HPB-SB-14-12: Difference between revisions
(Полный текст по скану) |
(незначительные правки) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
This has always been my position. I did not suppose that ''nothing'' was used as the raw material; but if the Mosaic account means anything, it means that whereas there was ''nothing'', God caused something to exist—created what we know as matter. I cannot conceive of something being made, created without anything to make anything with. I have no more confidence in | This has always been my position. I did not suppose that ''nothing'' was used as the raw material; but if the Mosaic account means anything, it means that whereas there was ''nothing'', God caused something to exist—created what we know as matter. I cannot conceive of something being made, created without anything to make anything with. I have no more confidence in | ||
{{Style P-Align center|1={{Style S-Small capitals|fiat worlds}}}} | |||
{{Style P-No indent|than I have in fiat money. Mr. Talmage tells us that God did not make the universe out of ''nothing'', but out of “omnipotence.” Exactly how God changed “omnipotence” into matter is not stated. If there was ''nothing'' in the universe, ''omnipotence'' could do you no good. The weakest man in the world can lift as much ''nothing'' as God.}} | {{Style P-No indent|than I have in fiat money. Mr. Talmage tells us that God did not make the universe out of ''nothing'', but out of “omnipotence.” Exactly how God changed “omnipotence” into matter is not stated. If there was ''nothing'' in the universe, ''omnipotence'' could do you no good. The weakest man in the world can lift as much ''nothing'' as God.}} | ||
Mr. Talmage seems to think that to create something from ''nothing'' is simply a question of strength, that it requires infinite muscle, that it is only a question of biceps. Of course, omnipotence is an attribute, not an entity, not a raw material; and the idea that something can be made out of omnipotence, using that as the raw material, is infinitely absurd. It would have been equally logical to say that God made the universe out of His omniscience, or His omnipresence, or His unchangeableness, or out of His honesty, His holiness, or His incapacity to do evil. I confess my utter inability to understand, or even to suspect, what the Rev. gentleman means, when he says that God created the universe out of His “omnipotence.” | Mr. Talmage seems to think that to create something from ''nothing'' is simply a question of strength, that it requires infinite muscle, that it is only a question of biceps. Of course, omnipotence is an attribute, not an entity, not a raw material; and the idea that something can be made out of omnipotence, using that as the raw material, is infinitely absurd. It would have been equally logical to say that God made the universe out of His omniscience, or His omnipresence, or His unchangeableness, or out of His honesty, His holiness, or His incapacity to do evil. I confess my utter inability to understand, or even to suspect, what the Rev. gentleman means, when he says that God created the universe out of His “omnipotence.” | ||
{{Style P-Align center|1=''(To be continued.)''}} | |||
Latest revision as of 07:27, 5 November 2026
 |
vol. title: vol. period: 1882 pages in vol.: 174 |
< A Tilt with Talmage. (continued from page 14-7) >
power—their power having been lessened, their crimes have decreased. As a matter of fact, Paganism of itself did not produce any great men; neither has Christianity. Millions of influences determine individual character, and the religion of the country in which a man happens to be born may determine many of his opinions, without influencing, to any great extent, his real character.
There have been brave, honest and intelligent men in and out of every church.
Question—Mr. Talmage says that you insist that, according to the Bible, the universe was made out of nothing, and he denounces your statement as a gross misrepresentation. What have you stated upon that subject?
Answer—What I said was substantially this: “We are told in the first chapter of Genesis, that in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. If this means anything, it means that God produced—caused to exist, called into being—the heaven and the earth. It will not do to say that God formed the heaven and earth of previously existing matter. Moses conveys, and intended to convey, the idea that the matter of which the heaven and the earth are composed was created.”
This has always been my position. I did not suppose that nothing was used as the raw material; but if the Mosaic account means anything, it means that whereas there was nothing, God caused something to exist—created what we know as matter. I cannot conceive of something being made, created without anything to make anything with. I have no more confidence in
fiat worlds
than I have in fiat money. Mr. Talmage tells us that God did not make the universe out of nothing, but out of “omnipotence.” Exactly how God changed “omnipotence” into matter is not stated. If there was nothing in the universe, omnipotence could do you no good. The weakest man in the world can lift as much nothing as God.
Mr. Talmage seems to think that to create something from nothing is simply a question of strength, that it requires infinite muscle, that it is only a question of biceps. Of course, omnipotence is an attribute, not an entity, not a raw material; and the idea that something can be made out of omnipotence, using that as the raw material, is infinitely absurd. It would have been equally logical to say that God made the universe out of His omniscience, or His omnipresence, or His unchangeableness, or out of His honesty, His holiness, or His incapacity to do evil. I confess my utter inability to understand, or even to suspect, what the Rev. gentleman means, when he says that God created the universe out of His “omnipotence.”
(To be continued.)