards for yourself that has no scriptural foundation and falls down with the slightest push.It's clear logic. Omni-anything means all encompassing, whether that is presence, knowledge, etc. If there is more than one omni, that presence, knowledge, etc, has been divided between however many omni's you have going, making them logically, omni-nothing.
saemo Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 You have, yet again, failed to understand what I actually said. It's not interpreting scripture that is moot, it's anyone's particular interpretation. Given any passage of scripture, there will be several different ways of understanding it. Some will be in direct opposition to each other. They cannot all be true. Resorting to the Bible, because it does not and cannot speak for itself, will never resolve the question. The reason for this failure is that there is no one, a prophet excepted, can claim any authority to back his interpretation over that of another. That's why Bible bashing is a useless sport. It's fun for the spectators in the same way football or any other waste of time is: if your team's "winning", life is great. If not, it's the umpire's fault. LehiAh well, I believe Christ established an authority to interpret Scripture, so it is not moot to me. It is a gift, of the Holy Spirit, Who was given to Christ's Church at Pentecost.Peace.
Anakin7 Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) Are you God? Who/what created the wood?The Bible is clear, God is the Creator of ALL things.I believe ALL means ALL, not everything except that one thing that Mormons think exists outside of God's Creation.From my LDS JEDI KNIGHT Archive - http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormon_view_of_the_Creaation_ex_nihilo In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT Edited July 25, 2011 by Anakin7
zerinus Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) GOD created all things in heaven and earth.Agreed.You, being one of God's Creations, did you create something, someone, stars, what?If you mean create "out of nothing," the answer is No. But we don't think God created something out of nothing either. However, if by "create" you mean to make, to manufacture, the answer is yes, man can be creative, but not on the same level as God can be. Remember, God made man in His own image. That means that as God is creative, so is man, though not on the same level as God.It is rather obvious isn't it, that God Creates, and that which is created (you) does not.Not true. See above.GOD CREATES, if God is uncreated, who/what, created God?God is not created. God has always been God.You've only replaced this understanding of God with something else called natural law. Though, natural law as being defined here is not natural law as I understand it, but that would be another conversation.If by natural law is meant the laws that govern the universe, such as gravity or electromagnetic force, or the law by which elements are combined to make chemical compounds, or the laws that determine how plants grow and animals to survive and reproduce, those laws were created by God. Edited July 25, 2011 by zerinus 1
zerinus Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Well, I can't really take seriously the idea that what you have to say is more important to understand than Scripture. Nothing personal against you, I just think that would be a mighty offense against God.That is a bit rich, coming from someone who prefers philosophical speculation over scriptural revelation. 1
LeSellers Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 GOD created all things in heaven and earth.Yes, He did. However, what you imagine about "creation" and what we know about it makes a huge difference in what that means to each of us. You, being one of God's Creations, did you create something, someone, stars, what?Yes, I have created (with more than a bit of help) seven of His children's bodies. It is rather obvious isn't it, that God Creates, and that which is created (you) does not.Non sequitur. GOD CREATES, if God is uncreated, who/what, created God?You are begging the question. You cannot demonstrate that "God is uncreated". You've only replaced this understanding of God with something else called natural law. Though, natural law as being defined here is not natural law as I understand it, but that would be another conversation.No. the problem is not "what is natural law?", but "what does it mean to create?""Create" does not mean "create ex nihilo". It means "organize" or "fashion" [out of pre-existing material]. The Hebrew word is bara. It is said that this only applies to God. This is not true. It is also said that bara means "creatio ex nihilo". This is false. Brown, Driver, and Briggs are clear: it means "to create, shape, form". A second definition is "to cut down or to cut out".We create all the time. I create books and plans. I have created children, and barns, and roads, and a myriad of other things. I have formed them, fashioned them, cut them out, and shaped them. I have created them. Lehi
Anakin7 Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 From my LDS JEDI KNIGHT Archive - http://en.fairmormon...ation_ex_nihilo In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT Repost for Saemo
saemo Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) Agreed.If you mean create "out of nothing," the answer is No. But we don't think God created something out of nothing either. However, if by "create" you mean to make, to manufacture, the answer is yes, man can be creative, but not on the same level as God can be. Remember, God made man in His own image. That means that as God is creative, so is man, though not on the same level as God.Not true. See above.God is not created. God has always been God.To Create I mean to Create, as in, it didn't exist before but now it does. If something existed before God, this brings to light at least two theological problems, one that something exists outside of God, and second that God is not the Creator of all things.If by natural law is meant the laws that govern the universe, such as gravity or electromagnetic force, or the law by which elements are combined to make chemical compounds, or the laws that determine how plants grow and animals to survive and reproduce, those laws were created by God.I prefer to not quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), because it gives the impression I'm focusing on Catholicism only, when I know that there are universal beliefs among all Christians that are expressed in the CCC. But for this instance, I'll quote the CCC, with the understanding that this is a universal belief. This is my understanding of what "natural law" is:1954 Man participates in the wisdom and goodness of the Creator who gives him mastery over his acts and the ability to govern himself with a view to the true and the good. The natural law expresses the original moral sense which enables man to discern by reason the good and the evil, the truth and the lie:The natural law is written and engraved in the soul of each and every man, because it is human reason ordaining him to do good and forbidding him to sin . . . But this command of human reason would not have the force of law if it were not the voice and interpreter of a higher reason to which our spirit and our freedom must be submitted. Edited July 25, 2011 by saemo
saemo Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Yes, He did. However, what you imagine about "creation" and what we know about it makes a huge difference in what that means to each of us. Yes, I have created (with more than a bit of help) seven of His children's bodies. Non sequitur. You are begging the question. You cannot demonstrate that "God is uncreated". No. the problem is not "what is natural law?", but "what does it mean to create?""Create" does not mean "create ex nihilo". It means "organize" or "fashion" [out of pre-existing material]. The Hebrew word is bara. It is said that this only applies to God. This is not true. It is also said that bara means "creatio ex nihilo". This is false. Brown, Driver, and Briggs are clear: it means "to create, shape, form". A second definition is "to cut down or to cut out".We create all the time. I create books and plans. I have created children, and barns, and roads, and a myriad of other things. I have formed them, fashioned them, cut them out, and shaped them. I have created them. LehiLehi, I hope you understand there is a difference between procreating and creating.But all in all, I see Mormonism has redefined the word "create". Nothing to be done about that!Peace.
Recommended Posts