There are other arguments for timeless eternity that Feinberg covers, we will not be investigating all of them as some are only slightly nuanced from others.
Nature of Time Necessitates a Timeless God
When we think of time we often have the image of a clock with three hands in our minds. We also think of it as a mere measurement that is merely a human construct. This is much more complex than what appears on the surface. The whole issue of time as a mere measurement created by humans is debated. Since modern relativity theory the whole notion of time as being something that humans have made up has been turned upside down on its head. I am not certain how many people, and for how long, have known that time is no mere measurement and is something real to be measured, but I believe that relativity has made more people think about time. At least in my case this is true. Ever since I heard about the theory of relativity my mind has been racing with curiosity and wonder. Have you ever thought about it? If the earth were a little bigger or spun on its axis a little slower would not time change? If your reaction is yes, then I think you are wrong. I would say that our measurement of time would be different. Why is this? Our measurement of time is not the same as time its self. The theory of relativity takes this very seriously and postulates that time is so real (can something be so real? Or very real? Oh well, lol) that time is relative to speed. I would be lying if I told you I completely understood this, but I can give you an illustration that both Einstein and Hawking use:
Let us suppose you were on a train with a friend, and as the train was traveling down the tracks you and your friend start throwing a ball from one end of the train car you occupy to the other. Let us say that the train is traveling at 50 miles per hour and you were throwing the ball at 10 miles per hour. To you and your friend the ball would appear to be traveling at 10 mph. Now let us say there is someone who is way better looking than Jason Sturkie standing outside of the train, standing still and watching the train go by. To this quite handsome fellow (me) the ball would appear to be traveling at 60 mph. Because time is relative to speed, mass, and distance and time is real, not just a measurement, then time is also relative. Therefore, even though it is not obvious to the three parties involved, time is relative because time is real and is relational to objects in the universe; as it is in this illustration.
Let us be clear that this is a contested notion of time. So, time as we know is related to the earth's relationship to the sun. It is difficult to think of a given moment as simultaneous across the universe given relativity theory. If this is the true nature of time then God can not be in time. God is not physical which is necessary for time given our defined understanding above. God is not contingent on anything, he transcends all spacial locations for he is omnipresent (all present). He does not have to hurry to one place to hear one prayer and be off in a dash to hear another. He does not go really fast in space like warp speed in Star Trek. He is present without limitation and without mass (since mass entails limits this is an obvious point). Those who hold that God is within time, or Temporalists as they are sometimes identified, feel that God is not limited by these physical realities. They feel he is in touch with each time frame without being rooted in these time frames. Temporalists say that to say that God is in time is not synonymous to stating that he is in these time frames, but rather that his life encompasses successive states. If God's life operates with in successive states then he a being within time, but not the same way physical objects are. This, in my opinion, affirms a dichotomy: there are two times; one which God experiences and one which is operating within the space-time continuum.
God does not need a personal succession to know all about time frames within the universe. He can know all at once events that occur in temporal sequences with out waiting for those sequences to pass for he decreed these events to happen. It seems to me that the Atemporalist is saying that the notion that because there are sequences that we experience then God must also experience sequences as well, just not our sequences; this is a very generalized conclusion based on the human experience of time. In other words the Atemporalist is accusing the Temporalist of inductive reasoning. Why should this be suspect? Deduction moves from the general to the specific, inductive moves from the specific to the general. Any inductive argument (like almost every Atheist argument) looks at specifics then makes general conclusions and tries to approve them as specific. An example would be that humans have 99 percent DNA in common with primates, therefore humans must have evolved from primates. The theist could respond with his own induction: humans share 99 percent DNA with primates, therefore God uses similar methods in making primates as he does humans. Which one is right? Who knows, the two methods are so inductive and general they are only being paraded as specificity! No wonder they both come to such radically different conclusions, we need a deduction to come to a specific conclusion (there are theistic arguments that can apply deductive reasoning, read miracles by C.S. Lewis or any Ravi Zacharias book). The Temporalist could be right, but their argument comes short of proving it. Another critique by the Atemporalist is that if God was temporal before creation, then what was the reference point for time? It could not be in the physical sense in which we witness in the universe, so just exactly what is the time God was experiencing? Possibly the trinity? That is a different topic of posts that we don't have time to go into. See you next time for part V.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Assuming that Jason Sturkie was throwing the ball on the train, and assuming that his anti-temporal good-looks were in play, the ball would have travelled so fast that it would have traversed all the way from the east to the west. This being the case, the person standing outside of the train would have simply exclaimed "That was faster than the time it would take for Ravi to obliterate Sam Harris in a debate on epistemological warrant and belief!"
One might say that the difference between the two were as fas AS the east is from the west, would you not agree?
Very good posting. I am perplexed by the mere thought of eternity. If eternity is so long, and our lives so short in comparison, then why do we waste time chasing after things that will only benefit us in the present age? Why don't we constantly focus on glorifying the One who is eternal, and store up treasures in eternity? I must side with Solomon on this one: It is all pointless. Life under the sun is a pursuit of the wind, an effort in futility.
Git'er Done -- I can see your Ecclesiastes study is yielding some fruit. I want to push you on something: Do you think Solomon is saying that everything under the sun is pointless? Or is it that chasing everything under the sun without "fearing God and keeping His commandments" what he is calling vanity? I think I know what your answer is, because we obviously have present age responsibilities and pursuits that we are called to accomplish like Being Husbands and Seminary and Preaching in the Nursing Home and Sharing the Gospel. So, my real question is: How can we live our lives in the present age, knowing that we only have a short time here to accomplish our responsibilities, and yet keep a focus on Christ and His Eternal Kingdom so as to keep ourselves from being anxious about anything? I find that to be the hardest tension to hold in my own life and the hardest tension to convey to other people. It seems almost counter-intuitive to suggest that we must take care to accomplish our responsibilities in the present, and yet not to worry about tomorrow, and yet be focused on a Day even farther in the future than tomorrow. The practical side of thinking about God and Eternity will help smooth out this tension. The Incarnate Son, being fully human, was temporal in exactly the same way we are -- and yet he never was anxious about tomorrow. With respect to His divinity, we could point out that He knew what tomorrow held and therefore did not need to be worried about it. But, that simply exposes our sinful anxiety. If God knows what tomorrow holds and has sovereignly decreed it from eternity, then we have no good reason to be anxious. It comes down to whether or not we trust the provision of our Father in Heaven, our High Priest Intercessor, and our Indwelling Sanctifier. Therefore, we can focus on God's glory and glorifying God in this present age. And by His grace, we can mortify the sin of anxiety along the way. Sorry for the long post guys. -- Jason
Don't apologize for long posts, I am thrilled with any posts, lol. I realize that this is a complex issue and to be honest I did not expect it to be this complex. I appreciate Git'er done for reminding us to think biblically about these type of issues. Exploring some of the deeper things of God does glorify him, but remembering our limitations is equally important. I also want to thank Jason for such an insightful post and not putting a picture of us together up which could refute a certain percentage of my rhetoric.
Jason: I do agree with your stance on Solomon's writings in Ecclesiastes. Everything "apart from God" (aka: under the sun) is pointless when the fear of God is not in the pursuer's heart. I will also take it one step further by asserting that if the glorification of God is not sought in a certain action, then that action is pointless. For example, an atheistic tree-hugger will live their life for the purpose of protecting the environment, but for what gain? The environment will soon perish, as will the environmentalist, so why does he live his life for something that will not last, or for something that he will only enjoy for the next fifty years or so? This is pointless! Why live your life for something that will die? Why even live life, if you are just going to die? However, if the same environmentalist is a Christian who is living his life for the glory of God, he will protect the environment for a reason that is NOT pointless; he will be protecting the environment as a steward of what God has given, and he knows that this has eternal repercussons. This Christian tree-hugger is NOT chasing the wind!
Post a Comment