Well ......
Why is my statement a loaded assumption, but your above statement is not?
You start with the assumption that time did not exist with GOD before creation and continue that assumption to your conclusion.
That's what we are trying to determine by asking questions about it from both perspectives.
So I don't consider either of our statements as "loaded".
I think they help us explore thoughts on the matter.
If it was not necessary, then it was purposeless, aimless, meaningless, of no value.
Plus the fact that we have no indication in scripture that GOD ever did anything that was not in sequence.
So why would any theology student want to insist on adding it to a study of the GOD of scripture?
I mean, some (not saying you) are so adamant about it that they will call anyone a heretic for not believing it.
The theory of timelessness in theology started around the time of Ambrose and Augustine.
Augustine was a Platonist.
Augustine was so enthralled with Platonism that he once suggested that one could not sufficiently understand scripture but through the lens of Platonism, and did all he could to merge them.
He also commented that he did not believe hardly any of scripture until after he studied Platonism.
This is not news, it has been known of Augustine that he relied heavily on Platonism and incorporated it into his theology.
I like the topic.
I think it's interesting to talk about.
But if it cannot be verified with scripture, then it is little more than speculative philosophy talk.
Hi and in 2 Peter 3:8 say that a thousand years is like one day , so it seems that recognizes DAYS , YEARS and TIME !!
In Eph 2:7 , in the AGES / AION means time ?
dan p