Evidence for God from Science

CeT-To wrote:

DannyM wrote:God is certainly outside of time in the sense that He is not constrained by time. I agree that the past is not occuring as we speak, any more than the future is occuring as we speak.

Maybe you could explain what you mean by that, Danny. In what sense would he be constrained by time? Time doesn't necessarily mean erosion or that i think that it might apply to our universe us such but there are no physical or entropy laws outside the universe. But yeah explain

God is timeless, hence He is outside of, and not constrained by, time. It's not about erosion, but it appears to be about you thinking God is somehow temporal and necessarily a part of this universe. Physical or entropy laws have no bearing on this, either

DannyM wrote:

CeT-To wrote:

DannyM wrote:God is certainly outside of time in the sense that He is not constrained by time. I agree that the past is not occuring as we speak, any more than the future is occuring as we speak.

Maybe you could explain what you mean by that, Danny. In what sense would he be constrained by time? Time doesn't necessarily mean erosion or that i think that it might apply to our universe us such but there are no physical or entropy laws outside the universe. But yeah explain

God is timeless, hence He is outside of, and not constrained by, time. It's not about erosion, but it appears to be about you thinking God is somehow temporal and necessarily a part of this universe. Physical or entropy laws have no bearing on this, either

You've misunderstood me, i never said God is part of the universe lol that assumption comes from thinking that time is only in the universe or that time is necessarily a dimension but we don't know that and i think it doesn't have to be that way. I still don't understand your explanation what is this constraint of time on God? I think once God created then universe he did enter into a temporal state and left the state of timelessness because of the act of creation.

CeT-To wrote:You've misunderstood me, i never said God is part of the universe lol that assumption comes from thinking that time is only in the universe or that time is necessarily a dimension but we don't know that and i think it doesn't have to be that way.

If you are saying that time exists outside of the universe then please explain.

I still don't understand your explanation what is this constraint of time on God?

It's pretty simple. God is not subject to space/time, which as far as I know exist within the universe.

I think once God created then universe he did enter into a temporal state and left the state of timelessness because of the act of creation.

Why do you think that?

DannyM wrote:

CeT-To wrote:You've misunderstood me, i never said God is part of the universe lol that assumption comes from thinking that time is only in the universe or that time is necessarily a dimension but we don't know that and i think it doesn't have to be that way.

If you are saying that time exists outside of the universe then please explain.

I still don't understand your explanation what is this constraint of time on God?

It's pretty simple. God is not subject to space/time, which as far as I know exist within the universe.

I think once God created then universe he did enter into a temporal state and left the state of timelessness because of the act of creation.

Why do you think that?

Time can exist outside the universe for example if God being timeless created something like an angel who isn't timeless since it thinks in a finite sense then there is time, the time where the angel did not think of this and the time where the angel did think of this ( "this" being whatever you want haha) and God reacts differently depending on the timing of the angel's state. Where time began would be the moment of anything finite created.

CeT-To wrote:Time can exist outside the universe for example if God being timeless created something like an angel who isn't timeless since it thinks in a finite sense then there is time, the time where the angel did not think of this and the time where the angel did think of this ( "this" being whatever you want haha) and God reacts differently depending on the timing of the angel's state. Where time began would be the moment of anything finite created.

And how does this relate to time as we know it? You know what the standard Big Bang model says, right? What did God create outside of creation?

I think once God created then universe he did enter into a temporal state and left the state of timelessness because of the act of creation.

Bro, why do you think this?

DannyM wrote:

CeT-To wrote:Time can exist outside the universe for example if God being timeless created something like an angel who isn't timeless since it thinks in a finite sense then there is time, the time where the angel did not think of this and the time where the angel did think of this ( "this" being whatever you want haha) and God reacts differently depending on the timing of the angel's state. Where time began would be the moment of anything finite created.

And how does this relate to time as we know it? You know what the standard Big Bang model says, right? What did God create outside of creation?

I think once God created then universe he did enter into a temporal state and left the state of timelessness because of the act of creation.

Bro, why do you think this?

Right well i never said it's the same time as we know it, i mean time in the universe is connected to the physical nature of the universe while outside there is no dimension of the sort i guess since it is spiritual eternal realm. Yeah i know what the big bang model says that time and space was created at the moment of the big bang but wouldn't this be the the physical time and space. Wouldn't it be the case that to say that the creation of the universe is the ultimate beginning of the essence of time be an assumption that the universe was the first creation? though we don't know that, it could be or it could be possible that angels were created first and they take time to process info since they are finite beings. I say God has entered into a temporal state from the logical effect of creating a finite creation which takes time to process, like the angel example - God would have to react differently at different times depending on the angel's mental state or train of thought thus he would be acting IN time .

Hi Neo!

neo-x wrote:I am not in the idea that free will means we can win God's favour by works. It simply means that one is not influenced by God to make a choice in his favour or against him.

John 6:44
No-one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.

No-one can come to the Lord uninfluenced by God.

Was Eve influenced by evil when she ate the fruit? No, she reasoned, as the Bible tells us. So the point that choices are influenced, fails particularly in this scenario. But I see your point. An evil heart will produce bad things.

Brother, are you saying Eve was not influenced?

one cannot come to God without the father enabling him but I think this is not the initiate step.

The initial step come from the Father and not the sinner, who is unable due to being dead in his sins:

Ephesians 2:4-5
4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy,
5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions— it is by grace you have been saved.

I think first man hears, then repents, when you hear the gospel, the holy spirit will convict you, now either you repent or you don't, this is free will. And I think whoever hears or witnesses the Gospel is enabled by God to have a choice in this matter. If he chooses to accept, he will be drawn to God. So when Jesus says, no one can come to me unless the father enables him, this, to me, means that once the gospel is heard, the work of God begins but it is the same with everyone, not just a few.

I think this is all back to front, Bro:

John 8:42-47
42 Jesus said to them, If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me.

43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say.

44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!

46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me?

47 He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.

Men hear, Brother, and do not repent. Reading the above, why is that?

Bro, the same way you think he can't refuse because God already knew he wouldn't.

But none of this shows Paul ‘has been overridden’. Bro, for this to work you need to show me that Paul’s choice was not a real choice. This is what I am struggling to see. God predetermines actions and events throughout history. Of this, unless one is Scripturally blind, we can be sure. But it does not follow [that] Paul’s choice wasn’t a real choice. I know it’s hard to get our heads around, but it seems to me that, since God predetermined that Paul would be His, then the point is practically moot. If Paul was ever going to do anything different it’s because God would have foreordained things differently. Since God in eternity foreknew Paul, then Paul is a child of God, and surely he gladly ran to God of his own choice, and surely out of a will that was as ‘free’ as any other so-called free will.

See a difference, you are coming from the same point I hold objection to, brother. Paul can not do otherwise because God already knew. And this is why I say, if Paul can not choose (since God already knew) then we don't have a choice in accepting God (note, I am not saying that Paul can come to God on his own free will merit and not grace. I am saying that even LIMITED FREE WILL also means that Paul can reject God's plan, this has to be or else God forces us).

Brother, you’re repeating the same thing, and it seems to me to be fruitless. God knew Paul before creation. Paul was foreknown; he was 'fore-appointed' in eternity. The Bible does not relate some sort of anticipation from God of what might 'spontaneously' happen.

Either we have free will, in at least a personal relationship to God or God's omniscience would make us do nothing except what God knows. Thus in latter conclusion we always get to choose what God knows we would, which again renders choice as just an illusion.

Then all your choices are an illusion, my Brother. Unless you want to abandon the doctrine of God’s omniscience.

1. We do what God always knew we would do, this amounts predestination to some extent. As you say, we don't have absolute free will, we just have limited choice but NO, we can not say No to God if he intends to change my life (as you think Paul could not have done it since God already knew he wouldn't)

That’s right, since Paul was predestined to freely come to God.

2. God does not force us to do exactly what he knows and we can always change our mind, we have free will (not that our free will has any merit on gaining salvation by works, only acceptance when God offers it to us) , even limited free will YET we can say "Yes" or "no" to God's plan for our lives (not talking about prophecies, bro), we will face the consequences anyway. But if this is so then God's foreknowledge is not even an issue here. Is it? Whether God knew or not, doesn't matter, I can choose, God's knowledge has nothing to do with it, it may even be changed or updated.

Okay, Neo. In this case:

1. If God knows exactly what you will do, how can you change your mind from what God exactly knows?
2. Did God foreknow whether you would say Yes or No?

God bless, Brother Neo, and sorry for the lateness in replying.

Can a person come to know God exists, regardless of whether or not they are saved?

neo-x wrote:I am not in the idea that free will means we can win God's favour by works. It simply means that one is not influenced by God to make a choice in his favour or against him

Neo, I'm with Danny on this. I can't see how man can come to God, without God's quickening. Danny and I may or may not agree on what exactly God does to quicken, but there is some kind of "drawing" from God, that is needed.

one cannot come to God without the father enabling him but I think this is not the initiate step.

This "enabling" by God, has to be before man's choice to accept the gospel.

Either we have free will, in at least a personal relationship to God or God's omniscience would make us do nothing except what God knows. Thus in latter conclusion we always get to choose what God knows we would, which again renders choice as just an illusion.

The only thing that is an illusion, is "absolute, libertarian" free will, IMO. All our choices are influenced by something.

1. We do what God always knew we would do, this amounts predestination to some extent. As you say, we don't have absolute free will, we just have limited choice but NO, we can not say No to God if he intends to change my life (as you think Paul could not have done it since God already knew he wouldn't)


That’s right, since Paul was predestined to freely come to God.

Well said, Danny.

CeT-To wrote:Right well i never said it's the same time as we know it, i mean time in the universe is connected to the physical nature of the universe while outside there is no dimension of the sort i guess since it is spiritual eternal realm. Yeah i know what the big bang model says that time and space was created at the moment of the big bang but wouldn't this be the the physical time and space. Wouldn't it be the case that to say that the creation of the universe is the ultimate beginning of the essence of time be an assumption that the universe was the first creation? though we don't know that, it could be or it could be possible that angels were created first and they take time to process info since they are finite beings.

Hmm, very speculative, Bro, but interesting nonetheless

I say God has entered into a temporal state from the logical effect of creating a finite creation which takes time to process, like the angel example - God would have to react differently at different times depending on the angel's mental state or train of thought thus he would be acting IN time .

CeT-To, if you’ll indulge me, I need more on this. God is eternal (Deuteronomy 33:27) and he is from everlasting to everlasting (Psalm 106:48). God is spirit (John 4:24). God does not ‘change’ to an angel‘s whim, let alone the whim of man. The Lord does not change (Malachi 3:6). A timeless God is the source of eternal truths. A temporal God is a God who limits Himself, changing in some ways, as and when, in order to respond to a changing creation. I see no reason, Scriptural or logical, to hold to this strange idea of God.

DannyM wrote:1. We do what God always knew we would do, this amounts predestination to some extent. As you say, we don't have absolute free will, we just have limited choice but NO, we can not say No to God if he intends to change my life (as you think Paul could not have done it since God already knew he wouldn't)

That’s right, since Paul was predestined to freely come to God.

Same with Jonah. Jonah's will was to high-tail it to Tarshish. God's will was for Jonah to go to Ninevah. God sent two things to get Jonah's attention which would eventually bring him to Ninevah: a tempest (storm) and a great fish.

DannyM wrote:But it does not follow [that] Paul’s choice wasn’t a real choice. I know it’s hard to get our heads around, but it seems to me that, since God predetermined that Paul would be His, then the point is practically moot. If Paul was ever going to do anything different it’s because God would have foreordained things differently. Since God in eternity foreknew Paul, then Paul is a child of God, and surely he gladly ran to God of his own choice, and surely out of a will that was as ‘free’ as any other so-called free will.

Bravo

Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he (Paul) is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

Katabole wrote:Same with Jonah. Jonah's will was to high-tail it to Tarshish. God's will was for Jonah to go to Ninevah. God sent two things to get Jonah's attention which would eventually bring him to Ninevah: a tempest (storm) and a great fish.

DannyM wrote:But it does not follow [that] Paul’s choice wasn’t a real choice. I know it’s hard to get our heads around, but it seems to me that, since God predetermined that Paul would be His, then the point is practically moot. If Paul was ever going to do anything different it’s because God would have foreordained things differently. Since God in eternity foreknew Paul, then Paul is a child of God, and surely he gladly ran to God of his own choice, and surely out of a will that was as ‘free’ as any other so-called free will.

Katabole wrote:Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he (Paul) is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

Indeed, Kat.

I'm into those links, Brother, and I can't lie to you, it's tough going....But I'm a stayer, my friend, and it is interesting!

DannyM wrote:

CeT-To wrote:Right well i never said it's the same time as we know it, i mean time in the universe is connected to the physical nature of the universe while outside there is no dimension of the sort i guess since it is spiritual eternal realm. Yeah i know what the big bang model says that time and space was created at the moment of the big bang but wouldn't this be the the physical time and space. Wouldn't it be the case that to say that the creation of the universe is the ultimate beginning of the essence of time be an assumption that the universe was the first creation? though we don't know that, it could be or it could be possible that angels were created first and they take time to process info since they are finite beings.

Hmm, very speculative, Bro, but interesting nonetheless

I say God has entered into a temporal state from the logical effect of creating a finite creation which takes time to process, like the angel example - God would have to react differently at different times depending on the angel's mental state or train of thought thus he would be acting IN time .

CeT-To, if you’ll indulge me, I need more on this. God is eternal (Deuteronomy 33:27) and he is from everlasting to everlasting (Psalm 106:48). God is spirit (John 4:24). God does not ‘change’ to an angel‘s whim, let alone the whim of man. The Lord does not change (Malachi 3:6). A timeless God is the source of eternal truths. A temporal God is a God who limits Himself, changing in some ways, as and when, in order to respond to a changing creation. I see no reason, Scriptural or logical, to hold to this strange idea of God.

Of course why would scripture need to talk about this :S it has got nothing to do with God's character, which is exactly why God says he does not 'change' because he is the moral standard/ 'the Good' - he is talking about his character here in Malachi 3:6. God is still everlasting and eternal even if he enters a temporal mode of existence since God would have still have existed from eternity to eternity, everlasting to everlasting. Well hold on God does limit himself in some ways when dealing with creation - God can't overthrow our free will or annihilate us, this isn't anything new and this would be a change in your view since before he was not limited or self restrained in this way, unless you take that Malachi 3:6 is talking about his character. But it is not possible for a timeless God to interact with finite timely beings unless you take the view that time is static where all moments in time are present to their subjective standpoint in the time block and God is outside this block of time- yet this view of time is unacceptable for the Christian because then 2000yrs ago Jesus is still on that Cross existing yet in the future he is Still existing but at the right hand of the father. That makes no sense at all. So that is why i was saying it is a logical effect from creation that he also enter into a temporal mode of existence and not be timelessly frozen. Plus Christ is not timeless lol the second person of the trinity entered time to save us by your view ( mine is that God entered into a temporal state since creation) so even then you can't hold that God is still in his timeless state. Lol you should see a logical reason because you can't remain timeless yet act in time - once God would act in time he would shift into a temporal mode where there would be no turning back, even if he destroyed the universe and physical time (as you see it as the only place with time) you can still say " God DID annihilate the universe" or " God DID uphold the universe", time would still be there.

I think the problem here is, when we say, God is timeless we are actually saying that the time of the creation must come after God, hence time was not always there. But it is a relative issue here. By definition, time is the period between two occurrences. So God is timeless, yes from the human scale, sure. He is, he precedes all. But in the realm outside of our universe, time can in fact be still called time. It may be too much close to infinity and forever that WE, humans, cannot calculate it, but by definition, we can say, God exists always and so does time. Though that time has nothing to do with us. We can't change or alter it, neither does it affect us. So in that sense it is irrelevant but I don't think time is something that can be an objection to God, I mean it doesn't hurt God if time exists.

I have heard preachers say, "Time exists in God", I agree, but then we are talking about our time, we as a universe exist in God, so naturally whatever we have, must also exists in God and God exist before and prior to it. But then that does not necessarily say or negate that there is no time outside of our knowledge. I certainly think there is a time, it may unaccountable or may not be calculated in any human terms but yes, time would exist by definition even outside of what we know.

neo-x wrote:I think the problem here is, when we say, God is timeless we are actually saying that the time of the creation must come after God, hence time was not always there. But it is a relative issue here. By definition, time is the period between two occurrences. So God is timeless, yes from the human scale, sure. He is, he precedes all. But in the realm outside of our universe, time can in fact be still called time. It may be too much close to infinity and forever that WE, humans, cannot calculate it, but by definition, we can say, God exists always and so does time. Though that time has nothing to do with us. We can't change or alter it, neither does it affect us. So in that sense it is irrelevant but I don't think time is something that can be an objection to God, I mean it doesn't hurt God if time exists.

I have heard preachers say, "Time exists in God", I agree, but then we are talking about our time, we as a universe exist in God, so naturally whatever we have, must also exists in God and God exist before and prior to it. But then that does not necessarily say or negate that there is no time outside of our knowledge. I certainly think there is a time, it may unaccountable or may not be calculated in any human terms but yes, time would exist by definition even outside of what we know.

Yes, i take the view that God was in a timeless state and then when initiated the act of creation is when time began thus entering into a temporal mode of existence. Umm i don't think time has been ever existent since God has existed but rather when He first initiated an act of any sort then that is when time began. I agree being temporal has no bearing on the limits of God - in a sense rather he has liberated himself from the motionless state of timelessness.

Time doesn't exist in God, what does that even mean? It seems rather the initial act of God in effect allows you to use timely senses like past, present, future where before no such use would make sense because of God's timelessness. I think that's all time is outside the universe ( or if there was no universe) - being able to say something was in the past, present or will happen in the future, as such time isn't only a physical dimension of the universe as time is presented in the universe we live in.