Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Oh, no, Grac. Not at all. Distance is a poor measure for time in any true sense. John observed the future, by the way. So speak for yourself when you say 'we' can only observe the past.
When you are dead and gone, how would we apply I am to you? You see, actually, it is not all in your personal head, or other peoples.
But what about evolutionists that think the universe is so old because its diameter is so large?
LOL. So it's answer a question with a question, is it. Sorry, but you have to go first: To reiterate: Is there any reason to believe it flows if there is nothing that indicates it exists?Wiccan_Child said:
And as I pointed out by my example, it's not a good one.
Your definition of "state" and mine are obviously very different. Mine simply indicated change, like moving from point A to point B.dad said:
Only if you equivocate. 'Time flows' is a literary technique to convey the idea of progression, it doesn't refer to the literal flowing of a river (which is indeed a change, since water molecules are changing position over time).
Yep. I've never understood why it's frowned upon
My answer is the same as the answer to the question I posed to you in kind.
Any analogy can be overextended into absurdity. That doesn't invalidate the original analogy, since, by definition, it's an analogy; it's not meant to be taken to its logical conclusion, since its inherently an oversimplification.
Not a claim as much as how it appears to me. I'm open to any argument to the contrary. In fact, I welcome it.Wiccan_Child said:
of course not.
That would be a claim, wouldn't it? "It appears to me that, without any means to measure time flowing, time ceases to flow"
The only counter-argument is simply "Unsubstantiated assertion". What reason do you have for concluding the above?
Which means what, exactly? Time continues, but it's perpetual daylight? Or time itself ceases, meaning nothing - absolutely nothing - happens?
I'm not sure -- the technical term we use for this is called eternity future.
Again -- I'm not sure.
I don't think 'absolutely nothing' happens.
Given the verses, I'd say it means that it's perpetual daylight, rather than time literally coming to a halt. So travel time would be the same. But since we're talking about an omnipotent being doing away with day and night, all bets are off. It reminds me of the last Narnia book, where [spoilers]they go to that sublime new golden yummy Narnia[/spoilers]. But then, it turns out that the Narnia books are based on Christian lore, so, go figure.
Not in the common understanding of word.
Why it appears to me to be the case? Because change is the only characteristic by which we identify time, and failing any other evidence to suggest it has a nature apart from change, as it stands, to me it's the most reasonable assessment, and therefore how it appears. Give me additional info on its character and I may well change my assessment, and consequently, how it appears.
And is "It appears to me that, without any means to measure time flowing, time ceases to flow" not a statement as something as fact, an assertion of truth?Not in the common understanding of word.claim (klm)
n.
A statement of something as a fact; an assertion of truth.
I could cite general relativity and its consequences for causality, simultaneity, etc, but I'll wait to see what you say to the above. You seem to be avidly avoiding saying whether you are, or are not, asserting that "without any means to measure time flowing, time ceases to flow". If you're not, I'll take it as idle speculation and leave it at that. If you are, well, it'll lead to an atheist-v-agnostic temporal brawl! Groovy.
Do appearance qualify as truths? Not in my book.
Sorry, but English is my only language, and this is getting a bit tiresome to say nothing of unproductive, so unless you have something to ADD to the topic.
As you said, there's nothing to suggest either way. So, yes, I'd say that would.
I've said my piece. If you want to clarify your position, we can go from there.Sorry, but English is my only language, and this is getting a bit tiresome to say nothing of unproductive, so unless you have something to ADD to the topic.
