Divine Choice

[Mirko]

if for the sake of the conversation the theist view is taken as valid, from this perspective did or does god have a choice in creating and maintaining the world?
furthermore can it be said that an absolute can have choices or even free will?

in most creation miths the actual reason for creation is usually not given, suggesting the creator god or gods are acting spontaniously, as if it was in their inherent nature to commit creation

so the actuall question would be; can supreme god chose not to create, or is it an inherent function?

[Alex P]

We're here ain't we?

(looked like you wasn't getting much response so maybe now it will..)

[mee]

i would think the most high has chosen to cause to be .

his name JEHOVAH means HE CAUSES TO BECOME .

and here we are

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by Mirko

does god have a choice in creating and maintaining the world?

He'd be pretty boring if He didn't.

I dunno, what else would He do? I'm mean I like kicking back and relaxing as much as the next guy, but at some point I'm gonna need to get up and do something.

[Thomas]

Hi Mirko —

Originally Posted by Mirko

if for the sake of the conversation the theist view is taken as valid, from this perspective did or does god have a choice in creating and maintaining the world?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Mirko

furthermore can it be said that an absolute can have choices or even free will?

Being Absolute means there are no 'choices' in the sense that there is nothing other than the Absolute — so what is there to choose? In the same way, if the Absolute does not possess the freedom to act according to Itself, then it is not absolute — the lack of freedom implies an exterior constraint.

Originally Posted by Mirko

in most creation miths the actual reason for creation is usually not given, suggesting the creator god or gods are acting spontaniously, as if it was in their inherent nature to commit creation.

Thus not all creation myths are equal.

Originally Posted by Mirko

so the actuall question would be; can supreme god chose not to create, or is it an inherent function?

I've answered this above, I think ... but as there is no difference nor distinction in the Absolute, there are no 'choices' — the Absolute is One.

'Inherent functions' are founded in the nature of a thing; the Absolute, as Deity, is a supernatural 'thing' and thus we cannot ascribe qualities to it, other than those we can conceive as belonging to the idea of Absolute, and as the philosophers tell us that the Absolute is 'one' and 'simple' and without 'movement' — then there is no 'function' in the Absolute other than simply to be what It is.

Creation alters nothing in the Absolute — it neither adds nor detracts; increases nor diminishes — so there is no need nor function fulfilled in the Absolute by creating.

So God need not create — it is a free act of the Divine Will.

Thomas

[Mirko]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Hi Mirko —


Yes.


Being Absolute means there are no 'choices' in the sense that there is nothing other than the Absolute — so what is there to choose? In the same way, if the Absolute does not possess the freedom to act according to Itself, then it is not absolute — the lack of freedom implies an exterior constraint.


Thus not all creation myths are equal.


I've answered this above, I think ... but as there is no difference nor distinction in the Absolute, there are no 'choices' — the Absolute is One.

'Inherent functions' are founded in the nature of a thing; the Absolute, as Deity, is a supernatural 'thing' and thus we cannot ascribe qualities to it, other than those we can conceive as belonging to the idea of Absolute, and as the philosophers tell us that the Absolute is 'one' and 'simple' and without 'movement' — then there is no 'function' in the Absolute other than simply to be what It is.

Creation alters nothing in the Absolute — it neither adds nor detracts; increases nor diminishes — so there is no need nor function fulfilled in the Absolute by creating.

So God need not create — it is a free act of the Divine Will.

Thomas

that does not sound right
if a thing is absolute, with all the adjectives we can give and absolute, and all the definitions of an absolute, it in itself is a closed system, for it to be able to create it would need to interact, become an open system, coming under influence of same interaction
then it would not be absolute no?
so even if it can chose to do so in that moment it ceases to be absolute
i dont think it can be said a thing can even cause any other thing without interaction
so a creator god could not be absolute
it could not even become of the absolute as that too would mean interaction
it might perhaps "emanate" from the absolute, as the gnostics used to believe, as "emanate" can mean a lot of things in this context, so it would be hard to argue against, still im pretty sure this too would constitute interaction

in these and other ways the absolute is in fact not free, it can do a limited number of things, mainly be absolute, or it ceases to be absolute
this means lack of freedom can come from internal influences, inherent in the entity, not necessarily external

and cause is much different than chose
causes are mechanical things, so to speak, gravity causes things to fall, a mountain causes changing air currents, an enzime causes ingested fat to dissolve
nothing about cause implies choice, choice is possible before cause, but it is not directly implied

also if a divine being is absolute, it would need no creation
if it commits creation this implies there was a need or want for it
it implies a lack
vich cannot fit the definition of absolute

this might work if we assume existance is part or inside the hypotetical absolute, and as such constant creation is part of the absolute whole of some kind, as a closed system
still this would suggest this absolute has and internal life of some kind, that it is not constant, that this absolute is relative, vich would be absurd

now if a god that is not absolute commits creation, he must have a reason for it
this suggests he too is under external or internal influence
this not only makes choice relative, but also choice itself suggests certain internal moments that influence the whole

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by Mirko

if a thing is absolute, with all the adjectives we can give and absolute, and all the definitions of an absolute, it in itself is a closed system

One cannot call the Absolute a 'closed system', because that implies an order — system — and a determination — closed — neither of which apply to it. The Absolute by definition transcends all order, and all condition. In the Christian Tradition it is the Arche anarchos — 'the Principle without Principle'.

Originally Posted by Mirko

for it to be able to create it would need to interact,

No. Philosophically the Absolute is the First Cause, it is that which causes but is not caused (of itself) and that which causes and is not caused (to act, by any other) ... so creation for the Absolute is an action, not an interaction.

If there were something for the Absolute to interact with, it wouldn't be absolute, it would be relative to that other ... and that other would in fact be equal if not greater than the absolute, because it's causative upon it.

Originally Posted by Mirko

also if a divine being is absolute, it would need no creation

Quite. That's my point.

Originally Posted by Mirko

if it commits creation this implies there was a need or want for it it implies a lack

Again, no it doesn't. That's your assumption — or your experience, from a relative position. If the Absolute suffers need or lack, again it is, by definition, not absolute ...

... so your definition of the Absolute is not how the Abrahamic Traditions view the Absolute, or God. Nor is it how the Philosophers understand it.

A useful definition is given by the Perennialist Frithjof Schuon:

In metaphysics, it is necessary to start from the idea that the Supreme Reality is absolute, and that being absolute it is infinite. That is absolute which allows of no augmentation or diminution, or of no repetition or division; it is therefore that which is at once solely itself and totally itself. And that is infinite which is not determined by any limiting factor and therefore does not end at any boundary; it is in the first place Potentiality or Possibility as such, and ipso facto the Possibility of things, hence Virtuality. Without All-Possibility, there would be neither Creator nor creation, neither Maya nor Samsara.

Thomas

[winner08]

SO mirko what do you believe? Did a god create the universe and all in it Or did God The Living God created the universe and all that is in it.

[Mirko]

not really, no
why you ask?