Is God temporal or atemporal?
- Thread starter God_Is_Truth
- Start date
Webster was a believer, but must have accepted the traditional view of timeless eternity. This is not a theological dictionary, and does not mean it is an accurate understanding (which must come from Scripture and godly philosophy).
We are limited, and God is not. Time is not a limitation on God, but an aspect of His existence.
We are limited, and God is not. Time is not a limitation on God, but an aspect of His existence.
God_Is_Truth
New member
why wouldn't he be sovereign? he's still be omniscient as well, but the change would be how he knows things, not what he knows.
OMEGA
New member
endless
endless
Goddrulzzzzz said:
'Alpha and Omega, Beginning and End, First and Last' imply endless duration (no beginning, no end), not timelessness.
----------------------------
Did someone mention my name ?
Alpha means Beginning , Omega means end.
So, how can you say that it means Endless when it means the End.
(Rev 22:13 KJV) "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."
(Rev 21:6 KJV) "And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely."
This statement by Jesus is referring to the Gospel Procession.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
God is not a solitary being.
He reveals Himself as BIUNE, the Father and the Son.
Before the universe was created, there was communion,
thought, feeling, love, fellowship, Mindmelding in the Biune Godhead.
The objective measure of time at creation (space-time history measured by sun, moon, Atomic clock.) is a prerequisite for the reality of succession, duration, sequence experienced by the Godhead from all eternity.
In other words All Living Beings live INSIDE time
= God and Man.
:thumb: :angel:
endless
Goddrulzzzzz said:
'Alpha and Omega, Beginning and End, First and Last' imply endless duration (no beginning, no end), not timelessness.
----------------------------
Did someone mention my name ?
Alpha means Beginning , Omega means end.
So, how can you say that it means Endless when it means the End.
(Rev 22:13 KJV) "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."
(Rev 21:6 KJV) "And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely."
This statement by Jesus is referring to the Gospel Procession.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
God is not a solitary being.
He reveals Himself as BIUNE, the Father and the Son.
Before the universe was created, there was communion,
thought, feeling, love, fellowship, Mindmelding in the Biune Godhead.
The objective measure of time at creation (space-time history measured by sun, moon, Atomic clock.) is a prerequisite for the reality of succession, duration, sequence experienced by the Godhead from all eternity.
In other words All Living Beings live INSIDE time
= God and Man.
:thumb: :angel:
Last edited:
lost anomaly
New member
Who says he can't?
These concepts are mutually exclusive. Either God is a timeless 'eternal now', or He experiences duration, sequence, succession (the past, present, and future are valid for God and us). He cannot be timeless and experiencing time...it is either/or. This is not a limitation on God, but a description of the way He experiences reality.
1+1=2; 1+1 never equals 5.
1+1=2; 1+1 never equals 5.
God_Is_Truth
New member
on that note, i just finished listening to a talk a guy gave last week at a college ministry on open theism (i wasn't able to attend but got the cd). his position basically came down to thomism which he used to try to destroy open theism. IMO he did a horrible job. some quotes:
neither of these are true. God CAN excercise total control in this universe but CHOOSES not to. so it's not that he CANT its that he WONT. and the God of open theism DOES know the future. the difference is HOW it's known, as possibilites not actualities. so right off the bat, this guy has misconceptions about open theism :down: :nono:
here he tried to use Iasiah 41:21-24 to show that to be divine means that God has foreknowledge of the future.
21 "Present your case," says the LORD .
"Set forth your arguments," says Jacob's King.
22 "Bring in your idols to tell us
what is going to happen.
Tell us what the former things were,
so that we may consider them
and know their final outcome.
Or declare to us the things to come,
23 tell us what the future holds,
so we may know that you are gods.
Do something, whether good or bad,
so that we will be dismayed and filled with fear.
24 But you are less than nothing
and your works are utterly worthless;
he who chooses you is detestable.
and again, open theism affirms that God knows the future, the difference is in HOW the future is known.
here he attempted to show that if we take the bible at face value then God is ignorant of the past and present. both of these are taken care of and explained here
http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/Custom/4/Documents/beltstudies.htm
as i've already shown, the open view of God does NOT lead us to the god of mormonism and does not portray God as having physical body parts, ignorant of the past and ignorant of the present.
he then went into some philosophical areas but used his thomism to wish them away to nothing. here is a summary statement of why God can know our decision and have us still be free
however, he gives absolutely NO support for his idea of this "timeless, eternally present all at once" God. i see absolutely no reason to accept it as such given the nature of time: succession, duration, sequence.
so, in summary, this guy misrepresents the position of open theism, uses a passage of scripture to defeat his strawman which gains him nothing and then gives his belief of thomism as reason that open theism is philosophically incorrect. :doh:
neither of these are true. God CAN excercise total control in this universe but CHOOSES not to. so it's not that he CANT its that he WONT. and the God of open theism DOES know the future. the difference is HOW it's known, as possibilites not actualities. so right off the bat, this guy has misconceptions about open theism :down: :nono:
here he tried to use Iasiah 41:21-24 to show that to be divine means that God has foreknowledge of the future.
21 "Present your case," says the LORD .
"Set forth your arguments," says Jacob's King.
22 "Bring in your idols to tell us
what is going to happen.
Tell us what the former things were,
so that we may consider them
and know their final outcome.
Or declare to us the things to come,
23 tell us what the future holds,
so we may know that you are gods.
Do something, whether good or bad,
so that we will be dismayed and filled with fear.
24 But you are less than nothing
and your works are utterly worthless;
he who chooses you is detestable.
and again, open theism affirms that God knows the future, the difference is in HOW the future is known.
here he attempted to show that if we take the bible at face value then God is ignorant of the past and present. both of these are taken care of and explained here
http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/Custom/4/Documents/beltstudies.htm
as i've already shown, the open view of God does NOT lead us to the god of mormonism and does not portray God as having physical body parts, ignorant of the past and ignorant of the present.
he then went into some philosophical areas but used his thomism to wish them away to nothing. here is a summary statement of why God can know our decision and have us still be free
however, he gives absolutely NO support for his idea of this "timeless, eternally present all at once" God. i see absolutely no reason to accept it as such given the nature of time: succession, duration, sequence.
so, in summary, this guy misrepresents the position of open theism, uses a passage of scripture to defeat his strawman which gains him nothing and then gives his belief of thomism as reason that open theism is philosophically incorrect. :doh:
Swordsman
New member
I guess you have to really dig down and research what Sovereignty is all about. God created the heavens and the earth. He CREATED it ALL. He is the author of time. He even had a plan for the Trinity. Why do you think Jesus Christ the Son exists? The Holy Spirit? The angels? Satan? He knows. And I believe we do to. We often just can't accept the fact He knows everything. He injects Himself into time, but is not bound by time.
It is only our downfallenness that we cannot understand that God had a plan for us before the world began.
2 Thessalonians 2:13
But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.
God_Is_Truth
New member
but you see, i don't believe time to be a created thing. i don't see it as a thing at all. it's just a concept. it's duration. it's not something one "makes" at all. so i don't hold that God is the author of time.
i'm curious as to what you are saying about the trinity though. are you saying that God wasn't always a trinity? or just in reference to the incarnation?
i also hold that God chose us from the beginning. but the difference is that i believe the "us" is a group of people and unspecific. in other words, God chose this group of people, whoever ends up being in the group, for salvation from the beginning. i believe the group was chosen, but not who makes up the group.
but i don't see how any of this would make God any less sovereign.
i'm curious as to what you are saying about the trinity though. are you saying that God wasn't always a trinity? or just in reference to the incarnation?
i also hold that God chose us from the beginning. but the difference is that i believe the "us" is a group of people and unspecific. in other words, God chose this group of people, whoever ends up being in the group, for salvation from the beginning. i believe the group was chosen, but not who makes up the group.
but i don't see how any of this would make God any less sovereign.
philosophizer
New member
I don't know if we can honestly say that those things are mutually exclusive. It would seem mutually exclusive for someone to be both fully God and fully man at the same time, yet Christ was.
Arguing about the "nature" of time and how it pertains to God won't prove anything because the premise remains unproven. The best arguments have always come from the authority of God's word, not from theories about the nature of existence.
Swordsman
New member
Genesis 1:3-5
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Correct, I'm just referring to the incarnation. The Trinity always has been and always is.
So you believe in corporate election. Why does Paul in Romans 9 address figures such as Pharoah, Esau, and Jacob? Were they not individually picked out (elected or not elected)?
Mark 13:20
And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.
If corporate election is true, then this would mean "but for the sake of all humanity he has shortened the days". Doesn't make much sense to phrase it this way. Its very clear election is of the individual sense.
He either is or isn't sovereign. Meaning He is in control of all things. He doesn't have to respond because His will always comes to pass. Then you may ask, "Does God create evil?"
Proverbs 16:4
The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
The answer, of course, is yes.
God_Is_Truth
New member
the dividing of the light and dark created us a way to measure duration. if you wish to say that in this instant time was created then i ask how did God create without time? don't you agree that it takes time to create something? all actions take time do the not? even if it's just a moment. so, seeminly, if time is a thing, then it would take time to create it. but that leads to nonsense which is why i hold that time is not a thing which can be created.
:thumb:
Paul used the decision of God to have the messiah go through Jacob and not Esau on the basis of His sovereign right as evidence that God has the right to make the basis of who enters into his kingdom be faith.
sov·er·eign ( P ) Pronunciation Key (svr-n, svrn)
n.
One that exercises supreme, permanent authority, especially in a nation or other governmental unit, as:
A king, queen, or other noble person who serves as chief of state; a ruler or monarch.
A national governing council or committee.
A nation that governs territory outside its borders.
A gold coin formerly used in Great Britain.
why would sovereign mean "in control of all things"?
but even if we did, surely you agree that there is a difference between "being in control of all things" and "controlling all things" right?
as for the verse about evil, my interpretation is that all people are made by God, even those who have become wicked. i do not hold that God created them as evil beings. that would seem to go against God's goodness.
God Bless
God_Is_Truth
It seems to me that everybody is just talking past one another here, stating and restating our own respective positions. In an attempt to break through the mud we seem stuck in on this topic I would like to pose a question to the Calvinists.
What would it mean if God DID NOT exist outside of time?
Whether time actually exists or not, is just a semantic issue with respect to this question. In other words I'm not looking for a why or how as to God's existence outside of time.
Just assume that by whatever means, God exists outside of time and explain what you think would be the ramifications of such a truth.
Also, if one of your answers is "It would mean that God is not Sovereign.", then please explain why that necessarily is so. Just don't leave pat answers unsubstantiated.
Resting in Him,
Clete
What would it mean if God DID NOT exist outside of time?
Whether time actually exists or not, is just a semantic issue with respect to this question. In other words I'm not looking for a why or how as to God's existence outside of time.
Just assume that by whatever means, God exists outside of time and explain what you think would be the ramifications of such a truth.
Also, if one of your answers is "It would mean that God is not Sovereign.", then please explain why that necessarily is so. Just don't leave pat answers unsubstantiated.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Swordsman
New member
To us, time is a nescessity to create anything. To God it isn't. Why do you say God cannot act outside of time? You say God is omniscient. Then He must have to exist also in a different realm in order to make provisions for the future.
Correct. It was God's free will to love Jacob and hate Esau. The wind blows where it pleases.
sov·er·eign ( P ) Pronunciation Key (svr-n, svrn)
n.
One that exercises supreme, permanent authority, especially in a nation or other governmental unit, as:
A king, queen, or other noble person who serves as chief of state; a ruler or monarch.
A national governing council or committee.
A nation that governs territory outside its borders.
A gold coin formerly used in Great Britain.
why would sovereign mean "in control of all things"?
It does not do God any justice to define His Sovereignty by a dictionary reference.
A difference? No. God has written the script. Now, it is just playing itself out.
I think you have to understand the fall of man before you jump to these conclusions. Man is utterly wicked anyway. Pharoah was raised to power so that God would show His power by destroying the Egyptian armies. And what about Judas? He played his part in the handing over of Jesus, just like Jesus had foretold. Judas was a disciple, but obviously not one of the elect.
I concur that the Word is the authority. The simple, straightforward reading of Scripture shows God and man moving through history. His Story predates ours, but it still involved unidirectional 'time'. Timelessness/'eternal now' concepts have their roots in Greek speculative philosophy and influenced Augustine. The Hebraic view is one of endless duration. From everlasting to everlasting, He is God.
The incarnation/kenosis does not have a mutually exclusive component, since it is reasonable that the Word/Son could take on humanity= one person with 2 natures (cf. we have a spirit and body).