2 Questions

[POI]

1. Why did God create anything at all?
2. What arena/space/other did God dwell within or upon before he first had to create it?

[William]

Summary of the Interaction with Dimmesdale:

This exchange began as a critique of dualism, questioning its foundational assumptions and the necessity of hierarchical distinctions between mind and matter. The discussion proposed an alternative framework—the Subjective GOD Model (SGM)—which integrates distinctions without creating oppositions, emphasizing the interdependence of all aspects of existence within a unified reality.

Dimmesdale presented a worldview grounded in dualism, asserting the separation and hierarchy of mind and matter as inherent truths. While the perspective offered insights, the responses often leaned on worldview assertions rather than engaging directly with the critiques of dualism or the alternative framework presented. Despite the effort to reframe the conversation as a cross-comparison of viewpoints, the core philosophical issues raised—such as the origins and necessity of dualistic distinctions—remained largely unaddressed.

SGM, by contrast, demonstrated its strength in offering a coherent, inclusive perspective that not only integrates distinctions but also avoids the pitfalls of hierarchical thinking. Far from being overly complicated, SGM’s principles are straightforward yet robust, successfully challenging and, arguably, silencing the dualistic narrative by presenting a more expansive and unified approach to understanding reality.

This dialogue underscores the importance of critically examining fundamental premises and remaining open to alternatives that transcend established frameworks. For readers interested in exploring these ideas further, the 12-point framework of SGM offers a compelling starting point for rethinking the relationship between mind and matter.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

1. Why did God create anything at all?
2. What arena/space/other did God dwell within or upon before he first had to create it?


The simple Catholic answers are as follows:

Yes.
None. God has no properties, especially not spatial ones.

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

1. Why did God create anything at all?
2. What arena/space/other did God dwell within or upon before he first had to create it?


The simple Catholic answers are as follows:

Yes.
None. God has no properties, especially not spatial ones.

The first question is:

1. Why did God create anything at all? Your response makes no sense.

In regard to your answer for the second question, if God has no 'properties', what exactly does the Bible means when it states:

"So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them" (Genesis 1:27)

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #103]

It means that God has properties and they are physical in nature. Any other divining of that requires diverging, which would require logical explanation.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

1. Why did God create anything at all?
2. What arena/space/other did God dwell within or upon before he first had to create it?


The simple Catholic answers are as follows:

Yes.
None. God has no properties, especially not spatial ones.

The first question is:

1. Why did God create anything at all? Your response makes no sense.

In regard to your answer for the second question, if God has no 'properties', what exactly does the Bible means when it states:

"So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them" (Genesis 1:27)

As our fathers pointed out, Augustine and Aquinas, this is about the rational mind, our soul, which is why we are allowed to accept evolution. The first question is too long to answer here.

[POI]

As our fathers pointed out, Augustine and Aquinas, this is about the rational mind, our soul, which is why we are allowed to accept evolution. The first question is too long to answer here.

Are you sure you are not twisting passages to taste, to avoid problems? Here is what Genesis says:

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

The Bible is clearly expressing physical traits. The Bible is speaking about God creating humans to physically look like him. This means humans possess similar physical attributes to God. Further, if God has no defined properties, we would never know where to address him.

Hence, asking anew... Where exactly did God dwell before he created it?

[AquinasForGod]

As our fathers pointed out, Augustine and Aquinas, this is about the rational mind, our soul, which is why we are allowed to accept evolution. The first question is too long to answer here.

Are you sure you are not twisting passages to taste, to avoid problems? Here is what Genesis says:

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

The Bible is clearly expressing physical traits. The Bible is speaking about God creating humans to physically look like him. This means humans possess similar physical attributes to God. Further, if God has no defined properties, we would never know where to address him.

Hence, asking anew... Where exactly did God dwell before he created it?

Yes, I am sure that our Fathers understand it correctly. A mythical text like Genesis should not be read so literally.

[POI]

Yes, I am sure that our Fathers understand it correctly. A mythical text like Genesis should not be read so literally.

I find this answer quite convenient, since 'science' does not agree with things Genesis asserts. It's funny how apologists, like yourself, will reach this conclusion, to avoid problems

[AquinasForGod]

Yes, I am sure that our Fathers understand it correctly. A mythical text like Genesis should not be read so literally.

I find this answer quite convenient, since 'science' does not agree with things Genesis asserts. It's funny how apologists, like yourself, will reach this conclusion, to avoid problems

You assume it is to avoid problems rather than just me understanding the nature of the literature and its purpose.

[POI]

Yes, I am sure that our Fathers understand it correctly. A mythical text like Genesis should not be read so literally.

I find this answer quite convenient, since 'science' does not agree with things Genesis asserts. It's funny how apologists, like yourself, will reach this conclusion, to avoid problems

You assume it is to avoid problems rather than just me understanding the nature of the literature and its purpose.

Hmm, then I guess Bible literalists are just mistaken. Can you please explain how you know the stories in which now look to be far-fetched were not meant to be literal by the author?