tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post1569175589623964705..comments2024-03-28T13:23:50.623-05:00Comments on Alexander Pruss's Blog: How could God have chosen not to create anything?Alexander R Prusshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-10065937485937854622011-06-18T20:37:43.169-05:002011-06-18T20:37:43.169-05:00I think the story in this post will be enriched if...I think the story in this post will be enriched if we add that in the Trinitarian relations, God already expresses that artistic vision that he himself is, and does so perfectly.Alexander R Prusshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-57553798452004215992011-06-16T14:12:00.640-05:002011-06-16T14:12:00.640-05:00Intersting . . I had never considered the portion ...Intersting . . I had never considered the portion about worms, us, and angels! Immediately it sounds objectionable, but I think thats a fair statement.<br /><br />That actually puts a lot of things into perspective, when you say that Gods artistic vision is himself. I may even suggest that an objectively bad artistic creation would come from an objectively "bad" artistic vision, or subject (including concepts). In light of you saying God's artistic vision would be himself, and there is nothing bad in him.<br /><br />Very preliminary. . But that's really helpful. :DIcaras Triakis Harimauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18173169441352894373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-4082232063881330102011-06-15T11:49:03.208-05:002011-06-15T11:49:03.208-05:00Anne:
I don't think there is any such thing a...Anne:<br /><br />I don't think there is any such thing as tipping in the case of God. When God acts, he acts on all the applicable reasons. The value of creatures praising him, the value of freedom, the value of there being contingent beings, etc.--all these played a role. <br /><br />It's an interesting thing about God and man that sometimes we can be more definite about some of God's reasons than we can about human reasons. For whenever R is an applicable good reason to do A, and God does A, then God does A at least in part because of R. So to know that R was among the reasons for which God acted one just needs to know that R was an applicable good reason for what God did. Not so for humans who can ignore good reasons. <br /><br />Icaras:<br /><br />Yes, angels fall infinitely short of God. On balance, I think humans and angels are more like worms than like God. They are only finitely different from worms and infinitely different from God.<br /><br />"Because it seems to me that as a human being, even fallen images of Gods creation have an overwhelming amount of beauty."<br /><br />Well said. And yet creation at its best falls infinitely short of God. So how beautiful God must be!<br /><br />"And to the artist who creates, take someone like caravaggio. I would say that even though truly, any depiction of the human body falls terribly short, when you become that elite of an artist (in any medium). . there are different standards that apply that may not necessairily hang on how well the human form is portrayed."<br /><br />Yes, how well the art work does depends on what the artistic vision is. I was assuming, with much of the Christian tradition, that God's artistic vision is himself--that he makes beings to be images of him. <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1047.htm" rel="nofollow">Aquinas puts it</a> well: "Hence we must say that the distinction and multitude of things come from the intention of the first agent, who is God. For He brought things into being in order that His goodness might be communicated to creatures, and be represented by them; and because His goodness could not be adequately represented by one creature alone, He produced many and diverse creatures, that what was wanting to one in the representation of the divine goodness might be supplied by another. For goodness, which in God is simple and uniform, in creatures is manifold and divided and hence the whole universe together participates the divine goodness more perfectly, and represents it better than any single creature whatever."Alexander R Prusshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-57562136493736489692011-06-14T13:59:24.494-05:002011-06-14T13:59:24.494-05:00Clarity needed:
When you say anything God creates...Clarity needed:<br /><br />When you say anything God creates will fall infinitely short of Him, would you say that is also true of angels? <br /><br />Also are you speaking from the standpoint of God looking at his creation? Because it seems to me that as a human being, even fallen images of Gods creation have an overwhelming amount of beauty. <br /><br />I think it the universe, the world and particularly human beings as creations of God who has in himself infinite beauty. . . Even a deeply flawed product of his handiwork spills over with beauty. I think that says alot about God. Maybe since God knows beauty better, this would be different for him?<br /><br />And to the artist who creates, take someone like caravaggio. I would say that even though truly, any depiction of the human body falls terribly short, when you become that elite of an artist (in any medium). . there are different standards that apply that may not necessairily hang on how well the human form is portrayed.<br /><br />Ide have to think on that more. Not sure this post makes sense. Thiers a question in thier somewhere. Rushed for time! I apologizeIcaras Triakis Harimauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18173169441352894373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-460652276411167902011-06-14T13:39:42.160-05:002011-06-14T13:39:42.160-05:00What do you think might have "tipped the bala...What do you think might have "tipped the balance" of reasons?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com