Ex Nihilo Creation - Problems

[_huckelberry]

Again. Do you believe that God has free will?

Yes, why not?

I, and LDS, absolutely believe that God has free will.

Earlier, you essentially argued that God could not have free will.

Only, at the time you did not realize that was what you were arguing.

-7up

If you wish conversation it would help if you stated how you see me as having argued such a thing.

[_huckelberry]

"[Evangelicals assume] that God must create morally fallible persons if he creates them free. However, that is not true given the evangelical view of creation ex nihilo, for if God creates ex nihilo, then he can create any persons that it is logically possible to create. He certainly could have created more morally sensitive and rational persons than we are. Richard Swinburne has argued that a perfectly rational being is necessarily good. There is no logical reason that God could not have created perfectly rational beings who are perfectly good even though they are free to choose evil if they wish. If Swinburne is correct, the fact that a person always rationally chooses to do what is right is not incompatible with libertarian free will. Given the creedal view, there is no reason that God could not have created perfectly rational persons who would always see by the light of reason that choosing what is right is the most rational course. us God had open to him the possibility of creating more intelligent and morally sensitive creatures who would bring about less evil than we do through our sheer irrationality. God is thus morally indictable for having created creatures who bring about more evil than other creatures he could have created from nothing."

-7up

"for if God creates exnilo then he can create any person that is logically possible , he could have created more morally sensitive persons than us"

That is pure, lets suppose.There is nobody who actually knows that exnilo guarantees such is actually the case. The fact that the results of creation, us, do not match suggests that the premise is inaccurate.

I am not particularly sold on the idea that reason is adaquate to always choose good. I think love is necessary.

[_seven7up]

Again. Do you believe that God has free will?

Yes, why not?

I, and other LDS, absolutely believe that God has free will.
Earlier, you essentially argued that God could not have free will.
Only, at the time you did not realize that was what you were arguing.

If you wish conversation it would help if you stated how you see me as having argued such a thing.

I can do that. You said:

"To my view. only spirits created from nothing can be free. Otherwise an escape from the determinism of matter, environmental structures, preexisting character and random events is hard to see."

Therefore, you are essentially saying that in order for God to have free will, then God had to be a spirit created from nothing. Do you believe that God is a spirit created from nothing, or do you believe that God has free will? OR do you want to take back that original statement?

Now let's look at some of the teachings in the LDS gospel:

[The mind of] man was in the beginning with God. Intelligence... was not created or made, nor can it be. (D&C 93:29)

"If there are two [inteligences], even though one is more inteligent than the other, they have no beginning." (Abraham 3:18)

"The mind of man is as immortal as God himself" (Joseph Smith teachings)

"It says 'God made man out of the earth and put into him Adam's spirit, and so became a living body.' The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is [co-eternal] with God himself. I know that my testimony is true . . . Is it logical to say that the intelligence of spirits is immortal, and yet that it had a beginning? The intelligence of spirits had no beginning, neither will it have an end."

So Huckleberry, if you are going argue that the Mormon view of God, creation and humanity does not allow for free will, then you also have to argue that God has no free will. That argument is flawed. God and man both have free will, as both have always existed in some form or another.

This is an important topic because love, without free will and choice, is not true love. Does God truly love us?

-7up

[_huckelberry]

Therefore, you are essentially saying that in order for God to have free will, then God had to be a spirit created from nothing. Do you believe that God is a spirit created from nothing, or do you believe that God has free will? OR do you want to take back that original statement?

Now let's look at some of the teachings in the LDS gospel:

[The mind of] man was in the beginning with God. Intelligence... was not created or made, nor can it be. (D&C 93:29)


"It says 'God made man out of the earth and put into him Adam's spirit, and so became a living body.' The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is [co-eternal] with God himself. I know that my testimony is true . . . Is it logical to say that the intelligence of spirits is immortal, and yet that it had a beginning? The intelligence of spirits had no beginning, neither will it have an end."

So Huckleberry, if you are going argue that the Mormon view of God, creation and humanity does not allow for free will, then you also have to argue that God has no free will. That argument is flawed. God and man both have free will, as both have always existed in some form or another.

This is an important topic because love, without free will and choice, is not true love. Does God truly love us?

-7up

seven7up,
I am happy we both agree about the role of free will and choice in the event of love. Perhaps my comment about created spirits needs emphasis that I was referring to created spirits. In my view and general traditional understanding is that God was not created in any way and specifically not created from preexisting parts. Howeverr as you point out LDS thinking proposes both God and us share that uncreated quality.My proposal was that in the context of exnilo creation whatever freewill we have comes from the creative potential of God. I do not think that Gods creation is limited to mechanical and determined processes he may be able to create something more in his own image.

I was not embarking on a criticism of LDS view but declining your criticism of my faith.

I do suspect that the LDS view does not really propose our free will originates in an eternal character but like your sister forms of Christianity that all the free will we possess comes from God. Otherwise if our intelligneces were free unto themselves their progession could be self initialted and self sustained

[_Uncle Ed]

I'd rather cut to the chase and point out that "God Is Existence" satisfies all questions about free will. Nothing in the world of humans is "other" but all Is God. That means a dogmatic belief in damnation and salvation is probably the core misconception of Judeo-Christianity.

At least Joseph Smith gave us "Endless Torment", Eternal Punishment", as names of God, meaning that with God all things are present and within his power. There is no final state because there is no final separation into the righteous and the wicked. Everyone with free will is created to learn from their choices in the world of humans, where opposition reigns and points to sensibility: the awareness of opposites and choices in all things. It would be perverse of "God" to create some souls to "get it" and others to be so perverse themselves that they never do, and choose to be in hell instead. That kind of thinking makes god into a monster....

[_seven7up]

In my view and general traditional understanding is that God was not created in any way and specifically not created from preexisting parts. However as you point out LDS thinking proposes both God and us share that uncreated quality.

That is essentially correct. This is something that many critics of the LDS church do not understand. For example, some anti-Mormons criticize the LDS because they claim that we believe Jesus is a created being. The problem with that is that they think of "created" as meaning "ex nihilo". From the LDS point of view, Jesus (or the perfect divine intelligence of Jesus) has always existed.

Note: This also caused issues by the time the Council of Nicea was formed to hash out the Trinity. Ex Nihilo creation theology had already become the standard view by that time (started near the end of the second century A.D). So, when people argued that Christ was a second being, (ie second to the Father, people felt that it must imply that Christ was created ex nihilo, which was unacceptable. But it is unacceptable because Ex Nihilo is a wrong assumption to begin with.

My proposal was that in the context of exnilo creation whatever freewill we have comes from the creative potential of God. I do not think that Gods creation is limited to mechanical and determined processes he may be able to create something more in his own image. I was not embarking on a criticism of LDS view but declining your criticism of my faith.

I don't think that you have addressed the problems I proposed to the idea of free will in the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxOiYvKDack
You say you disagree with my conclusion and you "decline it", but you have not addressed why. Certainly, by watching the video and seeing the arguments, you can see why I find the traditional Christian viewpoint to be problematic.

There is nobody who actually knows that exnilo guarantees such is actually the case. The fact that the results of creation, us, do not match suggests that the premise is inaccurate.

I have to call you out on your circular reasoning. You are simply claiming that the arguments I have given against Ex Nihilo MUST be false ... because we humans turned out so badly. Have you considered that mankind is flawed because Ex Nihilo is a false assumption to begin with?

I am not particularly sold on the idea that reason is adaquate to always choose good. I think love is necessary.

And if God is creating every single aspect of an individual from God's own mind, and can create any kind of being that is logically possible, you don't think that God can create more loving beings?

If all existence is purely the result of God's own imagination, then God indeed controls everything and God himself determined everything that would ever happen even before God created anything.

I do suspect that the LDS view does not really propose our free will originates in an eternal character but like your sister forms of Christianity that all the free will we possess comes from God. Otherwise if our intelligneces were free unto themselves their progession could be self initialted and self sustained

I think that free will IS an eternal character. The problem is that we were far inferior intelligences, and therefore, we were in a state that did not allow us to act out our free will. We had no power, glory, dominion, etc. Giving us the power to act is how I understand that God allows us to have free will. This is why you see LDS scripture with statements like

"that they may act, rather than be acted upon."

or

"Man {his intelligence} was also in the beginning with God... was not created or made, neither indeed can be.
30 All truth/intelligence is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, otherwise there is no existence.
31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.
32 And every man whose spirit receiveth not the light is under condemnation." (D&C 93)

-7up

[_subgenius]

I, and LDS, absolutely believe that God has free will.

Earlier, you essentially argued that God could not have free will.

Only, at the time you did not realize that was what you were arguing.

-7up

This seems to be a little inaccurate.
Are you proposing that God is capable of lying? that God is capable of being unjust? that God is capable of breaking a covenant?
I mean, this would speak to the fundamental nature of God...does He define the Law or does the Law define Him?

So, are you saying that God can cheat if He so desires?..and perhaps more importantly...is He able to even have that desire?

[_Bazooka]

However, this discussion and that discussion are related because we are explaining WHY Adam and Eve are ignorant and disobedient to begin with. Is it because God created them that way?

I think first we have to reach the point that Adam and Eve are considered real people and not just fictional characters of a religious myth.

Does God have free will?

Is that a serious question, or were you laughing when you typed it?

All I am asking is that we continue to use our heads.

If I use my head I reach the conclusion that Adam and Eve were fictional characters of a religious myth, now what?

But let's deal with one thing at a time. Let's discuss free will and then move on from there.

-7up

Okay.
Show me how you've reached the conclusion that Adam and Eve should be considered real people....

[_huckelberry]

My proposal was that in the context of exnilo creation whatever freewill we have comes from the creative potential of God. I do not think that Gods creation is limited to mechanical and determined processes he may be able to create something more in his own image. I was not embarking on a criticism of LDS view but declining your criticism of my faith.

I don't think that you have addressed the problems I proposed to the idea of free will in the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxOiYvKDack
You say you disagree with my conclusion and you "decline it", but you have not addressed why. Certainly, by watching the video and seeing the arguments, you can see why I find the traditional Christian viewpoint to be problematic.

There is nobody who actually knows that exnilo guarantees such is actually the case. The fact that the results of creation, us, do not match suggests that the premise is inaccurate.

I have to call you out on your circular reasoning. You are simply claiming that the arguments I have given against Ex Nihilo MUST be false ... because we humans turned out so badly. Have you considered that mankind is flawed because Ex Nihilo is a false assumption to begin with?
-7up

Circular reasoning? My comment about results used the word suggests ,as in could or may, not as you remark meaning must. My point was that I do not believe we were created machines. I do not think we are chosen roles of a dice. We are created in the image of God capable of inventing things that never existed before.

I understand the implications of the analogy you presented. I am stating that I do not feel convinced your analogy is appropriate to start with. Along with us being created in the image of God and not in the image of dice we are not individuals chosen to exist with specific characters. We are part of a family with family characteristics.Events do not happen as isolated chosen inventions. Everthing that happens including us is part of a chain of cause and effect in which everything is tied together. The people you live with have been shaped by the people and decisions of generation upon generation of individuals. God created a whole family.
Even if one is to use the theoretic of every logical possibility God can choose from, there may be serious constraints represented by the word logical. Systemic coherence being one obvious one. There could be others less visible to us.

I could clarify. I am not a very dogmatic person. I belong to a Presbyterian congregation. It does not insist on people accepting traditional Calvinist dogma. I am familiar with it and how it can be seen that God determines all actions. I understand how that doctrine can be seen as not contradicting free will. That is another line of thought though not my preferred one. I am perfectly capable of considering alternatives to Exnilo. In my first post I ageed that it was an unfinished theory or interpretation. I have spent many years viewing the universe as eternal. It is fairly easy to see that possibility. I find it harder to think that there could exist eternal intelligence that combine free will and an inability to act. That combination sounds very close to self contradictory. I suppose one can state there are such things just because you think there are.. Perhaps you see my proposal that God can create people who unlike machines are in his image as arbitrary in the same way.

[_seven7up]

I don't think that you have addressed the problems I proposed to the idea of free will in the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxOiYvKDack
You say you disagree with my conclusion and you "decline it", but you have not addressed why. Certainly, by watching the video and seeing the arguments, you can see why I find the traditional Christian viewpoint to be problematic.

I have to call you out on your circular reasoning. You are simply claiming that the arguments I have given against Ex Nihilo MUST be false ... because we humans turned out so badly. Have you considered that mankind is flawed because Ex Nihilo is a false assumption to begin with?

Circular reasoning? My comment about results used the word suggests ,as in could or may, not as you remark meaning must. My point was that I do not believe we were created machines. I do not think we are chosen roles of a dice. We are created in the image of God capable of inventing things that never existed before....I understand the implications of the analogy you presented. I am stating that I do not feel convinced your analogy is appropriate to start with. Along with us being created in the image of God and not in the image of dice we are not individuals chosen to exist with specific characters.

I already addressed this. The example of dice represents possible choices. I do not believe that choice or free will is the same as chance or randomness. My arguments do not depend on the idea that chance and choice are the same thing. My arguments stand regardless.

My arguments stand if God knows the future. Not only that, but my arguments stand only if God creates every aspect of any individual from God's own imagination. The video lays it out that way and you have not given any significant rebuttal to those arguments.

We are part of a family with family characteristics.Events do not happen as isolated chosen inventions. Everthing that happens including us is part of a chain of cause and effect in which everything is tied together. The people you live with have been shaped by the people and decisions of generation upon generation of individuals. God created a whole family.

So .... we are victims of circumstance? That argument does not help your position.

Even if one is to use the theoretic of every logical possibility God can choose from, there may be serious constraints represented by the word logical. Systemic coherence being one obvious one. There could be others less visible to us.

Feel free to expand on this. I will be happy to discuss it with you. But for now, let's keep it simple: If we have a scenario whereby if we accept Jesus, we get eternal happiness and bliss. If we reject Jessus, we get eternal damnation. Being omnipotent, God can create any kind of being that is logically possible from God's own imagination ex nihilo; yet God ends up creating beings who choose eternal damnation. Please explain.

I could clarify.

I have spoken to many, many evangelicals about this. None of them have been able to explain. In the end, most end up resigning themselves in a somewhat similar way as you have below:

I am not a very dogmatic person. I belong to a Presbyterian congregation. It does not insist on people accepting traditional Calvinist dogma. I am familiar with it and how it can be seen that God determines all actions. I understand how that doctrine can be seen as not contradicting free will. That is another line of thought though not my preferred one. I am perfectly capable of considering alternatives to Exnihilo. In my first post I agreed that it was an unfinished theory or interpretation. I have spent many years viewing the universe as eternal. It is fairly easy to see that possibility.

It is good to see that you are open minded on the issue. From my view, Joseph Smith's revelations on this may save Christianity in the future. Does that idea bother you?

"I calculate to be one of the instruments of setting up the kingdom of Daniel by the word of the Lord, and I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world." - Joseph Smith

“You can understand, from the few remarks I make with regard to the Gospel, that many things which were revealed through Joseph came in contact with our own prejudices: We did not know how to understand them. I refer to myself for an instance. … My traditions were such, that when the Vision came first to me, it was directly contrary and opposed to my former education.”
- Brigham Young

-7up