What does the Bible say about Pre-universe?

Originally Posted by Mike555

I actually was trying to remember something that Heiser said about it but was to lazy to look it up. But Genesis 1:1 states that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. That sounds like a reference to creation to me. But I think I know where to find Heiser's statement on it and will listen to it.

It's a reference to creation but not the first creative act. It's not that God created the heavens and the earth in verse 1 and verse 2 is the result. The grammar does not support that nor the context. All of God's creative acts in this chapter are as a result of '...God said...' The first creative act was verse three.

Is nothing possible unless we know how it is possible? Do we need to be able to explain something for it to be a fact? We can't explain how quantum energy could have always existed without first coming into existence, but logically, it, or something, had to always have been in existence without having been caused to come into existence even though we can't explain it except perhaps as a five year old would - 'just because.'

If God exists and if He is responsible for creation, then He did it however He did it regardless of whether we can understand it.

But we know that the energy exists unlike God. We should not assume that God exists because of ignorance about how something happened. IF God exist and IF he created then yes it follows he did it regardless but those are HUGE IFs.

Originally Posted by Katzpur

Huh? In what way is creativity a result of dissatisfaction? I would think it would be just the opposite.

Here, let me explain!

So God is existing from all eternity and nothing else is yet existing. Why would God then decide to create if he was satisfied with his present state of existence - his lone existence?

You see for any conscious person able to think and act would not act if there was satisfaction with the present sate of being - think about it. Think about every action that you make - why do you act at all? You do so because the present state of your existence is not something that is satisfying to you - whether it is your needs or wants - physically or psychologically.

Since God is from eternity if his will was to create from eternity the universe itself would be eternal with his will but because, according to creationism, the creation is not eternal, his will must have changed there must have been a decision in his will that was different from a previous state. Why did that will change? It must by necessity be because he was not satisfied with the state of existence prior to that change. If he was there would have been a desire to create.

[Michael Way]

Originally Posted by Shiloh1

It's a reference to creation but not the first creative act. It's not that God created the heavens and the earth in verse 1 and verse 2 is the result. The grammar does not support that nor the context. All of God's creative acts in this chapter are as a result of '...God said...' The first creative act was verse three.

Whether or not Genesis 1:1 refers to the first creative act or not isn't relevant to the point I was making. The point I was making is that the word 'bara' is used for creation in Genesis 1:1. But since bara is also used in Genesis 1:27 for the creation of man which the text says was made from existing material, this means that the word bara cannot automatically be assumed to refer to creation out of nothing.

But we know that the energy exists unlike God. We should not assume that God exists because of ignorance about how something happened. IF God exist and IF he created then yes it follows he did it regardless but those are HUGE IFs.

For evidence of the existence of God you must look for historical evidence of His entrance into human history. I accept as valid the testimony of the apostles who were eyewitnesses of Jesus and of His resurrection. That is the strongest evidence for God. I realize that you don't accept that. I do.

But again, the existence of God can't be debated on this forum. Nor would anything come of such a debate.

Originally Posted by Mike555

Whether or not Genesis 1:1 refers to the first creative act or not isn't relevant to the point I was making. The point I was making is that the word 'bara' is used for creation in Genesis 1:1. But since bara is also used in Genesis 1:27 for the creation of man which the text says was made from existing material, this means that the word bara cannot automatically be assumed to refer to creation out of nothing.

Yes, bara does not necessitate meaning creation out of nothing but I'm not sure why you are telling me that since I never said it did. My point about creation from nothing was not about the word bara. It's a belief that Christians hold too regardless. It has to do with whether it is logical and how this could happen given God's sole existence prior to creation. Just saying well God could do it if he existed seems to be a very weak basis for even faith. I mean how does God affect nothing when the creation is ontologically different from him and he was the only thing in existence? That's why I brought up the three possibilities of the prior state, which is the subject of this thread - creatio ex nihilo, creatio ex materia, and creatio ex deo.

Christians reject the latter two but Genesis 1:1-3 actually teaches creatio ex materia. Which was my answer to the OP's question. This helps with the problem of creatio ex nihilo but creates other problems. We really don't get anywhere just assuming he exists because of ignorance and thinking that he is exempt from everything we know about causation, that's special pleading, particularly when it involves a being affecting nothing. And it matters not that you just invoke that he is powerful yet expect us to be more rigorous with are explanations. At least with the quantum state we know it exists ans we know that it is tied to the universe we experience whether we know how this happened, which was my other point. I could just as easily say well the quantum sate has all the properties necessary, as an assumption or axiom or an a priori starting point, to explain everything without a God. Of course that is never where scientists leave it nor want it to be and Christians never just accept such special pleading and bald assertions.

For evidence of the existence of God you must look for historical evidence of His entrance into human history. I accept as valid the testimony of the apostles who were eyewitnesses of Jesus and of His resurrection. That is the strongest evidence for God. I realize that you don't accept that. I do.

But again, the existence of God can't be debated on this forum. Nor would anything come of such a debate.

Yes, that I agree with.

[SumTingy]

Originally Posted by Mike555

Whether or not Genesis 1:1 refers to the first creative act or not isn't relevant to the point I was making. The point I was making is that the word 'bara' is used for creation in Genesis 1:1. But since bara is also used in Genesis 1:27 for the creation of man which the text says was made from existing material, this means that the word bara cannot automatically be assumed to refer to creation out of nothing.



For evidence of the existence of God you must look for historical evidence of His entrance into human history. I accept as valid the testimony of the apostles who were eyewitnesses of Jesus and of His resurrection. That is the strongest evidence for God. I realize that you don't accept that. I do.

But again, the existence of God can't be debated on this forum. Nor would anything come of such a debate.

Are you not the one that thinks Genesis is written an allegorical form and is not historical fact? Then, why are you using this book as the source of your argument?

[Leo58]

Originally Posted by Mike555

If God couldn't have done anything then He couldn't have created the Universe. God is not limited to, or subject to time and space. He transcends both. Time and space are for the benefit of God's created beings.

That's why it is nonsensical to ask what happened before the universe was created. You can say that God existed, but without time and matter "exist" has no meaning

[Michael Way]

Originally Posted by Shiloh1

Yes, bara does not necessitate meaning creation out of nothing but I'm not sure why you are telling me that since I never said it did. My point about creation from nothing was not about the word bara. It's a belief that Christians hold too regardless. It has to do with whether it is logical and how this could happen given God's sole existence prior to creation. Just saying well God could do it if he existed seems to be a very weak basis for even faith. I mean how does God affect nothing when the creation is ontologically different from him and he was the only thing in existence? That's why I brought up the three possibilities of the prior state, which is the subject of this thread - creatio ex nihilo, creatio ex materia, and creatio ex deo.

Christians reject the latter two but Genesis 1:1-3 actually teaches creatio ex materia. Which was my answer to the OP's question. This helps with the problem of creatio ex nihilo but creates other problems. We really don't get anywhere just assuming he exists because of ignorance and thinking that he is exempt from everything we know about causation, that's special pleading, particularly when it involves a being affecting nothing. And it matters not that you just invoke that he is powerful yet expect us to be more rigorous with are explanations. At least with the quantum state we know it exists ans we know that it is tied to the universe we experience whether we know how this happened was my other point. I could just as easily say well the quantum sate has all the properties necessary, as an assumption or axiom or a priori starting point, to explain everything without a God. Of that is never where scientist leave it nor want it to be and Christians never just accept.

Yes, that I agree with.

I mentioned 'bara' because you referred to creatio ex nihiloh in post #27 and I think that creatio ex nihiloh is largely based on that word. So I thought it worth mentioning. Yes, many or perhaps most Christians do hold to the belief of creation from nothing though there really is no need to. Christians believe all sorts of things that aren't necessarily true.

I can't help or speak to why others believe what they believe (God of the gaps/God done it). As for myself I believe the historical evidence concerning the resurrection of Jesus is one bit of evidence for God's existence.

I am also perfectly fine with the idea that our Universe could have just randomly come into existence as a result of quantum fluctuations in an infinite vacuum energy field and that if the theory of eternal inflation is correct then 'big bangs' are constantly occurring and creating other Universes.

[Michael Way]

Originally Posted by Leo58

That's why it is nonsensical to ask what happened before the universe was created. You can say that God existed, but without time and matter "exist" has no meaning

The fact that our Universe had a beginning doesn't mean that other realms of existence, other/higher dimensions didn't pre-exist. If God is transcendent then He simply isn't limited to our Universe.