Difference between revisions of "Debate: Is it possible for God to be timeless?"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 9: Line 9:
 
I should point out that I have no evidence for this, but thinking of it that way helps me to organise my thoughts, such as they are.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 08:15, 23 October 2008 (EDT)
 
I should point out that I have no evidence for this, but thinking of it that way helps me to organise my thoughts, such as they are.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 08:15, 23 October 2008 (EDT)
  
I thought relativity stated that time is relative to the speed of movement in the spatial dimensions. -Barnes
+
I thought relativity stated that time is relative to the speed of movement in the spatial dimensions. In this way I dont think relativity addresses so much the existence of a continuum but how the rate of this continuum is relative to movement. -Barnes
  
 
== I don't know, and nor do you ==
 
== I don't know, and nor do you ==

Revision as of 13:27, October 24, 2008

I have heard people in the other debate topics assert that God is the only logically possible cause of the universe, but is it possible for God to be entirely seperate to, yet completely responsible for the universe?

To me, it seems not. I see time as a continuum and the medium through which causality can exist. If you take away time, you take away all means of causality and thus in this way you cannot have a God who lacks time and yet still causes physical events.


Yes

I used to think of time that way as well, but the theory of relativity (or some other related physics) appears to disagree: time is a dimension in which one can move, just like spatial ones. So if we believe that God can exist in all places, He could (must?) exist in all times as well.

I should point out that I have no evidence for this, but thinking of it that way helps me to organise my thoughts, such as they are.--CPalmer 08:15, 23 October 2008 (EDT)

I thought relativity stated that time is relative to the speed of movement in the spatial dimensions. In this way I dont think relativity addresses so much the existence of a continuum but how the rate of this continuum is relative to movement. -Barnes

I don't know, and nor do you

Perhaps God is just so far outside of human comprehension, trying to work this out is impossible. God is, and that's all that really matters. NewCrusader 08:50, 23 October 2008 (EDT)

Would you say that God is outside of logic too? The fact that you can assert that God exists means that you are conforming God to logic, since affirming his very existence means obeying the logical law of non-contradiction. In this way you cannot have movement in the first place without a medium through which you can move within; the rate of time that passes is what I thought relativity addresses. -Barnes