Summit Clock Experiment 2.0: Time is Absolute

[gcthomas]

So Jesus lived life on Earth somehow outside of time? How did that make Him different from other people?

Welcome back. Have you had a chance to look up what you mean by the term time yet?

If it not what is experienced by clocks and other physical processes, then what is it?

 

[Lon]

This is not "out of hand." I dismiss it because there is, after all this time, no definitive empirical evidence to support it.


Yeah, I don't see any explanation on that page.


Are you still making the same tired argument that if time was not created by God then it must necessarily control Him?

That IS the Open Theism premise, not mine. I completely disagree that time controls Him or 'binds' Him in any way shape of fashion. It is impossible.

Your brain must be quite limited as it still doesn't grasp the idea that time exists as a result of God existing, and therefore it is a response to that existence and therefore the control flows from God, in a passive manner.

We've had this who's brain is limited conversation already. You say it's me, I say and post proofs that its you. I'm the only one in this conversation saying that God isn't bound by your limited time cognitions, though.

He has to be omni what?

Yes (and read my sig including the verses)

And what is "everything"? Is it not all that exists to be known?

Sadly, you don't know, that you don't know all there is to be known and then are trying to limit and spell-out God's parameters. Go ahead and remember Boyd and Sanders saying God makes mistakes. It'll help you get to the end of this conversation a lot quicker. Bottom line: You don't get to tell me or God what His limitations are. Time is a huge limitation, LH. The only reason you are against the ideas of God's transcendences, is because of what damage it might do to Open Theology. That's sad, frankly. You are more concerned about what you value in a theology than you are about what God might lose for your convenience. That really is the problem with the OV in a nutshell. Too much concern about man and his rights, not enough care and concern for God and His.

So then the question is regarding what exists to be known, not whether God can know that which does. We do not argue that God cannot know things that exist as objects of knowledge, we argue that there are things that don't exist and thus cannot be known.

Doesn't really matter. That's simply an Open View connundrum I don't have or share, nor does it have a lot to do with a time discussion imho.

Can God contain Himself?

That is a 'limiting' question. What I mean is, it isn't a great question. It is like asking if a jar can contain itself. It isn't much of a question and doesn't do a lot for anyone talking about jars. In this case, it doesn't do much for us talking about God without limits/ limitless. The OV has God making mistakes and having limitations. None of the rest of us do. We believe in and assert the Omni's of God as being Biblical (not Greek). They are logical as well as biblical, any limitation upon God by man's finite mind means that God cannot be more than 'we think or ask' (see sig Ephesians 3:20-21).

When you can actually show your theology on this subject in Scripture, instead of being a hypocrite, then someone might take you seriously.

Hypocrisy? "Lon's being mean to my ideas and poor theology" is hypocrisy? No, rather I gave scripture ideas in my discussion. I said 'the scriptures says about Him,' remember?

You are the one kowtowing to a doctrine that makes you feel warm and fuzzy, because the idea the future isn't settled is unsettling to you. You are a coward, afraid of tomorrow if God hasn't already planned it all out.

Does it make me feel warm and fuzzy that God is God and I don't get to dictate what His attributes are but that He gets to dictate them to me, being God and all? Yep. Does it conversely make you feel warm and fuzzy that people get to make it up as they go along so that scripture fits their expectations rather than their expectations being molded by scripture?

I don't have to be afraid of tomorrow because I know God is powerful enough to move without having to know exactly how every little thing will play out. He has promised to do His will in spite of anything else, which means He doesn't have to see the future, let alone control every aspect, to know He will accomplish what He wills, as He is the Alpha and Omega.

Difference? Powerful 'enough' verses 'all - powerful.' An omnicompetent God isn't able to 'do exceedingly far and above' (see sig scripture) all that I think or imagine, or frankly, not even remotely close to an incredibly limited and quite explanatory version from Open Theism which is nowhere near exceeding or above my imagination. It is frankly, a let-down that barely elevates God where He rightly belongs. I honestly don't know why that kind of view could bring comfort to anybody. My God is exceedingly beyond all I can hope/think/or imagine. He says so. I can imagine and capture the open view version in my finite limited brain, that's what scares me about it. God becomes too humanistic. I am created in His image, not He in mine. I'm sorry to explain it in these stark terms, but this is my overall hang-up with Sanders and Boyd and their rendition of God who makes mistakes 'to be relational to man.' To me that's no good news at all. It brings me not an ounce of anything that Christians need, imo.

 

[Lon]

Worth repeating:

Actually, we can. Your 'now' is actually full of past and future events.
For instance, you are able to see, because the light you are seeing by came from the sun 8 minutes prior. If something suddenly blocked the sun (an eclipse), you'd know about it 8 minutes after it happened and experience that past event in your now. Similarly, because we are deliberate beings, our immediate future is somewhat set already. We don't live in a 'now' that isn't actually a collision of past and future events colliding into each other. "Now" is simply a perception somewhere between past and future that overlaps in many ways.

Even 'our' concept of time is beyond clocks. "Now" isn't merely the hour,minute, and second, and as such the clock is just a random invention as well as our concept about it. We all experience and live partially in the past (light that came from the sun, just NOW that we are seeing by, happened 8 minutes ago on the sun), and we all partially live in the future and so 1) God certainly is not bound and 2) He gives us strong verses in Scripture that prove the point. The OV has this one completely wrong. God is beyond time/time is a physical reality/perception so is created by God.

 

[Stripe]

Worth repeating:Even 'our' concept of time is beyond clocks. "Now" isn't merely the hour,minute, and second, and as such the clock is just a random invention as well as our concept about it. We all experience and live partially in the past (light that came from the sun, just NOW that we are seeing by, happened 8 minutes ago on the sun), and we all partially live in the future and so 1) God certainly is not bound and 2) He gives us strong verses in Scripture that prove the point. The OV has this one completely wrong. God is beyond time/time is a physical reality/perception so is created by God.

That is some very flimsy reasoning.

 

[Lon]

That is some very flimsy reasoning.

Yes, if you are dedicated to Open Theism. Otherwise, it is there to explain how past and future definitely and unequivocally collide and affect each other. The problem with time is that is is ONLY meaningful to physical finite beings. It always must start with a 'now' point and progress forward. God has no 'now' point. He 'always' existed. The language/concept of clocks is all-too human and physically restricting.

Mull it over. There is an "ah ha" moment to be had here and I think it's short enough so that none need get lost: Time is a bound (finite) concept/measurement.

 

[Stripe]

Yes, if you are dedicated to Open Theism. Otherwise, it is there to explain how past and future definitely and unequivocally collide and affect each other. The problem with time is that is is ONLY meaningful to physical finite beings. It always must start with a 'now' point and progress forward. God has no 'now' point. He 'always' existed. The language/concept of clocks is all-too human and physically restricting. Mull it over. There is an "ah ha" moment to be had here and I think it's short enough so that none need get lost: Time is a bound (finite) concept/measurement.

Even if God is "outside" of time, the concept has no meaning for people and He presents Himself to us within a rational, time-based relationship.

Your invitation to "mull it over" has been accepted. I mulled this over coming from a position of believing as you believe and found there to be no reason to stick to that way of thinking and no barrier to the notion that God can be not "outside" of time.

The term has no rational use.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

I was wondering when you are going to show us something that backs up your opposition to Nick's assertion that gravity affects clocks.

Gravity does affect clocks, but not just the mechanical functioning of them. Is time the sum of all other objects?

 

[gcthomas]

Gravity does affect clocks, but not just the mechanical functioning of them. Is time the sum of all other objects?

I've asked Stripe to define what he means by the term 'time' since he obviously doesn't think that it is what is measured by clocks. Perhaps he imagines some undetectable absolute time, of the sort that has been shown to be unnecessary by the evidence.

 

[Stripe]

Gravity does affect clocks, but not just the mechanical functioning of them.

:dizzy:

What does it affect? Their emotions?

Is time the sum of all other objects?

What? :AMR:

Time is the distance between events.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

Time is the distance between events.

And if that distance increases has time slowed?

 

[Stripe]

And if that distance increases has time slowed?

The distance between two events cannot change.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

The distances cannot change.

The temporal distance between, for example, a drummer's drum beats is always equal? Every drum strike is equally spaced?

 

[gcthomas]

The temporal distance between, for example, a drummer's drum beats is always equal? Every drum strike is equally spaced?

Leave it out, DS, Stripe can't explain what time is or how it is measured, so how do you expect him to be able to answer other basic questions on the matter?

How is time measured, Stripe? Come on, it can't be that difficult for you.

 

[Stripe]

The temporal distance between, for example, a drummer's drum beats is always equal? Every drum strike is equally spaced?

What do you think?

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

What do you think?

I know what I think. I'm asking what you think. Answer the question.

 

[Stripe]

You are too stupid to talk to any more. :wave2:

 

[gcthomas]

So you can't define time or explain how it is measured or why absolute time makes any sense at all.

Figures.

:chuckle:

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

You are too stupid to talk to any more. :wave2:

I know what your answer is stripe. I'm asking you to say it not because I don't know what it is, but because I am going to use your answer to make a particular point.

Perhaps you already see what that particular point is, perhaps you don't. If I was a betting man, I'd wager that you don't.

 

[TimLutz]

Time is relative and affected by gravity. Exampled by the two atomic clocks time difference. Next check out the theory that speed of light is slowing down.

Posted from the TOL App!

 

[Stripe]

Time is relative and affected by gravity. Exampled by the two atomic clocks time difference.

Time is not relative and affected by gravity. Clocks are. Time is the distance between events. It is not a physical entity that can be manipulated. It is just an idea that can be expressed mathematically.

Your example of two atomic clocks showing time differences is similar to two pendulum clocks in different gravity fields showing different rates.

Next check out the theory that speed of light is slowing down.

How would you measure this?