The Origin Of God?

[carrdero]

These are question to see if I am understanding this correctly, if there is no before or after (or if past,present future are the same) is it safe to assume that other spiritual entities existed always as God did or with God?

How does the Genesis human creation account fit into this theory?

Was the apostle Paul presumptious in making this remark?
[color="#000080"]2 Peter 3:8
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."[/color]

Edited July 24, 2007 by carrdero

[aalpha1989]

God created mankind inside of time. we are not denying that there IS time, only that God is subject to it. How could God be subject to something he created?

yes there are spiritual beings which are not subject to time. Angels and demons were created outside of it and at their creation chose good or evil.

[carrdero]

It will take me awhile to consider this information but for the sake of convenience it almost seems as if God has been theorized to receive chronological immunity.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1339285' date='Jul 24 2007, 12:25 AM']These are question to see if I am understanding this correctly, if there is no before or after (or if past,present future are the same) is it safe to assume that other spiritual entities existed always as God did or with God?

How does the Genesis human creation account fit into this theory?

Was the apostle Paul presumptious in making this remark?
[color="#000080"]2 Peter 3:8
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."[/color][/quote]
I explained how we approach this stuff about eternity from human analogies; but look how he compresses a thousand years into one day, that's an attempt at describing how all moments are as one. a thousand is a biblical number for, basically, the biggest possible number; like if a little kid says 'a million' he doesn't mean a finite million, he's picking the biggest number he can think of to describe something huge. that's what the biblical idiom of 1000 was... it also has a parallel in some teenage lingo going "like a thousand years ya know"...

human creation is within time, that point in God's 3-d plane.
the creation of angels is within time, that point in God's 3-d plane.

there are three persons in one God who have always existed. there is a reason there must be more than one person within that being, and there is a reason that there must be only one being that takes this place. it is all clear when you look at God as an ontollogical principal, taking away our anthropomorphisms (though since we have an anthropocentric worldview as Christians, we believe many of these anthropomorphisms to actually reflect a reality of how humanity was actually theomorphized, ie made in the image and likeness of God). The ontological principal: the cause of all existence. There can only be one principal cause of all existence to make a consistent ontological model which accounts for the regularity and constancy of the universe.

as a principal which is the cause-of-all-existence, it must have an attribute within itself and existing within eternity which causes another to exist within itself. this is why "before all ages" the Son is "eternally begotten" from the Principal source of God the Father. God by nature causes something to exist, thus God the Father eternally causes the existence of God the Son. And that causation of existence is the very Spirit of God. Their consubstantial nature is seen in the oneness of the universe caused by them.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1339307' date='Jul 24 2007, 12:40 AM']It will take me awhile to consider this information but for the sake of convenience it almost seems as if God has been theorized to receive chronological immunity.[/quote]
God has been theorized to have been the cause of time itself.

Step back and look at the system you would support if God did change: it is a system in which time is a principal higher than God. You have extended time as a constant with no justification. It would seem to me to make more sense that you have extended your experience into your philosophical system, unable to see outside of your own existence. Like people before we understood the nature of space would have thought of things only in relation to the Earth; you think of God in relation to time because you live within time and thus project time onto all things you conceptualize; whereas experience teaches us this is true of all things within the universe, there is no reason to believe this necessarily extends over things outside the universe.

That's the fundamental difference, and it's one of the fundamental concepts of the 'radical monotheistic revolution' that has inverted the way our society views God away from the way pagans viewed gods... it removes all humanly-projected limitations from God, making Him completely and totally transcendent (thus making way for science to study that which God is transcendent of, the universe, because it can have regular laws not governed by the whims of supernatural beings)

The only difference between the system you originally proposed and the system we espouse is this:

Yours:

TIME
GOD

OURS:

GOD
TIME

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1339312' date='Jul 23 2007, 11:45 PM']human creation is within time, that point in God's 3-d plane.
the creation of angels is within time, that point in God's 3-d plane.[/quote]


ok wait. angels were created in time...but aren't they 'supernatural' (not of our nature)? and if they were created in time...do they experience it as we do? but they are in heaven...does that not mean that they don't experience time? however, demons were cast from heaven to earth so they do experience time. right?

[Aloysius]

they are "preternatural" meaning "above human nature"

"supernatural" means "above nature". humanity receiving the beatific vision is receiving something "supernatural" because it's above human nature... but angelic power is natural to angels, preternatural insofar as it is above human nature.

the creation of angels occurred within time. everything that reaches heaven and the beatific vision comes out of time, breaks out of that point, and reaches eternity. everything that has gone to hell, likewise has reached eternity. but their entrance into eternity, a great mystery which is hard to comprehend, does not mean that they always existed, they have their origin in that point of time and then extend into eternity. human language fails to explain it, because "thens" have no place in a description of eternity, but in a very very imperfect analogy they are like rays, wherein their origin point is the entire duration of time that they once experienced, and the ray line is their eternity.

[carrdero]

[quote]Aloysius writes; That's the fundamental difference, and it's one of the fundamental concepts of the 'radical monotheistic revolution' that has inverted the way our society views God away from the way pagans viewed gods... it removes all humanly-projected limitations from God, making Him completely and totally transcendent (thus making way for science to study that which God is transcendent of, the universe, because it can have regular laws not governed by the whims of supernatural beings).[/quote]

Well this certainly explains His human relation to time but not his behavior which I have known many religions to be guilty of. How would you account for this?

[carrdero]

[quote]Aalpha writes: ok wait. angels were created in time...but aren't they 'supernatural' (not of our nature)?[/quote]
Not to mix threads but this is what I was trying to say; that I believe angels are us. I do not believe that any entity begins their existence in the physical.

[Aloysius]

If you don't mind, we shall save discussion of angels for another time. suffice it to say, if you think that humans have an origin as spiritual beings, there is no reason to label them as "angels"; you ought to simply say "there are no angels, human beings have their origins as spirits and are incarnated"... but that's a whole other discussion.

As to His actions within time: all points in time are, what we temporal beings would deem "the present" to Him. Every point in time is completely the present to Him. Everything He has done in the world has been, then, like one action; He created the world the same "time" He gave Moses the ten commandments which is the same "time" He heard the last prayer I prayed to Him.

Every aspect of that "one-time-act" was done with full knowledge of the state the people within time were, God acted towards them in ways they would understand.

[carrdero]

Last question for the night.

Are these theories backed or comparable to scripture? Are there internet references or books you can recommend for further study?

[Aloysius]

Well, you must realize that we are not sola scripturians, and do not believe something has to be explicitly stated in the bible to be true. What I describe is the product of millenia of theological reflections informed by the scriptures and guided by the Holy Ghost. But here are some scriptures:

The Immutability (Changelessness) of God

Malachi 3:6 "For I am the LORD, I do not change"

"He is the same yesterday, today, and forever." (Hebrews13: 8)

Aquinas's Argument on God's immutability including scriptural references: [url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1009.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1009.htm[/url]

Aquinas on Eternity:
[url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1010.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1010.htm[/url]

that's just a few things off the top of my head.

[adt6247]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1338747' date='Jul 23 2007, 07:24 PM']You’re absolutely right, entering a debate board to discuss and compare my beliefs with others, what was I thinking? I should have just surrenderd myself to faith.[/quote]

I was responding to the quote below, where you stated that you do not have to defend your statements. If you refuse to defend your outrageous and lazy postulations, you are merely a troll. Here is the quote in question:

[quote name='carrdero' post='1338369' date='Jul 23 2007, 03:19 AM']If I was remotely philosophical or in the market of promoting or serving a god, I would probably enjoy the challenge but the GOD that I have come to know and describe does not need defending, believing, proving or worshipping to exist.[/quote]

[carrdero]

[quote name='adt6247' post='1340399' date='Jul 25 2007, 10:06 AM']I was responding to the quote below, where you stated that you do not have to defend your statements. If you refuse to defend your outrageous and lazy postulations, you are merely a troll. Here is the quote in question:[/quote]
[quote name='adt6247' post='1340399' date='Jul 25 2007, 10:06 AM']I was responding to the quote below, where you stated that you do not have to defend your statements. If you refuse to defend your outrageous and lazy postulations, you are merely a troll. Here is the quote in question:[/quote]
The GOD that I describe does not need defending from me, He can take care of Himself.
I can discuss and debate my beliefs because this is a debate board. I have nothing to lose in debating my beliefs. Beliefs come and beliefs go. I practice no faith, so if someone comes along and disproves my argument it does not mean that I lose, it means that I have been enlightened. Why have a debate board if not to discuss, compare and debate one’s beliefs? If this is a “Catholic’s Only Debate Board” than I should be notified immediately that I am on the wrong website. If this is a debate board where only “Catholic Issues” may be debated not only should I be notified immediately but one has to wonder if everyone is of the same faith, why a debate board debating Catholic issues exist? If it is just you who have a problem with me, you do not have to read or respond to my posts. If there is a ignore function on Phatmass, utilize that. To call me a “mere troll” is unfair as well, for I do not remember charging you a monetary toll for safe passage.

Edited July 26, 2007 by carrdero

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1341211' date='Jul 26 2007, 05:18 AM']The GOD that I describe does not need defending from me, He can take care of Himself.
I can discuss and debate my beliefs because this is a debate board. I have nothing to lose in debating my beliefs. Beliefs come and beliefs go. I practice no faith, so if someone comes along and disproves my argument it does not mean that I lose, it means that I have been enlightened. Why have a debate board if not to discuss, compare and debate one’s beliefs? If this is a “Catholic’s Only Debate Board” than I should be notified immediately that I am on the wrong website. If this is a debate board where only “Catholic Issues” may be debated not only should I be notified immediately but one has to wonder if everyone is of the same faith, why a debate board debating Catholic issues exist? If it is just you who have a problem with me, you do not have to read or respond to my posts. If there is a ignore function on Phatmass, utilize that. To call me a “mere troll” is unfair as well, for I do not remember charging you a monetary toll for safe passage.[/quote]
:applause:

[carrdero]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1340013' date='Jul 24 2007, 08:07 PM']Well, you must realize that we are not sola scripturians, and do not believe something has to be explicitly stated in the bible to be true. What I describe is the product of millenia of theological reflections informed by the scriptures and guided by the Holy Ghost. But here are some scriptures:

The Immutability (Changelessness) of God

Malachi 3:6 "For I am the LORD, I do not change"

"He is the same yesterday, today, and forever." (Hebrews13: 8)

Aquinas's Argument on God's immutability including scriptural references: [url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1009.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1009.htm[/url]

Aquinas on Eternity:
[url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1010.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1010.htm[/url]

that's just a few things off the top of my head.[/quote]
Thanks for the links Aloysius, I shall consider all of them.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1341213' date='Jul 26 2007, 05:31 AM']Thanks for the links Aloysius, I shall consider all of them.[/quote]
Aloysius tends to provide good stuff.

[carrdero]

[quote]Aloysius writes: I explained how we approach this stuff about eternity from human analogies; but look how he compresses a thousand years into one day, that's an attempt at describing how all moments are as one. a thousand is a biblical number for, basically, the biggest possible number; like if a little kid says 'a million' he doesn't mean a finite million, he's picking the biggest number he can think of to describe something huge. that's what the biblical idiom of 1000 was... it also has a parallel in some teenage lingo going "like a thousand years ya know"...[/quote]

From a Biblical standpoint I have heard different reasonings from other religions that may have taken that scripture quite literarly. The one thing that I can agree upon is that human time is not the same as GOD time.

[quote]Aloysius writes: there are three persons in one God who have always existed. there is a reason there must be more than one person within that being, and there is a reason that there must be only one being that takes this place. it is all clear when you look at God as an ontollogical principal, taking away our anthropomorphisms (though since we have an anthropocentric worldview as Christians, we believe many of these anthropomorphisms to actually reflect a reality of how humanity was actually theomorphized, ie made in the image and likeness of God). The ontological principal: the cause of all existence. There can only be one principal cause of all existence to make a consistent ontological model which accounts for the regularity and constancy of the universe.[/quote]

The trinity may be another thread entirely. The only understanding that I can offer on this subject is that I believe that GOD is a muti-tasker and can usually be found everywhere.

The “image of GOD” for me may be thought because that is what image means for me. As an artist, I am required to come up with different images if I plan to fill a blank piece of paper. These images can include locations, props, inanimate objects and also character designs. If I am comparing this scripture to the creation of man, I am in no way insinuatiing that GOD looks or behaves like a human but would rather propose the belief that GOD imagined humans to be created that way and again, I must remind you of my belief that GOD may have had assistance during the formation of the earth and its inhabitants. Not that GOD required help but I believe that He welcomed it from other creative spiritual entities.

[quote]Aloysius writes: as a principal which is the cause-of-all-existence, it must have an attribute within itself and existing within eternity which causes another to exist within itself. this is why "before all ages" the Son is "eternally begotten" from the Principal source of God the Father. God by nature causes something to exist, thus God the Father eternally causes the existence of God the Son. And that causation of existence is the very Spirit of God. Their consubstantial nature is seen in the oneness of the universe caused by them.[/quote]

Would you consider this to be the Word as depicted in the opening of the Bible? I may not lean toward the belief of an eternally begotten Son but I do entertain a belief of “children” or aspects of GOD. Other entities who are a part of GOD but are individual of Him. The only example that I can compare this to is when parents have children. This child may have been conceived, nurtured in a womb and cared for by parents and even physically resemble them but this individual has a different personality, purpose and existence from their parents. I also do not believe that parents own their children.

[quote]Aloysius writes:Step back and look at the system you would support if God did change: it is a system in which time is a principal higher than God. You have extended time as a constant with no justification. It would seem to me to make more sense that you have extended your experience into your philosophical system, unable to see outside of your own existence. Like people before we understood the nature of space would have thought of things only in relation to the Earth; you think of God in relation to time because you live within time and thus project time onto all things you conceptualize; whereas experience teaches us this is true of all things within the universe, there is no reason to believe this necessarily extends over things outside the universe.[/quote]

Not necessarily. If GOD was ignorant and then became intelligent this would be considered change and He would have no concept of time or how long He was ignorant. Ignorance (imperfection) and intelligence are changes not measured by time. If GOD is eternal I do not think time is a principal to Him at all (unless He has a specific date to keep). If GOD had created something (and I have done this myself) there is not any concept of time going by. Many times I have looked up from my work to a clock and thought whoa, no way did that much time go by. If GOD made a mistake and had to change one of His creations, I do not think we would be hearing of a eternal GOD complaining how much time and effort he spent on this creation and about having to do it all over again.

The concern that I think you have in a unchanging GOD (despite the many contrary examples in the Bible) is that you have a unease for GOD having a reason to change. If GOD changes His mind or ways than everything you believe to be, cannot be supported. In this case, if you believe in a GOD who has always been perfect, your very perspective of GOD would exist in the expectancy of what you have hoped it to exist (which really is no way for any entity to exist). For many, a GOD who at one time made mistakes but who now has achieved perfection is not very Supreme or impressionable and may not be considered worthy of worship (Why should anyone worship or be in awe of a god who has made mistakes? We all have made mistakes.). The contracts and promises that primitive human cultures have made with God and extended to future generations would become null and void. The relationships that primitive ancestors have had with what they would deem a Supreme deity would have to be re-questoned and re-examined. A GOD who changes would no longer be existing for us or our expectations.

Edited July 26, 2007 by carrdero

[Sirklawd]

Since this is getting no where....

So you believe that there are other beings that may have helped your god. who are they? what created them? if they created them and helped create us do you worship them too? How come they didnt come down to earth and introduce themselves to us?

Note: you will get no one on this board to entertain your beliefs. you will get no one to speculate these ideas with you. What you will get is alot of people trying to encourage to see how illogical your ideas are and how, when placed in reality, they just cant work. How do you justify evil in the world?, how do you explain the disconnect between man and the "creation entities" you've thought up [ie: why cant we see/hear/be with them]? What happens when we die? What is the different relationships between all these creation entities and how do they all feel about us?

You should really check out "Everlasting Man" by GK Chesterton. It's a vast overview of the history of man and the various religious beliefs he's held throughout time, why man has held them, the repercussion of these beliefs on man, and how Christ changed it all. Chesterton is a great author, very humble and charming. The book doesnt beat christianity into you, so dont think that.

Edited July 26, 2007 by Sirklawd

[adt6247]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1341239' date='Jul 26 2007, 09:12 AM']Not necessarily. If GOD was ignorant and then became intelligent this would be considered change and He would have no concept of time or how long He was ignorant. Ignorance (imperfection) and intelligence are changes not measured by time.[/quote]
In that case, the being who you call "God" must have had a creator. He thus cannot be the definition of existence. He would depend on something else. Ultimately, there must be a first creator that is the definition for existence that had no beginning and no end, and operate outside of time. There HAS to be an unmoved mover. Whether or not you believe this is the God of Abraham or not is irrelevant to the underlying philosophical and logical principals. Time is linear and unidirectional. It is a vector. This vector has to have a starting point, and a direction, though the magnitude is infinity. That starting point has to intersect with its creator. You can abstract it any number of levels you like, but there has to be a creator of everything that is unchanging. Your system is incomplete, irrational, and flies against the faith of all Christians (and no, Mormons aren't Christian).