Can your god ever forget?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
eternal heaven doesn't imply eternal time. it could be outside normal time. which if we admit of a creator of time-space would be reasonable.

You are implying extra dimensions and extra dimensions of time, if indeed time actually turns out to be a dimension. Time that goes sideways...

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
eternal heaven doesn't imply eternal time. it could be outside normal time. which if we admit of a creator of time-space would be reasonable.

Before FreakyKBH made the assertion time doesn't exist for god then my meaning of "time" here was from our perspective [1]. Constrained as such, then "eternal" in whatever setting you would apply it, and so long as we wish this term to be meaningful to us would, from our perspective, imply infinite time (since it is we (or more accurately, you) who is claimed shall be the inhabitants of this place - forever).







---------------------------------------------
1) My meaning of time here is justified because to make any sense of "infinite memory" implies some sort of recall of past events and would be rendered meaningless for an entity for which there is no temporal progression from one state of events to another.

Originally posted by Agerg
Yes...implied not only by some eternal heaven. I should have been stricter in my last post to say: "...majority of theists on these boards".

I disagree. I believe that there is a universal consensus among Christians on this site that there is a final day of reckoning, a passing away of heaven and earth, and then the creation of a new world. I do not see why time is a necessary property for this new world, as Jesus explains, the resurrected will be like angels (physical properties like time may no longer be applicable). I cannot speak here on behalf of Christians on this forum -- I speculate here -- but a Christian might contend that the eternity of this heaven is like the eternity of God -- rather than infinite time, there is simply no such time at all.

Originally posted by Agerg
Before FreakyKBH made the assertion time doesn't exist for god then my meaning of "time" here was from our perspective [1]. Constrained as such, then "eternal" in whatever setting you would apply it, and so long as we wish this term to be meaningful to us would, from our perspective, imply infinite time (since it is we (or more accurately, you) who is claimed ...[text shortened]... an entity for which there is no temporal progression from one state of events to another.

Constrained as such, then "eternal" in whatever setting you would apply it, and so long as we wish this term to be meaningful to us would, from our perspective, imply infinite time

No; in fact, traditional Christian doctrine has always emphasised that the eternity of God means that He is not bounded by time. Time is the property of a created universe, which God transcends.

1) My meaning of time here is justified because to make any sense of "infinite memory" implies some sort of recall of past events and would be rendered meaningless for an entity for which there is no temporal progression from one state of events to another.

Obviously such a definition of memory would not apply to God, for whom there is no past, present and future. In traditional Christian theology, however, God's memory was interpreted somewhat differently. God's memory is existence itself. In Trinitarian theology, for example, the Father was often identified with memory (the son with understanding and the Holy Spirit with love or will) because God's memory creates, rather than recalls, things.

Originally posted by Conrau K
I disagree. I believe that there is a universal consensus among Christians on this site that there is a final day of reckoning, a passing away of heaven and earth, and then the creation of a new world. I do not see why time is a necessary property for this new world, as Jesus explains, the resurrected will be like angels (physical properties like time may n ...[text shortened]... n is like the eternity of God -- rather than infinite time, there is simply no such time at all.

But if I'm looking to make sense of this (and I am - on the grounds of wanting to know what is feasible, and what isn't), as opposed to throwing it out as an ill-formed assertion which has no meaning; I would be interested in knowing, as I have asked others, how things "get done" if there is no such thing as time (or temporality, or some other words to articulate the notion that one state of events, for example, evaluating that you exist as some angel, like God, in some timeless new world progresses to some new state; i.e. completing this evaluation.)

If all things are instantaneous then what intrinsic value (better than not existing) is to be had in this new form of existence "after"Reveal Hidden Content this final day of reckoning?

To try and crystalise what I mean here suppose it is the case God created the (our) universe. This to me implies some sort of action taken by this god so to produce an additional universe or change the state of an inoperable universe to one that functions so to let us exist within it.
This implies two disjoint situations or states of "what is":

1) One where the universe that we exist in presently either failed to function or did not exist.
2) One where the universe we exist in presently is now functional.

Given that god is timeless (in that temporal change has no meaning), how does God cause the transition from state (1) to state (2)?

Is it instead the case that the creation of our universe and lack of such creation (from the perspective of God) happen simultaneously and "permanently" (defining a trivial notion of "permanent" to mean there is no point at which one can differentiate between two different situations - since there are no points other than one single instance for which they both occured!)?
If so, what does it actually mean to say "God created the universe"?

double post

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
You're mixing your definitions.

He has always existed (without beginning).
He will always exist (without ending).
He knows everything that can be known.
He knows all possible outcomes, possible and actual.

Time is a creation of God for the convenience of His creatures, as for Him, there is no time: one minute is the same as a thousand years.

...[text shortened]... bsurdities only appear in the minds of those looking at Him from their diminished perspectives.

So for you your god exists outside our time dimension and our universe is considered to be finite and your god to be infinite or so much more timewise than us that we would be just an insignificant speck on the horizon of your god?

Originally posted by Agerg
But if I'm looking to make sense of this (and I am - on the grounds of wanting to know what is feasible, and what isn't), as opposed to throwing it out as an ill-formed assertion which has no meaning; I would be interested in knowing, as I have asked others, how things "get done" if there is no such thing as time (or temporality, or some other words to articul ...[text shortened]... existence "after"[hidden](for want of a better word)[/hidden] this final day of reckoning?

But if I'm looking to make sense of this (and I am - on the grounds of wanting to know what is feasible, and what isn't), as opposed to throwing it out as an ill-formed assertion which has no meaning; I would be interested in knowing, as I have asked others, how things "get done" if there is no such thing as time (or temporality, or some other words to articulate the notion that one state of events, for example, evaluating that you exist as some angel, like God, in some timeless new world progresses to some new state; i.e. completing this evaluation.)

First, I did not contend that the Christian notion of eternity (and I think it is quite universal among Christians) is tenable. There may be significant logical obstacles. The point simply is that a Christian need not be committed to the idea of infinite time. They may construe eternity differently.

Second, though, I do think that the Christian notion of eternity is in part defensible. As a Christian understands, God's act of creation was not an event in time, but rather the beginning of time. Time is a property of the physical universe. It doesn't make sense to inquire what happened before the creation of the universe. There was no before.

Now I think you have a point that if God created the universe, then there had to have been a transition from nothing to a new state. But what I do not see is why that should presuppose any temporality. The transition from nothing to a universe, rather than being a temporal event, could have been, say, an ontic sequence -- that is, God came first in the sense that His existence is logically prior but there was never any time when the universe did not exist. The point is that a sequence need not be temporal.

Originally posted by Agerg
I refer now to "time" not as it relates to man but as it relates to your god (from it's perspective). Are all it's actions instantaneous from it's perspective? or is there some sort of temporal line (or plane, or higher dimensional space) with which there is some notion of before and after for this entity (that would serve as "time" - albeit by a different name)?

Pardon my French, but that's a sweet asterisk question! This gets into some theological heaviness, so bear with it if you don't mind.

Consider the decrees of God. We name them in the plural, but the reality is, all of the articulated and distinct particulars are one. A more accurate, God-view of the situation would describe the situation as the decree of God. Think about that one for a few seconds, and your head is likely to fall off!

Before there was anything other than God, when there was just God-in-God-in-God (okay, the Trinity), the thought was 'what if we create the other?' That thought was taken to not only the logical conclusion, but the all-possible-outcomes conclusion, and He created.

He considered everything that could happen, everything that would happen, everything that could have happened if even one particular changed here, there or anywhere, and created.

We see these acts as progressive (we're somewhat shackled to lines in time), but the truth is, it (all of all reality) is nothing less than one, single comprehensive whole of a thought of God. Not the 'thoughts of God.' 'A' thought of God: the entire panoply of a single thought.

I don't know about you, but I am sobered by such a revelation.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Pardon my French, but that's a sweet asterisk question! This gets into some theological heaviness, so bear with it if you don't mind.

Consider the decrees of God. We name them in the plural, but the reality is, all of the articulated and distinct particulars are [b]one. A more accurate, God-view of the situation would describe the situatio ...[text shortened]... ]single[/b] thought.

I don't know about you, but I am sobered by such a revelation.[/b]

Before there was anything other than God, when there was just God-in-God-in-God (okay, the Trinity), the thought was 'what if we create the other?' That thought was taken to not only the logical conclusion, but the all-possible-outcomes conclusion, and He created.

The issue here is how you frame this narrative: God is alone, God thinks, then God creates. I think Agerg has a good case when you describe the act of creation here: there is a kind of meta-time operating here and so, in a sense, God is still bound within time. Amalgamating all God's decision into one does not solve this problem.

Originally posted by sonhouse
You are implying extra dimensions and extra dimensions of time, if indeed time actually turns out to be a dimension. Time that goes sideways...

maybe there is no "time" outside time. maybe god experiences things simultaneously . maybe he knows his future and his past. it is difficult to explain and but one of several possibilities. how can a being with linear time perception like us perceive god's time?


maybe god does have a linear time and he is looking at the universe from outside. and the universe is like a video tape that he can watch from any point he wants.


maybe he doesn't know everything at any point but can summon any knowledge he wants whenever he wants.

Originally posted by Agerg
Before FreakyKBH made the assertion time doesn't exist for god then my meaning of "time" here was from our perspective [1]. Constrained as such, then "eternal" in whatever setting you would apply it, and so long as we wish this term to be meaningful to us would, from our perspective, imply infinite time (since it is we (or more accurately, you) who is claimed ...[text shortened]... an entity for which there is no temporal progression from one state of events to another.

i posted some hypothesis on this in my reply to sonhouse

they are pretty forced though.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]Before there was anything other than God, when there was just God-in-God-in-God (okay, the Trinity), the thought was 'what if we create the other?' That thought was taken to not only the logical conclusion, but the all-possible-outcomes conclusion, and He created.

The issue here is how you frame this narrative: God is alone, God thinks, then[/ till bound within time. Amalgamating all God's decision into one does not solve this problem.[/b]

I see the dilemma: there is God thinking, God creating, thus--- to our frame of reference--- before/during/after, or, in short, progression. Sorry, can't resolve it. Whatever exists in terms of no-time, however it is measured (although I suspect it is only measured by virtue of a small gesture toward it, not unlike one would point at the sea while standing on the beach), God's actions in eternity past were not linear.

I'm not too upset by that idea, however. I can still recall when doing math with letters in the place of numbers seemed other-worldly!

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I see the dilemma: there is God thinking, God creating, thus--- to our frame of reference--- before/during/after, or, in short, progression. Sorry, can't resolve it. Whatever exists in terms of no-time, however it is measured (although I suspect it is only measured by virtue of a small gesture toward it, not unlike one would point at the sea while standi ...[text shortened]... I can still recall when doing math with letters in the place of numbers seemed other-worldly!

I don't think the problem is insoluble. Deliberation is logically prior to any rational action but we could say that in the case of God, it is not temporally prior. This isn't unprecedented. We might say in an ordinary conversation, 'If you won the running race, then you were born gifted'. Obviously the adverb 'then' does not signify an event prior (it would be impossible to win before birth.) In the same way, we might say that God deliberates and then acts, even if the two events were simultaneous. My point here is the need for clarity of language. I think this is the site of Agerg's problem -- the way in which we describe how God acts.