God and TIME

Sempiternal
SEMPITERN'AL, a. [L. sempiternus; semper, always, and eternus, eternal.]
1. Eternal in futurity; everlasting; endless; having beginning, but no end.
2. Eternal; everlasting.

Brandon, this describes us, not God! This makes God a created being, what the church in Colosse believed. This is heresy. God isn't "semi"-anything. He's omni-everything!

 

"Saw who believed". Interesting. So there is something inherently good in all men ?

 

straw men

webdog: you listed what Feinberg (and me) would define to be sempiternal, but ignored that option and chose one that made me a, "gasp" heretic. Eternal and everlasting are on your list and those are fine definitions for sempiternal as far as I'm concerned. The distinction between sempiternal and eternal (is omni-ternal a word?) is this: If God is sempiternal, then he is everlasting with no beginning or end and operates with temporal succession. If God is eternal (in the classic sense), then he has no beginning or end and does not operate with temporal succession, but rather is "outside" of time.

I would've been happy to clarify my position for you if you were curious, instead of just opting for the worst possible definition in your list and linking me with Collossian heretics.

BJ

 

The word means what it means, whether you change the definitions to appease your beliefs. A sempiternal being is a created being. Period.

 

I like that thought. God is transcendent to His Creation. Therefore, God TRANSCENDS time.

Yes, there is more, but you point out an important concept, IMO. It is important to understand that the Scriptures are not captured by time, as we are. For example, we who are saved were saved at some point in the past, before this moment. Further, we WERE SAVED, we ARE BEING SAVED as we speak, and we WILL BE SAVED.

Many of the arguments on this board are oblivious to this idea, and thus are captured by time, especially the threads about false teachings or sovereignty/calvinism. For example, I always say I am a 94% calvinist because that's the best way I can describe it - I agree with about 94%, best I can tell, of what hard-line calvinists believe. I agree with elements of all the 5 points, some more than others, but at the same time disagree with some positions taken from them, and therefore disagree with some of the arguments of my learned calvinist brothers, mostly, I believe, because they are stiffly oblivious to being captured by time.

Anyway, when the Holy Spirit led me through this several years ago, it really opened my eyes. I don't think the importance of unbinding the mind from the captivity of time, ESPECIALLY from present culture, can be overemphasized. Wish I had more time to participate in the thread - thanks for bringing it up.

:type:

 

straw man argument exemplified

Wow! Just wow! Perhaps I'll keep a copy of this exchange to show others a textbook example of a straw man argument. "I'll define your position for you and then attack what I declare your position is." You are telling me the only meaning of the word is the one you chose out of your own list. If what your saying is true and your preferred definition is the only one period, then why are there more options in your own list? You're being absurd.

BJ

Maybe this link can help you out too: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sempiternal

 

Wow!! someone else that thinks like I do... I'm not sure that is a good thing for you though :wavey:


I struggled with the C/A thing a few years ago, until I watched the last episode of "Star trek, TNG" where Picard was bouncing through time, past, present, and future." In the episode it describes what would happen if anti-time met time..... Kaboom.

I know, I'm wierd... but it got me to wondering about the "end of time"

Anti-time had none of the qualities of time, and this got me to thinking about eternity, and what would happen if time existed no more.
Then I started examining the doctrines of the Bible, like C/A and the Holy Spirit opened my eyes and understanding.

I always thought the term "Omnipresent" encompasses not only space but time.
Is Omnitemporal even a theological term... if not, can we coin it?
And would BB get royalties from it?:laugh: :tongue3:

 

Thinking about Star Trek, what has happened to Johnv? He hasn't posted since March.

 

My definition was given straight from Webster's. Notice from your link...

sempiternal
adj : having no known beginning and presumably no end; "the dateless rise and fall of the tides"; "time is endless"; "sempiternal truth" [syn: dateless, endless]

God is not sempiternal. He has NO beginning and NO end...not no "known" beginning and "presumably" no end.

 

If I was standing next to you while you gave your life to Christ, would I be seeing something "inherently good" in you?

 

I agree. Prepare to be called a Methodist.

 

Let me help you for God is Omnipresent and saw us believe so you left out one little point that Paul teaches and Jesus teaches and the whole Bible teaches ever since man was created and that is faith/belief. I will add what you seemed to over look in red.

 

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????

Webdog: I can't figure you out, and I'm not interested enough to waste more time trying to figure you out. See you later.

BJ

Two follow ups: sempi (Latin for "always" like "Semper Fi") and semi have different meanings.
I agree with your quote "the word means what it means." If only you would abide by your tautology we could get somewhere on this thread, and I wouldn't have a headache right now. You don't really mean this because your position is "the word means only what webdog says it means and all other definitions are to be ignored--in fact they don't even exist."

 

"Always" doesn't mean no beginning. If I say the power is "always on", there was a point that it was turned on. This cannot be said about God. He is eternal, not sempiternal. If anything you are the one claiming it only means one thing, and what I say should be rejected, the "Brandon Jones is always right" position. Quit trying to "figure me out", and instead understand what you are saying.

 

okay I can't leave this one alone

This is it I hope. But I want to pull my hair out.

It's fine if you want to disagree with me, but disagree with ME not the straw man you erected and labelled as my position. I know other definitions for sempiternal exist, but I am using it in a proper way too (according to Websters, dictionary.com, whatever proper source you like) while acknowledging that there are other proper ways to use it. You are trying to tell me that I can't use it in a certain, legitimate way, which is absurd.

As to your comparison to the light bulb, well that's the nature of religious language: is it equivocal, analogical, or univocal? That's another thread for another time. Always can mean that there was never a "time" when it wasn't, especially if one is talking about God. I recommend David Kelly's book "To Know and Love God" and his chapter on the nature of religious language for more about that.

Trust me I know what I am saying, but you're trying to override my own thoughts (as I understand them-based on legitimate definitions-I'm not playing word games) with your straw man of what you think I believe.

Okay, enough's enough...this board is so hit or miss. Where's hubblesmith?

 

No strawman erected from this end. If any were erected it's in your redefining of terms.

:wavey:

 

redefinition?

Redefinition? :tongue3: I feel like I'm in a monty python skit on this thread. You've just redefined redefinition from n : the act of giving a new definition to n : the act of using a different existing definition than the one webdog likes. I'm losing my headache a little now because I'm having fun.

 

I'm glad you're having fun, I am too. I might be getting your headache, though

Use whatever definition you like. I will say God is eternal, you can say sempiternal. Not the same definitions...but, hey, who cares. Both don't say the same thing, regardless what you claim.