Heaven's view of time

[BCven86]

I have been thinking about what this world would look like from Heaven’s (and purgatory’s) perspective, especially in a temporal sense. We are taught that both of these places are not limited by time; purgatory is a state and heaven has a more integral type view of time (someone in heaven looking down at time would be able to see all moments of time). Being outside of time would require that nothing changes and these two places would actually be states, not places of change. If this is a correct assumption I have several questions as to how things might occur within these states.

1. How do angels have free will? Free will assumes that you, at some point, need to make a decision. To make a decision is a verb that requires time in order to perform the action. For example, how do angels make decisions (that require time to make) if they are in a place where time does not exist? Especially, how/when did demons make the decision to turn away from God if time was never an issue for them? Were they created already in a state of contention with God?
2. I have always viewed purgatory as a sort of prison that we had to sit in until our sins were completely purged. Of course waiting in prison implies that there is time to wait, and if purgatory is outside of time then this would not be the case. So, would our passing through purgatory then be ‘instantaneous’ as viewed by the world since it does not exist in time? Also, how would our souls ‘pass’ from purgatory to heaven? ‘passing’ from one state to another implies change, change implies that there is time to do so.

These are all the examples I can think of at the moment but I’m sure later I could think of more. Can anyone who has thought about this offer some insight into this thought? Also, can anyone offer some resources from Catholic philosophers that might help quench this curiosity?

Thanks,

 

[JimG]

1. How do angels have free will? Free will assumes that you, at some point, need to make a decision. To make a decision is a verb that requires time in order to perform the action.

Time is needed for human beings to make a decision, only because we are composites of body and spirit, and thus immersed in time. An act of will, in itself is a non-temporal event; but for humans it is bound up with our bodies and so appears to be part of a temporal process.

Angels had free will but not the beatific vision when they made their decision for or against God. Once angels make a decision, it is irrevocable. I’m not sure what sort of “time” could be applied to angelic decisions, but I’m sure it is not the kind of time that human beings are accustomed to.

As for purgatory, we do not have our bodies, so there is no intrinsic need for time. However, there is a process of purification going on, so if one wants to call that time, that’s ok. But it’s not time in the sense that we experience it here.

 

[Douglas_Naaden]

I have been thinking about what this world would look like from Heaven’s (and purgatory’s) perspective, especially in a temporal sense. We are taught that both of these places are not limited by time;

“Not limited by time” does not mean that said places do not have time. There is no teaching that there is no time in the afterlife. It is actually a philosophic necessity that there is time in the afterlife. Creation means change, which requires time, bodies or not. However, in regards to the time of the angels/saint/Heaven/etc., they almost assuredly have a different mode of temporality which is to say time passes differently.

 

[CTA1967]

I’ve also wondered this. Is there an official Church document on this?

 

[Douglas_Naaden]

I’ve also wondered this. Is there an official Church document on this?

That’s an interesting question. Would it matter (as far as official church teaching)? Time does not fall under the bounds of faith and morals. What mode of temporality the angels function under, for instance, would be an exploration of philosophy, it seems to me. I’m sure some documents brush the subject, but I don’t think the subject warrants any kind of official document.

That being said, idk, if there’s any official document on the subject.

 

[JimG]

The nature of time is not even clearly agreed upon from a purely physical and scientific perspective. Newton’s view of time was as a constant and unchanging background phenomenon, on which physical events played out (as was space.) Under Einstein and relativity theory, neither time nor space are constant and unchanging, but subject to variation in the presence of matter and energy.

 

[Douglas_Naaden]

Honestly, I never got Einstein’s theory of relativity in regards to time. It always seemed like a theory of relativity of the measure of time, rather than a relativity of time itself. But then again, only a few people are supposed to be able to understand Einstein’s stuff. Either way I don’t see how the Church can make an infallible declaration about it, since ultimately modes of temporality are not about faith or morals.

 

[Wirraway]

The nature of time is not even clearly agreed upon from a purely physical and scientific perspective. Newton’s view of time was as a constant and unchanging background phenomenon, on which physical events played out (as was space.) Under Einstein and relativity theory, neither time nor space are constant and unchanging, but subject to variation in the presence of matter and energy.

although you might concede that God is the ultimate frame of reference

 

[JimG]

although you might concede that God is the ultimate frame of reference

In a matter of speaking, perhaps. But not a frame of reference for the material universe, since physicists can have no way to use God as a frame of reference for any sort of measurement.

 

[JimG]

Honestly, I never got Einstein’s theory of relativity in regards to time. It always seemed like a theory of relativity of the measure of time, rather than a relativity of time itself. But then again, only a few people are supposed to be able to understand Einstein’s stuff. Either way I don’t see how the Church can make an infallible declaration about it, since ultimately modes of temporality are not about faith or morals.

There must be quite a few who understand Einstein’s theories, since they are pretty much a pre-requisite to the study of physics and cosmology. Einstein’s theory of general relativity was, after all, published in 1915, and physics has advanced quite a bit since then, although there seem to be some intractable problems in arriving at a general unification theory.

 

[BCven86]

although you might concede that God is the ultimate frame of reference

Based on this thought, does God exist in an ‘environment’? i.e. time, some sort of ‘space’, etc. It seems to me that if he did, it would be necessary for something to have created this space that was other than God… He wouldn’t be able to generate the space of his existance since he would need to already exist in order to do so. Something else would have been needed to build this space, something greater than God. He would need to exist in a dimensionless place. Does this rationale sound correct?

 

[Wirraway]

In a matter of speaking, perhaps. But not a frame of reference for the material universe, since physicists can have no way to use God as a frame of reference for any sort of measurement.

God could use Himself as a frame of reference.

 

[Wirraway]

Based on this thought, does God exist in an ‘environment’? i.e. time, some sort of ‘space’, etc. It seems to me that if he did, it would be necessary for something to have created this space that was other than God… He wouldn’t be able to generate the space of his existance since he would need to already exist in order to do so. Something else would have been needed to build this space, something greater than God. He would need to exist in a dimensionless place. Does this rationale sound correct?

presumably an omnipotent Being could do such a thing.

however, I see this as a prime example of the limitations of the human mind in comprehending and of human language in conveying, “Godness”.

a more trivial example, yet a suitable analogy, is in the limitations of the human mind and language to comprehend and describe quantum mechanics, a world that is beyond common sense experience. (e.g., particle/ wave duality)

 

[JamesG]

Well there is talk of a multi-verse in science now. Perhaps the angles are able to exist and experience all possiblities. Their choices are simplly ignorance or acceptance of each variation.

Now, if each thought or choice is another variation then the universe is eternal from a different perspective, one that isn’t subject to time.

I think that this world is a possibility shown to us by Lucifer. A state of life that is outside of Gods direct love. God told us not to eat of this fruit, but we did it anyway.

It would seem to me that an eternal creature can chose to experience time or to experience everything at once.

Everything with God is a choice.

 

[Douglas_Naaden]

Well there is talk of a multi-verse in science now.

Yep. Talk.

I think that this world is a possibility shown to us by Lucifer. A state of life that is outside of Gods direct love. God told us not to eat of this fruit, but we did it anyway.

Huh? Reality is reality. If God is God, His perfections aren’t limited by Lucifer. His Love encompasses all.

It would seem to me that an eternal creature can chose to experience time or to experience everything at once.
Everything with God is a choice.

It’s not about God being eternal; it’s about His nature, what it means to be God. God doesn’t choose to know, He knows all because His knowledge has no limits. Omniscience.

 

[BCven86]

I have a question on ‘eternity’. Could the term ‘eternity’ revealed to us be a simplification made to us that are born and subject to time, but instead the reality of our experience after death is more of a state that is outside of time. Since time could not describe a state, could the term ‘eternity’ have been used to describe that which our temporal minds could not comprehend?

 

[JimG]

I have a question on ‘eternity’. Could the term ‘eternity’ revealed to us be a simplification made to us that are born and subject to time, but instead the reality of our experience after death is more of a state that is outside of time. Since time could not describe a state, could the term ‘eternity’ have been used to describe that which our temporal minds could not comprehend?

Yes, our experience after death will be “outside of time.” “Eternity” as applied to God, describes a state of not being extended in time at all, ever. It means that for God, all moments in time are simply “now.”

God has no extension in either time or space.

 

[Douglas_Naaden]

I have a question on ‘eternity’. Could the term ‘eternity’ revealed to us be a simplification made to us that are born and subject to time, but instead the reality of our experience after death is more of a state that is outside of time. Since time could not describe a state, could the term ‘eternity’ have been used to describe that which our temporal minds could not comprehend?

States of Being and Time are 2 different topics. A State of Being is considered outside of time. Ice is a state of being of water. How the Ice persists through time is irrelevant to the fact that it “is.”

Yes, our experience after death will be “outside of time.”

Time is a necessary state of affairs with any of God’s creation. One’s “mode of temporality,” the way time passes may be different in Heaven (& probably is). In Heaven there will be acts of adoration; the fact that acts happen means time passes.

 

[JimG]

States of Being and Time are 2 different topics. A State of Being is considered outside of time. Ice is a state of being of water. How the Ice persists through time is irrelevant to the fact that it “is.”

Time is a necessary state of affairs with any of God’s creation. One’s “mode of temporality,” the way time passes may be different in Heaven (& probably is). In Heaven there will be acts of adoration; the fact that acts happen means time passes.

I was making a distinction between pre- and post- resurrection. After we have our bodies back, I can see that time would be more applicable. Our souls, being spirits, do not really have temporal extension in the same way that a material thing does.

 

[Douglas_Naaden]

Our souls, being spirits, do not really have temporal extension in the same way that a material thing does.

Exactly. The way created spirits experience time is different, but they nevertheless do experience time, since they have a beginning.