Creatio Ex Nihilo - Forming Something out of Nothing?

[Ignorant]

You seem to think that the Bible makes a declarative statement about the monotheistic deity of later tradition that philosophical arguments, as you say, can be stated so as to be made compatible with.

That sentence is poorly written, so I am doing my best to interpret it in a light which is favorable to you. What I said was this:

"However,[the argument that utilizes the premise "out of nothing, nothing comes"] would establish that there is at least one thing in the universe that has at least one of the qualities that the revealed monotheistic god (Jewish, Christian, or of Islam) claims for himself, viz. eternal being."

What I meant to say that the conclusion of that purely philosophical argument converges with the religious claim of the monotheistic traditions that God is eternal. In other words, at least ONE claim of the image of God as claimed to be revealed by the monotheistic traditions does not contradict the conclusions of reason. Does that mean that such a god exists? Certainly not. It was merely a passing comment that apparently you felt needed clarification. Fair enough.

That's probably the lens through which you read the texts. However, the ancient Hebrews didn't dispute that there were other gods for other nations, they just didn't believe that these gods were comparable to their own---Yahweh---who had chosen them. Monotheism was later adapted, the arguments for such being molded by the philosophers, and utilized by the myth-makers whose deity began to appear less anthropomorphic and more of the detached metaphysical monster that the "intellectual theologians" advocate today.

Wow. So much learning going on here. =) Suffice it to say that the process was a great deal more complex than this caricature you have illustrated here. Is there some truth to what you said about the early Hebrew's monotheistic beliefs, or lack thereof? Certainly. Is it as simple as you describe? Certainly not. But wouldn't that be more appropriate a discussion on a Christian or Jewish topic thread? Or is it always appropriate to critique revealed religious beliefs on a philosophical thread? I mean, all I did was mention the philosophical distinction between a rational, self-evident premise and a (supposedly) revealed proposition, as well as their logical compatibility (i.e. they are not mutually exclusive propositions), and now we are talking about the different revealed understandings of the monotheistic god's inner life. What happened?

When I said "ancient" I'm pretty much referring to everything prior to the Dark Ages, or about the sixth century. Your Christian monotheism (which the Muslims rightly say isn't really) looks very different from your Jewish monotheism, and your Jewish monotheism looks very different when the Bible is first starting to be written in the 8th century B.C.E. Western philosophy began with Thales in the 6th century and I presume Eastern philosophy slightly predates that (can anyone confirm or deny?).

I am not sure what has brought on this history lesson? I appreciate your concern for my knowledge of comparative religion, but what has that to do with whether or not the concept of creation contradicts "out of nothing nothing comes"?

But no doubt the authors of the Bible were iron age goat-herders who borrowed from other cultures; and they certainly weren't all that philosophical, which is why people have to bend over backwards to explain all the ridiculous tales while feigning respectability for their "arguments"---what they usually only want to discuss.

Ha! If only every socio-religious phenomenon were so easy to describe!