God cannot live outside the time since there is no objective time

[Bahman]

This is very simple since we just need to prove that there is objective time. We can only experience form and motion as quantities that exist outside. We then construct an axillary concept from form and motion so called time. This means that the objective time does not exist and what we experience as a duration is subjective time.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

This is very simple since we just need to prove that there is objective time. We can only experience form and motion as quantities that exist outside. We then construct an axillary concept from form and motion so called time. This means that the objective time does not exist and what we experience as a duration is subjective time.

Why is it the case that we construct time rather than that there actually is time?

Why would the fact that time has subjective qualities mean that there are no objective qualities to that could be construed as objective time?

Why would the fact (if true) that time were entirely subjective make it any harder to say that it does not apply to God?

 

[EveningSkye111]

God can live everywhere and anywhere. Why are people always trying to fit God into manmade ideas?

 

[RebeccaJ]

This is very simple since we just need to prove that there is objective time. We can only experience form and motion as quantities that exist outside. We then construct an axillary concept from form and motion so called time. This means that the objective time does not exist and what we experience as a duration is subjective time.

According to quantum physics, time does not exist as we know it. If you take that even further, you then must have a hypothesis for what the object is, instead of what it is not.

“Time” as a term of physics, is being studied, explored even, and there are numerous papers and publications on the subject. None say time does not exist at all. The closest any physicist has come to this conclusion is to say time is not a river, or a plane, but is an illusion. In the illusion hypothesis, each moment we are in is a Now. Each Now is independent and is not reliant on a previous or future Now. This sounds counter intuitive of course but quantum physics, particularly the two slit experiment, allows this hypothesis to be entirely rational.

So let’s go with the hypothesis that time is an illusion, and each Now is an independent existence. The theological view of God existing outside of time does not change. The entire premise of God existing outside of time is that God exists outside of creation. Quantum physics, as wondrous as it is, is still an observation of creation. If we say time is an illusion there are only Nows, then of course theologically the rational response is that God exists outside of every Now.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

… If we say time is an illusion there are only Nows, then of course theologically the rational response is that God exists outside of every Now.

Even, in every Now as well.

Not so much illusory, as elusive.

And also there must be a continuum of Nows.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Even, in every Now as well.

Not so much illusory, as elusive.

And also there must be a continuum of Nows.

The hypothesis of the Now is that every what we call “present” comes into existence, Now. How Catholic is that? Of course, we understand that God is the creator of every “Now” and is not absent from creation.

The OP is coming from a Buddhist position (I don’t know if they are Buddhist or not). In Buddhism there is no belief of God or gods. They are essentially, attempting to refute that God exists. Or, at least that is my perception of the argument.

From a Catholic understanding, rooted in Jesus Christ, we express God as rationally understood. I’m not attempting to prove God’s existence, but rather Catholic theology is rational. The argument that time does not exist, therefore God does not exist, is not logical in Catholic theology. Nothing of creation is required to exist in order for God to exist.

 

[Lucretius]

Dear Bahman:

This is very simple since we just need to prove that there is objective time. We can only experience form and motion as quantities that exist outside. We then construct an axillary concept from form and motion so called time. This means that the objective time does not exist and what we experience as a duration is subjective time.

Time is objective. Just because the Absolute Time theory of Newton is false, doesn’t make time itself not objective. For example, if time were purely subjective, then it would be nonsense to talk about the age of the universe. Furthermore, distance and speed would also be have to be considered nonobjective as well. Relative =/= nonobjective (at least in modern physics).

I agree though that time certainly has a subjective component. As time is the measure of motion, its impossible to ignore the measurer while focusing on the measured. There is a relationship between the measured and the measurer which ends in union.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[fisherman_carl]

… and each Now is an independent existence\

This reminds me of Parmenides. He believed that change was impossible because for something to change something would have to be created out of nothing. And, since this is impossible then all change is an illusion. Of course, Aristotle came and refuted his idea.

Aristotle said that something can change if it has the potential to change. And, so the idea of actuality and potentiality. Also, that something can not change itself but is changed from outside that has the ability to cause that change or effect.

Time could in fact be a change or effect that is caused by God. Just as God sustains our existence, time itself could be sustained by God.

 

[Lucretius]

This reminds me of Parmenides. He believed that change was impossible because for something to change something would have to be created out of nothing. And, since this is impossible then all change is an illusion. Of course, Aristotle came and refuted his idea.

Aristotle said that something can change if it has the potential to change. And, so the idea of actuality and potentiality. Also, that something can not change itself but is changed from outside that has the ability to cause that change or effect.

Time could in fact be a change or effect that is caused by God. Just as God sustains our existence, time itself could be sustained by God.

Now that I think about it, Zeno’s arguments would refute Rebecca’s. Once we introduce motion we are stuck with some kind of time…

 

[Bahman]

Why is it the case that we construct time rather than that there actually is time?

There is not any objective time because our senses only inform us about shapes and motions. All process inside our brain run with specific speed. So we have two speed, one inside our brain and other which happens outside. From this we construct a subjective time.

Why would the fact that time has subjective qualities mean that there are no objective qualities to that could be construed as objective time?

I didn’t say so. Shapes and motion are objective qualities and we can experience them which means that there are subjective quality related to objective qualities which exist outside.

Why would the fact (if true) that time were entirely subjective make it any harder to say that it does not apply to God?

I don’t understand you question. Could you please elaborate?

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

There is not any objective time because our senses only inform us about shapes and motions. All process inside our brain run with specific speed. So we have two speed, one inside our brain and other which happens outside. From this we construct a subjective time.

There is probably more than one kind of time because our imagination is an investigative tool. Also, the subjective provides us with evidence of the objective.

I didn’t say so. Shapes and motion are objective qualities and we can experience them which means that there are subjective quality related to objective qualities which exist outside.

Yes.

I don’t understand you question. Could you please elaborate?

The subjective is objective because we wouldn’t have any evidence of it otherwise.

 

[Bahman]

Dear Bahman:

Time is objective. Just because the Absolute Time theory of Newton is false, doesn’t make time itself not objective. For example, if time were purely subjective, then it would be nonsense to talk about the age of the universe. Furthermore, distance and speed would also be have to be considered nonobjective as well. Relative =/= nonobjective (at least in modern physics).

I agree though that time certainly has a subjective component. As time is the measure of motion, its impossible to ignore the measurer while focusing on the measured. There is a relationship between the measured and the measurer which ends in union.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

Do you have any sense which can inform you about the objective time? Our senses can only inform us about shape and motion.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

Do you have any sense which can inform you about the objective time? Our senses can only inform us about shape and motion.

Imagination and logic are investigative tool and scientists are discovering new dimensions all the “time”!

 

[Bahman]

Imagination and logic are investigative tool and scientists are discovering new dimensions all the “time”!

Yes. But at the end their models should show what we observe. The reality is that we just observe form and motion. It is quite arbitrary to use time and form, or form and motion because you can always formulate the third quantity in term of other two.

 

[Lucretius]

Do you have any sense which can inform you about the objective time? Our senses can only inform us about shape and motion.

Time is deprived from motion and matter. Time just is the measure of motion.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[Bahman]

Time is deprived from motion and matter. Time just is the measure of motion.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

What do you mean with “Time just is the measure of motion.”?

 

[fisherman_carl]

This is very simple since we just need to prove that there is objective time. We can only experience form and motion as quantities that exist outside. We then construct an axillary concept from form and motion so called time. This means that the objective time does not exist and what we experience as a duration is subjective time.

On the contrary, time passes at the same rate for all of us each day. It is not like your day is quicker than mine. It is still 24h. Similarly to measure the height of a flag, it is the same objective height regardless of what units you use. It is not like you can say the height of the flag is subjective because one person measures with metres and the other in feet. The height of the flag is the same. Similarly the passage of time occurs at the same rate for us all regardless of what units of measurement we use. Is this not correct? If not then time travel would be common place. If time went at a different rate, a quicker rate for me, I would get to your future quicker than you do. As far as I know this is only possible as one nears the speed of light.

 

[Bahman]

On the contrary, time passes at the same rate for all of us each day. It is not like your day is quicker than mine. It is still 24h. Similarly to measure the height of a flag, it is the same objective height regardless of what units you use. It is not like you can say the height of the flag is subjective because one person measures with metres and the other in feet. The height of the flag is the same. Similarly the passage of time occurs at the same rate for us all regardless of what units of measurement we use. Is this not correct? If not then time travel would be common place. If time went at a different rate, a quicker rate for me, I would get to your future quicker than you do. As far as I know this is only possible as one nears the speed of light.

That is only motion which exist outside our brain. If the rotation of earth around its main axis take 24 hours it means that this motion is similar for each day. Our experience of our inner motion can of course be faster or slower depending on the situation we experience a duration longer or shorter.

 

[Lucretius]

What do you mean with “Time just is the measure of motion.”?

Time is derived from comparing things in motion. For example, we compare the changing of everything else to the radiation of cesium atoms.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[Bahman]

Time is derived from comparing things in motion. For example, we compare the changing of everything else to the radiation of cesium atoms.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

That I agree. This exactly means that objective time does not exist.