the doctrines surrounding Creation

changed · #1 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 01:57 PM

from the son of God thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shelly200

Honestly, this is one reason why I canNOT be a Mormon today: the doctrines surrounding Creation. To each his own, I guess; I don't want to get into this subject, because this is not the point of this thread.

we all know there are many mistranslations in the Bible. The English word "create" has become one of those words because it is now defined as being something that is different than the original intent.

When we say that we create something - create a piece of art, or create a meal - does this mean that we created it from nothing?

from Hebrew Word Studies
Child Root (Branches of the Tree)Pronunciation: "Qa-NeH"
Meaning: To build a nest.
Comments: This child root is a nest builder, one who builds a nest such as a bird. Also God as in Bereshiyt (Genesis) 14.19; "God most high creator (qaneh) of sky and earth". The English word "create" is an abstract word and a foriegn concept to the Hebrews. While we see God as one who makes something from nothing (create), the Hebrews saw God like a bird who goes about acquiring and gathering materials to build a nest (qen), the sky and earth. The Hebrews saw man as the children (eggs) that God built the nest for.

from the Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon
bara'
1) to create, shape, form
a) (Qal) to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)

The Greek NT word:
ktizō
1) to make habitable, to people, a place, region, island
a) to found a city, colony, state
2) to create
a) of God creating the worlds
b) to form, shape, i.e. to completely change or transform

Both Greek and Hebrew words do not mean to make something from nothing. The word means form, shape, change, to make habitable.

all of the above links are non-LDS sites. So too is this: New Translation Says God Did Not Create the Earth - Softpedia
it seems a few others are slowly changing their view on what the word "create" means too, although they have not come to the full realization that was presented within the early LDS church.

If God ex-Nihlo created us, then it seems all the sin/pain/evil in the world would be a result of what God created.

In the LDS view, God is cleaning up a mess He did not make, which makes Him a selfless loving perfect person (rather than seemingly hypocritical in the ex-nihlo scenario)

Shelly200 · #2 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by changed

If God ex-Nihlo created us, then it seems all the sin/pain/evil in the world would be a result of what God created.

In the LDS view, God is cleaning up a mess He did not make, which makes Him a selfless loving perfect person (rather than seemingly hypocritical in the ex-nihlo scenario)

I don't have time to delve into all of this just yet, but I wanted to quickly point out that ex nihlio creation believers... I don't know how else to say that... do not believe that God introduced sin/pain/evil into the world. That was the work of Satan in the Garden. Before then there was no pain, no sin, no shame, no death, etc. It was not until the tempation and sin of Eve -- through the free will given to her by God -- that everything changed.

Ex nihlio creation belivers also believe that God is "cleaning up a mess He did not make" in a way; He had to redeem us from our sin, but He did not create sin, He created free will and we chose to use that freedom against Him.

But I don't want to be a sitting duck here alone trying to defend creation ex nihlio, so I will leave this brief explanation as is and wait some more comments from others.

A couple of clarification questions on the LDS side though: If God created matter from matter, where did the matter come from? Who created that matter? Who created the matter from God's pre-exalted world? Is there no belief in an ultimate creator at the beginning of all time, ever?

Vort · #3 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 02:11 PM

The ex nihilo view of creation is a pagan idea championed by Plato, revived (or at least accepted as part of the whole) by neoplatonists, and adopted into Christianity around the same time as the rest of the neoplatonist heresies. It furthers the pagan notion that the material world is inherently corrupt, and that all truly pure things exist outside any material representation of those things.

By the way, it is not only traditional Christians who accept this. Islam adopted ex nihilo creationism wholesale and enthusiastically, to the extent that they co-opted (or perhaps invented) a verb for divine "creation" that can be used only with God as the subject and that carries with it the Islamic convention that God poofed everything into existence out of nothing ("Islamic convention" in the sense that it's what Islam teaches, though Islam obviously inherited the belief from sixth- and seventh-century Christianity).

I find it amusing that, in years past, many religionists who believed in ex nihilo creation simply denied the reality of any physical theory (such as the conservation of matter and energy) that suggested it was impossible, yet today many of those same people enthusiastically embrace certain cosmological speculations that the universe arose from nothing based on a dipolar or quadripolar quantum fluctuation. To such people (and we Mormons have them, too), science is to be used as a proof-text for already-formed beliefs. While I acknowledge the primacy of revealed truth, my own take is somewhat less enthusiastic: If science can provide insights into religious beliefs, that's cool and sometimes even useful, but for the most part science is about mechanics while religion is about expectations.

changed · #4 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shelly200

I don't have time to delve into all of this just yet, but I wanted to quickly point out that ex nihlio creation believers... I don't know how else to say that... do not believe that God introduced sin/pain/evil into the world. That was the work of Satan in the Garden. Before then there was no pain, no sin, no shame, no death, etc. It was not until the tempation and sin of Eve -- through the free will given to her by God -- that everything changed.

Ex nihlio creation belivers also believe that God is "cleaning up a mess He did not make" in a way; He had to redeem us from our sin, but He did not create sin, He created free will and we chose to use that freedom against Him.

But I don't want to be a sitting duck here alone trying to defend creation ex nihlio, so I will leave this brief explanation as is and wait some more comments from others.

A couple of clarification questions on the LDS side though: If God created matter from matter, where did the matter come from? Who created that matter? Who created the matter from God's pre-exalted world? Is there no belief in an ultimate creator at the beginning of all time, ever?

I know - but if God made everything, then He made everything - including Satan, including evil.

Free agency? but then I don't logically see how free agency can exist in the ex-Nihlio scenario. Computers - even with random num gen's etc. etc. - will never have free agency, because everything they do can be traced back to how they were created. To have an independent - free - will - part of you has to be independent imo.

You cannot make a perfect robot with perfect personality, and place it in a perfect world - and have something go wrong. If something goes wrong, then something is not perfect - either He set up all the dominoes to fall how they were set up to fall - or He is not responsible for setting up the dominoes...

conservation laws of thermodynamics - conservation of mass, of energy - matter has always existed, energy has always existed? so too with God. The simplest solution to me is not something from nothing, but rather than something has always existed. without end we can imagine, but without beginning? it is different somehow?

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon
aiōnios - eternal - as in eternal life, and eternal nature of God
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2) without beginning
3) without end, never to cease, everlasting

eternal life would be impossible if we had a beginning it seems...

not trying to team up on you or anything - I think there is something to be learned from the ex-nihlo crowd - poetically, we are nothing without God - we are an unorganized/uncreated mess - so poetically speaking, God is making something from nothing - it's all just a matter of semantics, and being able to understand what words really mean when we use them.

annewandering · #5 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 02:20 PM

We believe there was no beginning and no end. We, as humans want to put points of beginning on everything but matter, and us, as well, have always been.

changed · #6 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by annewandering

We believe there was no beginning and no end. We, as humans want to put points of beginning on everything but matter, and us, as well, have always been.

The Beginning. by Brig Klyce
Nor is anything gained by running the difficulty farther back.... — William Paley

We understand things in a cause/effect web I suppose... chicken or the egg? The first cause, but what was the cause of the first cause?

we are trapped within the confines of time - not so with God though...

(Book of Mormon | Alma 40:8)...all is as one day with God, and time only is measured unto men.

no time - no beginning, no end, no before/after/cause/effect - no beginning, no end - just everything existing as it is... (Old Testament | Exodus 3:14) And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM

if I let my mind wander, time reveals the different sides of our personality - but perhaps the core of who we are is eternal/timeless? To those who become Gods, Gods who are unchanging - there must be some part of us that exists outside of time?

the existence of time is a subject of much debate within some communities...

annewandering · #7 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 02:53 PM

there must be some part of us that exists outside of time?

I think we only exist in 'time' during our mortal existence.

Shelly200 · #8 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by changed

I know - but if God made everything, then He made everything - including Satan, including evil.

God created beings with free will; therefore, personally, I would say that God created the situation in which evil can exist, yes. Because we can use our free will to follow God or to go against God. Satan was not created an evil being; he was created, and then he rebelled against God, becoming evil. Some people speculate that this moment is when sin popped into existence... I don't speculate on it either way.

I view it like this: God does not go around (except in the book of Job, if you take this book literally... which I don't) doing evil things to people or causing people to sin. People sin and do evil because it is their choice to sin and do evil. Without free will we could not choose to do good either. We could not choose to do anything. We'd be puppets, essentially. To me, this is why there is, even at the very beginning, a forbidden tree in the Garden; if everything in the Garden was good and there were no rules, then there would be no opportunity to express one's free will to follow God or to turn from Him. Even the tree itself wasn't evil; it was good for eating and gave Adam and Eve wisdom. But the opportunity has to be there to choose or reject God and His commands, or we have no free will. Our first parents chose sin, therefore they were punished. God did not make them sin, God did not make Satan tempt them, God did not make Satan evil in the first place. God simply created a world in which we had the choice to follow Him or not. Since we chose to disobey Him, we have been slaves to sin ever since.

That's just my own take on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by changed

Free agency? but then I don't logically see how free agency can exist in the ex-Nihlio scenario. Computers - even with random num gen's etc. etc. - will never have free agency, because everything they do can be traced back to how they were created. To have an independent - free - will - part of you has to be independent imo.

You cannot make a perfect robot with perfect personality, and place it in a perfect world - and have something go wrong. If something goes wrong, then something is not perfect - either He set up all the dominoes to fall how they were set up to fall - or He is not responsible for setting up the dominoes...

I'm honestly a little confused by this analogy. God gave us free will. We all agree on that. I don't see how it conflicts with a from nothing creation. Since God can create whatever He wants. We aren't computers or robots; God created us with intellect, souls, free will, the capacity to feel and know... God wants us to love Him freely. We cannot do that if we have no free will. This free will was imbued into us upon our creation. We cannot create computers with free will because we are not God... we cannot create computers with feelings, emotions, and a soul either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by changed

not trying to team up on you or anything - I think there is something to be learned from the ex-nihlo crowd - poetically, we are nothing without God - we are an unorganized/uncreated mess - so poetically speaking, God is making something from nothing - it's all just a matter of semantics, and being able to understand what words really mean when we use them.

I think it would be a stretch to say that it's a matter of semantics only. The out of nothing creation theory goes right to the heart of who we believe God is, what He is capable of, and who we are in relation to Him.

The Catholic doctrine is that God has always existed and the world has not. We believe that the only thing that has always existed is the Trinity, not matter, gravity, atoms, anything material. We can trace this world back millions, billions, trillions of years (in our minds) until we get to... nothing. To be completely honest, the fact that the LDS teach that matter has always existed is strange and foreign to me... and I would believe to most others as well. Even atheists who do not believe in God still purport that the material world did not always exist, they just have a different view about how it came into being. Not going to help my case any, but I'm just trying to say that the non-LDS view of creation is going to be hard to explain/accept when the two sides do not even agree that the material had a beginning.

Shelly200 · #9 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by changed

we are trapped within the confines of time - not so with God though...

This is one way to reason that God has always existed (outside of time) and we and matter have not (within time).

Quote:

Originally Posted by changed

And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM[/I]

I do not know how the LDS church interprets this verse, but non-LDS (at least the RCC... or maybe just me, who knows) interpret it to mean that God is existence itself. He has always existed, no one created Him. We, however, are creations, and so there was a time we did not exist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by changed

if I let my mind wander, time reveals the different sides of our personality - but perhaps the core of who we are is eternal/timeless? To those who become Gods, Gods who are unchanging - there must be some part of us that exists outside of time?

the existence of time is a subject of much debate within some communities...

This is one question most non-LDS have with LDS teaching on exaltation: how can God, or the people who become gods, be "unchanging?" The fact that you are going from spirit, to human, to god is change in the non-LDS mindset. In the non-LDS realm God is always divine, He did not progress to divinity. (To me you are having the same problem: you can't be unchanging really unless some part of you exists outside of time... with non-LDS this problem does not arise.)

volgadon · #10 (**permalink**) 12-21-2011, 05:22 PM

Quote:

This is one question most non-LDS have with LDS teaching on exaltation: how can God, or the people who become gods, be "unchanging?" The fact that you are going from spirit, to human, to god is change in the non-LDS mindset. In the non-LDS realm God is always divine, He did not progress to divinity.

This leaves you wide open to the counter argument that Jesus couldn't become human without changing.