 |
 | 
Ochuk
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 102
| Posted 9/24/2003 8:48 AM (GMT -6) |   | | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/24/2003 9:35 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey, I'll respond too!
Ochuk: I'd like to know how exactly does God relate to time. Is he "temporal" as some crtics (like Geisler) of the OV say, or is he somehow "above time" but yet is in it?
Tom: Geisler is a critic of the OV, but he doesn't argue that God is "temporal." He argues that God is both temporal and atemporal. Actually he attempts to use atemporality to explain a lot about God, but he also argues that God understands and experiences the flow of time. He's just not limited to that flow. Screwy? Yes, quite.
For what it's worth, my view is that God is above the effects and ravages of time. He doesn't grow older or forget. In this sense God transcends time. But (as Bill Craig argues on that link Laika shared with you) God is temporal since creation. Whatever God's relatonship to time or sequence was in the absence of creation is entirely beside the point for me. I have no interest in the subject whatsoever. A temporal universe is here now and God interacts with this temporal world. That's all that matters. To add to this the belief that God is also atemporal in the sense of existing in some eternal "now" where our past, present, and future are timelessly present to God is at best interesting to think about when there's nothing else to think about (like never) or at worst utterly useless in explaining anything.
Timelessness? Bury it. Bury it with a shovel and then bury the shovel.
Tom  | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 9/24/2003 10:22 AM (GMT -6) | | | IVP published an excellant book on the subject called God And Time :Four Views. | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/24/2003 12:20 PM (GMT -6) | | Mandzaredis wrote a book called "Time and Man." (Notice its not God and Time.)
Our knowledge of God and God's activity in salvation all concerns man. So that is the key issue we are concerned with. How does time concern us, and how does God act towards us in time. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/24/2003 1:25 PM (GMT -6) | | Ochuk The sticking point that Geisler made for me is that God is infinite. He uses the Kalam argument to show that it is impossible to have an infinite amount of past moments because the presents moment passes, and we get an infinity + 1 puzzle. But what I'm hearing you (and Craig) say is that God simpy created the universe and willingly subjected himself to a temporal creation and thus acts in the manner the OV describes?
Tom: Craig uses the Kalam argument also, but only to argue that God is necessarily timeless in the absence of creation. Geisler seems to feel God must remain timeless since creation. Craig's really good on arguing against this. Creation amounted to a real kenosis for God, who abandoned a timeless mode of existence for a temporal mode for the sake of relating to creation. So, an open theist actually could go this direction too. Some do.
I wonder if Geisler thinks Criag is a neotheist too.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/24/2003 1:36 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom: I wonder if Geisler thinks Criag is a neotheist too.
Laika: Craig studied under Geisler at Trinity.
Tom: Oh for sure then Craig is a neotheist. To have studied under Geisler and end up denying God is pure actuality and absolutely simple is to walk the plank off the Good Ship Orthodoxy into the neo-abyss.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Ochuk
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 102
| Posted 9/24/2003 1:56 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/24/2003 3:15 PM (GMT -6) | | Ochuk: What do you think of the term "neotheist?" I find it incredibly condecending.
Tom: So do I.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/24/2003 4:34 PM (GMT -6) | | EVER HEAR OF "DIACHRONIC" TIME?
quote:
Christ rose not on the sabbath, but on the first day of the week (mia sabbaton). The sabbath was the day of His rest, His 'en-sabbathment' in the tomb, the day which completed His task within the limits of the 'old aeon.' But the new life, the life which had begun to 'shine out of the tomb,' began on the first day of the week. This was the first day, the beginning of the risen life over which 'death has no dominion.' This day also became the day of the Eucharist as the 'confession of His resurrection,' the day of the communication to the Church of this risen life.34 And here it is quite remarkable that in early Christianity, up to and including the time of Basil the Great, this day was often called in fact 'the eighth day.' This means that the symbolism of Hebrew apocalypticism was adopted by Christians and became one of the theological 'keys' to their liturgical consciousness. There is no need to dwell especially on the first epistle of Peter, in which there seems to be a hint of the significance of the number eight (3:20-1). In the Gospel according to John, undoubtedly the most 'liturgical' of all the Gospels, the risen Christ appears after eight days (John 20:26). Later the 'mystery' of the eighth day is explained by Christian authors in application to the Eucharistic Day of the Lord, which points to a dear tradition. These numerous texts on the eighth day have been collected by J. Danielou.35 Their meaning is clear: Christ rose on the first day, i.e. on the day of the beginning of creation, because He restores creation after sin. But this day which concludes the history of salvation, the day of victory over the forces of evil, is also the eighth day, since it is the beginning of the New Aeon. 'So the day which was first,' writes St. Augustine, 'will be also the eighth, so that the first life might not be done away, but rather made eternal.'36 And even more clearly St. Basil the Great writes: 'The Lord's Day is great and glorious. The Scripture knows this day without evening, having no other day, a day without end; the psalmist called it the eighth day, since it is outside of time measured in weeks. Whether you call it a day or an age, it is all the same. If you call it an aeon, it is one, and not a part of a whole....'37 In this way the eighth day 'is defined in opposition to the week,' writes J. Danielou. 'The week is related to time. The eighth day is outside time. The week stands within the sequence of days, the eighth day has nothing coming after it, it is the 'last one.' The week involves multiplicity; the eighth day is one...'38
quote:
For the early Church the Lord's Day was not a substitute for the sabbath; it was not (so to speak) its Christian equivalent. On the contrary the real nature and significance of this new day was defined in relation to the sabbath and to the concept of time connected with it. The key position of the sabbath (and all its related prescriptions) in the Old Testament law and Hebrew piety is well known. From whatever source the weekly cycle of time may have been acquired by Israel, its religious interpretation and experience was rooted in a specifically biblical theology of time. The Seventh Day, the day of complete rest, is a commemoration of the creation of the world, a participation in the rest of God after creation. This rest signifies and expresses the fullness, the completion, the 'goodness ' of the world, it is the eternal actualization of the word spoken about the world by God from the beginning: 'it is very good.' The sabbath sanctions the whole natural life of the world unfolding through the cycles of time, because it is the divinely instituted sign of the correspondence of the world to God's will and purpose. On this day the Law prescribes joy: 'thou shalt eat and drink and give thanks to Him who created all things,' since 'He who created all things honoured and sanctified the sabbath day and commanded that it should be so' (2 Macc. 15:2-4). Faithfulness to the sabbath was bound up with the ultimate mystical depths of the people of Israel, and only by understanding it as something for which men were prepared to die is it possible to comprehend the significance of the new day introduced by the Church.
quote:
The appearance of this new day is rooted in the expectation of salvation, in that striving toward the future and in those messianic hopes which were just as characteristic of the theology of the Old Covenant as the cult of the Law. If in the sabbath the Hebrew honours the Creator of the universe and His perfect Law, he knows too that within this world created by God hostile forces are rebelling against Him, that this world is spoiled by sin. The Law has been broken, man is sick, life is poisoned by sin. The time which is included in the weekly cycle is not only the time of a blessed and God-pleasing life, but also the time of a struggle between light and darkness, between God and all that has rebelled against Him. This is the time of the history of salvation which is founded in an eschatological. Realization– the Day of the Messiah. And again, no matter what may have been the original content and genesis of Hebrew Messianism and the apocalypticism connected with it, the important thing for us is that the time of the manifestation of Christianity coincided with the ultimate limit of intensity of these expectations, with their growth into a universal eschatological outlook. It was precisely in connection with or as a result of this eschatology that there arose the idea of the Lord's Day, the day of Messianic fulfilment, as the 'Eighth Day, 'overcoming' the week and leading outside of its boundaries.33 In the eschatological perspective of the struggle of God with 'the prince of this world' and the expectation of the new aeon, the week and its final unit– the sabbath– appear as signs of this fallen world, of the old aeon, of that which must be overcome with the advent of the Lord's Day. The Eighth Day is the day beyond the limits of the cycle outlined by the week and punctuated by the sabbath– this is the first day of the New Aeon, the figure of the time of the Messiah. 'And I have also established the eighth day,' we read in the book of Enoch, a characteristic example of late Hebrew apocalypticism, 'that the eighth day be the first after my creation, that in the beginning of the eighth (millennium) there be time without reckoning, everlasting, without years, months, weeks, days or hours.' The concept of the eighth day is connected with another idea characteristic of Jewish apocalypticism : the cosmic week of seven thousand years. Each week is thus a figure of all time, and all time, that is the whole of 'this age,' is one week. So then the eighth day and the eighth millennium are the beginning of the New Aeon not to be reckoned in time. This eighth day (coming after and standing outside the week) is also, therefore, the first day, the beginning of the world which has been saved and restored.
Protopresbyter Alexander Schmemann
The Original Structure of Christian Worship
Chapter Two of Introduction to Liturgical Theology,
"The Problem of the Origin of the Ordo".
(St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, Crestwood, NY; 2d ed. 1975) pp. 40-71.
www.jbburnett.com/auctor/schmemann/schmemann_intro-2-origordo.pdf | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/24/2003 4:38 PM (GMT -6) | | | A DIACHRONIC UNDERSTANDING OF TIME -- SUCH AS THE EUCHARIST PRESENTS -- SEES THE WHOLE OF THE ISSUE OF TIME (RATHER THAN GETTING BOGGED DOWN NOMINALISTICALLY WITH JUST THE WORLD TRAPPED BY SIN). | | Back to Top | | |
|
Ochuk
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 102
| Posted 9/25/2003 8:02 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/25/2003 12:04 PM (GMT -6) | | Ochuk : POW, that all went over my head. Please explain.
PoW : (The whole thing was pages long. I DID hugely reduce what you have before you from the context--and tried to provide as much internal context as was possible. Again, YOU have to read and do the work.)
- The time which is included in the weekly cycle is
not only the time of a blessed and God-pleasing life,
- The time which is included in the weekly cycle is ... but also the time of a struggle between light and darkness, between God and all that has rebelled against Him.[/*]
- The Seventh Day, the day of complete rest, is a commemoration of the creation of the world, a participation in the rest of God after creation. This rest signifies and expresses the fullness, the completion, the 'goodness ' of the world, it is the eternal actualization of the word spoken about the world by God from the beginning: 'it is very good.'
- The sabbath sanctions the whole natural life of the world unfolding through the cycles of time, because it is the divinely instituted sign of the correspondence of the world to God's will and purpose.
- On this day the Law prescribes joy
- For the early Church the Lord's Day was not a substitute for the sabbath; it was not (so to speak) its Christian equivalent.
- The Eighth Day is the day beyond the limits of the cycle outlined by the week and punctuated by the sabbath– this is the first day of the New Aeon, the figure of the time of the Messiah.
- This eighth day (coming after and standing outside the week) is also, therefore, the first day, the beginning of the world which has been saved and restored.
SO TWO THINGS CAN BE AND MUST BE SAID, LEADING TO A THIRD:
- 1. THE LORD'S DAY IS BOTH "IN" AND "OUT" OF THE PRESENT EON OF TIME THAT SUFFERS UNDER SIN. ("NOW" AND "NOT YET" ARE COMMON THEOLOGICAL EXPRESSIONS.) EVERYTHING IN THE OLD ANTICIPATED AND POINTED TO THE NEW. AND THE NEW FULFILLS THE OLD.
- 2. THE EUCHARIST IS PARTICIPATION *BY THE SPIRIT* (PART OF THE EUCHARISTIC PRAYER IS THE EPICLESIS.) IN CHIRST'S REDEMPTION. WHILE WE ARE STILL IN THIS LIFE, IN CHRIST WE ARE BORN AGAIN -- PARTICIPATING IN HIS LIFE WHO IS THE 'TRUE VINE.' COMMUNION IS AN ACTION IN THIS EON THAT IS A PARTICIPATION IN THE NEW EON.
[*]3. SO, COMMUNION IS A "DIACHRONIC" ACT.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/25/2003 12:14 PM (GMT -6) | | Ochuk, if THAT did'nt catch on for you, then you can always go read the original long version (save it and read at your lesure) at www.jbburnett.com/auctor/schmemann/schmemann_intro-2-origordo.pdf
quote:
Protopresbyter Alexander Schmemann
The Original Structure of Christian Worship
Chapter Two of Introduction to Liturgical Theology,
"The Problem of the Origin of the Ordo".
(St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, Crestwood, NY; 2d ed. 1975) pp. 40-71.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
johnmd
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 154
| Posted 9/25/2003 1:09 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Ochuk
I'm sure this topic has been talked about before, but I'd like to know how exactly does God relate to time. Is he "temporal" as some crtics (like Geisler) of the OV say, or is he somehow "above time" but yet is in it?
What about this thought:
Scripture indicates God experiences a "before," "during," and "after" when relating to man. Whether or not this sequential experience of "time" as revealed in scripture relates to our concept of time (e.g., time=distance/velocity) I do not know. I do not believe we have enough information in scripture to fully correlate God's "experience" with our perception of the time-space continuem (e.g., Stephen Hawkings, Einstein, etc.).
I just simply believe that scripture reveals that God has sequential experience. I find myself at a total loss trying to relate to God as if He doesn't relate to me sequentially.
For example, Revelation 3:
"Behold I stand at the door and knock. If any man hear my voice and open the door I WILL COME IN (after he opens the door)... vs. I am already in and you just don't know it vs. I am "in" and outside knocking at the same time.
This text indicates that God is OUT and wants to come IN. If He is above time and knows He is IN (for all eternity) the IF and I WILL becomes nonsensical. He cannot BE IN and tell you He will COME IN at the same time.
At best philosophical arguments that God does not relate sequentially are conterintuitive. When reading the critics of OT I get the same sensation I had when reading Hawkings Brief History.. or Universe in a ...My mind gets tied in a knot since I cannot grant his assumption that the universe is finite without boundary. Likewise, I have difficulty (because I do not see it in scripture nor in my intuition) granting the assumption that God experiences ALL things simultaneously yet reveals to me that he is experiencing and relating to me sequentially.
I hope I have not muddied the water too much
John
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/25/2003 1:48 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Ochuk
Ok, after reading all of that am I supposed to say that God experiences time is one "timeless moment"-- past, present, and future-- or do I adopt the temporal view of time that God, of course, created, but experiences sequencially?
1. Throw out everything that has been said by open-theists AND classical-theists about "God and Time."
The matter that needs attention is "Time and Man."
It is an entirely false delema to think that both God being immutable AND God being personal allows only one of them. God IS immutable, AND God is personal. (That's the view of the Eastern Church. The Western Church decided that God's essence dictated his actions.)
2. Think on Christ Jesus. God "became man" holding to Himself our humanity. He healed our humanity without it being annihilated in the process--because we were made in the image and after the likeness of God. But that was an ASSYMETRICAL UNION. Humanity got healed in the life, death and resurrection of Christ. But Christ's deity was unchanged in the process.
Likewise, God made, acts in, and knows time. But God is not changed by or limited by time. Actually, Christ's work was to heal the WHOLE cosmos--including time, which suffered corruption and became part of the curse...leading towards death, instead of continual growth as Adam and Eve would have experienced.
The Romans 11:33-36 Doxology says:
Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom
and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!
"Who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?"
"Who has ever given to God,
that God should repay him?"
For from him and through him and to him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen.
God is Creator of all. Yet God is closer to you than you are to your own heart.
That is the measure of the issue.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/25/2003 1:52 PM (GMT -6) | | God, who is unchanging, can draw sequential acts and changing people to Himself, redeeming them and leading them into continuing growth in fellowship in participation in the divine life of the Trinity, in Christ, by the grace of the Holy Spirit by the will of the Father.
To God be glory forever. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 9/25/2003 5:13 PM (GMT -6) | | Ochuk: Ok, after reading all of that am I supposed to say that God experiences time is one "timeless moment"-- past, present, and future-- or do I adopt the temporal view of time that God, of course, created, but experiences sequencially?
Tom: The temporal view. God is temporal. Immutability isn't a helpful idea really unless it's qualified. There's more than one version. I also have no problem with God's being immutable and personal but that's because I don't see that being immutable entails timelessness (you can be immutable while experiencing time; depends on what's immutable about you). God is immutable in his character and holiness. That needs to be immutable. It's "absolute immutability" in the classical sense that you want to bury with a shovel. Is God immutable in his "essence"? I'm not sure I even understand what that means. But I don't think it requires timelessness. To insist God must be absolutley immutable in his essence may be motivated more by assumptions about the notion of perfection. Certainly, it's contradictory to assert that God is immutable or timeless with respect to the manner in which he is personal with us, but if God has some timeless deal going on in his essence, outside his knowing and relating to creation, that's his business. I don't think this is the case, but I don't think we can be dogmatic either way.
Of course, I also don't assume, as POW seems to, that temporal being is a "limit." I see it as a freedom and enablement. So I don't need timelessness to protect God from whatever it is that's supposedly bad about temporal being.
Here's the thing Ochuk. Seems to me that people usually want to embrace the belief that God is timeless for two reasons: 1) To avoid the imperfections that temporal existence is believed to entail, and/or 2) to explain how it is that God knows and relates to our temporal world. Because God is timeless, God timelessly knows all our past, present, and future. Timeless knowledge thus enables God to act providentially in the world.
On #1 I'm not persuaded by any of the arguments that temporal being is a less perfect mode of being than timeless being. In fact, quite the opposite. On #2, well, there's no knowing and relating to a temporal world timelessly.
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 9/25/2003 5:42 PM (GMT -6) | | | Tom: thank you for cutting it to the quick. BTW, I agree. I don't see God being temporal as a "bad" thing. | | Back to Top | | |
| 31 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:24 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 |
|
|