I don't think time is a physical attribute either.
I mean, how does one go about creating an hour, or creating a year?
Incidentally...
I will reveal 1 of my cards.
I fully agree with you on this.
I don't think time is a physical attribute either.
I mean, how does one go about creating an hour, or creating a year?
If we extract ourselves from the abstract, and look at the words we're using, right on the screen, we recall that there are nouns and verbs and other types of words. "God" is a noun. Based on what we know about God, we can always trust that there is no other noun to which God is subject. I include "time" in that.I think time itself could very well be an innate attribute of GOD.
Afterall, we read in scripture that GOD is light (an innate attribute), and yet we also see that GOD created light.
As steko has said, God is self-existent. If God existed in time, that would not be true.I might agree that matter cannot exists without time, but I don't agree that time cannot exists without matter.
I think the only reason matter could ever exist at all is because there was already time.
God existed BEFORE any of that stuff. If we start to go down that path too far, we end of up with pantheism.If GOD is everywhere, wouldn't it be right to say that GOD is within every single atom/molecule/particle that exists in creation?
No doubt.The whole universe is held together by GOD.
Including time.Colossians 1:16-17 KJV
(16) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
(17) And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
To a point, I would agree.If we extract ourselves from the abstract, and look at the words we're using, right on the screen, we recall that there are nouns and verbs and other types of words. "God" is a noun. Based on what we know about God, we can always trust that there is no other noun to which God is subject. I include "time" in that.
Perhaps, perhaps not.Including time.
Did you bother to look at any of those links that gave you?Perhaps, perhaps not.
Love and faith exist, but are they created?
Well I don't know that saying existed "in" time is proper.As steko has said, God is self-existent. If God existed in time, that would not be true.
Love is an attribute of God. Time is not.Well I don't know that saying existed "in" time is proper.
Love existed before creation, but we don't say GOD existed "in" love; nor do we say that because love existed before creation that GOD was not self-existent.
See what I mean? Does that make sense?
Sometime I will look at links posted.Did you bother to look at any of those links that gave you?
What's nice about that analogy is that it helps when explaining to atheists and God-haters in general about how it's not wrong for God to bring his creation into the next life. It goes something like this:Psssst...
Oh sure! You could put it that way if you want it to make more sense and be easier to grasp.
#Why do I always go the complicated rout!
#I like it!
As steko has said, God is self-existent. If God existed in time, that would not be true.
God existed BEFORE any of that stuff.
Sometime I will look at links posted.
I prefer not to while I'm asking questions that are on my mind so as to not be biased.
And also because I'm not even looking for scientific studies of time, but the theological study of time.
If things like love and time could be utterly destroyed and eliminated, then they would have to be part of creation (ie. created).
I don't see either as created or even possible of being eliminated.
What's nice about that analogy is that it helps when explaining to atheists and God-haters in general about how it's not wrong for God to bring his creation into the next life. It goes something like this:
Anti-God person: Well God killed x number of people in the Bible
Me (or any Christian): God still has yet to kill several billion more during the end times... If you created something, and designed it to have 2 stages, Stage One and Stage Two, and once it's in Stage Two, it can't go back to Stage One, would it be inherently wrong for you, as it's creator, to bring it from Stage One to Stage Two?
A-G person; something something well that's different something something yada yada yada
Me(): No, it's not different. Think of it this way, God made us to live this life out on the front porch, but has prepared 2 houses for us. When we die, if we had repented of our sins, we would go through the front door and into the living room of the house that represents Heaven. But if we had not repented, then the house we entered represented Hell. However, because God is our Creator, He has every right to do what He wants with His creation, as it is His to do with as he sees fit.
God is just, so even when God cleansed the Earth with the Flood, He was bringing justice to those who were immoral. God is also merciful, so by killing the children as well, He spared them from being influenced by the culture around them, and gave them the ability to choose between being with Him and being separated from Him, where before they would not have had any choice.
Does God exist in Heaven?
Once again, in order to have a sequence of events, there must be time. 'Before' and 'after' refer to a sequence.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
"Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet.1:2).
However, we cannot understand the "foreknowledge of God" in a literal sense since He sees everything at once, as explained here:
"Much of the difficulty in regard to the doctrine of Predestination is due to the finite character of our mind, which can grasp only a few details at a time, and which understands only a part of the relations between these. We are creatures of time, and often fail to take into consideration the fact that God is not limited as we are. That which appears to us as 'past,' 'present,' and 'future,' is all 'present' to His mind. It is an eternal 'now'...Just as He sees at one glance a road leading from New York to San Francisco, while we see only a small portion of it as we pass over it, so He sees all events in history, past, present, and future at one glance" (Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination [Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1932]).
You don't have to get very far into that article to see the fallacious reasoning.
Bob's problem and yours is that you are always looking at everything from a human perspective.
God does NOT "experience" the Creation the way that WE do.
Bob's "proof" is just completely wrong based on a wrong premise. The Son of God ENTERED into the Creation AS A MAN. How ELSE could THIS happen except in the context of TIME, since time is a part of the Creation? This does NOT, in any way, prove that time exists apart from the Creation.
I also note Bob's "high sounding" use of the term "overtly biblical statement". What is that supposed to mean except that he wants to sound "smart"?
You both need to come to the understanding that God condescends to use human terms and language when communicating with humans.
P.S. Even the relationship of Father and Son in the Godhead is NOT a temporal one, like it is in the human father/son relationship.
I agree with you on time because it is a measure. God did bless us with stars, the moon, sun and seasons that we can "measure" the passage of the "concept" of time with. But, I theologically think of infinity when I think of God.
If time existed "with" God, then that train track of infinite time would go backwards from our present day and have no end. This would mean that it would be impossible to have a "train station" of time that everything started from to get here.
It only "makes sense" to me if I think of "timeless", infinite God creating what we know as the tangible reality that surrounds us, and providing a measure for the passage of "time" as we perceive it.
Perhaps, perhaps not.
Love and faith exist, but are they created?
This is discussed in the time article. Please read it (objectively, if you would )
I asked you to be objective when reading, so that you could try to understand the argument being made. You're not being objective, and you're "jumping the gun" with your conclusion.
I think you need to (re-)read the whole article (again), and not make any objections until you're done reading it.
I want to reiterate here to you that a measurement of time is not itself time. For example, a day, week, hour, second, moment, those are all measurements of time, and not actually time themselves.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
As steko has said, God is self-existent. If God existed in time, that would not be true.
God existed BEFORE any of that stuff. If we start to go down that path too far, we end of up with pantheism.
No doubt.
Including time.
I understand your approach as far as being careful. In the case of those time links, I'd give them a chance. Just because we learn about our planet with the senses that God gave us, doesn't mean that we can only look in the Bible for facts.Sometime I will look at links posted.
I prefer not to while I'm asking questions that are on my mind so as to not be biased.
And also because I'm not even looking for scientific studies of time, but the theological study of time.
Love was not created and cannot be destroyed. It is an attribute of God.If things like love and time could be utterly destroyed and eliminated, then they would have to be part of creation (ie. created).
I don't see either as created or even possible of being eliminated.
Not to change the topic again, but where does the idea that God knows the future come from?
I'll probably take a peek at some time.I understand your approach as far as being careful. In the case of those time links, I'd give them a chance. Just because we learn about our planet with the senses that God gave us, doesn't mean that we can only look in the Bible for facts.