God is timeless

[Esquilax]

God's eternal what use does an eternal being have for time.

GC

He still crafted time, though, and made design choices that, if time were made solely for mankind, he wouldn't need to make. Incidentally, do you have any biblical reference for your claim there?

[Angrboda]

I always thought it meant that God is not part of or bound by the causal chain unless He wants to be.

What causes God to want to be a part of the causal chain or not?

[Little Rik]

Ben Davis

Look at here Ben.
I say.............When you think that the life is finite...you reply........Which I do... and then you say.............I don't know how often I have to correct you on this... never mind, I'll go again. Atheism, being an absence of theism, has no attributes on which to have faith or dogma. You do understand that saying "You're as bad as us" is no defense at all?

Can't you see the hypocricy?
You say that in atheism there is no faith and dogma and then you say that one of your pillar of FAITH is the believe that life is finite.
Beside, you can't even bring evidence that life is finite.
Total disaster Ben.

But you've given me nothing with which to generate any understanding of any system. You haven't even described a system, just made a bunch of useless assertions.

There is no point in knowing things that at the moment go against your belief.
The day you will be open to what lie within then you will start digging up the real treasure.
First you got to set aside your dogmaS and blind faith.

---

Enrico - given you have demonstrated you don't even know what a dimension is, it's highly unlikely you can explain how something can be outside of one (if indeed this is what you mean by timeless, you haven't actualy gotten that far).
However you can try again by answering the question I've already asked: How can you test whether something is timeless?
Please please please no more metaphors. If I asked any sane person how to test something, e.g. the mass of a bag of sugar, their reply wouldn't be a metaphor.

Your watch tick the seconds and the hours according to physical laws but inside yourself the time works in different ways.
If you are happy and do something interesting the time goes very fast but if your have to carry on with something not interesting or painful then you will find that the time goes very very slow.
By practicing intuitional science you find more and more peace of mind and this allow you to experience that the time goes faster.
The more you enter this spiritual arena and the time assume a new meaning.
And when you realize that there is less and less separation between you and your spirit within (God) then you also realize that the time is an illusion and God is the only reality.

[Angrboda]

Ben Davis

Look at here Ben.
I say.............When you think that the life is finite...you reply........Which I do... and then you say.............I don't know how often I have to correct you on this... never mind, I'll go again. Atheism, being an absence of theism, has no attributes on which to have faith or dogma. You do understand that saying "You're as bad as us" is no defense at all?

I don't believe Ben replied thus, at least not in this thread, and lifting pieces out of context from another discussion entirely to make a point in this one distorts its meaning, which is an ostensible example of the fallacy of contextomy, as well as being a violation of our rules on quoting at this forum. We recently, just, made some changes to our rule on accurately quoting people, and if you haven't, I suggest you avail yourself of the substance of that rule. That being said, while there were minor changes, the substance of the rule has not changed, and to my mind you are in multiple violation of both its past and present form here. I am simply going to advise you on the matter here, however... if you do not start properly quoting people, including backward links, if you quote mine people unfairly, if you paraphrase unfairly, if you are sloppy and reckless in attributing thoughts and words to others, if you continue to make these mistakes unrepentantly, I will not hesitate to call for the ban hammer with the aim of banishing you from this forum for good.








(ETA: And for what it's worth, you can be in London and Rome simultaneously, according to brane theory, provided the two are on separate brane, or the brane has folds such that the points occupied on the brane by London and Rome are coincident in an (imaginary) ultra-brane manifold space.)

[Ben Davis]

Ben Davis

Look at here Ben.
I say.............When you think that the life is finite...you reply........Which I do... and then you say.............I don't know how often I have to correct you on this... never mind, I'll go again. Atheism, being an absence of theism, has no attributes on which to have faith or dogma. You do understand that saying "You're as bad as us" is no defense at all?

Can't you see the hypocricy?

There's no hypocrisy. I think that life is finite because of the evidence: death. People die in their hundreds of thousands every day. Animals die in their millions every day. All life meets some form of end. There is no credible evidence, none at all, that 'life' continues after death. Consequently my understanding of the finite nature of life is not an article of faith rather my response to the demonstrable facts.

You say that in atheism there is no faith and dogma and then you say that one of your pillar of FAITH is the believe that life is finite.

My personal view of death is not faith-based, it's evidence-based. Neither is it shaped by any 'commandment' from an 'atheist doctrine': there are atheists who believe that life is infinite or at very least continues after death, in some way; I'm not one of them. Your argument is nonsense.

Beside, you can't even bring evidence that life is finite.
Total disaster Ben.

Erm... death? Have you heard of it?

There is no point in knowing things that at the moment go against your belief.

Yes there is. My beliefs are subject to change based on evidence therefore I make a point of actively seeking information that goes against what I believe. That way, I counter any bias/prejudice I may have and I can make sure that my beliefs are based on as much reality as possible.

The day you will be open to what lie within then you will start digging up the real treasure.

I already know myself. Your attempts to coin an epigram, at my expense, are poor indeed.

First you got to set aside your dogmaS and blind faith.

I already have. I did so when I started paying attention to reality rather than the religious nonsense I was being fed. I would suggest that you take your own advice.

[Rational AKD]

I think this is actually a very valid question that Christians seldom address adequately. I think, however, it is most accurately addressed by Dr WLC in these vids.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3N_RAvksP4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbirUdSnZLU

[pocaracas]

I think this is actually a very valid question that Christians seldom address adequately. I think, however, it is most accurately addressed by Dr WLC in these vids.

Didn't watch the vids....
but... wasn't WLC a "professional (apologist) philosopher"? How can he say anything about time, which is in the realm of Physics, something philosophers tend to be a bit out of touch with?

[Rational AKD]

Didn't watch the vids....
but... wasn't WLC a "professional (apologist) philosopher"? How can he say anything about time, which is in the realm of Physics, something philosophers tend to be a bit out of touch with?

the actual state that time exists is the realm of physics. ideas of what time is (a theory and b theory of time) is the realm of philosophy. FYI, he confronts both theories of time. also, regardless of what science says about time, philosophy can impose a specific definition on what time is and explore the possibilities of timeless existence. no matter what definition of time science chooses to adopt, I guarantee philosophy has already created it.

[pocaracas]

Didn't watch the vids....
but... wasn't WLC a "professional (apologist) philosopher"? How can he say anything about time, which is in the realm of Physics, something philosophers tend to be a bit out of touch with?

the actual state that time exists is the realm of physics. ideas of what time is (a theory and b theory of time) is the realm of philosophy. FYI, he confronts both theories of time. also, regardless of what science says about time, philosophy can impose a specific definition on what time is and explore the possibilities of timeless existence. no matter what definition of time science chooses to adopt, I guarantee philosophy has already created it.

That translates to: mental masturbations about what time is abound... eventually, physics will be able to accurately explain time and we'll realize that one of those countless masturbations was correct.
Excuse while I'm not impressed...

[Rational AKD]

That translates to: mental masturbations about what time is abound... eventually, physics will be able to accurately explain time and we'll realize that one of those countless masturbations was correct.
Excuse while I'm not impressed...

says the one so closed minded he can't spare 18 minutes to watch a couple vids before he judges.