Is God temporal or atemporal?

[OMEGA]

LOVEOFJOY said:

What I meant, if I understand myself, was: did God start the universe with the light of the stars already hitting the earth, with the galaxies already in motion, and the universe expanding. From our perspective, it should have taken billions of subjective years. Did it? Or did He start it in that shape already, so that we would perceive that this time has passed, when it had not?
=========================

Answer: NO , God started the Starmaking Machines which over

Billions of years compressed the Gas that was already in the Universe

and formed Billions of Stars to light the Darkness.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by Swordsman

So you're saying God is not eternal, right? He lives in time?

i think it depends on how you define eternal. and what you believe time to be.

i believe eternal to be has always been and will always will be and that obviously includes being now. kinda the whole "necessary existence" deal. God must exist and by that definition, he is eternal.

as for time, i like how godrulz put it as being "succession, duration, sequence.". thus, it's not a created thing. so, perhaps you could say he lives "in" it but really there's nothing to live "in".

thats how i think i see it.

Swordsman, do you believe God is temporal or atemporal?

 

[philosophizer]

"Is God temporal or atemporal?"


Yes.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by philosophizer

"Is God temporal or atemporal?"


Yes.

:darwinsm:

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lost anomaly

Unless everything is predestined then the future is .

True. It seems that there are 2 motifs in Scripture (Dr. Gregory Boyd 'God of the Possible"). Some of the future is predestined (e.g. the first and second coming of Christ...hence the Calvinist proof texts), and some of the future is open (free moral choices of moral agents, hence Open Theism).

It is an unnecessary assumption to assume all the future is fatalistically predestined (Calvinism, Islam...'sovereign, meticulous control' or foreknowledge=Arminian). Free will is genuine and does not make God less sovereign (providential vs meticulous control would be a better understanding).

 

[philosophizer]

Originally posted by godrulz
'Eternal Now' is a philosophical concept from ?Philo to Augustine to Calvin, etc. Timelessness is illogical.

Yes, timelessness is illogical. But so is an everlasting being experiencing time without beginning or end. Both ideas defy logic. Yet one of them has to be true.

All we can derive from that paradox is that "logic" is a construct which cannot escape our limited universe. There's no way to fully understand the logic of either argument on logic alone, because the logic begins to break down. And when that happens, all we can do is turn to the Word of God.

We shouldn't be so quick to assert either argument. We just simply cannot understand them.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Swordsman

So you're saying God is not eternal, right? He lives in time?

Time is not a thing or place that God 'lives' in. It is not a created thing, but an aspect of His experience (duration). He is everlasting, eternal (no beginning, no end...the problem is the pagan philosophical influence that says eternity means timelessness...this is contrary to Hebrew word studies and understandings of God being from everlasting to everlasting... Ps. 90:2 "BEFORE the mountains were born...from everlasting to everlasting you are God." (i.e. eternal=uncreated)

"A Treatise on Time and Space" - J.R. Lucas (p. 3)

"Time is more fundamental than space. Indeed, time is the most pervasive of all the categories. Some theologians say that God is outside time, but it cannot be true of any personal God that He is timeless, for a personal God is conscious, and time is a concomitant (accompany) of consciousness. Time is not only the concomitant of consciousness, but the process of actualization and the dimension of change....Time is connected with persons, both as sentient beings and as agents; it is connected with modality, and the passage of the open future to the unalterable past..."


"God and Time: 4 views" IVP ed. Gregory Ganssle

1) Divine Timeless Eternity -Paul Helm ? (Calvinistic; Augustinian)

2) Eternity as Relative Timelessness - Alan Padgett (Lutheran) ?

3) Timelessness and Omnitemporality - William Lane Craig ? (maybe....timeless in eternity past; temporal after creation; Open View camp)

4) * (seems to resonate with reality and revelation) Unqualified Divine Temporality - Nicholas Wolterstorff (I emailed him once) (Open View) *

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by philosophizer

Yes, timelessness is illogical. But so is an everlasting being experiencing time without beginning or end. Both ideas defy logic. Yet one of them has to be true.

All we can derive from that paradox is that "logic" is a construct which cannot escape our limited universe. There's no way to fully understand the logic of either argument on logic alone, because the logic begins to break down. And when that happens, all we can do is turn to the Word of God.

We shouldn't be so quick to assert either argument. We just simply cannot understand them.

There is a difference between something that is difficult to fully comprehend, and that which is a logical contradiction or absurdity. God cannot be timeless and experience time at the same time.

The simplist understanding is that timelessness does not make sense if God is personal, since He would not be able to think, feel, or act (all require sequence). Eternity as everlasting duration is cogent and consistent with Scripture. Timelessness has its roots in pagan philosophy.

 

[Swordsman]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

i think it depends on how you define eternal. and what you believe time to be.

i believe eternal to be has always been and will always will be and that obviously includes being now. kinda the whole "necessary existence" deal. God must exist and by that definition, he is eternal.

as for time, i like how godrulz put it as being "succession, duration, sequence.". thus, it's not a created thing. so, perhaps you could say he lives "in" it but really there's nothing to live "in".

thats how i think i see it.

Swordsman, do you believe God is temporal or atemporal?

God is atemporal. He is not limited by time. He created the concept of time. He is outside of time. Before Abraham was, I AM.

 

[godrulz]

Jn. 8:58 shows the preexistence of Christ. Before Abraham existed, the uncreated Word always existed.

cf. Jn. 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word..."

When there was a beginning (creation), the eternal Word was already existing ('was' = imperfect tense= continuous vs punctiliar/aorist past tense). Again, it teaches preexistence and uncreatedness, not a concept of timelessness.

Time is linear and unidirectional moving from the present into the 'future' becoming the fixed past.

Time is not a limitation on God. He never dies and is not limited to doing one thing at a time in one place (like mortals). This does not mean that He is 'in' the past, present, and future at the same time ('eternal now'= absurdity).

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by Swordsman

God is atemporal. He is not limited by time. He created the concept of time. He is outside of time. Before Abraham was, I AM.

are there any other verses you know of to support the idea of an atemporal God besides the "I AM" reference?

 

[godrulz]

'Alpha and Omega, Beginning and End, First and Last' imply endless duration (no beginning, no end), not timelessness.

 

[philosophizer]

Originally posted by godrulz

There is a difference between something that is difficult to fully comprehend, and that which is a logical contradiction or absurdity. God cannot be timeless and experience time at the same time.

Both sides of the argument can be reduced into absurdity.

On one side:
God is said to be timeless or "existing outside of time." But how would an atemporal God interact with temporal beings when an interaction requires a sequence?


On the other side:
God is said to be eternal or everlasting, meaning that He always has been and always will be, but He experiences "time" just like everything. But what was He doing before He created the universe? How long was it before He created it? In this view, either God had a beginning or He has existed infinitely into the past.

--If He has a beginning-- What brought God into being? And why?

--If He has existed infinitely into the past-- Did He do other things before He created the universe? Does an "infinite past" make any logical sense? And if time is simply a measurement of change, would time have existed without a universe to cause changes?

**If God was the only thing that existed before the universe, then would time have existed?

**If yes** Then, since time is only a measurement of change, God must have been changing somehow. That means He must have been doing something. What could He have been doing before the universe? Is that logical?

**If no** Then God was not changing. That means He wasn't doing anything. If He was not doing anything, could we even say that He existed? If not, then He did in fact come into existence when He started doing things. Is that logical?



Both arguments can be reduced into absurdity where they no longer make any logical sense. Does that mean neither are True? No. It just means the "logic" is not the proper tool to use here.

 

[godrulz]

Karl Barth emphasized that God is known in acting.

God is the First Cause, the uncreated Creator. This is known by relelation (not reason, though it is not unreasonable) and is an absolute of wonder. It is difficult to fathom, and causes us to worship Him as God in all His glory.

God is not a solitary being. He reveals Himself as Triune: one God (essence/nature) with 3 personal distinctions (Father, Son, Spirit). Before the universe was created, there was communication, thought, feeling, love, fellowship, etc. in the triune Godhead.

The subjective measure of time at creation (space-time history measured by sun, moon, clocks, etc.) is not a prerequisite for the reality of succession, duration, sequence experienced by the Godhead from all eternity.

One view is more consistent with reason and revelation. What appears to be illogical to both views is probably a lack of understanding or not thinking through the implications of each view from a philosophical or theological viewpoint.

 

[Lovejoy]

Is, then, the function of time for God to give linearity to His actions?

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Lovejoy

Is, then, the function of time for God to give linearity to His actions?

Time was not 'created' to assist God. It is merely an inherent reality of His existence. One cannot listen to Beethoven's symphonies all at once. This would be incoherent cacophony. Actions, thoughts, emotions all presume sequence, duration, succession to have any meaning for a personal Being. For example, creation occurred at a specific point in God's history (and ours). It is not co-eternal with Him (despite the Mormon's false idea that matter, not God, is eternal).

 

[Lovejoy]

Quote: One cannot listen to Beethoven's symphonies all at once. This would be incoherent cacophony. Actions, thoughts, emotions all presume sequence, duration, succession to have any meaning for a personal Being.

And yet God hears all our prayers at once, sees all our deeds at once, etc. There are billions of us, and He manages. Not only that, but He knows future deeds (He is the God of prophecy, after all). Does not mean I think you are wrong, I just would like you to expound on this part.

 

[godrulz]

The omnicompetent God (all-wise, all-powerful, omnipresent, etc.) can and does listen to billions of conversations at once in a coherent way. This is not parallel to all notes of a sequential work of music being played all at once vs measure after measure. God can listen to multiple symphonies at once, but it is a logical contradiction to imply these symphonies would be meaningful if their playing took place in one instant rather than over a period of time.

I would suggest that God knows some of the future as a certainty/actuality (that which He intends to bring to pass by His ability vs 'foreknowledge') and other aspects as possibilities/uncertainties in the realm of free will moral and mundane choices (hence, the openness of God's creation vs openness of God). Some prophecy is unilateral and unconditional, while other prophecies are contingent or conditional on man's responses.

A possible definition of omniscience is that God knows all that is knowable (logically possible to know). cf. omnipotence means that God can do all that is doable...He cannot do logically contradictory things like creating a rock so big that He cannot lift it or make a square a circle at the same time.

Philosophically, it is not possible to know future free will, contingent (may or may not happen) moral/mundane choices as a certainty/actuality until they are made. Before that, they are correctly known as a possibility. This is not a deficiency in omniscience, but God knowing reality as it is (truth).

Thank you for your humility, Lovejoy...or are you laying a trap for me?

 

[Swordsman]

Originally posted by godrulz

'Alpha and Omega, Beginning and End, First and Last' imply endless duration (no beginning, no end), not timelessness.

It is only our downfallen nature to not understand the truth of eternity outside of time (i.e. timelessness). We cannot comprehend it, but that does not make it untrue.

 

[godrulz]

My feeling is that timelessness is speculative, rather than the simple revelation of God's reality and relationship to creation in Scripture.

e.g. There was silence in heaven for 1/2 hour. This is an example of time in eternity.