The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 1,343
|
Post by The Lost One on Jul 26, 2022 11:39:08 GMT
So...if God is timeless, by definition, each thought he has happens/happened at once with no gaps between them, and if he is eternal and had a thought which resulted in something being created (a universe), then that creation has to be eternal. That means if God is eternal and timeless, the universe has always existed and exists eternally meaning it had no beginning. Which is it? Is the universe eternal or did the universe have a beginning? But the universe still would have begun to exist - there was, per Abrahamic belief, an act of creation to bring it about. But you just can't really think of a 'before' it began to exist because time only became a thing at its creation. Taking God out of the equation, this remains true with naturalistic interpretations of the universe. It doesn't make any sense to talk about 'before the Big Bang' but the Big Bang is still an event that happened. It might be easier to think in terms of contingency rather than sequences of events. Per Abrahamic belief, the universe is contingent on God - no God, no universe. Regardless of whether both could be said to be eternal, God is still the element whose existence is necessary. Although personally, I prefer more pantheistic concepts of the universe.
|
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jul 26, 2022 12:15:59 GMT
Whatever time is, it is the thing that keeps everything from happening all at once. Or, more precisely, if things happen sequentially, even thoughts, the implies a form of time as the gaps between each thought becomes something that can be counted. That implies a sequential series of events and can, for all intents and purposes be called time. So...if God is timeless, by definition, each thought he has happens/happened at once with no gaps between them, and if he is eternal and had a thought which resulted in something being created (a universe), then that creation has to be eternal. That means if God is eternal and timeless, the universe has always existed and exists eternally meaning it had no beginning. Which is it? Is the universe eternal or did the universe have a beginning? Does God experience sequences and experience time, by default? If God's thoughts occur sequentially, what was his first thought? If he is eternal, CAN he have had a first thought? I'm not following the logic because by definition, God is supernatural while the universe is natural, so his existence is outside the universe. And time is a dimension in this universe, we don't know if it exists outside. So perhaps God would be timeless because he exists in a timeless place, literally a place with no time. Can anything....e.g. a being (supernatural or natural) experience sequences without time?
|
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jul 26, 2022 12:42:54 GMT
So...if God is timeless, by definition, each thought he has happens/happened at once with no gaps between them, and if he is eternal and had a thought which resulted in something being created (a universe), then that creation has to be eternal. That means if God is eternal and timeless, the universe has always existed and exists eternally meaning it had no beginning. Which is it? Is the universe eternal or did the universe have a beginning? But the universe still would have begun to exist - there was, per Abrahamic belief, an act of creation to bring it about. But you just can't really think of a 'before' it began to exist because time only became a thing at its creation. Taking God out of the equation, this remains true with naturalistic interpretations of the universe. It doesn't make any sense to talk about 'before the Big Bang' but the Big Bang is still an event that happened. It might be easier to think in terms of contingency rather than sequences of events. Per Abrahamic belief, the universe is contingent on God - no God, no universe. Regardless of whether both could be said to be eternal, God is still the element whose existence is necessary. Although personally, I prefer more pantheistic concepts of the universe. How can sequences of events occur without gaps or without experiencing 'series?' It's one thing to claim God is timeless, but it's quite another to explain how it can think sequences of thoughts without implying a sort of time. To me, sequences imply a separation even if the separation is simply that one has to have 'ended' before the other began. The only other alternative is that all those separate thoughts happen at one time...ie in NO time. The only logical upshot is that since the 'thought' to create was not preceded by anything, the universe was created as soon as God thought it....and since God does not experience sequences, you know because sequences imply time and he has to time, then the universe has to have always existed which is NOT what the evidence supports.
Please answer the first question before getting mired in the rest. Describe in simple words what a sequence is.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 1,343
|
Post by The Lost One on Jul 26, 2022 13:28:16 GMT
the universe was created as soon as God thought it....and since God does not experience sequences, you know because sequences imply time and he has to time, then the universe has to have always existed which is NOT what the evidence supports. What does the evidence support? My understanding is the evidence suggests that time and space emerged in the big bang. So if there was no 'time' before the big bang then the universe has existed for all time so it is, in that sense, eternal, no? I think the problem here is you are defining eternal as 'existing for all time' but saying that something that begins is not eternal. But there is no before the beginning so it is still eternal by that definition, even if it had a beginning. A sequence is A leads to B leads to C etc. In time, A must precede B, but in a timeless world, they all happen at once. So if God caused the big bang, God doesn't precede the universe because that implies time which doesn't exist yet, but the universe is still contingent on God since it requires him to create it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jul 26, 2022 20:21:57 GMT
the universe was created as soon as God thought it....and since God does not experience sequences, you know because sequences imply time and he has to time, then the universe has to have always existed which is NOT what the evidence supports. What does the evidence support? My understanding is the evidence suggests that time and space emerged in the big bang. So if there was no 'time' before the big bang then the universe has existed for all time so it is, in that sense, eternal, no? I think the problem here is you are defining eternal as 'existing for all time' but saying that something that begins is not eternal. But there is no before the beginning so it is still eternal by that definition, even if it had a beginning. A sequence is A leads to B leads to C etc. In time, A must precede B, but in a timeless world, they all happen at once. So if God caused the big bang, God doesn't precede the universe because that implies time which doesn't exist yet, but the universe is still contingent on God since it requires him to create it. The word yet gets in the way in your last sentence because...doesn't yet give the connotation of time passing as in something hasn't happened yet meaning there is some sort of time intervening before the event and when the event and after the event happens? That is 3 sequential states and those three states, being different, mean something kept them from happening simultaneously.
Isn't the idea that the universe is contingent and God is necessary an assertion because we think the universe began to exist? But what if there is a timeless underlying existence that is natural? That would mean the natural world would not be contingent because it never began to exist. That would mean the expanding universe we see emerged from this timeless natural existence which, if God can do something without any time in which to do it, maybe so can a timeless natural existence. At least that solves the problem of how did the universe begin to exist...it wasn't actually a beginning other than it was caused by (emerged from) a timeless natural existence.
|
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jul 26, 2022 20:23:51 GMT
What does the evidence support? My understanding is the evidence suggests that time and space emerged in the big bang. So if there was no 'time' before the big bang then the universe has existed for all time so it is, in that sense, eternal, no? I think the problem here is you are defining eternal as 'existing for all time' but saying that something that begins is not eternal. But there is no before the beginning so it is still eternal by that definition, even if it had a beginning. A sequence is A leads to B leads to C etc. In time, A must precede B, but in a timeless world, they all happen at once. So if God caused the big bang, God doesn't precede the universe because that implies time which doesn't exist yet, but the universe is still contingent on God since it requires him to create it.
The word yet gets in the way in your last sentence because...doesn't yet give the connotation of time passing as in something hasn't happened yet meaning there is some sort of time intervening before the event and when the event and after the event happens? That is 3 sequential states and those three states, being different, mean something kept them from happening simultaneously.
Isn't the idea that the universe is contingent and God is necessary an assertion because we think the universe began to exist? But what if there is a timeless underlying existence that is natural? That would mean the natural world would not be contingent because it never began to exist. That would mean the expanding universe we see along with time and space emerged from this timeless natural existence which, if God can do something without any time in which to do it, maybe so can a timeless natural existence. At least that solves the problem of how did the universe begin to exist...it wasn't actually a beginning other than it was caused by (emerged from) a timeless natural existence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Jul 27, 2022 1:44:54 GMT
I'm not following the logic because by definition, God is supernatural while the universe is natural, so his existence is outside the universe. And time is a dimension in this universe, we don't know if it exists outside. So perhaps God would be timeless because he exists in a timeless place, literally a place with no time. Can anything....e.g. a being (supernatural or natural) experience sequences without time? In the natural world, no, because time and causality are the same thing. Outside our universe (if there is an outside) which would include the supernatural, no one knows. Seems reasonable there is no time until there is causality, i.e. a beginning. If our universe has no effect on the supernatural (the outside) then there is no causality and no time there. Obviously, it's a thought experiment, but an interesting one.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 1,343
|
Post by The Lost One on Jul 27, 2022 7:51:42 GMT
The word yet gets in the way in your last sentence because...doesn't yet give the connotation of time passing as in something hasn't happened yet meaning there is some sort of time intervening before the event and when the event and after the event happens? Ha, yes, I slipped up there. Perhaps I should have said 'God doesn't precede the universe because that implies time which is part of the universe.' There is no before the universe. I don't think that follows. Different things can occur simultaneously. The question is whether simultaneous causation is theoretically possible (ie can cause and effect happen simultaneously?) and that's a long-standing debate in metaphysics. You can get a bit of the flavour of that debate here: philarchive.org/archive/CLARAT-11: Yeah, from a naturalist view, either the universe itself is necessary rather than contingent, or its contingent on some other natural entity. I wasn't arguing for the existence of God by appealing to contingency, just suggesting a way the relationship between a hypothetical creator God and a created universe could be understood without bringing sequential chains into it.
|
|
|
|
Post by MooseNugget on Jul 27, 2022 7:58:26 GMT
Whatever time is, it is the thing that keeps everything from happening all at once. Or, more precisely, if things happen sequentially, even thoughts, the implies a form of time as the gaps between each thought becomes something that can be counted. That implies a sequential series of events and can, for all intents and purposes be called time. So...if God is timeless, by definition, each thought he has happens/happened at once with no gaps between them, and if he is eternal and had a thought which resulted in something being created (a universe), then that creation has to be eternal. That means if God is eternal and timeless, the universe has always existed and exists eternally meaning it had no beginning. Which is it? Is the universe eternal or did the universe have a beginning? Does God experience sequences and experience time, by default? If God's thoughts occur sequentially, what was his first thought? If he is eternal, CAN he have had a first thought? I'm not following the logic because by definition, God is supernatural while the universe is natural, so his existence is outside the universe. And time is a dimension in this universe, we don't know if it exists outside. So perhaps God would be timeless because he exists in a timeless place, literally a place with no time. Wouldn't a black hole be a place in The Universe where time stops? |
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jul 27, 2022 13:19:20 GMT
The word yet gets in the way in your last sentence because...doesn't yet give the connotation of time passing as in something hasn't happened yet meaning there is some sort of time intervening before the event and when the event and after the event happens? Ha, yes, I slipped up there. Perhaps I should have said 'God doesn't precede the universe because that implies time which is part of the universe.' There is no before the universe. I don't think that follows. Different things can occur simultaneously. The question is whether simultaneous causation is theoretically possible (ie can cause and effect happen simultaneously?) and that's a long-standing debate in metaphysics. You can get a bit of the flavour of that debate here: philarchive.org/archive/CLARAT-11: Yeah, from a naturalist view, either the universe itself is necessary rather than contingent, or its contingent on some other natural entity. I wasn't arguing for the existence of God by appealing to contingency, just suggesting a way the relationship between a hypothetical creator God and a created universe could be understood without bringing sequential chains into it. A cause and effect being entirely simultaneous seems counterintuitive in that the conditions that allow the cause to even exist seem to have to be in place before the 'effect' can occur whether it be a natural or supernatural cause. IOW....yes, one billiard ball striking and causing another billiard ball to now have motion happens simultaneously. But the striking billiard ball had to already possess some characteristics (motion, substance, inertia, etc.) that make motion possible before it can impart those to another billiard ball which also had to already have mass, inertia and substance. But I'll be the first to admit that not matching, or making sense based on, intuition might be a poor basis for rejecting the possibility of something at the level we're talking about. From the little I understand of quantum mechanics, much of it is totally non-intuitive and/or counter-intuitive.
But the whole point seems to me to be that the existence of God while perhaps true, doesn't really solve any of the conundrums it is purported to solve such as why is there something rather than nothing and how did the universe come into existence. Saying something (ordered complexity, motion, low entropy, consciousness, morality, fine-tuning) is due to God only pushes the conundrum back a step and is still not actually solved.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 1,343
|
Post by The Lost One on Jul 27, 2022 14:56:59 GMT
Ha, yes, I slipped up there. Perhaps I should have said 'God doesn't precede the universe because that implies time which is part of the universe.' There is no before the universe. I don't think that follows. Different things can occur simultaneously. The question is whether simultaneous causation is theoretically possible (ie can cause and effect happen simultaneously?) and that's a long-standing debate in metaphysics. You can get a bit of the flavour of that debate here: philarchive.org/archive/CLARAT-11: Yeah, from a naturalist view, either the universe itself is necessary rather than contingent, or its contingent on some other natural entity. I wasn't arguing for the existence of God by appealing to contingency, just suggesting a way the relationship between a hypothetical creator God and a created universe could be understood without bringing sequential chains into it. A cause and effect being entirely simultaneous seems counterintuitive in that the conditions that allow the cause to even exist seem to have to be in place before the 'effect' can occur whether it be a natural or supernatural cause. IOW....yes, one billiard ball striking and causing another billiard ball to now have motion happens simultaneously. But the striking billiard ball had to already possess some characteristics (motion, substance, inertia, etc.) that make motion possible before it can impart those to another billiard ball which also had to already have mass, inertia and substance. But I'll be the first to admit that not matching, or making sense based on, intuition might be a poor basis for rejecting the possibility of something at the level we're talking about. From the little I understand of quantum mechanics, much of it is totally non-intuitive and/or counter-intuitive.
But the whole point seems to me to be that the existence of God while perhaps true, doesn't really solve any of the conundrums it is purported to solve such as why is there something rather than nothing and how did the universe come into existence. Saying something (ordered complexity, motion, low entropy, consciousness, morality, fine-tuning) is due to God only pushes the conundrum back a step and is still not actually solved.
Yeah, wouldn't argue with any of that. I think using God as an answer to solve these conundrums is not only unsatisfactory for the reasons you mention, but completely misses the point of God.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Jul 27, 2022 17:49:24 GMT
I'm not following the logic because by definition, God is supernatural while the universe is natural, so his existence is outside the universe. And time is a dimension in this universe, we don't know if it exists outside. So perhaps God would be timeless because he exists in a timeless place, literally a place with no time. Wouldn't a black hole be a place in The Universe where time stops? Could be. I've watched a lot of physics videos about black holes, and I don't think anyone really knows. One theory is that time and space flip so it would be possible to travel backward or forward at will except that space only has one direction, toward the singularity. But what's the difference, either way, all possible futures become the singularity. Another theory is that our universe is inside a massive black hole. The Big Bang was the formation of the singularity. Since black holes continually pull in matter, that doesn't make sense to me but maybe as you suggest, time stops inside the singularity and from our point of view there is no more matter added to our universe. Or maybe the matter is added outside the observable universe so we will never know of its existence.
|
|
