(August 20, 2019 at 10:43 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: I think the incoherence depends on one's definition of time, as well as the relationship between said God and the qualities of time. Since I'm not a physicist, I'm unfamiliar with any of their research and theories for time. I view time as a primarily subjective experience of change; if change didn't occur out in the world we wouldn't perceive time out in the world. The best way I've seen it put is that events are perceived but time is not (Gibson, 1975). In short, events are the primary reality and time is an abstraction. So treating events as occurring "in" time, or treating time as a space needing to be filled, is backwards reasoning psychologically speaking.
When you say God is unaffected by temporal changes, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that. I take it to mean that God does not experience sequential changes in himself the way a withering flower might, but can he still have the "psychological" experience of time as he observes the withering flower and the universe in motion.
References: Gibson, J. J. (1975). Events are perceivable but time is not. In J. T. Fraser, & N. Lawrence, The study of time II (pp. 295-301). New York: Springer-Verlag.
How could god observe anything if he is not directly experiencing time? It takes to time to experience or in fact DO anything at all.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
