 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > The raging debate continues here... > Is the entire OVT thing (+ others) time dependent? | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Laplace
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 138
| Posted 5/22/2003 2:52 PM (GMT -6) |   | I've been thinking...
In our attempts at trying to answer such questions using logic and reason, have we stopped to consider that such is within the boundries of time.
Meaning the concept of time is our ENTIRE basis for logic and reason. Don't believe me? Well don't we always FIRST start out with our assumptions (axioms)? THEN we NEXT make deductive/inferencial statements based on these, and FINALLY come with some conclusion. Sequence.
Even the most prized "Law" in logic, the "Law of Non-Contradiction" is time based (Mutually exclusive events cannot occur simultaneously [same time]). Remove the time contraint, and why even have the law?
Since time is a fundamental principle to our understanding of the world as a 3rd dimension is, is there any hope at trying to even reason out issues such as free will, determinism, etc? We all know God made the concept of time and He Himself transcends it. But poor little us, can't even agree upon time travel theory.
I suggest that in trying to understand the more difficult concepts a bit better we RELAX our constraints on time (can't throw them out the window since we have no idea what that would be like). It would be chaotic in a way since you can pretty much say just about is possible, but would open up some interesting disussions.
Say for instance that a person can be simultaneously saved and not so (different from "losing one's salvation" if you subscribe to that idea). We can guess that in the end it will be exlcusive as it will be one OR the other, but which? Who has the power to decide? Us, or God?
Let's also say that KNOWLEDGE can be simultaneously known and not known. Possible with God? Eh, let's say it is. Who again has final say? (Ans: God)
Finally, is it possible for FINAL SAY to be and not be with God? If not with God, then,...
Before this turns too Calvinistic, I will say this is an oversimplified not-totally thought out line of reasoning. We can see the concept of sovereignty in these instances, but obviously free will is involved for the Bible says so.
I now propose that free will is a time dependent idea, moreso than determinism. Hints of this can be seen in Natural Law. When we are born we don't have a whole lot of free will. Lots of crying, not knowing where we want to go (more like not really caring), and our "choices" are limited. As we grow older though, with an increase in KNOWLEDGE (knowing the choices), POWER (ability to make those choices), and WILL (desire for those choices) increases. And as we grow older, once again, the "choices" are again limited (mainly by power, then by will, then knowledge).
Perhaps that is where the separation and the middle ground lies. The fact that we are (for now) time dependent beings, and thus free will is all we are aware of. Yet this thing called determinism (sovereignty) is not part of this (completely perhaps, I haven't decided yet).
So how does it help us answer questions as "Why bad things happen to good people?" I'll get back to that one when I have the time.
"God created time, so everything wouldn't happen all at once." -Anon
"Balance in all things" - Dak'kon, Planescape Torment | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Laplace
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 138
| Posted 5/22/2003 3:12 PM (GMT -6) | | Oh, it's also why I personally believe that in Heaven we will not experience the passage of time.
We can get a hint of this when doing something we absolutely enjoy and get engrossed in. We are doing it one minute and when we realize are doing it, are amazed at how much time has passed. Imagine that feeling of being engrossed in something but never realizing that time is going by. (C.S. Lewis had it right I believe in The Last Battle).
Hell on the other hand is a different story.
"Balance in all things" - Dak'kon, Planescape Torment | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/22/2003 11:34 PM (GMT -6) | | Laplace: Even the most prized "Law" in logic, the "Law of Non-Contradiction" is time based (Mutually exclusive events cannot occur simultaneously [same time]).
Tom: The truth of the laws of logic are understood to not dependent upon time. The law of non-contradiction, for example, is actually no more than “A is not –A.” It has to do with mutually exclusive truth-claims and not the time at which events take place.
Laplace: We all know God made the concept of time and He Himself transcends it.
Tom: I don’t think we all know the God “made” time. I kinda think time is concomitant with God’s existence. We agree God transcends time, but we don’t all agree on how God transcends time. Some argue this means he is atemporal, while others argue it only means God is not subject to the effects or ravages of time (he doesn’t grow old, doesn’t forget, etc.).
Laplace: Say for instance that a person can be simultaneously saved and not so…
Tom: What need is there to imagine that?
Laplace: We can guess that in the end it will be exlcusive as it will be one OR the other, but which? Who has the power to decide? Us, or God?
Tom: Why must it be one or the other if you’re correct about timelessness. If timelessness prevails, there IS no “end” (or beginning or middle) where mutually exclusive truths resolve in the way you describe. To secure one OVER the other, you have to posit true time.
Salvation is synergistic. It takes both us and God deciding to enter into loving relationship.
Laplace: Let's also say that KNOWLEDGE can be simultaneously known and not known. Possible with God? Eh, let's say it is.
Tom: What need is there to even imagine or suppose this is true?
Laplace: The fact that we are (for now) time dependent beings, and thus free will is all we are aware of. Yet this thing called determinism (sovereignty) is not part of this (completely perhaps, I haven't decided yet).
Tom: Stop the ride, I’m dizzy! 
Laplace: So how does it help us answer questions as "Why bad things happen to good people?"
Tom: It doesn’t and can’t (that I can see), but I’m all ears. Maybe I don't feel so motivated to persue divine timelessness as a possible answer to theological problems because I don't see that the problems traditionally thought to be solved by recourse to timelessness as "problems."
Laplace: Oh, it's also why I personally believe that in Heaven we will not experience the passage of time.
Tom: Laplace, why in the world think that? The intense sense of enjoyment we’ll feel in heaven doesn’t mean time won’t exist (no more than getting engrossed in something we enjoy NOW means time doesn’t exist). We’re not AS sensitive or aware of the passage of time perhaps when we’re engrossed in something, but we never come close to anything like thinking time doesn’t exist. And as far as I know timelessness is thought (by those who believe God is timeless) to be an attribute of God NOT shared by finite beings or angels. It’s a divine attribute. I haven’t heard anybody argue we will come to share in this. How can we? We will be embodied (with glorified bodies, yes, but with bodies nonetheless) beings in heaven. Hmmmm? Just wondering.
Tom
Edited by - TGB on 05/23/2003 04:41:55 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 5/23/2003 12:20 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Tom: I don’t think we all know the God “made” time. I kinda think time is concomitant with God’s existence.
Can you "unpack" that, Tom?
Really.
| | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:19 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|