The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. A human artisan makes from a given material whatever he wants, while God shows his power by starting from nothing to make all he wants. Where did this originate? That would be more in accord with notion held by many physicists that Creation arose from quantum fluctuations. But if God is uncreated and matter uncreated, God is no longer, according to the Platonists, the Creator of all things, nor, so far as their opinions hold, is the monarchy of God established.
And further, as God, because He is uncreated, is also unalterable; so if matter, too, were uncreated, it also would be unalterable, and equal to God; for that which is created is mutable and alterable, but that which is uncreated is immutable and unalterable. And what great thing is it if God made the world out of existent materials? But the power of God is manifested in this, that out of things that are not He makes whatever He pleases.
And today such questions about the origin of the world are alive as physicists offered metaphysical theories to account for the emergence of creation. The theists attribute the origin of the universe to divine activity, and many have proposed that God created something from absolute nothing. Nevertheless, those who are against such view have questioned the viability of creation from nothing and offer alternative creation options in its place.
These new alternatives explore a variety of options in light of scientific work, biblical scholarship, and both old and new theological traditions. The term creatio creation implies both an action and the object effect thereof.
Creation in the sense of an action stands for productive activity generally, but more especially for a higher order of such efficiency, for example artistic creation.
Creation is not change or transformation, since change itself includes an actual underlying pre-existing subject that passes one real state to another real state. Also, creation with respect to a higher being God is not an emanation from the Divine substance, since the latter is utterly indivisible. Levenson , who points out that the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo does not appear in Genesis.
Oord speculates that God created our particular universe billions of years ago from primordial chaos. This chaos, however, did not predate God, for God would have created the chaotic elements as well. Biblical problem: Scripture — in Genesis, 2 Peter, and elsewhere — suggests creation from something water, deep, chaos, etc.
Historical problem: The Gnostics Basilides and Valentinus first proposed creatio ex nihilo on the basis of assuming the inherently evil nature of creation, and in the belief that God does not act in history. Early Christian theologians adopted the idea to affirm the kind of absolute divine power that many Christians now reject.
Empirical problem: We have no evidence that our universe originally came into being from absolutely nothing. Its very nature is ineffable because to begin to describe nihil is to turn it into something — nihilum. Perhaps the closest thing in nature to nihil is the vacuum of space, but even this is qualifiable and quantifiable — in turn making it something.
Nihil is an elusive beast and trying to track it only drives it further away. No amount of metaphysical introspection can reveal the essence of existence because the essence of existence is much higher than cognition.
The fact of the matter is that reason cannot truly imagine nihil because it does not exist. Existence — whether concrete, metaphysical, or abstract — does not depend on perception. Perception is subservient to existence ipso facto — not the other way around. Perception exists; thus, perception cannot perceive nihil. The human perception is incapable of perceiving anything outside of existence because perception is itself within existence.
Where does existence lie then? Descartes assures his readers that beyond the ego, both mathematics and God certainly exist. Now he divides these into two separate entities as would many philosophers, as if God were a coworker with mathematics. The commentator admitted that this was a relatively minor issue, but I think he was right to bring it up, since my claim was pretty strong, so strong, in fact, that even just one example would suffice to falsify it.
Next is a question about the relation between essence and form in Aquinas. From this, I think he derives two distinct questions. In other words, if a thing is composed of matter and form, then matter is what limits the form, not the other way around. Since he understood essence and form to be identical, I think his question was why I would call the essence limited, rather than the matter. God could have decided not to create, and God could decide, at any moment, to send creation into nonexistence.
Thinking God created the universe from nothing, however, easily leads to thinking creation does not ultimately matter. If God made it once unilaterally, so God can make it again. The lack of motivation becomes especially problematic when caring for and protecting creation requires considerable self-sacrifice. Some respond to this charge by arguing that earthly-oriented motivations ought to be secondary.
Christians ought to be primarily concerned with what God commands, they say, not with whether creation is radically contingent.
In all, it was a fantastic experience. Creation-at-an-instant problem: We have no evidence in the history of the Universe after the Big Bang that entities can emerge instantaneously from absolute nothingness. But many modern philosophers have identified it with the universe itself; and so also do the atheists: the universe itself is uncaused and eternal. See Science Background, Section 3. Laws themselves do not create anything, they are merely a description of what happens under certain conditions.
Linguistic and textual[ edit ] Scholars have suggested alternative translations from the Biblical Hebrew for the concept often rendered as "created" in English-language versions of Genesis 1. Aquinas held angels to be pure forms, not instantiated in any matter. Rather than follow the logic of Irenaeus, Christians should follow the logic of biblical passages, which consistently speak of God creating through, with, and alongside creation. And further, as God, because He is uncreated, is also unalterable; so if matter, too, were uncreated, it also would be unalterable, and equal to God; for that which is created is mutable and alterable, but that which is uncreated is immutable and unalterable. Empire Problem: The kind of divine power implied in creatio ex nihilo supports a 'theology of empire', based upon unilateral force and control of others. Waltke wrote an extensive Biblical study of creation theology in which he argues for creation from chaos rather than from nothing - based on the Hebrew Torah and the New Testament texts.
The English-language word "create" itself comes from the Latin creare to make, bring forth, produce, beget , with a root cognate with crescere to arise, to grow and allied to the English word crescent originally meaning "growing". Christians ought to be primarily concerned with what God commands, they say, not with whether creation is radically contingent. The CMBR, a faint microwave radiation permeating all space that can be detected by radio telescopes, is remnant radiation left from the Big Bang, and one of the few sources of information on conditions in the early universe. Wherein matter is the result of its discontinuity with space, and energy is the result of matter trying to recombine itself with space and the fragments of itself separated by space. They  also claim that rejecting creatio ex nihilo provides the opportunity to affirm that God has everlastingly created and related with some realm of non-divine actualities or another compare continuous creation.
The theists attribute the origin of the universe to divine activity, and many have proposed that God created something from absolute nothing. But most of these Christians affirm the ancient idea that God created the universe out of nothing creatio ex nihilo. One may even argue that — in this construction — the Logos and the Sum are themselves slaves to the unmoved God Who uses comprehensible roles to reveal Himself to mankind.
From Wikimedia Commons.
Anthropocentrism reigns. This idea of a required beginning appears to contradict the proposed creator who existed without a beginning. The epistemologist points to cognition as the key to understanding and defining existence. These assumptions set limits on what we can conclude from the science of cosmology. The logic of the mind is in some way a part of the all-encompassing Logos that is the basis of the logic of the universe. From this, I think he derives two distinct questions.
Since the third century, most Christians have said God initially created our universe from absolute nothingness.
On the basis of this Greek understanding of the principle, the first half of this paper will formulate an argument that summarizes the metaphysical problem of creatio ex nihilo. And further, as God, because He is uncreated, is also unalterable; so if matter, too, were uncreated, it also would be unalterable, and equal to God; for that which is created is mutable and alterable, but that which is uncreated is immutable and unalterable. If God could theoretically create the nihil, then does it exist? The very fact that we have some sense of existence is evidence for existence. Does care for creation fit well with creatio ex nihilo? Van Volde, for example, suggests that the Genesis account tells of the "separation" of existing material rather than of creation ex nihilo.