Where did God come from?

[This Charming Manc]

There are two major theories about time: A and B theory. A theory relates to endless time (presentism), while B theory relates more to timelessness (eternalism). They are mutually exclusive views with only one being right. I think it is more than theoretical or academic, but has practical implications to God and creation.

Just because God experiences duration rather than simultaneity does not mean He is limited by time like we are. He is not bound by time, but it is an aspect of His personal experience.

I am not sure how to answer your last question.

I most happy to cede that God experiences and interacts with time, but I struggle with the conepts that God is bound within the linear timeframe as we are.

The concept we call Time to me is part of the created universe, and as such God is pre eminent to it in everyway.

I may be misunderstanding you, but the caution I have with the stand you are taking is its tendencey to see time as a law that affects God and something he is subject too.

 

[godrulz]

i try to understand god, but it's too big of a thing for me.

This is why we need revelation in His Word, the Bible. We can know many things about His attributes and character, even if only partial knowledge (but sufficient to have relationship with Him).

 

[godrulz]

does GOD think, act, feel in a timeless simultaneity?

It is incoherent for a personal being to not think, act, feel in sequence. God can have new thoughts and experiences (He would not if it was a timeless, eternal now simultaneity). Eternal now is a philosophical construct that is not biblical nor coherent. What God thought and did in Genesis was before the things experienced in the incarnation. This is the way it is, not an illusion because God cannot communicate eternal now.

God said creation was very good. After the Fall, He was grieved. This change would not be genuine if it was a simultaneity. There is chronology. God has a history.

 

[Marcus Red]

Hi Mac_guy,

How did God come to be "In the beginning"?

Excellent question! This is the question that disposes of the God hypothesis in one easy step.

If you wish to use God to explain why the Universe exists you are then left with an even more difficult question. Having posited a supernatural being as the explanation for the Universe and all its denizens, which we actually can see, feel, taste, smell and think about ... we must then explain why an even more wondrous thing exists for which there is no evidence whatsoever. :hammer:

Regards,

Marcus

 

[TomO]

Here is physics' problem when it comes to time: no evidence, whatsoever, that time is a thing/dimension. None. At least evolution has evidence. And before you bite my head off, evidence is not always proof. So, no, there is no proof for evolution.

Within the bounds of Creation time is a measurement of change and movement. If change and movement exist then time exists. lain:

God did not create time. Time is an attribute of existence. And since God has always existed there has always been time.

It is an attribute of existence within the Creation. In other words existence as you know it. This is a faulty premise to base a judgment on in regards to the existence of the ALMIGHTY. :think:

But if you want to continue to believe God created time, how about you tell us when He decided to create it...

In the Beginning.... lain::duh:

 

[IoverE]

You plan on waiting like George Carlin did? He expects you to confess him before men first. A little humility. You won't even get a drip for your tongue to quench the burn.

Ahhh it does the heart good to see the smile on little Nikki's face when he thinks about all the pain us heathens will be in. So much christian love.

 

[Lighthouse]

Within the bounds of Creation time is a measurement of change and movement. If change and movement exist then time exists. lain:

And change and movement existed with God.

It is an attribute of existence within the Creation. In other words existence as you know it. This is a faulty premise to base a judgment on in regards to the existence of the ALMIGHTY. :think:

No it isn't. If a sentience exists then it must experience.

In the Beginning.... lain::duh:

The beginning of what?

 

[TomO]

And change and movement existed with God.


No it isn't. If a sentience exists then it must experience.


The beginning of what?

Okay, I can already see how this is going to go.....I concede. lain:


.....but Lighthouse, deliberate obtuseness is no way to defend a point. :nono:

 

[Lighthouse]

Okay, I can already see how this is going to go.....I concede. lain:


.....but Lighthouse, deliberate obtuseness is no way to defend a point. :nono:

No, you don't.

I asked when God decided to create time. Your answer was, "In the beginning." I asked, "The beginning of what?" I expected your reply to be, "The beginning of time."

So, before I elaborate on this, is that your answer?

P.S.
God changed and God moved.

Unless you want to tell me that God never decided to create.

 

[koban]

So we get that "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."


How did God come to be "In the beginning"?

A stork brought Him and laid Him in a cabbage patch.

 

[TomO]

No, you don't.

I asked when God decided to create time. Your answer was, "In the beginning." I asked, "The beginning of what?" I expected your reply to be, "The beginning of time."

So, before I elaborate on this, is that your answer?
P.S.
God changed and God moved.

Unless you want to tell me that God never decided to create.

Sure

 

[Lighthouse]

Sure

So you believe that God decided to create time at the beginning of time.

Do you really not see the logical contradiction there?

 

[TomO]

So you believe that God decided to create time at the beginning of time.

Do you really not see the logical contradiction there?

....before I answer (and I will) I have a few questions for you:

First how would you define "time"?

 

[Lighthouse]

....before I answer (and I will) I have a few questions for you:

First how would you define "time"?

Duration.

 

[TomO]

Duration.

Duration which is experience linearly through a sucession of moments? :think:

....do you hold to Kants view of "time"?

 

[drbrumley]

So Tom, your saying before anything ever existed, anything at all, even before Genesis 1:1 where the earth was void and nothing was created at all, there was no time?

 

[TomO]

So Tom, your saying before anything ever existed, anything at all, even before Genesis 1:1 where the earth was void and nothing was created at all, there was no time?

:think: Basic Physics recognizes that without space and matter there is no time.

If Gen. 1:1, John 1:3, Col. 1:16, & Heb. 1:2 are to be believed then before HIS action there was no time....at least not in the way that we understand/comprehend it.

.....unless there was a pre-creation of some sort, in which case all bets are off.

 

[Egbert]

So we get that "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."


How did God come to be "In the beginning"?

The idea that God, or any entity considered "supernatural," requires an origin is flawed, because that assumption arises from experience in the natural world. The reason we tend to look for causes is because things in our everyday world are constantly changing. If something it is not existing among or subject to physical laws, then there is no scientific problem with it being eternal and unchanging, needing no further explanation.

 

[Lighthouse]

Duration which is experience linearly through a sucession of moments? :think:

Pretty much.

....do you hold to Kants view of "time"?

I don't know. What's his view?

 

[godrulz]

Duration which is experience linearly through a sucession of moments? :think:

....do you hold to Kants view of "time"?

The common sense view of time makes sense.