Is the idea of God creating the universe out of nothing logically impossible, similar to the paradox of God creating a rock so big he can't lift?

[Brightstar777]

Is the notion of God creating the universe out of nothing logically impossible, similar to the paradox of God creating a rock so big He can't lift it? What does this analogy reveal about the nature of divine omnipotence and the boundaries of logical possibility?

In examining this, how do we conceptualize 'nothing'? What philosophical interpretations exist regarding the idea of creation ex nihilo, and how do these interpretations affect our understanding of existence and non-existence?

Moreover, how do different theological frameworks—such as classical theism, which emphasizes God’s transcendence, versus process theology, which focuses on divine changeability—approach the implications of creation? Are there philosophical arguments that reconcile the concept of creation from nothing with logical consistency?

 

[mindlessobserver]

The Paradox you are describing is at the fundamental core of conceptual cosmology. For a God to "Create" the Universe, he must exist BEFORE the Universe. Which means whatever function the universe has must function according to his design. If his design is then to be perfect, then God himself cannot break the rules he himself created to make the universe function. Is this true omnipotence?

The lesson of Christs Sacrifice speaks to this. In Christian Theology, God is infinitely just, and Justice requires punishment. This is Gods infallible law. But as God is infinitely merciful he is forced into a paradox. How can the Infinite Justice of God justify itself with the Infinite Mercy of God? The Third facet, Infinite Wisdom, emerges. If God is Infinitely Just, then Punishment must be given. As he is Infinitely Merciful however, he realizes that the failure of creation is his and his alone as its creator. Thus the Punishment must be carried by God. So God, in his Infinite Wisdom, incarnates as a Mortal to take the punishment of mortal man upon his own flesh and experience the existential torment of mortal death. Thus solving the paradox.

To answer the question of "Can God create a boulder he cannot lift" is to say "God could have but chose not too, because he created a bounded reality of his volition to which he wrote laws he himself willingly chooses to not break".

Oddly enough, JRR Tolkien is the best popular philosopher to explain this, in his Ainulindale. God Sang the Song of Creation and invited the heavenly host into its chorus. But in so doing bound them to the fate of creation, where their divinity would remain until the end of all things.

 

[Preacher ✝]

The lesson of Christs Sacrifice speaks to this. In Christian Theology, God is infinitely just, and Justice requires punishment. This is Gods infallible law. But as God is infinitely merciful he is forced into a paradox. How can the Infinite Justice of God justify itself with the Infinite Mercy of God? The Third facet, Infinite Wisdom, emerges. If God is Infinitely Just, then Punishment must be given. As he is Infinitely Merciful however, he realizes that the failure of creation is his and his alone as its creator. Thus the Punishment must be carried by God. So God, in his Infinite Wisdom, incarnates as a Mortal to take the punishment of mortal man upon his own flesh and experience the existential torment of mortal death. Thus solving the paradox.

Well said, no notes.

Oddly enough, JRR Tolkien is the best popular philosopher to explain this, in his Ainulindale. God Sang the Song of Creation and invited the heavenly host into its chorus. But in so doing bound them to the fate of creation, where their divinity would remain until the end of all things.

Tolkien is the GOAT when it comes to Catholic Fiction.

 

[Inco G. Nito]

The idea that something has to make logical sense in the first place is rooted in this world as we know it. To an all powerful creator, anything and everything can exist or function entirely arbitrarily even down to a reason as silly as "because I said so".

 

[mindlessobserver]

The idea that something has to make logical sense in the first place is rooted in this world as we know it. To an all powerful creator, anything and everything can exist or function entirely arbitrarily even down to a reason as silly as "because I said so".

This is actually contrary to the accepted doctrines of the Church, which incorporated the Hellenic doctrines of Plato, Aristotle and Socrates in Acts 17

Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry.

17 Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.

18 Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection.

19 And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is?

20 For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears: we would know therefore what these things mean.

21 (For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.)

22 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.

23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, To The Unknown God. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.

24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;

25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

32 And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this matter.

33 So Paul departed from among them.

34 Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.

 

[Preacher ✝]

This is actually contrary to the accepted doctrines of the Church,

KJV

Kind of ironic talking about being contrary to Church doctrine while citing the KJV instead of an officially sanctioned translation, but w/e.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Kind of ironic talking about being contrary to Church doctrine while citing the KJV instead of an officially sanctioned translation, but w/e.

Honestly the Pope just has to bother to recognize that the Conservative Anglicans are so far out in the wilderness he just has to send a legate and at a stroke he will have half the Episcopal church in America made Catholic. Unfortunately you have an Argentinian in charge at the moment, and he hates us yanks, has no knowledge of our history, nor does he care. Meanwhile the Cardinal Archbishops in America love the girl dick. When will you retards appoint an Augustinian Pope?!

 

[Dr. Ricearoni]

The problem with taking issue with the idea that God existed before the universe is the same thing as matter existing before the universe. The fact is we don't know and probably never will know why there was something before there was anything. There just kinda was.

 

[Preacher ✝]

When will you retards appoint an Augustinian Pope?!

I can only pray that I live to see it.

 

[Derrick]

This is something I've thought about before, what created God? How did God get here? You get a very similar question in the atheist model of 'the universe created itself', namely, 'what was before?' 'how did it get here?'. The advantage theism has in this regard as it can say, "God is supernatural, therefor he can be forgiven for breaking the laws of physics and just always existing", whereas in the atheist model you'd be in a never ending question to find out what came first, followed by what came before that, followed by what came before that, even if you could find out what was before the universe in an Atheistic model you'd always be asking yourself, "And what was before that?"

 

[Kiwi Love Thread]

I reject the notion of omnipotence because:
A) It creates more problems than it solves and there's no basis for it.
B) It's clearly just ancient "big brother is watching you" propaganda

I don't acknowledge any Creator Deity or anything "Ex Nihilo", because non-existence by it's own definition doesn't exist and because this is true, everything comes from something. Creation is it's own self-perpetuating cosmic machine. "It is as it is."

Paradoxes are all nonsensical thought-traps anyways.

 

[Inco G. Nito]

This is actually contrary to the accepted doctrines of the Church

If it's anything short of 'all powerful' then it isn't all powerful. Is God an all powerful transcendent creator or isn't he?

 

[Preacher ✝]

If it's anything short of 'all powerful' then it isn't all powerful. Is God an all powerful transcendent creator or isn't he?

Of course he is, and in his infinite power he can choose to follow a logical course of action.

One analogy I've often seen used to help people try and understand God is to imagine playing a civilization building sandbox type game that you coded. As the player you look down on a world that you have complete control over, you chose to start the game, and at any time you could choose to enable cheat codes to do whatever you want. However doing so would rob the experience of any real satisfaction. Even as the games creator, the satisfaction comes from playing by the rules of the game.

Another way to look at it is by understanding the why of free will. God gave us all free will, the price of free will is the existence of sin, but the value of free will outweighs that price. God would rather tolerate sin to have followers who freely choose to return the infinite love he has for us than make himself any number of mindless "perfect" drones.

At the end of the day though the real truth of it is thus:


1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood.

 

[Vecr]

No? The actual problem would come in when you try to ask where God came from.

It's like saying "is it logically impossible to boot up a spacetime simulation on a computer?"

No, it isn't.