Customer Discussions > Christianity forum

ex nihilo nihil fit


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Mar 16, 2012 9:14:03 AM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
1) ex nihilo nihil fit: "nothing comes from nothing." -- A fundamental law of science and philosophy - (conservation of matter and energy and Parmenides respectively)

2) creatio ex nihilo - "Creation from nothing" - Augustine

Both are true

Can you resolve them?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 9:18:36 AM PDT
Rev. Otter says:
<<Can you resolve them?>>

easily.

this part's wrong:

<<fundamental law of science>>

it's not. :)

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 9:22:31 AM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
Rev Otter

It is. The conservation of mass/energy in a closed system is a fundamental law in physics.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 12:49:42 PM PDT
mrs exp says:
M Galishoff,
The God who created the universe from nothing is the same one who made the laws of science to rule after the creation was complete.
exp

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:06:52 PM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
You got the prize. Augustine "creation from nothing" does not imply no creator, just that the creator had to create what to work with to start with, including the laws which govern creation.

The scientific law assumes a closed system. Creation is separate from God.

Posted on Mar 16, 2012 1:07:26 PM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
Now what are the implications for those who want to argue there is no God?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:12:07 PM PDT
That the kind of evidence they would be looking for here, would lie outside of creation and be inaccessible to them?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:12:28 PM PDT
mrs exp says:
M Galishoff,
Okay, when will my prize arrive and what is it? Haha!
exp

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:14:48 PM PDT
Max Flash says:
I can't see any. We know that you will refuse to apply ex nihilo nihil fit to God by claiming it is in a special category to which ex nihilo nihil fit doesn't apply. We also know that even thought this is clearly circular logic, you will ignore that reality.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:17:12 PM PDT
Max Flash says:
PL: That the kind of evidence they would be looking for here, would lie outside of creation...

Max: This would only be true if God is not currently active in creation. Is that your claim?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:18:19 PM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
Paul (Romans 1) and the Psalms claim otherwise.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:19:59 PM PDT
Define active.

A good creator could very much remain active without leaving fingerprints.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:21:23 PM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
Max

Welcome

"We know that you will refuse to apply ex nihilo nihil fit to God by claiming it is in a special category to which ex nihilo nihil fit doesn't apply."

It applies to God. Why would it not? I only stated that the law of conservation of matter and energy applied to a closed system. Now we are in philosophy and theology looking outside the closed system.

So how does it apply or not apply to God?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:21:49 PM PDT
I am not saying that the presence of God is inaccessible to humans.

Rather, the specific forms of "scientific" evidence that they demand. A God that stands in front of them like a statue that they can see, hear, taste, and touch. A God that performs enough scientifically verifiable miracles to appease them.

A God who has no use for faith.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:21:56 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 16, 2012 1:24:34 PM PDT
A Customer says:
M. Galishoff, The conservation of mass/energy in a closed system as a "fundamental law in physics" is an inductive observation of how things work under the "laws" of physics in this world. An inductive observation of how things behave is very different than a logical necessity of how things "must be". For example a triangle, of logical necessity "must" have 3 sides. The First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. "conservation of energy) is merely an observation of how the physics behave on this universe. If a supernatural creator created this universe and it's current laws of physics, he would have designed in the First Law of Thermodynamics, but he would not have been *constrained* by that law while creating the universe and it's very laws.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:22:34 PM PDT
Max Flash says:
PL: A good creator could very much remain active without leaving fingerprints.

Max: How?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:24:33 PM PDT
>ex nihilo nihil fit: "nothing comes from nothing."

This thread may serve as an example.

>A fundamental law of science and philosophy

Yes, though it may not mean quite the same as what it once did. As Lawrence Krauss points out in "A Universe from Nothing," you have to define what you think "nothing" is, in the first place. If physicists are correct, there is no true "nothing" in the science that scientists and philosophers thought they meant for thousands of years: that is, there is no truly empty void. What we might have called "nothing" before is actually a condition in which universes, and the laws that govern them, might spring into existence spontaneously.

>2) creatio ex nihilo - "Creation from nothing" - Augustine

>Both are true

No, they're not. Spoken by you, the second is wishful thinking. Spoken by the likes of Augustine, it was a theological premise necessary to place God above, and anterior to, matter, which could not be co-eternal with him, or he would not be God.

>Now what are the implications for those who want to argue there is no God?

There is no need to "want to argue." There is no God, and no reason to believe in one. Ask yourself rather what are the implications for those who, like you, still cling to a myth. That is the more interesting question.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:25:19 PM PDT
Max Flash says:
MG: It applies to God.

Max: So you believe that God was created?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:32:35 PM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
Macheath

I understand. So where does that leave you in this discussion?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:34:41 PM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
Mr Huggins

Nothing means just that - nothing - absence of anything. Zilch.

So wherefore creation? What are the logical options?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:36:13 PM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
Max

"Max: So you believe that God was created?"

No. God is not nothing. God is something.

God exists (or if you prefer a hypothetical: if God exists) then what are the possible explanations for His existence?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:36:29 PM PDT
Well, if I were God, I would have if not always immediately readily available or discernible some sort of scientific explanation for many if not all events.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:38:10 PM PDT
A Customer says:
That God created the The First Law of Thermodynamics (along with all other "laws" of physics") during the creation.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:38:48 PM PDT
M. Galishoff says:
Lass

"A good creator could very much remain active without leaving fingerprints."

Ahhh - I disagree here. Lest we digress think on it for a while.

What makes the Creator good such that Jesus says "why call me good. There is no one good but God."?
What has our creator done for us and what does he ask of us?
Is creation itself not a form of self-revelation?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 1:39:11 PM PDT
Max Flash says:
MG: No.

Max: Then you believe that God came from nothing?
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 55 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Christianity forum
Participants:  37
Total posts:  1356
Initial post:  Mar 16, 2012
Latest post:  Apr 25, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions