SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
As the triune God existed before he created the Universe, was this equation
valid?:
distance = rate x time
valid?:
distance = rate x time
ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
OK, It's the only way it makes sense to me, but I still think your an OK guy.
I don't think so. Distance did not exsist before the universe, as far as I can tell.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
How about:
0 distance = greater than speed of light x 0 time?
I think we can agree that physical science started with the physical universe. Which is completely different than saying God had no concept of sequence, before the physical universe.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
I'm not sure how there could be sequence if there was no duration.
Notice, I included "if".
Since all three factors of the equation exist now, how logical would it be to assume that perhaps only one factor (time) existed before creation?
Time existed as a concept, as soon as God considered it.I'm not sure how there could be sequence if there was no duration.
Notice, I included "if".
Since all three factors of the equation exist now, how logical would it be to assume that perhaps only one factor (time) existed before creation?
themuzicman
Well-known member
Saying it doesn't make it so STP!
We've been showing you precisely how it is logical; how foreknowledge of a freely chosen act is a contradiction and cannot happen. Either the act was freely chosen or it was foreknown, not both.
Actually, if you'll recall, my primary argument has to do with how the Settled View renders concepts like love, righteousness and justice meaningless. You are the one who brought up this syllogism, I simply quoted it again so that everyone would know what you were referring too. The point being here that I'll take the argument in whatever direction you want to go with it.
And who cares what "more scholarly" people BELIEVE is flawed? If you can show me (i.e. if you can demonstrate) how it IS flawed or show me how others have demonstrated how it is flawed then that would be a perfectly valid way to respond to the syllogism and I wouldn't have to be so disappointed in you. But that isn't what you've done nor can you present to me where anyone else has done it either. All you've got is merely the proclamation that "It doesn't make sense!" and that simply doesn't fly. If you cannot explain WHY it doesn't make sense then you're just blowing hot air as far as I'm concerned.
This will sound to you like a pat answer but you asked me to answer honestly and so I will do just that. Seriously - If I were being sarcastic, you could tell, I promise!
In my mind, there is no difference between the two. The gospel is based on justice. God loved us so much that He sent Jesus to die as a sacrifice in order to meet the righteous requirement of His own righteous perfection. Thus the gospel has no meaning outside the context of love, righteousness and justice. These concepts have no meaning if we are not free and we cannot be free if the future is settled. In short if the future is settled, God is unjust and we are without hope.
Resting in Him,
Clete
A corollary to this question is...
Before the creation of the physical universe was there any such thing as speed (distance/time).
The concept of existence itself already concedes the existence of time (i.e. duration) but not necessarily that of distance.
I don't think we know enough about the nature of God's existence apart from the creation to know the answer to your question. Was there distance before there was a physical universe? I don't know.
Resting in Him,
Clete
I'm not sure how there could be sequence if there was no duration.
Notice, I included "if".
Since all three factors of the equation exist now, how logical would it be to assume that perhaps only one factor (time) existed before creation?
2+2=4 even before matter was created.
elected4ever
New member
The question arises "Does God view time and distance the same as us?" The proper answer is, "I don't know." Man is limited by the observation of the created universe. God has never told us what the limitations of His existence are. Sense God is not the creation of man it is fool hardy to limit God to the created universe of man and man's understanding of it.
Philetus
New member
Great question.
I wonder what the settled viewers really consider to be at stake if they toss out EDF? Or if they have considered the gains.
Philetus
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
All the syllogism proves is that what is foreknown is carried out.
I researched your last 40 or so posts, 99% were about Open theism and/or Spanking. How many people believed that Christ died for their sins by convincing
them that God doesn't know the future? How many people understood the difference between Israel and the Church by convincing them that God doesn't knoew the future?
Thanks.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
So, the line of real numbers existed?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
What God foreknew was realized when I made the choice.
Philetus
New member
Hey, Elected4ever, Longtime no space.
The question arises "Does God view time and distance the same as us?" The best answer is, "YES, if God relates to us at all in time and space." BECAUSE man is NOT limited by the observation of the created universe; The Spirit of God dwells in man. Either God has created man with a capacity to know God or all this is a big waste of time and our existence is a joke.
Then is God 'fool hardy' to have become flesh in order to make Himself known 'in a more perfect way"? Is it 'fool hardy' for God to expect us to know Him at all? The incarnation most certainly informs us as to the fact that God has limited Himself in order to relate to His creation. The closer the intimation the greater is the limitation from “you are free to eat from any tree” (make choices) to “He could do no miracles among them.” The ultimate limitation (as I see it) is God coming near without destroying us altogether. The very fact of our existence means that God gave room or made space for us to exist as significant others. Do you consider God permitting others to exist as others and relating to them in freedom of both His and their existence fool-hardy?
Is God transcendent (independent of the world, existing outside the material universe and so not limited by it? Yes! But, transcendence viewed from within the created order means nothing. To understand God’s transcendence is to understand God drawing near, not remaining aloof.
Philetus
themuzicman
Well-known member
You're ducking the question.
What you said ways that at the point of my decision, my decision is settled to God, and contingent to me. Either God is delusional, or we're deceived, because it cannot be both settled and contingent at the same time.
Which is it?
Muz
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
I said it's certain to God, who in my view has EDF.
- Status