Catholic Church's View on God and Time

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moneyball
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Moneyball

Guest
Hi everyone, I’ve got a question that’s been bothering me for a while and I’m hoping someone can help me out. So I’m very much familiar with the apologetic work of Dr. William Lane Craig, and in his Kalam Cosmological argument there’s a premise that assumes the tensed theory of time (A-theory). He has said multiple times that if this theory of time is false and the B-theory is correct, then the Kalam argument doesn’t work (in his opinion). Ferthermore, he has also said that the tensless theory (if true) would void any moral responsibilities for human beings… that alone seems like it would destroy many central Christian doctrines.

Now I could be wrong, but doesn’t the Church hold the tensless view of time? And if so, what are we to make of this in light of the potentially devastating consequences? Thanks.
 
From what I have read, time is said to be used to measure change. Since God does not change, He is outside of time.
 
  • a digital infinite set is a paradox (though not necessarily impossible) but an analogue one isn’t even a paradox
  • God might well be, and have been, more than material-ful, more than timeful and more than spaceful
  • He may as personal free agent contain within Himself an infinite “regression” of causes combined into one cause. It’s not that long since people thought an atom was only one thing and all the time it is found to be more & more things
  • when the argument gets onto objects it gets stupid when people claim objects aren’t real
  • different descriptions of time are complementary rather than contradictory. Time has layers of characteristics. That we can only take one viewpoint at a time (even when employing global thinking), causes “difficulties” more apparent than real. From their brief descriptions in Wikipedia, the A-theory and B-theory are to me obviously both perfectly true
  • additionally, “difficulties” around “universe” disappear when one accepts that there are more universes. Scientists have said that in some of them, there are four dimensions of space alone
  • just as we can map time on a graph, maybe real time and space are mapping themselves and each other
  • as a linguist I can assure everybody that variations in languages between tense usages and even those languages that don’t have tenses are of no significance
  • the present is the only time we can use initiative or have experience (the latter including a memory or replay of past experience)
  • the future exists in God’s mind as plan A1, plan A2, plan A3 * etc depending as human initiative will impact the situation meanwhile
  • letter A as in well-known phrase “plan A”
 
I think there was a “point” (maybe quite a “big” one) where “causes” within the changeless God “became” a sequence of causes outside Him because it is innate in Him to be keen that things and people should be outside Him yet in relation to Him.

It will probably never be possible for us to perceive when was inside and when was outside.
 
Vic_Taltrees_UK said:
… the future exists in God’s mind as plan A1, plan A2, plan A3 * etc depending as human initiative will impact the situation meanwhile
  • letter A as in well-known phrase “plan A”
Click to expand...
But the one He knows in “advance” we will go for has extra “reality” for Him.

God in a sense overtakes us like an adult overtakes (on foot) a baby pedalling a tiny pedal car in a garden, seeing from a height the while.

He is in front and behind. Ps 139:1-18
 
I was really asking about the two theories of time and if the Church holds to a particular view. Is anyone familiar with the tensed (A-theory) and tenseless (B-theory) theories of time? Thank you.
 
StJoseph8 said:
From what I have read, time is said to be used to measure change. Since God does not change, He is outside of time.
Click to expand...
It’s more than that though. God not moving must be seen as not an accidental fact, but an essential state
 
Moneyball said:
I was really asking about the two theories of time and if the Church holds to a particular view. Is anyone familiar with the tensed (A-theory) and tenseless (B-theory) theories of time? Thank you.
Click to expand...
The Church isn’t going to get involved with the physics of time.

God may experience time like B-Theory, but regardless of A-theory or B-theory, God is outside of our spacetime continuum & and not bound by His laws of nature & physics
 
phil19034 said:
The Church isn’t going to get involved with the physics of time.

God may experience time like B-Theory, but regardless of A-theory or B-theory, God is outside of our spacetime continuum & and not bound by His laws of nature & physics
Click to expand...
If the Church can teach on social matters, what is the limit about physics and philosophy beyond which it can’t teach? Hmm, that is a really interesting question. How can I get the the little yellow face eating popcorn on this post?
 
thinkandmull said:
If the Church can teach on social matters, what is the limit about physics and philosophy beyond which it can’t teach? Hmm, that is a really interesting question. How can I get the the little yellow face eating popcorn on this post?
Click to expand...
The Church teaches on Philosophy. Priests actually receive a degree in Philosophy before they even start Theology.

But in regards to Physics, the only science the Church is really concerned with is theology (which is a science according to St Thomas Aquinus. The Church is more concerned with spiritual nature of the universe vs the physical nature of the universe.
 
Is there anything in philosophy the Church cannot teach on?
 
phil19034 said:
The Church isn’t going to get involved with the physics of time.

God may experience time like B-Theory, but regardless of A-theory or B-theory, God is outside of our spacetime continuum & and not bound by His laws of nature & physics
Click to expand...
The chruch must get involved in theories of time since it has real implications on theology. Take the libertarian free will vs determinism debate, if the latter is true, then no sin could ever be mortal, hence there would be no need for repentance.

The argument is that if we live in a universe with tenseless time, then that robs human beings of free will… surely that is a serious enough threat for the church to get involved. Now if you’re confident that the church has no view in this matter, then that answers my question.
 
Moneyball said:
The chruch must get involved in theories of time since it has real implications on theology. Take the libertarian free will vs determinism debate, if the latter is true, then no sin could ever be mortal, hence there would be no need for repentance.

The argument is that if we live in a universe with tenseless time, then that robs human beings of free will… surely that is a serious enough threat for the church to get involved. Now if you’re confident that the church has no view in this matter, then that answers my question.
Click to expand...
The Church believes in free will. If “tenseless time” truly denies free will (as you suggest), then the Church would disagree with “tenseless time.”

God Bless
 
After re familiarizing myself with the a and b theory from Dr. Craig (see here youtu.be/W4Wx18K9jUE ), I would question that the church officially teaches a tenseless view of time. Also, Craig teaches that God is outside of time or is timeless. So whatever time we experience God is not in it, although he can be in time with us. But he is not bound to time like we are . The closest thing Ive heard is the idea of God seeing all past, present and future at once. But this is not the same thing in my view. I can for instance know the past or the future without being present there. God, being outside of time is not limited the same way we are. Just because God can see the past does not mean the past eternally exists. In such a view free will seems unlikely.

After thinking about it I would be almost certain the church does not teach the b theory of time.

I don’t think Time actually exist. Time is like numbers. Or abstract ideas. They exist in the mind as abstraction. What exists is us. I don’t exist across multiple times concurrently. As though an infinite amount of me exists scattered through every moment. I exist in the present. I can learn from the past. But I can’t live in it.

I think you can disprove the b theory of time possibly just by using Craig s own disproofs of having an infinite amount of things. Since if time existed past, present,and future at the same time so to speak then wouldn’t that mean there would be an infinite number of past and future versions of yourself at this moment? But since it is impossible to have an infinite amount of Anything then it can’t be true.
 
Here’s another thought. If you had a time machine and could go back in time does that mean the past must always exist necessarily in order for you to travel back to it? Think of dr Who. He goes to the past or to the future. No, the past doesn’t always necessarily exist in the present in order for you to get to it. Rather, in order to get to the past you would have to step outside of time and travel to a point in time when that past still existed. For the time traveler it would seem as if the past and present always existed because they are all accessible to him. But even for the time traveler himself he exists in his own time, and as soon as he travels to and steps into a moment of time the past and present no longer exist for him, except in his memory.

Now, an omnipotent God, if you thought of him as a kind of time traveller, and since he could be in multiple places at once, could in theory travel to multiple places in time at once. Thus, he could be present in the past, present and future all at once without requiring time to be tenseless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top