quote:

---

quote:

---

Why do you find it necessary to think that God needs time to think? Since He knows everything, why does He need to think? Is it possible that "thinking" is only an anthropomorphism to help us conceptually or is it part of being in the image of God? It is an assumption on your part that He thinks like we do.

---

Sequence is necessary to reason. Perception, cognition, reason, deliberation, and decision all require sequence. One cannot make a decision before one thinks of it.

I see no compelling reason not to think that God's perception, reasoning, deliberation, choosing and acting all are predicated on the same basis as our own. To be certain, God is perfect, holy, and righteous in all his ways, as opposed to us, but the fact seems to remain that for any reasoning, thinking, or deliberation to exist requires time (the measurement of change).

Perception ====> Deliberation ========> Choice

Choice cannot precede deliberation or perception, even for something as fleeting as deciding you want to have a Coca Cola.

What makes this view of God's thought process most compelling of all is that it is supported by Scripture, which in fact does represent God as acting in time (creation, exodus, incarnation, resurrection, parousia, etc.) and even in many cases responding to the cries of his people (as in Exodus), responding to the sins of mankind with judgment or mercy (as at Calvary and the Last Judgment), being grieved that He had made man (Gen. 6), and changing his mind when circumstances warrant (such as in Jonah 3:8-10 or 2 Kings 20).

quote:

---

"There never was a time when he was not (did not exist)" and He has always existed, should be the completion of the thought. He says He is the same as God the Father, I Am.

---

"He has always existed" means the same thing as my original phrasing. If you agree that there never was a time when the Son (and consequently the Father and the Spirit) did not exist, then you have conceded that time is necessary to existence, even the existence of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Edited by - John Earp on 07/11/2003 12:20:11 AM

---

quote:

---

AVOID MAKING GOD IN YOUR OWN IMAGE.

---

Not really an argument, is it PoW?

Genesis 1:27
"So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them."




Edited by - Laika on 07/11/2003 1:48:55 PM

quote:

---

Genesis
"1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."

Here it is, God creates things that help us measure time. The very fact that God saw and divided and called shows that He experienced sequences/duration apart from our measurement of time. What Iconoclast calls causal sequences.

---

quote:

---

Paul,

Most people consider time to have been created with the creation of the physical universe (including the earth). Prior to that there wasn't anything to even reference for a measurement of "time" passing.

I think Fred, was actually referring to the necessity of time to pass while God is waiting for the need to make a decision to come up. He cannot go beyond that point until the pressing decision of the moment is made, then He can only go to the next pressing decision. It is very similar to "command by crisis" where nothing is ever planned and everything is dependent on the "now". Very military, but not very godlike.

---

quote:

---

fred

quote:

---

AVOID MAKING GOD IN YOUR OWN IMAGE.

---

Not really an argument, is it PoW?

Genesis 1:27
"So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them."




Edited by - Laika on 07/11/2003 1:48:55 PM

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

John,

Most people consider time to have been created with the creation of the physical universe (including the earth). Prior to that there wasn't anything to even reference for a measurement of "time" passing.

I think Fred, was actually referring to the necessity of time to pass while God is waiting for the need to make a decision to come up. He cannot go beyond that point until the pressing decision of the moment is made, then He can only go to the next pressing decision. It is very similar to "command by crisis" where nothing is ever planned and everything is dependent on the "now". Very military, but not very godlike.

---

I'm confused in how you think I was saying whatever you think, as per the second paragraph, John.

As to the first paragraph, the contemporanity of time and matter makes some sense. If someone mentions Angels, then I have to regroup my thoughts. (There is a heresy that says matter was created in a second line of defense once demons fell--that's wrong. Creation is a "good" thing, God-willed in its own right. Don't take any wooden nickles.)

BTW - My friend Dan designed the TEXAS quarter for 2003!!!

Obviously fallen angels change in some sort. Though I could be wrong too -- its over my head. Perhaps the "change" is in their relation to the ONE WHO "IS."

Anyways, SIN didn't enter into the material world until WE let it in. The devil only 'worked his thing' by tricking us into doing it for him. But also obvious is that by now he has some abilities to make pigs run into lakes, etc.


But as the the confusing second paragraph, "the necessity of time to pass while God is waiting for the need to make a decision to come up" -- Where's that come from? That sounds more "open" than it does me. So I agree with your concluding statement: "...not very godlike..."

---

quote:

---

fred: If I call God "Father" or "Son" am I "making Him in my image?"

If I say God speaks, feels, responds, experiences grief and joy, and is touched by the feelings of our infirmities, am I somehow "creating God in my own image?"

If I say God is love, and loves all mankind, am I somehow creating Him in my own image?

---

quote:

---

John Earp

Hi fred, In the below you have quoted Paul's response to me, not me. You seem to do this often. Perhaps you are skimming over the posts without really trying to understand them?

---

quote:

---

All those verses show God as "eternal" which is not "outside time". To us "outside time" means He doesn't experience sequences.

Without sequence, cause and effect have no meaning.
Without sequence, "before", "after", "during" have no meaning.
Without sequence, "in the beginning" has no meaning.
There is a difference between "time" the sequence and the measurement of those sequences.
I guess you need to reconsider your definition.

---

quote:

---

Do you really consider this to be reasonable? Isa. 1.18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. I doubt that any would consider than reasonable unless they have lots of Oxyclean or Chlorox.

---

quote:

---

fred

"Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks." (John 4:23)

John

I see nothing in this verse that relates to the concept of time. I do see God doing a very personal, relational thing -- seeking people. ...

---

quote:

---

"Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks." (John 4:23)

---

quote:

---

Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: It sure sounds like someone is unrestricted by time or you could say "outside of time".

---

Declaring the end from the beginning sounds like "outside of time"??? That makes referees of sporting events "outside of time" since they declare the end from the beginning of those games.

will do sounds like "outside of time"???
things not yet done sounds like "outside of time"???

quote:

---

PoW: Sine eternity might sometimes be construed of lots and lots of time, or ongoing time... to say "pre-eternal" effectually says that time is just so "totally besides the point."

Tom: If the expression "pre-eternal" is meant to avoid the conclusion that eternity is just lots and lots of time, or ongoing time, then time (and God's relationship to time) IS the point of the liturgy. If it was "totally beside the point" then it wouldn't matter what people believed about time or God's relationship to it and this is all one would ever have to say about the issue, if one said anything at all. If it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter. If it matters, THEN you write liturgies about it.

---

quote:

---

Tom: "time...and God's relationship to time...IS the point of the liturgy."

PoW: THIS IS A WOND3ERFUL POINT, TOM!

And the Gospel is the inter-weaving of God and creation, the uncreated with the created. Its "trans-figuring."

---

Don't be too happy. I was making a point about your comment on your liturgy. I wasn't agreeing with it. I think you know I disagree. I could go with either the view that God is eternally temporal or (ala Craig) that God is timeless in the absence of creation but that in creating he abandons this mode of existence entirely and absolutely and BECOMES temporal. I think which one of THESE options one goes with is pretty beside the point since they both deny that God is since creation timeless (or pre-eternal). Whereas you weave the two together, I see them quite incompatible.

But I'll take those blessings anyhow!

Tom

Edited by - TGB on 07/13/2003 09:38:42 AM

quote:

---

quote:

---

Tom: "time...and God's relationship to time...IS the point of the liturgy."

PoW: THIS IS A WOND3ERFUL POINT, TOM!

And the Gospel is the inter-weaving of God and creation, the uncreated with the created. Its "trans-figuring."

---

Don't be too happy. I was making a point about your comment on your liturgy. I wasn't agreeing with it. I think you know I disagree. I could go with either the view that God is eternally temporal or (ala Craig) that God is timeless in the absence of creation but that in creating he abandons this mode of existence entirely and absolutely and BECOMES temporal. I think which one of THESE options one goes with is pretty beside the point since they both deny that God is since creation timeless (or pre-eternal). Whereas you weave the two together, I see them quite incompatible.

But I'll take those blessings anyhow!

Tom

---