Evidence for God from Science

CeT-To wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:First off, reducing God to something we can understand is all fine and dandy but we always have to have in mind the notion that this is what we are doing.
God is far and above anything we can completely understand, that God has chosen to reveal himself in his Son, Christ, shows that we NEED to understand Christ as he WAS and IS to US, before we can truly grasp ALL the God is.
The Trinity was an attempt to do jsut that, something that was done to answer the herseys' of the likes of Arian.
If those things hadn't of come up, there would have been no "trinity doctrine".
The mind-body-spirit analogy is a good one to start with, in trying to grasp the Trinity.
We are made on God's image so the "trinity of US" has even more signifcance.
God The Father is supreme and the HS and Christ subject themselves volunterily to The Father because of their perfect Union, just as, IDEALLY, Our mind and body subject themselves to Our Spirit.
The equality is still there, What God begets is God, hence Christ is God and the HS, the is both Christ and God the Father and that which united them, is THEM, hence God.
Yet, they are distinct ( volunterily) and separate, just like our body, mind and spirit ( which together make us a Living Soul).

I agree with you on the perfect union! But for some reason i think the analogy, you could say, of 3 minds and 1 spirit is better than the analogy of the body, mind and spirit. Nonetheless if it gets the message out, the truth, then it doesn't matter. I'm trying to understand God but i know i can't comprehend Him but this doesn't mean we can't dwell on the subject. I mean better think about God and try to understand Him than watching tv or most of the stuff one can do. God isn't some sort of contradiction that we can't understand but this is not to say that we can comprehend Him either! I agree that we should be on alert not to bring God down when we try to understand Him but thats not always the case when people try to. For example, knowing that God is the unmoved mover. I understand that but I cannot truly comprehend it, it just leaves me in awe at the majesty of God.

God bless!

I think one of the biggest issues with understanding ANYTHING of the realm that is beyond our plane of experience is a "point of reference" and that I why I kind of like the "mind, body and spirit" analogy.
Personally I find the trinity doctrine "flawed" ( its language) and irrelevant for MY belief in God and Christ and the HS.
But if it works for some, great.
That said it is also a stumbling block for many that just don't understand it.
The bible gives as a base view of the trinity, it doesn't really go much into it in detail and bascially asks us to accept and understand that Christ is the son of God, begotten and not created, in Nature and essence God and that the HS is God's spirit and that Christ is ALSO the HS.
It asks us to understand this perfect union that we TOO are suppose to be part of.
It doesn't put a name on it or try to explain it with terms that require even MORE explanation and I think that mans something that the writers never expanded on it.
Paul came the closest and he was clear.
To me at least, that is enough.

Mmm okay I understand your position on the Trinity, Paul. Getting back to the main subject of the topic, any thoughts on what I've said so far?

God bless!

Going back to thew original post

CeT-To wrote:Was God thoughtless in his timeless state? Or did he have 1 thought for eternity till he chose to actualise the act of creating?

If the second stance is true, then since there are 3 persons in God having their own will and mind seperate from the other, will each 3 have a different thought or the exact same thought?

What do you guys think?

God bless

It's a very philosophical question.
God being outside our perception of time CAN indeed have a single thought that lasts 1000 years, I mean, why not?
Anything is possible of course, not matter how improbable.
I think that, as Christians, we have a unique perspective of God because we believe He has revealed himself fully in Christ, his Only Begotten Son.
So we must use Jesus's example to lead us in our understanding of God.
Jesus tells us that God is love and light and that He is he source of all, that He, the Father and the HS are in union and of the same purpose and focus.
That gives us the clues to answer your question:
God is in constant thought and, as the bible shows, when God choose to interact with US, he does so on OUR terms.
Christ, God and the HS are of a single purpose, in perfect union and even if they were to have different thoughts at the sametime, they would be in harmony with each other.

Since God is outside of time I would think terms like 'how long' or 'last a 1,000 years' or anything similar that denotes the passage of time is utterly meaningless. The way I think about it is that God's thoughts are always in the present. There is no past and no future, always in the present so that everything that happened and will happen is manifestly available in the here and now.

Byblos wrote:Since God is outside of time I would think terms like 'how long' or 'last a 1,000 years' or anything similar that denotes the passage of time is utterly meaningless. The way I think about it is that God's thoughts are always in the present. There is no past and no future, always in the present so that everything that happened and will happen is manifestly available in the here and now.

Yep i agree with your first part of your comment, but isn't God in a temporal state now since he actively works in his creation thus there is a "past" now even outside the universe? Thats why i said before that if God had successive thoughts one by one when he was in a timeless state then he would enter a temporal state. Correct me if i am wrong Byblos.

Byblos wrote:God's thoughts are always in the present.

Doesn't the suggestion that God has more than one thought remove his timelessness state? Clearly can't God have an innumerable number of ideas in 1 thought?

God bless!

CeT-To wrote:

Byblos wrote:Since God is outside of time I would think terms like 'how long' or 'last a 1,000 years' or anything similar that denotes the passage of time is utterly meaningless. The way I think about it is that God's thoughts are always in the present. There is no past and no future, always in the present so that everything that happened and will happen is manifestly available in the here and now.

Yep i agree with your first part of your comment, but isn't God in a temporal state now since he actively works in his creation thus there is a "past" now even outside the universe? Thats why i said before that if God had successive thoughts one by one when he was in a timeless state then he would enter a temporal state. Correct me if i am wrong Byblos.

It seems what you're implying here (consciously or otherwise) is that since God is actively working in his creation, that he somehow is adjusting his plan according to our actions (otherwise why would he keep actively working?). This again implies the notion of not only the passage of time, which God is not subject to, but also that God is somehow surprised by our actions and needs to adjust his plans accordingly. Both notions are absurd in my view.

CeT-To wrote:

Byblos wrote:God's thoughts are always in the present.

Doesn't the suggestion that God has more than one thought remove his timelessness state? Clearly can't God have an innumerable number of ideas in 1 thought?

No it doesn't, otherwise it would mean God did not have something (like a thought) at time T, which he gains at time T+1. This would make God not omniscient. God's thoughts in the here and now INCLUDE his plan from before creation, knowing what would have happened in the past and what will happen in the future (as far as created beings subject to time are concerned).

Byblos wrote:It seems what you're implying here (consciously or otherwise) is that since God is actively working in his creation, that he somehow is adjusting his plan according to our actions (otherwise why would he keep actively working?). This again implies the notion of not only the passage of time, which God is not subject to, but also that God is somehow surprised by our actions and needs to adjust his plans accordingly. Both notions are absurd in my view.

I wouldn't say God is suprised by our actions, thats just ignoring His omniscience. But if God is still in his timeless state then couldn't he enter in an moment in human history which includes the past? Isn't that absurd since the past doesn't exist anymore.

Byblos wrote:No it doesn't, otherwise it would mean God did not have something (like a thought) at time T, which he gains at time T+1. This would make God not omniscient. God's thoughts in the here and now INCLUDE his plan from before creation, knowing what would have happened in the past and what will happen in the future (as far as created beings subject to time are concerned).

Huh? I don't get it. Thats the opposite of what im saying in your first sentence, im saying that God has had 1 thought through out his timeless state or even now.

CeT-To wrote:

Byblos wrote:It seems what you're implying here (consciously or otherwise) is that since God is actively working in his creation, that he somehow is adjusting his plan according to our actions (otherwise why would he keep actively working?). This again implies the notion of not only the passage of time, which God is not subject to, but also that God is somehow surprised by our actions and needs to adjust his plans accordingly. Both notions are absurd in my view.

I wouldn't say God is suprised by our actions, thats just ignoring His omniscience. But if God is still in his timeless state then couldn't he enter in an moment in human history which includes the past? Isn't that absurd since the past doesn't exist anymore.

Can God change the past? I really don't know, philosophically there might be problems with that but I haven't really considered that. What I have considered is that even if God could theoretically change the past, he wouldn't because that would not only override free will but imo it will negate the necessity for a redemptive process and Christ.

CeT-To wrote:

Byblos wrote:No it doesn't, otherwise it would mean God did not have something (like a thought) at time T, which he gains at time T+1. This would make God not omniscient. God's thoughts in the here and now INCLUDE his plan from before creation, knowing what would have happened in the past and what will happen in the future (as far as created beings subject to time are concerned).

Huh? I don't get it. Thats the opposite of what im saying in your first sentence, im saying that God has had 1 thought through out his timeless state or even now.

My response was in relation to the first part of your sentence only, I should have quoted it better. Here is what you said and what I responded to:

CeT-To wrote:Doesn't the suggestion that God has more than one thought remove his timelessness state?

And to that I answered: No it doesn't ...

As to the second part of what you said:

CeT-To wrote:Clearly can't God have an innumerable number of ideas in 1 thought?

Yes, I would tend to agree but I don't think it's necessary to maintain God's omniscience. He could very well have an infinite number of thoughts (every thought possible). Can we think of them as one thought? Perhaps, why not.

Yes i agree with you it would negate Christs work. Not only that i think its impossible for God to enter the past because it doesn't exist anymore. To my knowledge there are 2 theories of time, A & B. A= is the dynamic theory where there are such things as past present and future but that the past doesnt exist anymore, the future doesnt either but is purely potential and the present is ... well now..now ..now if you get what i mean hahah. The B theory is that time is Static in the sense there is no real past & future but rather any point in time is present - for example Moses still exists in the past corresponding to this time, but for Moses' time it would be present for him. But yeah thats all i know, i'm no expert in time philosophy. B theory of time would create serious problems with Christianity i think.

Well hold on i made a distinction between thought and idea. Thought is the mind processing or process, while idea is the content of the thought. So since God is infinitely higher than us as beings i think its plausible for God to have 1 thought and innumerable amount of ideas. I agree with you he could have every possible idea at once hence in 1 thought but i don't think it can be infinite, i mean clearly there cant be and there isn't an absolute infinite number of ideas.

I think if God successively has 1 thought after another then He does enter into a temporal state. Even before He interacts with creation. For example if God has had 1 thought for eternity then he decides to have a different one and then another ... well there we go then, the past tense has been created. Another example is if God started counting down from 5 till 0 to which then he would create the universe. Time can be independent from space and physical objects as the examples clearly shows.

God bless!

Hmm, some strange ideas.
First of all, as they say in Texas: Time is Gods' way of keeping everything from happening at once.
But God is outside of time. So...
2) As for visiting the past: Well, God is everywhere in time at once. There is no T, T+1, etc.
In fact, since time is a creation of this universe, then I think that theory B is the correct one. And that leads to
3) If God is going to change the past, then He already did . Wait, going to... .

SnowDrops wrote:Hmm, some strange ideas.
First of all, as they say in Texas: Time is Gods' way of keeping everything from happening at once.
But God is outside of time. So...
2) As for visiting the past: Well, God is everywhere in time at once. There is no T, T+1, etc.
In fact, since time is a creation of this universe, then I think that theory B is the correct one. And that leads to
3) If God is going to change the past, then He already did . Wait, going to... .

2)God is omnipresent but that doesnt mean he is everywhere in time since that doesnt make sense lol the past doesn't exist.
3) God can't change the past it doesnt exist anymore.

B theory would be bad for Christianity because then Moses or even Jesus would still exist in the past but hold on isn't Moses with God at the moment? Contradiction.

A theory of time would be correct for the Christian world view. Furthermore like i showed in my previous post Time doesnt have to be dependent on space and physical objects. So if God did something before He created the universe - time would have started then.

Yes mind bending, Snow!

God bless!!

CeT-To wrote:

SnowDrops wrote:Hmm, some strange ideas.
First of all, as they say in Texas: Time is Gods' way of keeping everything from happening at once.
But God is outside of time. So...
2) As for visiting the past: Well, God is everywhere in time at once. There is no T, T+1, etc.
In fact, since time is a creation of this universe, then I think that theory B is the correct one. And that leads to
3) If God is going to change the past, then He already did . Wait, going to... .

2)God is omnipresent but that doesnt mean he is everywhere in time since that doesnt make sense lol the past doesn't exist.
3) God can't change the past it doesnt exist anymore.

B theory would be bad for Christianity because then Moses or even Jesus would still exist in the past but hold on isn't Moses with God at the moment? Contradiction.

A theory of time would be correct for the Christian world view. Furthermore like i showed in my previous post Time doesnt have to be dependent on space and physical objects. So if God did something before He created the universe - time would have started then.

Yes mind bending, Snow!

God bless!!

No, what I was saying is for God, everything happens now. God is creating the universe now, He is speaking to Moses now, He is watching the world being destroyed now. Well, not actually. In our now, within time, He is doing one thing. In this place in time He is doing one thing and since for us there is only one place at once we might ass well accept theory A. But for God, there is no time. In that sense, He did everything in one moment, which is possible since for Him the dimension of time is the same as the dimensions of space. We are still in only one place in time though, so it does not look like that for us.
As for Moses, well, in Heaven there is no time so I suppose that would put him in a situation kinda similar to Gods'. Yeah, I'll have to think about that. So I agree for now that Moses does not exist in some sense. Well, in any case he does not exist in our now, but I think he does exist in Gods' now.

Before you reply, think about the, umm, "Texas quote". I think it illustrates how different time and space seem to us than to God. After all, for God, space and time don't have any meaning.

Welcome to theoretical physics and philosophy. Combined

Hey, why did "as" get censored?

SnowDrops wrote:Hey, why did "as" get censored?

Maybe you typed it with double s?

In any case, time is part and parcel of creation, otherwise it would lead to many paradoxes (most commonly associated with the oscillating universe theory). Time is so woven into the fabric of the universe that it is now more common to call space and time as a single entity: space-time. So no, time could not have existed before the creation of the universe.

Byblos wrote:

SnowDrops wrote:Hey, why did "as" get censored?

Maybe you typed it with double s?

In any case, time is part and parcel of creation, otherwise it would lead to many paradoxes (most commonly associated with the oscillating universe theory). Time is so woven into the fabric of the universe that it is now more common to call space and time as a single entity: space-time. So no, time could not have existed before the creation of the universe.

Yo Byblos, what are some of the paradoxes?

What about the examples that ive given? clearly that make it possible that time could be independent from the physical world & dimension.

I'm saying a series of mental events in God's mind like the examples ive given could initiate temporal tenses. Like the past and present. God can still be perfectly omniscient knowing everything that will happen in the past, present, future.