Occasional-ism “a non-Deistic understanding of the World”

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Picking up where this relevant post left off from a now-closed thread on another controversial theory:



“Why are heavy things heavy things, ultimately? in a non-Deistic Universe? It's because God is pulling on them

[more than lighter things] ... ”


Occasionalism vs. the Standard Model of Particle Physics (QED (Quantum electrodynamics).

Occasionalism is an interpretation of the Standard Model.

Under occasionalism God Himself is directly responsible for all motion*, which is a term defined under the Standard Model’s lexical stance, and any Ph.D. physicist or any standard quality university introductory physics textbook will define motion there, under the Standard Model’s lexical stance.

So what is gravity?

Under occasionalism, gravity is the characteristic pattern of motion where God moves everything toward greater and greater Mass (even Light itself, God moves toward Mass, under the Standard Model). God does this in an extremely precise and reliably repeatable way, you can set your watch to it. Like literally, a year is a year because of how reliably repeatable God moves everything, including the Earth, toward greater and greater Mass (c. viz., in the case of the Earth’s orbit, toward His Sun).

This is gravity, under occasionalism. So it isn’t a force, but because of how beautifully precise the motion is toward Mass, we can conceive of it as a force, and it would be profitable to do so, except c. during an Ascension (Our Lord) or assumption (Our Lady, Enoch, Elijah) to Heaven, or some other miracle that "violates the 'laws' of physics".


* With the exception of motion under our control. For example if a person, male or female or inter$&% or eunuch, lifts weights or sprints for exercise, you are not moving toward greater Mass, you are trying to do your own thing. If you obeyed gravity, you would be a couch potato and not exercise, so our goal isn’t to obey gravity like everything else does, that’s determinism, and what all atheists believe, unless they are moral realists.



 
Last edited:

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Why is occasionalism helpful to anyone?
I guess the most simple reason is because it provides answers to all the open questions modern science cannot answer as of yet. Some of these open questions are in fact under modern science, permanently closed ... as open. Like, there is no answer, and an answer is ontologically impossible too–there's no answer coming iow. For example the most modern Bell's tests rule out cause and effect and determinism completely (assuming the speed of light is a real physical limit). Dark energy? So far completely undetectable. The graviton, the hypothetical particle mediating gravitation? Good luck with all of that.

But under occasionalism God is simply directly doing what modern science wants to believe and prove (but cannot prove) is happening according to ontological physical laws. Which is Deistic, which is another reason why occasionalism is helpful, because it's the polar opposite of Deism. The watchmaker God is opposed by nothing in particular in Scripture (except ofc miracles) since there's no passage unambiguously saying that God controls things according to occasionalism, but there's also nothing in particular which says there are immutable physical laws governing our physics either, so according to Scripture either option is plausible.

Under occasionalism God directly governs physics, and so scientific inquiry tells us precisely how reliably and predictably God does this. It's so predictable and stable that we have been able to invent engineering marvels, which depend on reliable physics.
 

Derf

Well-known member
I guess the most simple reason is because it provides answers to all the open questions modern science cannot answer as of yet. Some of these open questions are in fact under modern science, permanently closed ... as open. Like, there is no answer, and an answer is ontologically impossible too–there's no answer coming iow. For example the most modern Bell's tests rule out cause and effect and determinism completely (assuming the speed of light is a real physical limit). Dark energy? So far completely undetectable. The graviton, the hypothetical particle mediating gravitation? Good luck with all of that.

But under occasionalism God is simply directly doing what modern science wants to believe and prove (but cannot prove) is happening according to ontological physical laws. Which is Deistic, which is another reason why occasionalism is helpful, because it's the polar opposite of Deism. The watchmaker God is opposed by nothing in particular in Scripture (except ofc miracles) since there's no passage unambiguously saying that God controls things according to occasionalism, but there's also nothing in particular which says there are immutable physical laws governing our physics either, so according to Scripture either option is plausible.

Under occasionalism God directly governs physics, and so scientific inquiry tells us precisely how reliably and predictably God does this. It's so predictable and stable that we have been able to invent engineering marvels, which depend on reliable physics.
Under occasionalism, if I understand what you wrote before, "Physics" isn't needed. It is all just God doing stuff. Sometimes (most of the time) God does the normal thing, but sometimes He does different things. Therefore, the only definition of "miracle" that works is where God is deciding to do something different, or, iow, everything is a miracle. Every time the sun rises, it is a miracle. Every photon that hits the earth is a miracle. I think the conclusion that must come from that is that God is creating all the time, since every raindrop, every rockfall, every event that ever happens is God working it. I can't say that such is impossible, but it seems like it belittles God, making it seem like He couldn't make a decent, self-supporting universe. And it affirms the Calvinist view that there is no rogue molecule in the universe--God is directly moving every one of them, including the thoughts in our brains.

I agree this is opposite of Deism in some ways, but it leads one back to determinism.

I didn't think you were Calvinistic.
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Under occasionalism, if I understand what you wrote before, "Physics" isn't needed. It is all just God doing stuff.

Physics is how we describe motion, regardless of whether or not God is moving everything directly, or indirectly through many angels, or through ontological laws of nature. It just means motion and its description. The Standard Model describes motion. Occasionalism explains the ontological source of motion differently from those who believe in a watchmaker God, and from those who believe in Secular modernism.

Sometimes (most of the time) God does the normal thing, but sometimes He does different things. Therefore, the only definition of "miracle" that works is where God is deciding to do something different, or, iow, everything is a miracle.

Everything is a miracle under occasionalism, yes, according to miracle meaning, whenever God intercedes in the World. Intercession here meaning that without it, either A or nothing would happen, when and because of God interceding, instead B happens. So before and without intercession, either A or nothing would happen, but instead B happens. That would be a miracle, and in every case except concerning free will,¹ that does mean that basically everything is a miracle.

But we can still distinguish between what is predicted and observed and stable, and what is surprising, like a Resurrection, Ascension or assumption into Heaven.

Every time the sun rises, it is a miracle. Every photon that hits the earth is a miracle. I think the conclusion that must come from that is that God is creating all the time, since every raindrop, every rockfall, every event that ever happens is God working it.

While the Scripture never unambiguously says, either that nature runs according to impersonal physical laws (watchmaker God), or that God actively and intimately sustains nature moment-to-moment, the Scripture does unambiguously repeat and repeat and repeat how God is the Creator of Heaven and Earth and Maker of all things. (One of the reasons the Trinity is confirmed by Scripture is because clearly Jesus is the Creator in Scripture, it's repeated multiple times.)

I can't say that such is impossible, but it seems like it belittles God, making it seem like He couldn't make a decent, self-supporting universe.

We have no idea how many angels there are. He could be doing very little. It could be each angel is assigned to one particle. And their whole job is to move the particles in a structured, ordered, predictable way, for as long as the physical World exists. In fact if angels are in charge of the Planck scale, then it could explain spooky action at a distance (entanglement), because angels are not physical, so they wouldn't be limited by the speed of light.

And it affirms the Calvinist view that there is no rogue molecule in the universe--God is directly moving every one of them, including the thoughts in our brains.

My only intent is to affirm the Catholic view of Divine providence. We believe in freedom. God created our freedom (and the freedom of the angels), and so ¹there is sharp relief between the things God is doing Himself, and the things being done according to another party's will. It's obv. If a ball is falling out a window and a man who has chosen to practice catching balls for many years, runs and catches it, then the reason the ball didn't hit the ground was because another party besides God or angels, took control and was able to take control of the physics.

In a way, our free will is a miracle, and when we exercise our free will (instead of just going along to get along, or going with the flow, or passively living life in some way), it's even the miracle of creation, because we all can inject motion, caused by free will, into the Universe, which otherwise would just keep spinning like a top. So we constantly make a new Universe. Before we choose, the Universe has no idea what you're going to do to it, everything is just moving in orderly, regulated, predictable, stable ways. And now you're going to disrupt it, its course, with your freedom. That's a brand new Universe. Categorically different from the one that existed before you made your choice, and if we could reverse time, and you don't make that choice, then the Universe would have gone on from that point completely differently from how it went on when you did make the choice.

So you're creating a new, different Universe when you exercise your power to choose. It's obv different from when God made the Universe in the beginning. That was from nothing, ex nihilo, whereas our creative power works with what we've already got, there's persistence. We don't start from scratch.

I agree this is opposite of Deism in some ways, but it leads one back to determinism.

We can see galaxies through our telescopes, we can see dark energy and gravitation indirectly, but we can't see what's happening at the Planck scale because there's no persistence. The galaxies are always in the sky in predictable ways and we can watch what they're doing, over long periods of time.

But we don't have long term patterns at the Planck scale. We check here and there but there's nothing keeping God from making the most unlikely events from happening, happen anyway, when we're not looking at the Planck scale (which we're roughly never looking at). If God just moved around a galaxy in the sky one day, we would see it. We have no idea if God is moving around galaxies in the Plank scale. He might be, and He might be especially, where there are what we call miracles.

I didn't think you were Calvinistic.

I used to identify as a Calvinist, I thought Calvinism was the truth of God, but now I've found it's Papal or Roman Catholicism that's the truth of God.

Occasionalism is not Catholic or anti-Catholic, it's just an available idea which can coexist with Catholicism and Divine providence. One of the ancient progenitors of occasionalism was actually a Muslim.
 
Last edited:

Derf

Well-known member
I'm a little disappointed that I don't see a response I thought I posted. Hopefully I resurrect some of it.
Physics is how we describe motion, regardless of whether or not God is moving everything directly, or indirectly through many angels, or through ontological laws of nature. It just means motion and its description. The Standard Model describes motion. Occasionalism explains the ontological source of motion differently from those who believe in a watchmaker God, and from those who believe in Secular modernism.



Everything is a miracle under occasionalism, yes, according to miracle meaning, whenever God intercedes in the World. Intercession here meaning that without it, either A or nothing would happen, when and because of God interceding, instead B happens. So before and without intercession, either A or nothing would happen, but instead B happens. That would be a miracle, and in every case except concerning free will,¹ that does mean that basically everything is a miracle.
Even in free will actions of men, we are actually working against God's moving. Iow, if God (or His angels under His direction, however it would work) IS the force of gravity, then every time we get up out of bed or a chair, or if we fall down, then either God is working against Himself, or we are working against God.
But we can still distinguish between what is predicted and observed and stable, and what is surprising, like a Resurrection, Ascension or assumption into Heaven.
Can we? Why? Purely based on our observations? From what I've heard from numerous creationists, the idea of a repeatable world can only come from a Christian worldview, for the very reason that the things God did to "set the world" on its foundations, to "hang the earth on nothing", to make the sun rise and set in an orderly fashion and to explain to us that
"[Gen 8:22 KJV] While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease," are the reasons science, including physics, is possible.
While the Scripture never unambiguously says, either that nature runs according to impersonal physical laws (watchmaker God)
Maybe I'm missing the reference, but why is this the "watchmaker God"? I know of two uses of the watchmaker concept in relation to God. 1. William Paley, who talked about finding a fully formed and functioning watch (a living creature) on the ground leading to the conclusion that there was a watchmaker (God). 2. The deistic idea that God wound up the universe like a watch at the beginning of time, then sat back to let it tick through the ages, with everything going exactly as He had set it up to happen.

You can see that the first concept only slightly related to the second. Which one are you using?
, or that God actively and intimately sustains nature moment-to-moment, the Scripture does unambiguously repeat and repeat and repeat how God is the Creator of Heaven and Earth and Maker of all things. (One of the reasons the Trinity is confirmed by Scripture is because clearly Jesus is the Creator in Scripture, it's repeated multiple times.)
This is not exclusive from either of my watchmaker God descriptions.
We have no idea how many angels there are. He could be doing very little. It could be each angel is assigned to one particle. And their whole job is to move the particles in a structured, ordered, predictable way, for as long as the physical World exists. In fact if angels are in charge of the Planck scale, then it could explain spooky action at a distance (entanglement), because angels are not physical, so they wouldn't be limited by the speed of light.



My only intent is to affirm the Catholic view of Divine providence. We believe in freedom. God created our freedom (and the freedom of the angels), and so ¹there is sharp relief between the things God is doing Himself, and the things being done according to another party's will. It's obv. If a ball is falling out a window and a man who has chosen to practice catching balls for many years, runs and catches it, then the reason the ball didn't hit the ground was because another party besides God or angels, took control and was able to take control of the physics.
Not "physics", but Godly or angelic action. Iow, if the man catches the ball, he is expressly subverting the will of God, every time.
In a way, our free will is a miracle, and when we exercise our free will (instead of just going along to get along, or going with the flow, or passively living life in some way), it's even the miracle of creation, because we all can inject motion, caused by free will, into the Universe, which otherwise would just keep spinning like a top. So we constantly make a new Universe. Before we choose, the Universe has no idea what you're going to do to it, everything is just moving in orderly, regulated, predictable, stable ways. And now you're going to disrupt it, its course, with your freedom. That's a brand new Universe. Categorically different from the one that existed before you made your choice, and if we could reverse time, and you don't make that choice, then the Universe would have gone on from that point completely differently from how it went on when you did make the choice.
It might be a brand new universe, but so would it be without our actions. Any change, by God or angel, to move particles/constellations even a Plank length would be a "new" universe.
So you're creating a new, different Universe when you exercise your power to choose. It's obv different from when God made the Universe in the beginning. That was from nothing, ex nihilo, whereas our creative power works with what we've already got, there's persistence. We don't start from scratch.



We can see galaxies through our telescopes, we can see dark energy and gravitation indirectly, but we can't see what's happening at the Planck scale because there's no persistence. The galaxies are always in the sky in predictable ways and we can watch what they're doing, over long periods of time.

But we don't have long term patterns at the Planck scale. We check here and there but there's nothing keeping God from making the most unlikely events from happening, happen anyway, when we're not looking at the Planck scale (which we're roughly never looking at). If God just moved around a galaxy in the sky one day, we would see it. We have no idea if God is moving around galaxies in the Plank scale. He might be, and He might be especially, where there are what we call miracles.



I used to identify as a Calvinist, I thought Calvinism was the truth of God, but now I've found it's Papal or Roman Catholicism that's the truth of God.
You should reconsider where truth is coming from. Jumping from Calvinism to Catholicism seems lateral to me.
Occasionalism is not Catholic or anti-Catholic, it's just an available idea which can coexist with Catholicism and Divine providence. One of the ancient progenitors of occasionalism was actually a Muslim.
The more I think about it, the more it seems anti-Christian.
 
Top