God and Time

[Moral Orel]

God created time and God has no duration, he is eternal. He also has no lack of duration. The word doesn't apply to him in any way. Saying that God has duration is like saying that a llama has the number 8. Similarly, God created the color red, but he is not himself red.

You're going to have to explain how these things logically work if time isn't in existence.
Can God have a train of thought? Can God make an ordered plan? I don't think Aquinas thought about all the ramifications of there not being time when he posited his theories. He also said God is simple. If God was simple, we would understand him or things that he does.

 

[Moral Orel]

That doesn't mean that there are 3 things sitting in front of the computer: you, your intelligence, and your life.

I never said anything of the sort. Things can be combined to create something new, and things can be separated and thought of distinctly. I also don't call my car 1000 things, I just call it 1 car, but I understand that there are screws that can exist without my car, and my car can't exist without those screws.

 

[zippy2006]

You're going to have to explain how these things logically work if time isn't in existence.
Can God have a train of thought?

No, God's thought is not discursive. Like angels, God is intelligent rather than rational.

Can God make an ordered plan?

God has a plan. He did not need to make it up, take time, put it together, think over it, etc.

I don't think Aquinas thought about all the ramifications of there not being time when he posited his theories.

If you read him on the topic, it's clear that he did think through such things.

He also said God is simple. If God was simple, we would understand him or things that he does.

Anyone who reads Aquinas knows that when he says God is simple, he isn't saying that God is simple-minded, or easy to understand. Indeed, it is just the opposite.

Here is a taste of what Aquinas means by divine simplicity:

The absolute simplicity of God may be shown in many ways.

First, from the previous articles of this question. For there is neither composition of quantitative parts in God, since He is not a body; nor composition of matter and form; nor does His nature differ from His "suppositum"; nor His essence from His existence; neither is there in Him composition of genus and difference, nor of subject and accident. Therefore, it is clear that God is nowise composite, but is altogether simple...

 

[zippy2006]

I never said anything of the sort. Things can be combined to create something new, and things can be separated and thought of distinctly. I also don't call my car 1000 things, I just call it 1 car, but I understand that there are screws that can exist without my car, and my car can't exist without those screws.

Some things can be separated, and some things can only be thought of distinctly. Two car parts can be separated. The shape of an object and the matter from which it is made cannot be separated, but they can be thought of distinctly.

Do you think that your life and your intelligence are things that can exist without you? Do you think you are something that can exist without your life or your intelligence?

 

[Moral Orel]

Do you think that your life and your intelligence are things that can exist without you? Do you think you are something that can exist without your life or your intelligence?

I think that life can exist without intelligence and that intelligence can exist without life. I do not think that I would be me if I lacked one of the things that makes me who am I though, that would be illogical.

 

[Moral Orel]

God has a plan. He did not need to make it up, take time, put it together, think over it, etc

You're misunderstanding the "ordered" part of my question. It isn't about how God makes the plan, it's about how that plan is ordered. Without the existence of time, you can't comprehend a plan that says, "first this, second this, third this...".

 

[Moral Orel]

No, God's thought is not discursive. Like angels, God is intelligent rather than rational.

Is there a different word you could use here? Because something is either rational or irrational. Is God irrational? I know there is the idea that he seems irrational to our tiny brains, but he is still rational, right?

 

[zippy2006]

I think that life can exist without intelligence...

Yes, plants and animals.

...and that intelligence can exist without life.

...and angels.

I do not think that I would be me if I lacked one of the things that makes me who am I though, that would be illogical.

Yes, I agree. In fact I asked about your intelligence and your life, not intelligence and life in general. They are part and parcel of what you are.

You're misunderstanding the "ordered" part of my question. It isn't about how God makes the plan, it's about how that plan is ordered. Without the existence of time, you can't comprehend a plan that says, "first this, second this, third this...".

Ah, okay. Your last sentence is incorrect. If you replace "existence" with "understanding" then it would be true. God has always understood what time is, regardless of its existence.

Is there a different word you could use here? Because something is either rational or irrational. Is God irrational? I know there is the idea that he seems irrational to our tiny brains, but he is still rational, right?

Rational beings reason, intellectual beings know. All rational beings are intellectual, but not all intellectual beings are rational. God does not need to reason from premises to conclusions like humans do. He knows every thing with a kind of immediacy by virtue of being its creator.

 

[SuperCloud]

I've been thinking about what it means for God to create time itself, and it seems to mean strange things, so I thought I would share my thoughts and see what other people think.

First, if time doesn't exist, then time can't pass. This seems self evident, but it is important to think about.

Second, without the passage of time words like "before" and "after" are nonsense.

So from this it seems that anything that happens while time doesn't exist must happen simultaneously. Now given the concept of God, I don't think this is anything that is too hard for him. Of course he can do an infinite number of things and think an infinite number of thoughts all simultaneously, so don't think this is supposed to be a disproof of his existence.

So I'll put it into argument form given these premises.

1. Time doesn't pass until time exists
2. We measure age based on the amount of time that has passed.
3. No time passed until God created time.
4. God's age is equal to the amount of time that has passed since time was created.

So wether you believe the universe is 13.7 billion years old, or you believe that the universe is 6000 years old, we all pretty much agree that time began to exist at the onset of creation. I believe the theory of general relativity and the big bang theory state this, and that is why it is so hard (impossible?) to see what is beyond that threshold.

But it seems that without time, "eternity" is a nonsense word just like "before" and "after". Eternity needs to extend infinitely backwards in time in order for it to make sense (and infinitely forwards). So to say that God is eternal, but to say that time is not, seems like nonsense to me.

So what explanation for this could there be? Thoughts?

I'm terrible at math, so, I know I'm going to get myself in trouble with the mathematicians and those on here far better and more knowledgeable about man myself.

But I always found the concept and number 0 in relation and contrast to the concept of infinity in mathematics as interesting. Because they exist simultaneously.

 

[Moral Orel]

Rational beings reason, intellectual beings know. All rational beings are intellectual, but not all intellectual beings are rational. God does not need to reason from premises to conclusions like humans do. He knows every thing with a kind of immediacy by virtue of being its creator.

But rational doesn't just mean that you reason. It also means that you have reason. Does God act rationally?

 

[SuperCloud]

How is there something before time? If time started at 12pm, 4000bc, how do you say, "one minute before that"? You can't count backwards in time if time doesn't exist.

A long time ago I read a book written by some Anglican dude into music. The book was about theological concepts of time but trying to understand it through music.

I forget 99.9% of the content in the book but as I do recall he said that what we often term "time" is more appropriately "temporality." He explain why but I forget.

 

[Moral Orel]

Yes, I agree. In fact I asked about your intelligence and your life, not intelligence and life in general. They are part and parcel of what you are.

So then we agree that there are parts to a whole, and even God can be separated into parts in terms of concepts, obviously not physically, but we are simply disagreeing on what things must be a part of God and what must not.

 

[juvenissun]

If God created time then it had a beginning. My definition of eternal is no beginning or end.
I also believe space and time are a creation.
In my simple understanding the Word was God's first expression/manifestation in creation as we understand it.
I believe the Word is Eternal because it is God and we can know Him as the Son.

God is infinite. Infinite can create things that are infinite.
So, time can be infinite, in all dimensions.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Not at all. Have you read his book or essays?

I haven't read his books, but I'm familiar with the material through other presentations (debates) and from interacting with apologists.

 

[elopez]

So everything happened at the same time until after time existed in order for it to pass.

Thay may be a nice thought for you yet it is pure speculation. I'm not so keen on subscribing a thought order for God for creating.

Does God really not change at all? Sure, he never stops being omnipotent, omniscient, immortal, omnibenevolent, or even just existing. So broad strokes, God doesn't change.

God is immutable. All those attributes you listed, and that He doesn't stop being all powrful, or forget any knowledge, or cease to be eternal. In that sense God doesn't change.

But what about after he does some action? At one point God was God who hadn't created anything, and then he created everything. Now he is God who has created everything. Is that no change at all? It is a change in how he can be described. So doesn't that mean that he changed?

Sure there is change. And it is in reference to creating. That again just reiterates the point I was trying to make earlier, that God being timeless is not an immutable property. I believe a timeless being can change and cease to be timeless.

 

[zippy2006]

But rational doesn't just mean that you reason. It also means that you have reason. Does God act rationally?

What does it mean to "have reason"? Is it anything other than having intellect, or being capable of knowing? You could probably say that God acts rationally, but not that he reasons (discursively).

So then we agree that there are parts to a whole, and even God can be separated into parts in terms of concepts, obviously not physically, but we are simply disagreeing on what things must be a part of God and what must not.

Yet merely conceptual distinctions do not necessarily have anything to do with the relation of parts to the whole. Abstracted concepts or aspects of some reality do not add up as parts that constitute a whole. Other than that, I don't know if we are disagreeing at all.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I believe a timeless being can change and cease to be timeless.

So why posit a personal creator god at all then? If that is correct, then timeless matter can also cease to be timeless and become spatiotemporal.

 

[Moral Orel]

What does it mean to "have reason"? Is it anything other than having intellect, or being capable of knowing? You could probably say that God acts rationally, but not that he reasons (discursively).

I think we're just splitting hairs on the reason issue. God doesn't have to sit around and ponder, or reason as a verb, but his choices are based on reasoning none the less. It may just be that it comes so naturally and perfectly that it is instantaneous and immediate and intertwined with the action that it seems as if reason doesn't come into play, but if the actions have reason, then the actor is rational.

Yet merely conceptual distinctions do not necessarily have anything to do with the relation of parts to the whole. Abstracted concepts or aspects of some reality do not add up as parts that constitute a whole. Other than that, I don't know if we are disagreeing at all.

We have to conceptualize God's intelligence, benevolence, omnipotence, etc. because we can't understand them in terms that we have. But that isn't to say they can't exist separately from each other. That it is to say that it is possible for God's attributes to be separated conceptually without understanding exactly what they are and how they work.

For instance, we can imagine that there is a God that has all the predetermined attributes we have described, but we can also imagine a God that has all those attributes except that instead of being ultimately good, he is ultimately evil. There is nothing about intelligence and power and knowledge that forces someone to be good, so each facet of God can be imagined to be separated and put together in some other way.

Blasphemy, I know, but this is the philosophy forum, don't forget, so I'm not attacking some specific god, I'm merely postulating about the theory of God.

 

[Moral Orel]

Thay may be a nice thought for you yet it is pure speculation. I'm not so keen on subscribing a thought order for God for creating.

Doesn't matter if it's thoughts, that was just an illustration. It could just as well be actions or anything else. Or nothing else. Point is, that no time passed no matter what was going on.

 

[zippy2006]

I think we're just splitting hairs on the reason issue. God doesn't have to sit around and ponder, or reason as a verb, but his choices are based on reasoning none the less. It may just be that it comes so naturally and perfectly that it is instantaneous and immediate and intertwined with the action that it seems as if reason doesn't come into play, but if the actions have reason, then the actor is rational.

Well, his choices aren't based on reasoning, they are based on reasons. But, good enough.

We have to conceptualize God's intelligence, benevolence, omnipotence, etc. because we can't understand them in terms that we have. But that isn't to say they can't exist separately from each other. That it is to say that it is possible for God's attributes to be separated conceptually without understanding exactly what they are and how they work.

For instance, we can imagine that there is a God that has all the predetermined attributes we have described, but we can also imagine a God that has all those attributes except that instead of being ultimately good, he is ultimately evil. There is nothing about intelligence and power and knowledge that forces someone to be good, so each facet of God can be imagined to be separated and put together in some other way.

Blasphemy, I know, but this is the philosophy forum, don't forget, so I'm not attacking some specific god, I'm merely postulating about the theory of God.

I mostly disagree with all of that on philosophical grounds, but I don't have time to get into a long discussion about divine simplicity and and the transcendentals. Augustine and Aquinas write well on such topics. You could look at Aquinas' Summas and Augustine's works against the Manichaens.