God's existence

[Ceegen]

I woke up at 4 am, this morning and went outside. The sky was clear as it could be, and there right in a line was the moon, Jupiter and Venus. I got out the telescope and observed them until the sun rose. The thought went through my mind, what a beautiful creation by the Lord. I cannot imagine how anyone could not think there is a God who made all of this.

Knowing there is a Creator only takes obervation and common sense. Believing the Gospel is a step beyond that because of the element of faith. An athiest has to be the stupidest person on earth.

Let's not go and call Atheists stupid now. They're simply deceived by Satan, because there are many lies. It is hard for people who don't know the truth to accept it, when all they have are examples of evil... And yet, in the midst of it all, they blame God of whom they profess not to believe in!

Some great Atheist minds were converted when trying to disprove God and the bible. They are far from "stupid".

Ivan Panin was one such man, and God bless him, effectively has proven that the bible is the holy and inspired Word of God that we believe it to be. He was born in Russia, a multi-lingual mathematician (coincidently was fluent in Greek and Hebrew...), who set out to disprove the bible only to come out of the situation after 50 years of research, that the bible could not possibly be written by the hands of mere men. Approximately 42,000 hand-written pages documenting his findings, and he even said that he had barely scraped the tip of the iceberg! To date, no one has ever proven him wrong.

 

[John of Japan]

Nice try but, JoJ, is this not simply speaking of the fact that there will no longer be a delay in the proceedings (I think they were judgements, right?).
See Barnes:
See Clarke:
See Gill:
See Vincent's Word Studies:
See Wesley's notes and JFB's commentary.

You've listed a whole bunch of old time commentaries. Barnes and Clarke were both early 19th century, Gill was 18th century. Wesley was 18th century and JFB were all 19th century. Vincent is your only slightly recent commentary (over 100 years old), but he was a liberal (didn't believe in verbal inspiration or inerrancy). Do you actually have any modern commentaries? Maybe a recent systematic theology you want to quote? :sleep:

But hey, you were selective with your old dead white guys, weren't you? Geneva's notes and Matthew Henry both agree with me. So, tell me again how wrong I am to disagree with your guys? :smilewinkgrin:

Frankly, I think the context shows I am right and your old dead white guys are wrong.

(1) Verse 6 talks about how God created everything, with the implication that time is one of his creations.
(2) In v. 7 we learn that the mystery of God will be finished. That certain sounds to me like "everything," including time, will be done.
(3) The word "time" in the Greek has no definite article, saying to me that time generically, not specifically, will be ended.

 

[John of Japan]

Time is relative! You said it! Time is, to God, whatever He wants it to be! It doesn't matter what we think it is, it only matters what God thinks it is. And, if Jesus IS God in the flesh as we so believe, being Christians, then we must also say that whatever God said in the OT is really just what Jesus said, too.

So, anything Jesus said in the NT, applies to the OT as well. The law can not be broken.

"All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:" - Matthew 13:34

We are the multitudes! We are the masses! Jesus was speaking to us in parables, even in the OT. This is why one day "is as" a thousand years.

You get it!

For those who don't know relativity theory, Einstein proved that time is relative to speed. That's what E=MC squared, which means that the square of M (mass) times C (the speed of light) is equal to energy. According to this, the faster you go, the more time is squeezed. So if you left on a spaceship and travelled to Alpha Centauri (4 light years away) and back, you would return to earth hundreds of years later, not just 8. So God exists outside of time, and bends and breaks it like He wants to.

Here is more Biblical proof. At the time of Joshua's long day (Josh. 10) God through a miracle stretched time! This proves that God exists outside of the space-time continuum and controls it as he wills. God is not ruled by time or space, which are so inextricably interconnected that physicists call time the 4th dimension.

 

[saturneptune]

Let's not go and call Atheists stupid now. They're simply deceived by Satan, because there are many lies. It is hard for people who don't know the truth to accept it, when all they have are examples of evil... And yet, in the midst of it all, they blame God of whom they profess not to believe in!

Some great Atheist minds were converted when trying to disprove God and the bible. They are far from "stupid".

Ivan Panin was one such man, and God bless him, effectively has proven that the bible is the holy and inspired Word of God that we believe it to be. He was born in Russia, a multi-lingual mathematician (coincidently was fluent in Greek and Hebrew...), who set out to disprove the bible only to come out of the situation after 50 years of research, that the bible could not possibly be written by the hands of mere men. Approximately 42,000 hand-written pages documenting his findings, and he even said that he had barely scraped the tip of the iceberg! To date, no one has ever proven him wrong.

Maybe smart by worldly educational standards. He could have saved himselff a lot of time and writing by using common sense and observing the world around him to come to the conclusion there is a God who created everything. It takes no faith to believe there is a God. Observation and common sense is all it takes, and says as much in Romans 1.

 

[John of Japan]

You get it!

For those who don't know relativity theory, Einstein proved that time is relative to speed. That's what E=MC squared, which means that the square of M (mass) times C (the speed of light) is equal to energy. According to this, the faster you go, the more time is squeezed. So if you left on a spaceship and travelled to Alpha Centauri (4 light years away) and back, you would return to earth hundreds of years later, not just 8. So God exists outside of time, and bends and breaks it like He wants to.

Here is more Biblical proof. At the time of Joshua's long day (Josh. 10) God through a miracle stretched time! This proves that God exists outside of the space-time continuum and controls it as he wills. God is not ruled by time or space, which are so inextricably interconnected that physicists call time the 4th dimension.

I reminded myself of that great limerick about this:

There was a young lady named Bright,
Who could travel much faster than light.
She set out one day,
In a relative way,
And returned on the previous night!

 

[humblethinker]

You've listed a whole bunch of old time commentaries. Barnes and Clarke were both early 19th century, Gill was 18th century. Wesley was 18th century and JFB were all 19th century. Vincent is your only slightly recent commentary (over 100 years old), but he was a liberal (didn't believe in verbal inspiration or inerrancy). Do you actually have any modern commentaries? Maybe a recent systematic theology you want to quote? :sleep:

But hey, you were selective with your old dead white guys, weren't you? Geneva's notes and Matthew Henry both agree with me. So, tell me again how wrong I am to disagree with your guys? :smilewinkgrin:

Frankly, I think the context shows I am right and your old dead white guys are wrong.

(1) Verse 6 talks about how God created everything, with the implication that time is one of his creations.
(2) In v. 7 we learn that the mystery of God will be finished. That certain sounds to me like "everything," including time, will be done.
(3) The word "time" in the Greek has no definite article, saying to me that time generically, not specifically, will be ended.

Haha, "old dead white guys", thats funny, i like that... Was MH a minority? And talk about old white and dead, the Geneva Bible translators? Is that all you got? Anyway, I wasn't selective, just found the quickest answer (my references were from that one site so yeah selective that way at least ... And it looks like the two you claimed are there too) anyways, I'll check to see what current commentators say. Did you bother reading the dead old white commentators comments? Theirs seem more reasonable than yours, maybe you could answer the content of their arguments.

 

[humblethinker]

You've listed a whole bunch of old time commentaries. Barnes and Clarke were both early 19th century, Gill was 18th century. Wesley was 18th century and JFB were all 19th century. Vincent is your only slightly recent commentary (over 100 years old), but he was a liberal (didn't believe in verbal inspiration or inerrancy). Do you actually have any modern commentaries? Maybe a recent systematic theology you want to quote? :sleep:

But hey, you were selective with your old dead white guys, weren't you? Geneva's notes and Matthew Henry both agree with me. So, tell me again how wrong I am to disagree with your guys? :smilewinkgrin:

Frankly, I think the context shows I am right and your old dead white guys are wrong.

(1) Verse 6 talks about how God created everything, with the implication that time is one of his creations.
(2) In v. 7 we learn that the mystery of God will be finished. That certain sounds to me like "everything," including time, will be done.
(3) The word "time" in the Greek has no definite article, saying to me that time generically, not specifically, will be ended.

Ok, you asked for it. If you are prejudiced against my old dead white guys then maybe these will help convince you?

http://www.icr.org/bible/revelation/10/6/ICR.org online commentary
Revelation 10:6
10:6 time no longer. This does not mean that time itself will cease, for then the universe (which is a space-mass-time continuum) must also cease, and God has said it will last forever (e.g., Psalm 104:5; 148:6). Rather, God’s purging of the earth will not be further delayed after the “days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound” (Rev 10:7)

While the versions that say 'time shall be no more' could easily be understood to mean that there is no more time to wait, all the other versions' translation do not even hint to the reader what you are suggesting. Are these translations simply wrong?:

New International Version (©1984)
And he swore by him who lives for ever and ever, who created the heavens and all that is in them, the earth and all that is in it, and the sea and all that is in it, and said, "There will be no more delay!
New Living Translation (©2007)
He swore an oath in the name of the one who lives forever and ever, who created the heavens and everything in them, the earth and everything in it, and the sea and everything in it. He said, "There will be no more delay.

English Standard Version (©2001)
and swore by him who lives forever and ever, who created heaven and what is in it, the earth and what is in it, and the sea and what is in it, that there would be no more delay,

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
and swore by Him who lives forever and ever, WHO CREATED HEAVEN AND THE THINGS IN IT, AND THE EARTH AND THE THINGS IN IT, AND THE SEA AND THE THINGS IN IT, that there will be delay no longer,

Darby Bible Translation
and swore by him that lives to the ages of ages, who created the heaven and the things that are in it, and the earth and the things that are in it, and the sea and the things that are in it, that there should be no longer delay;

Off to get more opinions... Do you really insist on maintaining your exegesis of this verse? It really seems weak to me.

 

[saturneptune]

I have to agree with John of Japan on this one. Eternity is a state outside time and space, a concept we cannot fully grasp. Eternity does not mean a continuation of time forever as we now experience it.

We can only visualize what actually being in a state of eternity is like to a degree. I believe Paul describes it as now seeing through a blurry lens or mirror for lack of a better term. It will become crystal clear in eternity.

 

[webdog]

I have to agree with John of Japan on this one. Eternity is a state outside time and space, a concept we cannot fully grasp. Eternity does not mean a continuation of time forever as we now experience it.

We can only visualize what actually being in a state of eternity is like to a degree. I believe Paul describes it as now seeing through a blurry lens or mirror for lack of a better term. It will become crystal clear in eternity.

Humans and time go hand in hand. We will never cease being human.

 

[saturneptune]

Humans and time go hand in hand. We will never cease being human.

So what are you going to buy in heaven, a Timex or a Rolex? LOL. You may be right, I really do not know. I have always pictured heaven as a place outside time and space.

Something makes the spiritual realm invisible to us. There is definitely a different plane of existence, but whether or not time is in eternity, who knows? That was just my opinion, nothing from the Bible.

 

[webdog]

So what are you going to buy in heaven, a Timex or a Rolex? LOL. You may be right, I really do not know. I have always pictured heaven as a place outside time and space.

Something makes the spiritual realm invisible to us. There is definitely a different plane of existence, but whether or not time is in eternity, who knows? That was just my opinion, nothing from the Bible.

Maybe Swatch?

When he opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour.

 

[John of Japan]

Ok, you asked for it. If you are prejudiced against my old dead white guys then maybe these will help convince you?

I don't find the online commentary you mentioned to be convincing. The verses in Psalms that were given do not prove what the commentator wanted them to, since there will be a new heaven and earth.

While the versions that say 'time shall be no more' could easily be understood to mean that there is no more time to wait, all the other versions' translation do not even hint to the reader what you are suggesting. Are these translations simply wrong?:

In the first place, I have no confidence in the NIV and NLT, since both are (arguably) dynamic equivalence translations. The ESV is "essentially literal" in its method and it and the NASV do better, but in this case it and the other translations are interpreting what is an ambiguous original. In such cases I believe the ambiguity should be retained in the translation, allowing the reader to interpret for himself--just what we are doing.

There are perfectly good Greek words for "delay," the noun anabole (Acts 25:17) and the verb okneo (Acts 9:38). If John meant "delay," why didn't he use one of these words rather than the ambiguous xronos?

But if you must, I see your translations and raise you the KJV, Young's, Twentieth Century NT, Bible in Basic English, Modern KJV, the Spanish Reina Valera, the Japanese Kougo Yaku, and my own Japanese translation, the Lifeline NT. Are all of these translations wrong? :smilewinkgrin:

Off to get more opinions... Do you really insist on maintaining your exegesis of this verse? It really seems weak to me.

Fine. Tell me what's wrong with it.

 

[Ceegen]

Maybe smart by worldly educational standards. He could have saved himselff a lot of time and writing by using common sense and observing the world around him to come to the conclusion there is a God who created everything. It takes no faith to believe there is a God. Observation and common sense is all it takes, and says as much in Romans 1.

Ivan Panin was a mathematician. He discovered the "number" system in the bible, and proved that using this number system, no human could have written the bible. Anyone interested should go look up "Ivan Panin's letter to the New York Sun" - A very good read to start out with.

Again, please don't say stuff like that. Yeah, Mr. Panin COULD have saved himself "a lot of time and writing", but then we wouldn't have his great contribution which is grossly overlooked by many, including those in the faith. God works in awesome ways, and it is amazing that God opened up that man's eyes in the way He did. So who are we to talk in such a way about it?

 

[humblethinker]

Are all of these translations wrong? :smilewinkgrin:

Of course their not wrong, but they can reasonably be understood to mean that 'there is no more time' for delay. However, your view requires that all the other commentators and versions are necessarily wrong.

Regarding your exegesis... When the angel raises his hand and swares that "there should be time no longer", just what is he meaning?

6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.​

My understanding: The angel swares that there will be no more delay: for when the seventh angel begins to 'sound' then the mystery of God will be finished.

My view of your understanding: The angel swares that metered duration will cease to exist. for when the seventh angel begins to 'sound' then the mystery of God will be finished.

1) Regarding your view, what is the signifigance of duration ceasing related to the 'mystery of God' being finished?
2) What do you think the 'mystery of God' is here?
3) When will it come to pass that duration will cease to exist? Was the angel meaning that some day it would cease to exist? Was the angel meaning that it would cease 'now'?

 

[webdog]

Of course their not wrong, but they can reasonably be understood to mean that 'there is no more time' for delay. However, your view requires that all the other commentators and versions are necessarily wrong.

Regarding your exegesis... When the angel raises his hand and swares that "there should be time no longer", just what is he meaning?

6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.​

My understanding: The angel swares that there will be no more delay: for when the seventh angel begins to 'sound' then the mystery of God will be finished.

My view of your understanding: The angel swares that metered duration will cease to exist. for when the seventh angel begins to 'sound' then the mystery of God will be finished.

1) Regarding your view, what is the signifigance of duration ceasing related to the 'mystery of God' being finished?
2) What do you think the 'mystery of God' is here?
3) When will it come to pass that duration will cease to exist? Was the angel meaning that some day it would cease to exist? Was the angel meaning that it would cease 'now'?

I agree with this understanding as well. It really makes no sense for an angel to have dominion over time ceasing.

 

[John of Japan]

Of course their not wrong, but they can reasonably be understood to mean that 'there is no more time' for delay. However, your view requires that all the other commentators and versions are necessarily wrong.

You've given commentaries and translations supporting your view, I've given the same supporting mine. Yours are in the majority. That doesn't bother me. It is quite common for the majority to be wrong in exegesis. And simply having the majority on your side doesn't mean you are right. I'm actually surprised that you are arguing in this direction.

Regarding your exegesis... When the angel raises his hand and swares that "there should be time no longer", just what is the meaning?

6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.
​

My understanding: The angel swares that there will be no more delay: for when the seventh angel begins to 'sound' then the mystery of God will be finished.

I don't think you can prove this exegetically. The fact is, that the "seventh" anything in Rev. is there to announce something new, not something ending. In this case the "something new" is kept a secret from the reader since John is not allowed to write it down.

My view of your understanding: The angel swares that metered duration will cease to exist. for when the seventh angel begins to 'sound' then the mystery of God will be finished.

1) Regarding your view, what is the signifigance of duration ceasing related to the 'mystery of God' being finished?

When God is done with His plan, there will be a new heaven and earth and space/time as we know it will cease to exist. Something else will exist in its place, something currently a mystery.

2) What do you think the 'mystery of God' is here?

If I knew, then it wouldn't be a mystery would it? But I take it as being the overall mystery of the end of this world and how it will occur--something we apparently cannot comprehend, so it remains a mystery.

3) When will it come to pass that duration will cease to exist? Was the angel meaning that some day it would cease to exist? Was the angel meaning that it would cease 'now'?

The whole 10th chapter of Rev. is an interlude, something that happens elsewhere in the book also. It is pointing us to when the space/time continuum as we know it will cease to exist, when God's plan for it is over.

 

[John of Japan]

I agree with this understanding as well. It really makes no sense for an angel to have dominion over time ceasing.

I agree that the angel doesn't have dominion over time ceasing. He is just announcing it, not causing it.

 

[Yeshua1]

I don't find the online commentary you mentioned to be convincing. The verses in Psalms that were given do not prove what the commentator wanted them to, since there will be a new heaven and earth.

In the first place, I have no confidence in the NIV and NLT, since both are (arguably) dynamic equivalence translations. The ESV is "essentially literal" in its method and it and the NASV do better, but in this case it and the other translations are interpreting what is an ambiguous original. In such cases I believe the ambiguity should be retained in the translation, allowing the reader to interpret for himself--just what we are doing.

There are perfectly good Greek words for "delay," the noun anabole (Acts 25:17) and the verb okneo (Acts 9:38). If John meant "delay," why didn't he use one of these words rather than the ambiguous xronos?

But if you must, I see your translations and raise you the KJV, Young's, Twentieth Century NT, Bible in Basic English, Modern KJV, the Spanish Reina Valera, the Japanese Kougo Yaku, and my own Japanese translation, the Lifeline NT. Are all of these translations wrong? :smilewinkgrin:

Fine. Tell me what's wrong with it.

When jesus is done ruling on earth in his millinual kingdom, and presents it all back to the father, wouldn't time be included, so that in new heavens and earth, it will be state of eternal timelessness?

 

[Yeshua1]

I don't know what you are talking about.

if God was NOt alone in eternity past, when it was JUST God and nothing else was yet created by him...

IF there was always a creation, wouldn't that mean that it and Hima re both eternal, so more like pantheistic, as God is same as his creation?

For IF he was/is not totally outside time/space like I hold bible teaches, wouldn't he be in and part of his creation?

 

[John of Japan]

When jesus is done ruling on earth in his millinual kingdom, and presents it all back to the father, wouldn't time be included, so that in new heavens and earth, it will be state of eternal timelessness?

That's my view on this thread. :smilewinkgrin: But of course there is little in Scripture about it.