Why Something Rather Than Nothing?

[datc]

What makes you think "God" is a he?

The male / female duality is everywhere in our world. The masculine aspect tends to be interpreted as one with power to act, actuality; whereas the feminine aspect, as passive, one that is acted on, potency, potentiality.

Nature is a "she"; the female archetype is both receptive and destructive in its various guises: e.g., if you do not take the opportunity to plant your crops in the summer when nature is pliable, the same nature will starve and kill you in the winter.

But Nature's God is pure act with no admixture of potency in it. Hence is it appropriate to refer to God as "he."

This, of course, is off-topic regarding my proof.

---

Silly, Genesis doesn't say there was nothing it says "When God began to create the heaven and earth, the earth being unformed and void, with darkness over the surface of the deep and wind from God sweeping over the water." There was always God and deep water in a void.

I have presented a philosophical proof. It is not revealed but natural theology.

At any rate, we read in the Catechism that "the 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil' symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust." (396) Symbolically evokes. Not necessarily (or even probably) literally describes a piece of actual human history.

Same with the passage you have quoted.

---

That was a long walk around the block for Goddidit.

That is unfair, because in the process of the argument, I unfold the attributes of God.

"Goddidit" is equivalent to the meaningless "Blargdidit."

But God is not a empty concept. I show in the OP that God is beyond being, good, and eternal. Those are not the only attributes of God, nor is the argument presented the only argument for God's existence.

But if you want to call God, "Blarg," it's all the same to me, as long as we ascribe the same meanings to both terms.