Y
YosefYosep
Guest
I’ve been struggling with trying to understand what theory of time best fits a Catholic worldview.
What does the Church believe about time (A-theory or B-theory?)
- Status
F
fisherman_carl
Guest
This is something I wondered about also. I have not seen an official church teaching on this. Just like there is no church teaching on Einstein’s theory of relativity. The prevailing view seems to be God is outside of time and sees all of time at once. Since God is immutable he does not change with time and therefore can not be in time. Nor can experience the passage of time and events changing with time. Since that would imply change in God’s knowledge about current events. Therefore, He must experience all events at once. It really boggles the mind.
F
fisherman_carl
Guest
In order for God to be outside of time and see all of it at once does that mean b theory would be true? Although it sounds like it I don’t necessarily think so. B theory suggests that every moment of time is actually in existence right now in a kind of eternal now. However that doesn’t necessarily have to be true. God would be in an eternal now, but time itself may only exist on one point at a time of the time line. How could God see all of the time line at once if it didn’t all exist at once? Not sure, but consider this analogy. Dr. Who travelling to the, past and future does not imply that all points of the time line coexist at once. Right? He simply travels through the dimension of time. Now consider God is omnipresent, therefore could travel to all places in the time dimension at once, without requiring all points in the time line to coexist with one another at the same time.
Y
YosefYosep
Guest
Well one could say that A-theory is true and there is only one snippet of time that is actually real (right now, the present), and the past and future do not coexist. God could still see all of time, in a sense, because he is omniscient and knows all the outcomes of causal chains started in the present. For instance, I see a plane about to crash into the ground. It is several seconds away from demolition. I can foresee the future even though it does not actually exist yet. If we were to say A-theory is true, God’s knowledge would work in an analogous way–he foresees the unfolding of events before they arrive. This does not make these future events coexistent with the present.In order for God to be outside of time and see all of it at once does that mean b theory would be true? Although it sounds like it I don’t necessarily think so. B theory suggests that every moment of time is actually in existence right now in a kind of eternal now. However that doesn’t necessarily have to be true. God would be in an eternal now, but time itself may only exist on one point at a time of the time line. How could God see all of the time line at once if it didn’t all exist at once? Not sure, but consider this analogy. Dr. Who travelling to the, past and future does not imply that all points of the time line coexist at once. Right? He simply travels through the dimension of time. Now consider God is omnipresent, therefore could travel to all places in the time dimension at once, without requiring all points in the time line to coexist with one another at the same time.
F
fisherman_carl
Guest
But wouldn’t that put God in time if he is foreseeing future events? That would mean his present moment is our present moment. However, most say (on this forum) that God is in an eternal now where he sees or interacts with all of time at once. So its not just knowledge about some future event. But he interacts with all events at once. A being who interacts with all of time events at once is greater than one who only experiences the present moment but has knowledge of the future.
T
Tarpeian_Rock
Guest
Time is God’s way of making sure everything doesn’t happen at once.
L
Lucretius
Guest
Does anyone care to think that both theories of time are true, but from different perspectives? Like from a human’s point of view, a-theory is true, but from, say, God’s point of view b-theory is true? In this case, time is relative to the observer, right?
Christi pax,
Lucretius
Christi pax,
Lucretius
W
Wesrock
Guest
I think both ways of thinking are okay. Thomism seems to go with A-theory. Molinism seems to be B-theory. Both are okay within the Church.
M
mikekle
Guest
I can see both being accurate to some degree, but ‘no time’ is something we could never really wrap our minds around, we know nothing but time in the way it is here.
This is why I believe any and all mention of time and periods of time in the bible, (such as months, days, generations, etc) are meant to be understood as OUR time, not Gods version, after all, why would he trying to convey messages for us to understand, using a version of time we know nothing about, it wouldnt make sense.
This is why I believe any and all mention of time and periods of time in the bible, (such as months, days, generations, etc) are meant to be understood as OUR time, not Gods version, after all, why would he trying to convey messages for us to understand, using a version of time we know nothing about, it wouldnt make sense.
S
svid2
Guest
Pax Christi!
Pardon my stupids, but what exactly are these theories, A and B? I’m not familiar with these.
What I know about time can be illustrated with this:
Imagine a donut being fired from a cannon at the speed of light, while rotating. Time is like that, but without the cannon and the donut.
That’s what I got. What do you guys have?
God bless!
Pardon my stupids, but what exactly are these theories, A and B? I’m not familiar with these.
What I know about time can be illustrated with this:
Imagine a donut being fired from a cannon at the speed of light, while rotating. Time is like that, but without the cannon and the donut.
That’s what I got. What do you guys have?
God bless!
Y
YosefYosep
Guest
Philosophers have come to two different views concerning the nature of time-- A-theory and B-theory. With A-theory there is a real difference between the past, present, and future. So the present is real, the past once existed but no longer does, and the future does not exist yet–the future is just potentiality. In A-theory temporal becoming is real. This means that things come in and go out of existence. So for instance, an apple you eat for lunch came into existence and went out of existence in your digestive tract.
The B-theory says there is no difference between the past, present, and future. All of them are equally real. So for instance your birth from–say–thirty years ago is real and hasn’t vanished into non-being. Your future death is real, not purely potential. The difference between past, present, and future that we perceive, is just an illusion of the human mind. On this view there is no temporal becoming. All states of time are real and just exist. That apple you ate is always in existence.
To help your understand B-theory, picture a giant ruler with three different marks on it. There is a mark for the day you were born. Halfway down the ruler there is a mark for the day you got married. At the end of the ruler there is a mark for the day you die. Now notice that if you were to stand on the mark representing your death date, that does not mean your marriage and birth date no longer exist. Since the entire ruler exists, all of those markers are equally real. They all coexist. God, some theologians speculate, since he is outside of time, views this ruler at once. He views all the marks as an “eternal now.”
W
Wesrock
Guest
A-theory is that only the temporal now exists. The moments past have gone out of existence, and the future is yet to be.
B-theory views your entire existence, from conception to death, as a single object, extending across space and time. It all exists already, immutable. However, your perspective only sees a “slice” of this object at a time. I’ve seen all of space time represented as a single existing loaf of bread. Our perspective is like seeing one at a time. However, if you could step outside, you’d see the whole loaf at once. But everything is fore-ordained and set.
My understanding of Thomism is that it is A-theory. God’s perspective is complicated to explain as God is outside time. Still, he doesn’t know what hasn’t happened, only what is in being. That said, he doesn’t exist in a particular moment of time or experience time as we do. He only has one great now. So in a way, he sees the whole loaf at once. That said, it was fore ordained, and while each part of the loaf exists before him at once from his perspective, it doesn’t mean it was fore ordained or that we are on the track of some type of world line.
I think you can go wrong on this if you imagine God as just another tyoe of being who has stepped out of time. That conception makes God a temporal being even if he has stepped out of time. God has never been a temporal being (in his divinity, Jesus Christ is a more complicated situation).
B-theory views your entire existence, from conception to death, as a single object, extending across space and time. It all exists already, immutable. However, your perspective only sees a “slice” of this object at a time. I’ve seen all of space time represented as a single existing loaf of bread. Our perspective is like seeing one at a time. However, if you could step outside, you’d see the whole loaf at once. But everything is fore-ordained and set.
My understanding of Thomism is that it is A-theory. God’s perspective is complicated to explain as God is outside time. Still, he doesn’t know what hasn’t happened, only what is in being. That said, he doesn’t exist in a particular moment of time or experience time as we do. He only has one great now. So in a way, he sees the whole loaf at once. That said, it was fore ordained, and while each part of the loaf exists before him at once from his perspective, it doesn’t mean it was fore ordained or that we are on the track of some type of world line.
I think you can go wrong on this if you imagine God as just another tyoe of being who has stepped out of time. That conception makes God a temporal being even if he has stepped out of time. God has never been a temporal being (in his divinity, Jesus Christ is a more complicated situation).
Y
YosefYosep
Guest
Are you saying that God is outside of time and he knows everything that is in being? On an A-theory view of time, God’s knowing would have to change as time progresses. So his knowledge that there is no earthquake in Canada will change the next time there is an earthquake in Canada. Wouldn’t this make God a temporal being since his knowledge changes and time is the measurement of change?
G
GEddie
Guest
There is no teaching about this.
Me, I’d hold that collinear time is powered by entropy, and as such no other time can be reached: the future because that point has not yet formed, the past because that point has been lost.
But all times remain within God’s mind.
ICXC NIKA
Me, I’d hold that collinear time is powered by entropy, and as such no other time can be reached: the future because that point has not yet formed, the past because that point has been lost.
But all times remain within God’s mind.
ICXC NIKA
Y
YosefYosep
Guest
So you believe the only real time is the present, and that the future is pure potential and the past is lost–the only thing that exists is the present. But you also say that all time is in God’s mind. When you say that, are you saying that all time exists at once for God? If so, then that would be B-theory. If, however, you are saying that God has knowledge of the past which no longer exists, the present which exists, and the future (a non-existent state that he foresees) then you are proposing A-theory. If A-theory, then you are saying that God is temporal because his knowledge changes, constantly knowing the ever-changing present.
G
GEddie
Guest
Y
YosefYosep
Guest
Haha sounds good:thumbsup:I guess you could call it G-Theory.
ICXC NIKA
F
fisherman_carl
Guest
I know this is what Dr. William Lane Craig thinks. He also believes that God doesn’t actually see the future, but predicts it with 100% accuracy because of his omnipotence. God’s knowledge changes under this view according to ‘tensed’ facts, or what is occurring in the present moment.
However, under this view, if God knew the future with complete accuracy then would his knowledge really change? If I know for instance that at 2:59 it is going to be 3:00, does my knowledge change when it becomes 3:00? It wasn’t like 3:00 was a surprise. The only thing that has changed is that the state of 3:00 has been temporarily classified from ‘future’ event to ‘now’ event. And then, at 3:01 it would be classified as ‘past’ event. Yet, my knowledge of the event remained the same. Only the classification of the event has changed. But, even that you knew was going to happen.
At any rate if God sees all of time at once in an eternal now then such distinctions become obsolete.
W
Wesrock
Guest
All temporal events that ever have come into being exist in one great now for God. He only knows them once they are in being, or as they are in being. But there is no before or after for God. So all of that is before him at once. However, he doesn’t know alternate worlds or what would happen if time went on longer than what he allows.
Temporal sequence is real. But God does not experience temporal sequences.
V
Vico
Guest
Although St. Thomas Aquinas did not have the A-series, B-series, and C-series logic of McTaggert (The Unreality of Time), the B-series, which has been favored in philosophy, appears to work with St. Thomas Aquinas teaching, because God has knowledge of all potential. The non-temporal C series has order but no time.
- Status