rational experiences
Veteran Member
Oh no, no, no!
"Magical" is an improper and incorrect restatement of Christian theology @Clear.
If you want to argue against "Magical" Creation we'll need to find someone who argues FOR it, wouldn't you agree? No one here is arguing that supernatural demons created the universe.
Yes, actual (as opposed to stage) magic would have a supernatural source, but that source is demonic. The idea of a Magically created universe would be offensive to most Christians.
Let's change this a bit so we can get thing back to the actual issue at hand:
1)MAGICAL“DIVINE” CREATION VERSUS “NATURAL OR SCIENTIFIC” CREATION.
That looks much better. I don't think it's quite what we're discussing here, and I'll get to that in a moment, but it is looking better.
The actual issue is whether the universe was created by Divine fiat or whether the universe was just here, all the time, composed of pre-existent eternal matter, matter that no one could see, until God removed whatever was making it invisible so that it could be revealed, which come to think about reminds me of a magician or illusionist with a rabbit hidden in a secret compartment!
So it is the Mormon view that matter was always here and just invisible, not the Christian view. It is the Mormon view that God unveils already existent matter, just like an illusionist might unveil an already existent rabbit, and it is the Mormon view that God cannot create matter, any more than a Magician can actually create rabbits. Just like the illusionist, God can only work with what he has and cannot defy the "laws" of nature.
In other words, from my perspective, the Mormon view of theology has God acting like an Magician (watch me pull matter from under my hat) than as Creator of all things.
But since no one here is arguing “magical” creation, we can skip this for now. Of course I'm not trying to speak for everyone but if anyone here wants to make an argument for "magical" creation, please feel free to do so. Just expect the Christians here to strongly object if you present "magical" creation as a Christian one.
No it's correct. I appreciate the Mormon position that their belief was the belief of the early church, but the traditional, historic church sees things a bit differently.
Ummm...this doesn't tell me that Justin believed that God didn't create matter itself. God created matter and from matter created the universe. Likewise, God created man from dust, the dust itself a creation of God.
Secondly, I see no mention of eternal matter or pre-existing substrate. That would tell us God didn't create matter to begin with.
Jesus had a lot of contemporaries during the 1st century. Not all of them agreed with his teachings.
But if Philo thinks our world is made of matter then he is obviously correct. As I stated earlier, I have no problem with that.
I'm not sure why you look to Philo. Is he a church Father? An inspired prophet? He's is neither accepted by the Jews or considered a Patriarch of the Christians church.
Well there's the problem again. Clement is not considered a church Father by the vast majority of Christianity.
The second problem I see is that you appear to be confusing everlasting with eternal.
Everlasting is something that has a beginning but goes on indefinitely. Eternal, on the other hand, is something that has no beginning and no end.
What you've shown us here is Justin's belief that the universe began at a point in time, something the church has believed all along.
Same problem. Material creation simply means the universe is made of matter, it doesn't mean that the universe was made of eternal matter nor does it state God was too impotent to create matter.
Well if someone asks me if the earth is made of matter, I'm going to agree. It's you who are advancing the idea that Christians believe the universe was made of "nothing", when in actuality they believe it was made by nothing but the Word of God.
If a male says that expansion occurs from a lower state and says that lower state is cold, as compared to an expanding state that is heat, then the ancient male would claim it Satanic information.
And science says that space is cold and holds cold mass in cold...and cannot equate science without MATH.
Math is a male argument about the presence of God O proven by stating that MASS existed before any human being male did.
As a science quote...and how is that male quote wrong?
The Earth which owns and supports the life of human males, own an atmospheric gas mass body that is held constant by its mass surrounding the O body, and it owns non stop gas light irradiated light in a cold space body.
So space is cold enough to allow the gases to burn....as the supporting body.
A male says that he realizes that space is the coldest body, so if it supports gases burning, then a male also has to say, that the gases burning was an after event.
For cold gases had to exist first to be ignited and changed, to then be supported in space….so the God story said that the womb of space was changed, by the Sun radiation mass.
The actual male human conscious aware science knowledge, as he lives where he does...which was the God scientist arguing against the Satanic cosmological science self...who believed in putting Earth God into the state of Satan, the black hole theory.
Deeper into cold space.
For invention is always about first evaluating a theory and then forcing natural to inherit what he wants to cause.....for science was taught as cause and effect.
So if a male says that when the spatial body expanded, it created new mass and particles...it is because what previously was owned as a higher mass changed.
Which is the Satanic argument that said, I own everything, which is exactly true to the Satanic brotherhood as consciousness. Then he themes, and I want to change what I own and gain a changed condition, just because I own and can manipulate.
So he knew that God O mass existed first and he had to exert pressure changes upon it, which is to heat it with Sun radiation metallic mass.
Now he knows that Sun metallic radiation mass is its own mass and presence, so it is held as a constant of its own presence/form.
Earth as God is the only body that does not own a constant, it is created historic evolution of mass, as a totally different use of science information, evolution....from gas mass into formed stone.
When a male infers change in his mind, in science to own change previous mass has to exist by the determined O zero space stone God owned supported human life first. And the atmosphere 12 light gas radiation mass, the non physical mass, that can only change its presence by ignition of gas as a mass.
For a male says the space constant holds the metallic UFO radiation mass in the form that he studies.
To ignite a gas is to put the Earth gases into expansion which opens up deeper colder space, and then mass drops into it.
Male use science MEMORY about Planet Earth, and always had to own a theme of science as a male whilst living on Planet Earth. So they know consciously that Earth already was dropped into cold deep empty pit/well as the God body to become the particle.
Now what science as a male ignores, is that to discuss God being a particle he first has to assess why he believes that God is that particle to tell a theme/story before he says he can apply change to resource it.
The story he told was about God the O Earth mass history.
