Regarding Time...

[HankD]

If backed into a corner I would still choose the inability to understand the eternal state, although it's not exactly a white-knuckle choice - maybe a little pink with a firm grip.

HT your view of passage and sequence is reasonable though I disagree.


HankD

 

[OldRegular]

Actually there is sometimes a problem with the prefix a.

For example when used relative to the millennium as in amillennial. Now those who hold amillennial beliefs do believe in a millennium; yet the prefix a implies no millennium.

 

[Cypress]

I whole heartedly agree with the first conclusion and while you confirm my thoughts about the second conclusion I must say that I am surprised that there wasn't more of a discussion for you to concede such... but that's ok.



Very nice! What I'm thinking regarding your statements:
1.) Sequence/passage/action existed prior to creation therefore it exists necessarily
2.) A universe of sheer nothingness intuitively seems impossible to create
3.) N/A
4.) N/A
5.) God's very being is in relationship
6.) Passage/sequence are necessary attributes of relationship
7.) Therefore sequence/passage necessarily exists since God existed before/independent of creation

And I would add:
Because God is Free and Relational, these qualities to some degree are genuinely real in creatures in His image as well as the creation formed by Him.

What does our idea of God gain by Him not being atemporal? What does he lose by being temporal?

Newton believed in absolute time, but Newton's absolute time existed IN this universe. I'm proposing absolute time but that it exists outside this universe and there is no reason for me to think that it is metered, has a beginning or has an end since it (sequence) is inherent to the concept of a relationship which is a necessary attribute of the Trinity.

A side thought for everyone: it seems we also may be getting hung up on semantics. What I am saying about God is that passage and sequence existed outside of creation because God existed outside of creation. I am not saying that our metered time is an identical other or the very same essence to what God experienced outside of Creation. I am saying that our univers's time exists due to sequence existing outside of Creation, a logically outflow of it. (I may have gotten a little rhetorically redundant but one must click 'submit reply' sometime!)

I am in agreement with you on this one.

 

[humblethinker]

If backed into a corner I would still choose the inability to understand the eternal state, although it's not exactly a white-knuckle choice - maybe a little pink with a firm grip.

HT your view of passage and sequence is reasonable though I disagree.

HankD

Hank, you're alright... If I were a drinkin' man I'd buy you a beer! ;-)
Pink knuckles are alright... just so long as they weren't brass knuckles!

 

[humblethinker]

What does our idea of God gain by Him not being atemporal? What does he lose by being temporal?

Typo.... the first question should read "What does our idea of God gain by Him being atemporal?" (removed the 'not')

 

[OldRegular]

Originally Posted by humblethinker
What does he lose by being temporal?

Given the meaning of temporal that is a strange, even ridiculous, question.

Definition of TEMPORAL
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/temporal

1
a : of or relating to time as opposed to eternity
b : of or relating to earthly life
c : lay or secular rather than clerical or sacred : civil <lords temporal>
2
: of or relating to grammatical tense or a distinction of time
3
a : of or relating to time as distinguished from space
b : of or relating to the sequence of time or to a particular time : chronological

 

[saturneptune]

We have finite minds in relation to eternity. We exist in time and space. Eternity may or may not have elements of each, one or neither. For that matter, is our state in eternity the same as before the Lord created anything? Unless we stumble across some kind of mechanism to bridge the way we are now with eternity, only dying will answer these questions. My guess is that Stargate will remain on the SyFy channel.

 

[HankD]

Hank, you're alright... If I were a drinkin' man I'd buy you a beer! ;-)
Pink knuckles are alright... just so long as they weren't brass knuckles!

Thanks HT, if I were still a drinking man, I would accept.
No brass knuckles for/from me.

HankD

 

[humblethinker]

Given the meaning of temporal that is a strange, even ridiculous, question.

yes, i can agree but that is specifically why in earlier posts I made these comments to better clarify the use of words:

Newton believed in absolute time, but Newton's absolute time existed IN this universe. I'm proposing absolute time but that it exists outside this universe and there is no reason for me to think that it is metered, has a beginning or has an end since it (sequence) is inherent to the concept of a relationship which is a necessary attribute of the Trinity.

A side thought for everyone: it seems we also may be getting hung up on semantics. What I am saying about God is that passage and sequence existed outside of creation because God existed outside of creation. I am not saying that our metered time is an identical other or the very same essence to what God experienced outside of Creation. I am saying that our univers's time exists due to sequence existing outside of Creation, a logically outflow of it.