RE: Argument from Absoluteness
January 22, 2014 at 10:51 am
(This post was last modified: January 22, 2014 at 10:59 am by Anomalocaris.)
(January 22, 2014 at 8:18 am)bennyboy Wrote:(January 21, 2014 at 10:48 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote: Well, the problem is that Christian apologists will rarely, if ever, accept this view of time which is called th B-theory. Accepting the B-theory (which is supported by the usual interpretation of Relativity) entails that there is no priviledged frame of reference. Now, apologists can't have that, because among other things it means that the universe can't have, even in principle, begun its existence, because on this view there is no "temporal-becoming", to use the retarded jargon.
I think you'd need another dimension, call it "meta-space-time" or whatever, in which an entire universe, including its 4-dimensional framework, could be created, positioned, etc. But then God would just be whoever made THAT framework, and it's either philosophical theosophical nonsense or a more direct "Whoah, dude, circles in circles in circles. Pass that here!"
The concept that there could be multiple orthagonal dimensions of time is not new to physics. But seem to have received little development or support.
(January 21, 2014 at 12:03 am)bennyboy Wrote: Right. If, from God's point of view, time is like an extra physical dimension, along which objects are oriented, then God is timeless and absolute, and absolutely unable to change or to judge anything.
The Christian mess is in trying to reconcile an unchanging God with the capacity to have emotions and to take actions.
Well, an easy retort would say god might be static in a realm permanently and fundamentally inaccessible to us. But he is fully dynamic in every sense we can access. Is god that is not all mighty, but whose power in fact extends beyond all we can ever think to test, really the total equivalent of all mightiness within the context of our full realm of experience, past, now, or ever?
