Timeless God cannot know the current time hence cannot sustain the creation

[Brendan]

I like your example of film. That is God who is projector of this film and the current state is the frame which should be presented at now. The rate in which frames are presented is however subjected to time hence timeless God cannot sustain the creation.

Unless, of course, that one of the elements OF that creation is Time itself.

So for the analogy to be valid, the means by which the frames are presented is included in the frames themselves. So the ‘time’ of which you speak is part of the film itself, not something outside of it.

In which case, anyone having knowledge of the contents of the frames, has full knowledge of time.

But, being outside the frames, is not subject to the any requirement of the film.

 

[Bahman]

Unless He Created and controls time.

The main question in this thread is that timeless God cannot control time unless you elaborate how.

 

[Bahman]

Hi Bahman .

would you please explain to me what are you talking about ? honestly i can’t follow you and i want to learn .are you talking about this S in relation to time ?

You need to tell me which past you don’t understand so I can explain.

 

[Bahman]

Unless, of course, that one of the elements OF that creation is Time itself.

So for the analogy to be valid, the means by which the frames are presented is included in the frames themselves. So the ‘time’ of which you speak is part of the film itself, not something outside of it.

In which case, anyone having knowledge of the contents of the frames, has full knowledge of time.

But, being outside the frames, is not subject to the any requirement of the film.

Then God is not a sustainer since the creation can roll on its own. Is this what you believe? I however keep my reservation about the fact that timeless God cannot know the current time.

 

[wadramli]

i do not understand what you mean by timeless god .

 

[CHRISTINE77]

So the rest follows. God knows the set S but he cannot know what is the current time since this requires one thing more which is extra knowledge of the current state which God cannot since the current state is subjected to time.

And why can’t God have the extra knowledge? Who are you to say what God can and cannot know?

We are the people who are stuck in the now. God is omnipresent and omnipotent and outside any human constructs.

 

[Bahman]

And why can’t God have the extra knowledge?

Because that knowledge is time bound. It is about the moment now.

Who are you to say what God can and cannot know?

A curious person.

We are the people who are stuck in the now. God is omnipresent and omnipotent and outside any human constructs.

That is not a good argument and it is not a good idea to believe on something we cannot understand since people could then believe on whatever.

 

[Brendan]

Then God is not a sustainer since the creation can roll on its own. Is this what you believe? I however keep my reservation about the fact that timeless God cannot know the current time.

No, because the projector is not part of the film.

The flaw in your premise is that you presume that one who is not part of time cannot be aware of time.

 

[wadramli]

Frankly you got me completely lost . isn’t time a sort of measurement? Pressure is such and such at such a time and so on and then we rig up the formula and then we want to know time or pressure at any time or time at any pressure we differentiate and plug the values ?

forget it ,

 

[Bahman]

No, because the projector is not part of the film.

We need to stick in one interpretation. Either time is part of creation which means that creation does evolve by itself or it is not which means that you need a projector, God, that executes frame with a specific rate. Which one do you pick up?

The flaw in your premise is that you presume that one who is not part of time cannot be aware of time.

You need to know current time if you cannot experience it. I argued that is impossible for timeless God to know the current time since that require a change in God’s knowledge. You simply don’t offer any argument here so I cannot possibly understand what is the flaw in my argument.

 

[Bahman]

Frankly you got me completely lost . isn’t time a sort of measurement? Pressure is such and such at such a time and so on and then we rig up the formula and then we want to know time or pressure at any time or time at any pressure we differentiate and plug the values ?

forget it ,

Time is a measure of changes. You can read more about time here.

 

[wadramli]

Okay okay I see where you are coming from bahman. Look time is just a way for us to measure . but if u already know everything then you do not say what time so and so went nuts . it will be like this . which place is the nut frame of so and so . or how many frames apart between his birth frame and his nut state frame . u r just so used to using time to get by . just strike out got and when and did from your speech.

it doesn’t make sense for you to say timeless and then use time to pose a question. u mx bdetween two worlds . think of it in terms of file cabinet. You do not say when is file 100 . say where is file 100 .

this is good . i think i’d like to talk like that to some people. timeless stuff

 

[wadramli]

bahman time is not a measure of change . rate of change is a measure of change . it’s a division . dy/dx . that is measure of change . time is a measurement between one state and another .

thank you bahamn . I’m smarter thanks to you.

take care

 

[inocente]

Time is a measure of changes. You can read more about time here.

Did you read it? You keep making the same basic mistake on thread after thread, the mistake of thinking there can be a single state “S”, a single “now”, across the entire universe. It’s impossible, not only because changes can only propagate at the speed of light, but because there cannot even be an absolute reference frame (section 11 and 12 of your link).

So even before we get to your “unique” theology, your OP fails on high school physics.

Go to any physics forum and try arguing that when the digital clock in your bedroom clicks to 12:41 AM, there’s a state change “S” across the entire universe. See how long you last.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Because that knowledge is time bound. It is about the moment now.

A curious person.

That is not a good argument and it is not a good idea to believe on something we cannot understand since people could then believe on whatever.

If as you say, “it is not a good idea to believe on something we cannot understand”, than that would mean that it is NOT a “good idea”, in your opinion, for anyone to believe in God since God is beyond our human understanding.

Do you really think that a “puny god”, one that we humans can understand, is the only “god” that it is a “good idea” to believe in?

Your whole “construct” about God is flawed since it is based on a “god” that is so “puny” that this god can be “understood” by us mere humans.

It doesn’t matter if you believe in a God that created everything but just for a “thought experiment” try to think of a Being that could create something out of nothing?

I would imagine if you thought about it long enough that you would either go completely insane or you head would explode but it can be an interesting thought.

One of the things in the above sentence probably would never happen but the other very well could.

And I do mean “create something out of nothing”, I do NOT mean merely rearranging what already is, even though that would be something.

I, suppose, that that is why God is referred to as the Creator, as opposed to being referred to as the Rearranger.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Time is a measure of changes. You can read more about time here.

I think that the person who said, “Time is God’s Way of everything not happening at once”, has more of a grasp of time than you have.

Time is not merely, seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years and so on but is the unfolding of what is happening.

The “seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years and so on” are merely the “measurements of time”, they are not time.

 

[Brendan]

We need to stick in one interpretation. Either time is part of creation which means that creation does evolve by itself

I have not seen proof of that premise? Why does it logically follow that creation must evolve by itself if time is a creation?

You need to know current time if you cannot experience it. I argued that is impossible for timeless God to know the current time since that require a change in God’s knowledge…

That premise, likewise, does not follow. Why would it require a change in what God has knowledge of?

 

[Bahman]

Did you read it?

Yes, a couple of time.

You keep making the same basic mistake on thread after thread, the mistake of thinking there can be a single state “S”, a single “now”, across the entire universe. It’s impossible, not only because changes can only propagate at the speed of light, but because there cannot even be an absolute reference frame (section 11 and 12 of your link).

The fact that interaction can only spread by speed of light does not mean that we cannot have a single state that define the state of creation uniquely.

So even before we get to your “unique” theology, your OP fails on high school physics.

Then lets discuss it.

Go to any physics forum and try arguing that when the digital clock in your bedroom clicks to 12:41 AM, there’s a state change “S” across the entire universe. See how long you last.

I will do that.

 

[Bahman]

If as you say, “it is not a good idea to believe on something we cannot understand”, than that would mean that it is NOT a “good idea”, in your opinion, for anyone to believe in God since God is beyond our human understanding.

Let say that we are the result of whatever which is more conceiving than your God. I can claim that I believe on that. Would you accept it? No. You need to give me a reason that why you don’t drop your belief and not mine. That is the only thing we have in our disposal, our reasoning.

Do you really think that a “puny god”, one that we humans can understand, is the only “god” that it is a “good idea” to believe in?

What is the difference between your God and whatever if we could not have an understanding of subject matter.

Your whole “construct” about God is flawed since it is based on a “god” that is so “puny” that this god can be “understood” by us mere humans.

Well, that doesn’t grant any usefulness. You cannot claim that I believe on something i cannot understand.

It doesn’t matter if you believe in a God that created everything but just for a “thought experiment” try to think of a Being that could create something out of nothing?

I don’t believe on such a God.

I would imagine if you thought about it long enough that you would either go completely insane or you head would explode but it can be an interesting thought.

I have been thinking about it for a while.

 

[Bahman]

I have not seen proof of that premise? Why does it logically follow that creation must evolve by itself if time is a creation?

I think that were you who offered that premise. Do you want me to refer you your post? I could however provide an argument on that too.

That premise, likewise, does not follow. Why would it require a change in what God has knowledge of?

It does follow. You need to read OP more carefully. I repeat it anyhow. The state of current time changes hence you need to have the knowledge of now which is time dependent.