Creation Ex Nihilo 3 (Greg Thornberg)

Hi Justin,

After our discussion I more fully understand your argument and you agreed that my argument did not lead to the conclusion that God or Christ could not have existed under my logic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your logic was this: If it is logically possible for Christ to have an eternal preexistence and to enter into our time, then there is no logical barrier to our being able to do the same. I agree...that is if we once exist "prior" to time in the same way as God did, then it would be possible. We also made the distinction that a logical possibility is not the same thing as what must actually be. We then agreed that since prior existence cannot be known apart from revelation, we needed to pursue understanding from Scripture. You wanted to know what the Old Testament and New Testament alone had to say on the matter, I wanted to include the Book of Abraham (BOA) and D&C as well as any possible understanding from the Book of Mormon (BOM). The reason I want to do this is because all of these, according to the LDS Church, allege to be Scripture. Although I am not LDS myself, the reason I wanted to submit them as evidence is because I want to pursue the topic of their authenticity. Most LDS theology about prior existence is dependent namely on the BOA and D&C, so a discussion of their authenticity, and therefore authority, must be forthcoming.

I am glad to see that you acknowledge the logical possibility that prior to the existence of matter (spiritual or physical), God alone may have been all that existed. You concluded in your last post that

Therefore , did creation occur ex nihilo – out of
nothing OR was it created out of something, “spiritual matter”, though
organizing or bringing forth of this spiritual matter into physical
matter either:

(a) There was no matter of any kind other than God
himself that existed before the creation of this universe. And God created all
that there is from nothing.
(b) Matter did exist before creation. This eternal,
spiritual matter was organized and brought forth as our physical creation by the
power of God and perhaps even the spiritual being of each of us existed prior to
our earthly lives.
[Italics are my emphasis]

Unless futher evidence shows otherwise, the logical possibility of God being all that was from the beginning remains. In my next post I will pursue the Biblical understanding of this topic.

GT

Creation Ex Nihilo 2 (Justin Filley)

You wrote

The beginning of time and preexistence of the
soulEstablishing the Rules AND IS NOT POINT OF ARGUMENTBefore even going down
the road to “proving” particular things to be “true,” we have to agree on the
rules for taking such a venture. If your vocabulary does not match mine in
precise meaning so that the semantic scope of meaning does not vary or leave
open the possibility of other meanings, then we can say we have arrived at an
agreement. By this I mean when I say “time,” I mean time in the sense this
universe experiences—objectively experienced regardless of what we think it
is—which follows inescapably the laws of math and reason. I do not mean
hypothetical concepts but objective truths about time and the laws of
nature.

All matter and physical beings are affected
objectively by time and experience time the same. I am not saying that if
we were under different circumstances that it would be the same experience, such
as someone traveling at the speed of light will not experience time the same as
someone who is not, but two people moving at the speed of light will experience
time the same as each other just as two stationary people (if there really is
such a thing) experience time the same as each other. Given identical
circumstances, each person objectively experiences the laws of nature the same
way. There are no scapegoats, backdoors or loopholes which allow for
contradictory views so as to enable us to hold errant dogmas about the origin of
the universe. We won’t have our cake and eat it too.

I can only agree to a point on this, we must for sure establish of course the basis of our argument. However, we can not assume only our worldly, physical nature as a basis of our debate, because you yourself disregard this as it pertains to God. When you say we (man) could not have existed without beginning, your argument is that we would never have come to this point in time. Well, according to that argument God could not exist, especially Jesus, because he was placed on this very earth, within a certain time. You then argue that time does not pertain to God, he exists out of Time. I DO NOT SPECIFICALLY AGREE to this principle but I will agree for now as to establish a baseline to our discussion. In the same manner that God and Christ can exist eternally out side of physical time, so also did we and will we, exist eternally outside our current understanding of time. This is the bases of the argument of the eternal nature of man and matter. Before things where created physically, they existed spiritually. And that spiritual existence is one that is eternal in nature. - 2 corinthians 4:18 - the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.

In accordance with matching vocabulary I will submit the following definitions by which these arguments must be based. I will refer to PHYSICAL MATTER as the matter in which we can see and measure in our physical existence, by which the laws of the universe as we know it are governed. Where as SPIRITUAL MATTER are things which are unseen, pertaining to God and things eternal. They are the laws that pertained to God and existence before the creation of our universe. They to are things that do exist, and therefore must be some type of matter, but perhaps we do not yet fully understand their true nature, properties and makeup. However, they also abide by certain laws, just as our physical universe does. However, we may not have discovered these laws and principles because this Spiritual Matter and existence can not yet be seen, measured or detected by our science. BUT perhaps by learning these laws of eternal Spiritual Matter, we may learn how our Physical Matter came to be. For it is my contention that from this eternal matter and laws, sprang forth by the power of God our physical being and the creation of our physical universe.

Therefore, I am NOT saying that our physical universe or bodies did not have a beginning. In fact, I believe they did! They began when God created them from Spiritual Matter. The Physical universe we understand today came into existence. This was the beginning spoken of in Genesis, before physical matter and time existed.
Also, by way of definition, we agree that we will exist eternally in the future, however, when I use the word eternal, I am referring to without beginning and without ending.

Therefore , did creation occur ex nihilo – out of nothing OR was it created out of something, “spiritual matter”, though organizing or bringing forth of this spiritual matter into physical matter
Either:

(a) There was no matter of any kind other than God himself that existed before the creation of this universe. And God created all that there is from nothing.
(b) Matter did exist before creation. This eternal, spiritual matter was organized and brought forth as our physical creation by the power of God and perhaps even the spiritual being of each of us existed prior to our earthly lives.

Creation Ex Nihilo 1 (Greg Thornberg)

The beginning of time and preexistence of the soul
My Objective
My goal in the grand scheme of things is to demonstrate the nature of God as we understand it from both science and Scripture. As we progress through this discussion, it is my intention to show that God is (1) uncreated and (2) seperate from creation not only in nature but also in degree. It is my hope that we can learn that God is infinite by nature in every way and that we by contrast, along with all creation, are finite in every way. I assert that both scientific reasoning and divine revelation demonstrate such a God to exist.

Establishing the Rules
Before even going down the road to “proving” particular things to be “true,” we have to agree on the rules for taking such a venture. If your vocabulary does not match mine in precise meaning so that the semantic scope of meaning does not vary or leave open the possibility of other meanings, then we can say we have arrived at an agreement. By this I mean when I say “time,” I mean time in the sense this universe experiences—objectively experienced regardless of what we think it is—which follows inescapably the laws of math and reason. I do not mean hypothetical concepts but objective truths about time and the laws of nature.

All matter and physical beings are affected objectively by time and experience time the same. I am not saying that if we were under different circumstances that it would be the same experience, such as someone traveling at the speed of light will not experience time the same as someone who is not, but two people moving at the speed of light will experience time the same as each other just as two stationary people (if there really is such a thing) experience time the same as each other. Given identical circumstances, each person objectively experiences the laws of nature the same way. There are no scapegoats, backdoors or loopholes which allow for contradictory views so as to enable us to hold errant dogmas about the origin of the universe. We won’t have our cake and eat it too.

The other absolute tenant of our discussion must be that we do not contradict ourselves. If two opposing viewpoints exist, either one is true or both are incorrect. Also, if two views contradict, one does not by default become true. If two people oppose each other where one says the world is cube shaped and the other says it’s flat, it does not necessitate that one of the proposed beliefs is true since it is always possible that both are untrue.

If a principle is proposed by which we determine truth, it will only be considered a valid principle if it yields consistent and meaningful results. Invalid principles cannot be used consistently. For example, I remember hearing someone once say, “All the contradictions between different religions proves that they are all wrong!” The problem with this statement is that if it were true, anyone disagreeing with the man who said this would be proving him wrong as well. A statement must not be self-defeating such as, “There is no right and wrong,” to which anyone could reply, “Is that right?”

Finally, there is not an ounce of malice I have toward you. I don’t hate you and don’t seek to discredit you. You are separate from your beliefs, and if there is a belief I disagree with, it is the belief and not you that I “attack” without it affecting or devaluing your intrinsic value as a person created in the image of God.

The Nature of Time
Reasoning apart from Scripture is capable of revealing the nature of God
If reasoning is capable of revealing to us attributes of God, then it stands to reason that true divine revelation would fall in line with extra-biblical understanding about God. Some people are opposed to the idea that we can reason from nature attribute concerning the invisible God, but here the Bible agrees with me. The Apostle Paul wrote

“…since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.”
Romans 1:19-20 (italics mine)

If that which is created (i.e., the physical word) and that which is revealed (i.e., Scripture) both come from one and the same Creator, then they would both speak of and point to Him. A God who wishes to be made known would not only speak to us, but leave ample evidence so as to persuade those who look with open eyes that he exists. We should not fear science and the study of creation as if somehow it would lead us away from God. Rather, creation would proclaim his existence and this in many ways.

God is uncreated—the ultimate Beginner of all that is created
As to the nature of time, we agreed that time has a beginning since, if time always existed, it would be like saying we have traveled an infinite number of moments to arrive at now. Since an infinite number of moments cannot be traversed, the only way to arrive at now is to say that time had a beginning. This means all matter which owes its existence to time could not have existed prior to time since if time at one point did not exist, neither did the matter dependent on it. At some point matter did not exist since the dimension of time could not have always existed. So from this state of non-existence, as we say ex nihilo,[1] matter arrived. If this is true of created things, then that which is uncreated must be timeless. I am referring to God. At some point, something must be separate from creation to be the ultimate cause and beginning of all that is. This “something” would be uncreated, separated from time and all things that are by nature created. God is uncreated. Self sufficiency is not only an attribute belonging to God, God is necessarily uncreated. Everything else has a beginning and is dependent on that which is uncreated. If God is dependent on something else, he ceases to be God and the cause of all that is. Whatever is the cause of God would be the true God. So when I speak of God, I am referring to that (e.g., Him) that is uncreated and the ultimate cause of all that is. God is not begotten; he does not have a father or beginner; we cannot become like him because his uncreated nature necessarily belongs to him alone.

Scripture concurs with reasoning
All this begs the question, does Scripture fall in line with a timeless God or does it contradict such a view of God? If God is timeless, the fingerprint evidence of these attributes would be either (a) observable within canonized revelation or (b) we would not find a contradiction within Scripture.

The uncreated nature of God is clear within Scripture. God is also exclusively God. There is no Mormon doctrine of “as man is, God once was” within Scripture. God did not progress or acquire knowledge. God has knowledge, but it was not taught or learned—it was known. The Bible says

Who has understood the mind of the Lord, or instructed him as his counselor? Whom did the Lord consult to enlighten him, and who taught him the right way? Who was it that taught him knowledge or showed him the path of understanding?
Isaiah 40:13-14

The question is rhetorical to which the answer of “no one” expected. God did not progress in knowledge or learn from another. God is not equal to anyone (including prior so-called gods). The Bible says

“To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?” Says the Holy One.
Isaiah 40:25

There will be no other gods:

Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.
Isaiah 43:10

God exclusively holds his title ant attributes:

I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.
Isaiah 44:6

Is there any God beside me? No, there is no other Rock, I know not one.
Isaiah 44:8

I am the Lord, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God.
Isaiah 45:5

The uncreated nature of God is expressed when the Bible says

I am the Lord, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself…
Isaiah 44:24 (italics mine)

If “all things” in both heaven and on earth come from God, then he is by nature uncreated. The implication is that, of all that is created, God alone made these things. He cannot be created since all created things depend on him. There was no prior god (Isaiah 43:10) and no other way for God to exist unless he necessarily exists and is uncreated.

God alone will share his attributes since he says

I am he; I am the first and I am the last.
Isaiah 48:12

He is the first God and the last God. Jesus used these words of himself when he said

I am the First and the Last.
Revelation 1:17

Before you think that more than one “god” can have this title, note that Christ in his preincarnate state was uncreated. The Bible says

In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the Beginning. Through him all things were made and apart from him not even one thing came to be that was created.
John 1:1-3 (translation my own)[2]

If all things came through him (note it does not say “all other things” but “all things”), then he could not be part of creation. Someone might argue, “He could mean that he was created and that all other things came through him,” but it says “not even one thing came to be that was created.” So of all things which are by nature created, he created every single one of them. If all things were created through Christ and if he were created, he would have to create himself. It would be like saying Christ had to predate himself in order to create himself. This is nonsense. So we must conclude that the preincarnate state of Christ was coeternal with the Father—uncreated and necessarily self existent. Christ is God just as the Father is God, yet there is only one God. Jesus is of the exact same nature as the Father, equal to him (John 5:18) worthy of the same honor as the Father (John 5:23). There is more on this topic, but I think the point I’m making is clear enough with the evidence provided. Even additional revelation cannot add to what we already know (at least not without contradiction). These things are

(1) God is not contained within time
(2) God is not created
(3) God is self sufficient and must necessarily exist as the creator of all things
(4) God did not progress in knowledge; he was not taught his knowledge
(5) There are no prior gods; there are no future gods
(6) God is the first God and the last God—he alone will ever be God
(7) The preincarnate state of Christ was uncreated, without beginning.
(8) Christ shares in the uncreated, necessary nature of God because he is God

Scripture does not leave us to qualify this statement with, “There is no other god for us, but maybe for some other worlds or universe.” Scripture is farthest from such statements and in direct conflict with it.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_nihilo
[2] See also Colossians 1:15-19