KM- an apology

Originally posted by knightmeister
My thoughts are very clear. I am definitely a reductionist with regards to time. Time for me cannot exist without motion or change. Infact I would go as far as saying that time IS just a description of motion and change.

If the universe froze then for me time would stop. I have argued on other threads that time is just a descriptive word and doesn' ...[text shortened]... n an actual argument itself. I can only assume they hold an unexamined position on this.

I already knew you were a reductionist with respect to time, but I just wanted to see you explicitly state that talk of time for you boils down to talk of changes/events.

Now, can you seriously not understand why I keep insisting that your conception of God is self-contradictory, then? You state on one hand that he exists outside time; you are committed on the other hand to the idea that he is a causal agent who acts in time. This boils down to claiming that he is both subject to change and not subject to change. Logically impossible concepts cannot be instantiated, knightmeister!

Originally posted by bbarr
By 'ironic' do you mean 'contradictory'? If God ever acts or changes, then by your definition of time he is not in any sense outside of time.

Exactly, thank you.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Ok , I will answer this one in another question and I will anticipate where you are going with this. Potential just means that the possibility of a different outcome might be possible. So if you say catagorically that there is no possibility that the solar system could have been any different then you are in fact saying that the universe (solar system ) is operating under 100% hard determinism.

You have just replace 'potential' with 'possible'. You still haven't explained it. What do you really mean by it?

Originally posted by LemonJello
I already knew you were a reductionist with respect to time, but I just wanted to see you explicitly state that talk of time for you boils down to talk of changes/events.

Now, can you seriously not understand why I keep insisting that your conception of God is self-contradictory, then? You state on one hand that he exists outside time; you are committ ...[text shortened]... and not subject to change. Logically impossible concepts cannot be instantiated, knightmeister!

But why does there have to be only one "time" . What if there is time(a series of events that occur within the universe) and eternal time (a series of events that occurs outside of thge universe) . These two time frames do not have to be connected or run in a synchronised fashion do they?

When I say God does not exist in time I mean he is not within our 4 dimensional universe , but that does not mean that he is neccessarily static. Unless of course you think there is some grand unified over arching TIME that encompasses the universe , eternity, everything that could be and has been?......that would be quaintly Newtonian of you!

Originally posted by twhitehead
You have just replace 'potential' with 'possible'. You still haven't explained it. What do you really mean by it?

I have explained exactly what I mean by it and since it is you (and not me) that tends to make catagorical statements about potentiality and multiple timelines then the onus to explain is on you.

A potential timeline is a timeline that could have existed but didn't.

Originally posted by knightmeister
But why does there have to be only one "time" . What if there is time(a series of events that occur within the universe) and eternal time (a series of events that occurs outside of thge universe) . These two time frames do not have to be connected or run in a synchronised fashion do they?

When I say God does not exist in time I mean he is not withi ...[text shortened]... eternity, everything that could be and has been?......that would be quaintly Newtonian of you!

If God acts or is subject to some series of events "in eternity" (whatever that means), then he is in time. That follows directly from your own conception of time. So what could you possibly mean when you say that he is simultaneously outside "our time" (such that you are not simply contradicting yourself).

I challenge you to start making some sense.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Overall , we need to think about our assumptions and perceptions of what time is before we can address the question " how can God know what I will do tomorrow if I have free will?".

Let's say that God knows what HE will do tomorrow.

He will hear someone, who is depressed and suicidal, praying for a sign from heaven.

He will tell a passerby to perform cartwheels, which will be taken as a sign.

Depressed guy will decide not to kill himself.

So God has to step in to our little cage of time. He has to wait there for the lady to speak, and the other person to pass by, etc. While he's there waiting, can he back out and choose not to help the depressed guy?

Originally posted by LemonJello
If God acts or is subject to some series of events "in eternity" (whatever that means), then he is in time. That follows directly from your own conception of time. So what could you possibly mean when you say that he is simultaneously outside "our time" (such that you are not simply contradicting yourself).

I challenge you to start making some sense.

Easy. For example , if there are two parallel universes both with a series of events within them. Is there any reason for time to be a constant over both universes? Could time move slower in one and quicker in one? I see no reason why not. Time is a dimension of OUR universe , and related to a series of events WITHIN our universe. Therefore , a series of events NOT within our universe could constitute a completely different dimension of time.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Easy. For example , if there are two parallel universes both with a series of events within them. Is there any reason for time to be a constant over both universes? Could time move slower in one and quicker in one? I see no reason why not. Time is a dimension of OUR universe , and related to a series of events WITHIN our universe. Therefore , a series of events NOT within our universe could constitute a completely different dimension of time.

What I would like to continue emphasizing, KM, is that absolutely nothing about any of this warrants your claiming that God exists "outside time". He simply doesn't exist outside time according to your own conception of what time is.

Oh sure, maybe he exists in some parallel universe that moves "faster" or "slower" to ours. Whatever, he still exists in time. And, by the way, I completely fail to understand what any of this actually accomplishes for you. If you had two parallel universes as you portray, couldn't we still hypothetically map changes/events from one to the other? If so, there's no reasonable way you, given your conception of time, can claim that he exists outside "our time". Furthermore, nothing you've come up with suggests that God can somehow look up and down our timeline; nor does it suggest that God can somehow view our entire timeline all as present for him (both of these sorts of claims you have employed elsewhere repeatedly). Quite the opposite, it only seems to suggest that, just like us, he is in time and subject to change and temporal constraints.

So I am completely at a loss to understand why you think any of this advances your position in the least.

Originally posted by knightmeister
When I say God does not exist in time I mean he is not within our 4 dimensional universe , but that does not mean that he is neccessarily static. Unless of course you think there is some grand unified over arching TIME that encompasses the universe , eternity, everything that could be and has been?......that would be quaintly Newtonian of you!

But is the universe then static in Gods timeline?

Originally posted by knightmeister
I have explained exactly what I mean by it and since it is you (and not me) that tends to make catagorical statements about potentiality and multiple timelines then the onus to explain is on you.

No you haven't explained it. What do you mean when you say something "could have happened but didn't"?
How does it differ from me saying "I have a red car, it could be blue but it isn't"? Does my car have the potential for being blue? What does it mean to have the potential for something but not be that something - ever - in any universe or timeline?
Does Hitler still have the 'potential' to act differently? What has changed? Was he in a different universe then?

Originally posted by twhitehead
But is the universe then static in Gods timeline?

I don't know. My gut feeling is no.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No you haven't explained it. What do you mean when you say something "could have happened but didn't"?
How does it differ from me saying "I have a red car, it could be blue but it isn't"? Does my car have the potential for being blue? What does it mean to have the potential for something but not be that something - ever - in any universe or timeline?
Do ...[text shortened]... 'potential' to act differently? What has changed? Was he in a different universe then?

How does it differ from me saying "I have a red car, it could be blue but it isn't"? Does my car have the potential for being blue? ----whitey----

Yes it does , your car could be blue , but it isn't. Your cat cannot be a blue car , but your red car could potentially because it has the neccessary ingredients to be blue (eg it is a car , it is capable of being resprayed). Your car might never ever be blue but that would not rob it of it's potential to be blue as long as it was still a car capable of a respray job.

The onus is not on me to prove that your car has the potential to be blue , the onus is on you to prove that it has NO potential to be blue and can only ever have been red.

The point is that I am not saying that free will is true and can be proven , what I am saying is that the catagorical statement that free will can be proven to be false is ....false.

Can you prove for example that this solar system never ever ever could have been any different? Prove that and you will be a genius. If you can't prove that then you logically cannot rule out the solar system's inherent potential to have been different.