homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: The Point of Time (Page 3)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: The Point of Time
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
But I think your post reveals the problem here. It's impossible to imagine numbers like this one thousandth of a billion billion billionth, billion billion billionth, billion billion billionth of a percent. If we could, we’d surely abandon our faith in a sensible creator God.

That makes no sense at all. You really cannot be saying that there cannot be a God because we don't understand how big the universe is. What has that got to do with it?

No, you’re misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I said. What I said was that, if people could appreciate the enormity of the time in which the universe shall continue to exist after all life in it has ceased to exist everywhere, they would surely abandon their faith in a sensible creator God, since it makes no sense that this God would create such an unimaginably long period of spacetime in which nothing living exists, given the alleged nature of said God and His fondness for living things- only by whose existence His created universe has any meaning to anything other than Himself.
I understand it entirely and I think it is blatantly and obviously false. Assuming you believe it and its not just an arbitrary stick to beat theists with then that you believe it is evidence that you do not understand the questions you have been asking.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Time is an attribute of process.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Time is an attribute of process.

You would think. But processes can exist without time. Space cannot.

It is true that processes are always associated with time in this world.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Uh huh. But in metaphysics there are processes that are instantaneous?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Uh huh. But in metaphysics there are processes that are instantaneous?

Yes. The life that flows from God into all living things does so by a process, but it is instantaneous. The metaphysical aspect of any process is instantaneous. The part that takes time is physical.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
"Enormity" does not mean "enormousness." Look it up.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Yorick

Infinite Jester
# 12169

 - Posted      Profile for Yorick   Email Yorick   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Popular usage of the word ‘enormity’ has changed to become synonymous of ‘enormousness’, such that the orthodox meaning is no longer considered the only correct form. I deliberately chose the word, rather than the more cumbersome ‘enormousness’ or other similar, because it conveys in a very particular way the conceptually overwhelming immensity of the scale I was referring to. Your very own president used the word in this way in his victory speech in November 2008, “I know you didn’t do this just to win an election and I know you didn’t do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead.” So, I consider myself in grand company, and do not despair at the anachronistic and snobbish pedantry of your jibe.

Oh, and BTW, mousethief, just one more weasely little poke like that and you’ll earn yourself a Hellcall of some enormity.

--------------------
این نیز بگذرد

Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Oh, and BTW, mousethief, just one more weasely little poke like that and you’ll earn yourself a Hellcall of some enormity.

You sweettalker.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
But processes can exist without time. Space cannot.

It would be better to say that processes span up space and time. A clock is nothing but a regular process of which one can count cycles to time another process. Hence there is no process in God Himself, since otherwise He would be measurable in terms of space and time.

Martin's assertion has no foundation. For example, love is no process, it is a state: the state of willing good for another. People fall in love, and fall out of love as well, and that's a process indeed. However, God never changed in His love. His love is eternal.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
But processes can exist without time. Space cannot.

It would be better to say that processes span up space and time.
What does "span up" mean? Measure?

If so I agree. I guess it really isn't a process until it approaches space and time.
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Hence there is no process in God Himself, since otherwise He would be measurable in terms of space and time.

Yes. Think of the implications. Does God plan? Does God act?

I think that God's constancy means that He does neither of these things but simply is omnipresent and eternal, outside of space and time.
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Martin's assertion has no foundation. For example, love is no process, it is a state: the state of willing good for another. People fall in love, and fall out of love as well, and that's a process indeed. However, God never changed in His love. His love is eternal.

Yes. Thanks. [Angel]

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
What does "span up" mean? Measure?

Hmm, quite a bit more than that. But the extra bits are actually rather speculative, so let's pretend that it means "measure". [Biased]

(If you are really interested: I was boldly asserting that there is no such thing as space and time, but rather that they are an abstraction from comparing processes with each other. For example, if one counts 9,192,631,770 transitions between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom, then one has a "second of time". This does not require that there be any "time" as independent entity, but merely that there be separately observable transitions. I'm not sure that I can defend this assertion though.)

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I was boldly asserting that there is no such thing as space and time, but rather that they are an abstraction from comparing processes with each other.

Wow. I knew it!

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The fact that [triune, relational, perichoretic, flowing, pacific, raging, every aspect of fire and wind and water; concurrent] God's love, God, is constant, in a constant state, a state of constancy, from eternity does not negate time. Eternity is lots of time. Constant love is a process. The state of constant love is a process. Constancy takes TIME. The state of love is not a process, but the moment it segues to an other moment makes it a process. The state, the attribute of the sky being instantaneously blue is not metaphysical or a process. The state of it being blue for two Planck ticks makes it a process.

It's just words boys. If you want a timeless instant to be constant within itself, then process is state.

That's calculus for you.

None of this speciousness makes any sense, any meaning of anything happening or being outside time.

If something is it has an attribute of time. God is. Was and shall be. Neither of which ARE. Capital ell Love is constant. A TEMPORAL concept. That doesn't mean that all the Love that there ever was from eternity is and all the Love that that ever will be to eternity is.

Words boys.

Common sense boys.

Never mind the meaningless dogma, feel the parsimony.

Your WRONG IngoB. And you ain't even that Freddy.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
... YOU'RE wrong too ...

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave Marshall

Shipmate
# 7533

 - Posted      Profile for Dave Marshall     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I was boldly asserting that there is no such thing as space and time, but rather that they are an abstraction from comparing processes with each other.

An abstraction from comparing states, I would say. Space reflects the states, and time our experience of successive changes as a process.
quote:
I'm not sure that I can defend this assertion though.
Works for me.
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Eternity is lots of time.

Eternity is not lots of time.
quote:
Summa Theologica Ia q10 a1:
... the definition of eternity given by Boethius (De Consol. v) is ... : "Eternity is the simultaneously-whole and perfect possession of interminable life." ...
Thus eternity is known from two sources: first, because what is eternal is interminable - that is, has no beginning nor end (that is, no term either way); secondly, because eternity has no succession, being simultaneously whole. ...
Eternity is called whole, not because it has parts, but because it is wanting in nothing. ...
Two things are to be considered in time: time itself, which is successive; and the "now" of time, which is imperfect. Hence the expression "simultaneously-whole" is used to remove the idea of time, and the word "perfect" is used to exclude the "now" of time.
Summa Theologica Ia q10 a3 r2:
The fire of hell is called eternal, only because it never ends. Still, there is change in the pains of the lost, according to the words "To extreme heat they will pass from snowy waters" (Job 24:19). Hence in hell true eternity does not exist, but rather time; according to the text of the Psalm "Their time will be for ever" (Psalm 80:16).
Summa Theologica Ia q10 a4:
... granted that time always was and always will be, according to the idea of those who think the movement of the heavens goes on for ever, there would yet remain a difference between eternity and time, as Boethius says (De Consol. v), arising from the fact that eternity is simultaneously whole; which cannot be applied to time: for eternity is the measure of a permanent being; while time is a measure of movement. ...
granted also that time always goes on, yet it is possible to note in time both the beginning and the end, by considering its parts: thus we speak of the beginning and the end of a day or of a year; which cannot be applied to eternity. Still these differences follow upon the essential and primary differences, that eternity is simultaneously whole, but that time is not so.

quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Never mind the meaningless dogma, feel the parsimony.

May your idol "parsimony" burn in hell extravagantly for an infinite amount of time!

quote:
Originally posted by Dave Marshall:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I'm not sure that I can defend this assertion though.

Works for me.
Consider General Relativity.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You Dantean man of straw you!

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
By the way the Marshall-IngoB definition works for me too. How could it not. Unless Dave is being nicely ambiguous. As IngoB seems to paranoidly see [Devil]

But there's a but hovering.

I see God, reality - eternal, relational, personaed-personned, gestalt, mutually interpenetrating, fractal love - as constantly changing, in process, flowing, concurrently, infinitely in every parallel state as alluded to by the imagery of the Holy Ghost. All of it. Now. No one clock ticks in God. Harmonics ensue.

There is no basal, hypostatic ground of being from which God emerges against which God is measured. No pulse. But God surely pulses. The pulses pulse. There is no hierarchy of being. There is true irreducible complexity. God is self-emergent. Constantly. Eternally. God is. Becoming. Constantly. God is the measure. God IS Time.

I've said this before here. Every year or so 'recently'.

And Time does not surround all of time, past let alone future, the train of nows, each as a now, regardless of the ineffable complexity of Time.

time is quantized, Time is not.

And only one now is current. now.

Would have to be my necessarily IMPARSIMONIOUS proposition. now NOW.

From which Dave would demur. I.e. that God isn't quantized.

God=Time=Mind can't have a metronome. Is THE Metronome.

And time, the possibly infinite cosmos, is an ephemeral transition; now is ALL there is of it. The twinkling of His eye.

In Now. now is a transient harmonic in Now the integral of which, all thens and now, is the 13.75 Ga infinite cosmos. Of which every past then is gone. Every future then has not happened now matter how now is encompassed by Now. The integral of Now? Is the ineffable, unknowable, eternal, constantly infinitely varying story of God=Time.

Omniscience cannot possibly know any past, happened indetermined now attribute, any indetermined element, entity of then, or now or future then. Indeterminism is how now is determined. It can't NOT be. Except by Omnipotence. God can change what He wills. Except the past of course. That would be ... immoral. Inconsistent. Absurd. That would create multiverses. The floor lurches for a moment, but no.

The precedent is ONE incarnation. Of NOW in now. Just as the denial of universalism is Satan. So far.

Straw on the wind?

And Yorick, there will soon be a new heaven and a new earth. It's OUR time.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave Marshall

Shipmate
# 7533

 - Posted      Profile for Dave Marshall     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Consider General Relativity.

You'll be more familiar with this than me, but a process model of metaphysical creation requires only that there is no discontinuity of time between adjacent points in space. I wasn't aware General Relativity implies this.
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
There is no basal, hypostatic ground of being from which God emerges against which God is measured. No pulse. But God surely pulses. The pulses pulse. There is no hierarchy of being. There is true irreducible complexity. God is self-emergent. Constantly. Eternally. God is. Becoming. Constantly. God is the measure. God IS Time.

This is where theology gets interesting. Within this kind of pool of possibilities we have to decide which features are real, and where and how best to locate them relative to each other in order to credibly map the result onto human experience.

I think God can only be One that simply creates - no complexity. Creation, ie. now (N or n), cannot coherently be both God and the expression of God. Time (T or t) only exists as the becoming of creation, so it also cannot coherently be God. Mind doesn't fit God because the idea drags in a whole raft of time-bound, memory-requiring attributes unrelated to the rest of the model. As does incarnation. Both are imparsimonious. They confuse consistent model-building with explanatory story-telling. I want to be able to distinguish between the two.

[ 16. April 2011, 23:51: Message edited by: Dave Marshall ]

Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
"I think God can only be One that simply creates - no complexity."

No complexity of definition, no. In its broadest sense, yes. But or as the East would say 'and', to be inclusive and not divisive, despite us being divided [Smile] there is creation and Creation, time and Time, t & T as you rightly use below. orthodox God necessarily, eternally, constantly Creates. And does NOT necessarily create.

"Creation, ie. now (N or n), cannot coherently be both God and the expression of God."

In God being and expression are one. Is syntactic but is it semantic? C=T=N=God. We gots to get REAL philosophical here. God HAS to be thinking the insensate matter I inhabit. He has to be thinking me autonomously thinking. T does t.

"Time (T or t) only exists as the becoming of creation, so it also cannot coherently be God."

This is pantheism. And less even! At least Consciousness emerges from pantheism.

t proceeds from T.
T is not dependent on t IS dependent on T.
T !> f(t), t > f(T)

T becomes C, is C
t = c (is quantized, T/C ain't)

e t c

"Mind doesn't fit God because the idea drags in a whole raft of time-bound, memory-requiring attributes unrelated to the rest of the model. As does incarnation. Both are imparsimonious. They confuse consistent model-building with explanatory story-telling. I want to be able to distinguish between the two."

Tough! [Smile] Reality is panentheistic. God is relational, persons in relationship. Not only does (eternal, infinite) T do (ephemeral, subset) t. T became t that t become T. That the ephemeral might become eternal.

Imparsimony is a heuristic. Not a law. Not axiomatic. Reality does not have to comply with it at all. It's a rule of thumb for sifting between explanations of observations.

The mystery of God, the Trinity, Perichoresis and the hypostatic union of Christ, God the vicarious human are givens, observed not rationalizable, reductionable.

You reduce theology to materialism by logical positivistic fiat.

Surely?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave Marshall

Shipmate
# 7533

 - Posted      Profile for Dave Marshall     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
In God being and expression are one. Is syntactic but is it semantic? C=T=N=God. We gots to get REAL philosophical here. God HAS to be thinking the insensate matter I inhabit. He has to be thinking me autonomously thinking.

Nope. God precisely does not have to think. If by C here you mean Creation, to indicate a useful (and orthodox, not that that's an axiom of mine) model you have to stick at God->C->N->T. To use equality there reduces your model to a God/C/N/T mush with no explanatory value at all.
quote:
"Time (T or t) only exists as the becoming of creation, so it also cannot coherently be God."

This is pantheism.

Not for God->Creation->N->T.
quote:
Reality is panentheistic.
No, reality is how things are. Your model of reality is panentheistic, because you're locating God in it at the convergence of cause and effect, rather than as simply the first cause. That allows you to hold onto the traditional thinking, rational God, but only by rejecting the orthodox separation of God from Creation.
quote:
The mystery of God, the Trinity, Perichoresis and the hypostatic union of Christ, God the vicarious human are givens, observed not rationalizable, reductionable.
Er, not observed. As you well know. [Smile]

[ 17. April 2011, 11:51: Message edited by: Dave Marshall ]

Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Au contraire, I'll deal with = vs > later! The awkward eternal reality of the perichoretic triune primum mobile cannot be reduced, by-passed, ignored.

Which your last para does.

It's THE premiss.

ALL theology is contingent upon it.

You may be right in other regards, > !=, WITH that premiss, but we'll see.

UNLESS I'm missing something, UNLESS you are having your cake and eat it? That you ARE saying that, are accepting the orthodox God AND saying > != ?

I don't think you are.

Mahlzeit!

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave Marshall

Shipmate
# 7533

 - Posted      Profile for Dave Marshall     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
The awkward eternal reality of the perichoretic triune primum mobile cannot be reduced, by-passed, ignored [...] ALL theology is contingent upon it.

Depends on our point of view. If we want in whatever sense the approval of historical institutional orthodoxy, I guess you'd be right. For making contemporary sense with a mindset that assumes a scientific view of reality, it's only one possibility to be explored. And in my view rejected, if ultimate consistency and coherence have value.
quote:
I don't think you are [accepting the orthodox God].
Not by your description. But I think that's really based on a (very old) literalisation of story. I suspect I'm not far from the essential idea of God that originally underpinned it.
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Non-relational? A unitarian ground of being? Not even that as you can't not believe in the eternity of creation, therefore god is just an attribute of [eternal] stuff?

Where do you project that in to the text?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave Marshall

Shipmate
# 7533

 - Posted      Profile for Dave Marshall     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Non-relational?

Not at all. An eternal creator is in an eternal relationship with what is being created. It's only orthodoxy's hang-up that God must be free to not create that sees this as a problem.
quote:
A unitarian ground of being?
Why not?
quote:
therefore god is just an attribute of [eternal] stuff?
For an audience unattached to a thinking, rational, loving God that would be almost right. But I wouldn't have thought 'just' was appropriate when that 'attribute' is by definition the creator and sustainer all that is.

[ 17. April 2011, 17:27: Message edited by: Dave Marshall ]

Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hmmmm. It would seem that the single, discrete, once in an eternity incarnation has to be the ... crux of the matter.

As the orthodox God incarnated once then there is only one creation, finite with respect to time: with a beginning. Of the increase of which there will be no end.

So what was God doing for eternity before doing that? Being, Becoming, Boogying - the perichoretic perichorea, Creating.

God doesn't have to think? Mine does. He thinks all creation without raising a sweat. To relate within Himself between His Persons? Mine does. Before and now independently of creation.

He isn't just relational with regard to creation. He is relational.

He is ... mush. Not explanation offered. As with Job. None we could compute. Ever. Eternally, pre- extra- meta- creationally ineffable. Mysterious. Other. So. And good. Daddy.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No explanation ... it seems that both you and the truly imparsimonious neo-Platonists are struggling to make creation constant ins some way to make God constant.

To the neo-Platonists all future creation has to have already happened in God from eternity so that He remains unchanged.

Tail wagging dog or what.

Your more rational, parsimonious approach goes too far by making God dependent on creating.

He ain't.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
you and the truly imparsimonious neo-Platonists are struggling to make creation constant ins some way to make God constant.

But God is constant. That means that our ideas of creation need to adjust.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
God created. Once upon a time. Incarnated. Once. It's our ideas of constancy that need to change.

Our childish, pagan, imparsimonious, inconsistent, incoherent, absurd, perverted, heterodox ideas:

All of the future eternity of creation has to be known, have happened in God to comply with Him unchanging?!

Tail. Dog. Wagging.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave Marshall

Shipmate
# 7533

 - Posted      Profile for Dave Marshall     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Your more rational, parsimonious approach goes too far by making God dependent on creating.

No, I'm suggesting creating and eternal are the essential features of what God means. Anything else that we can or cannot rationally say about God follows from that. The alternative is an arbitrary invented god. That's handy if we have particular features in mind, but useless as the basis for metaphysical extensions to a worldview we want to have faith in.
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
God created. Once upon a time. Incarnated. Once. It's our ideas of constancy that need to change.

Are you sure that it is not our anthropomorphic ideas that need to change. God is not just a large man with superhuman powers who suddenly decides "I think I'll create something today!"

God is unchanging, but the created universe changes constantly - that is its very nature, and the nature of time.

It seems to us as if God changes, decides to act, decides to be incarnated. But it is we who change.
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
All of the future eternity of creation has to be known, have happened in God to comply with Him unchanging?!

Not at all. God is outside of time. Humanity is truly free. The certainty of the outcome is based on the fact of God's infinite wisdom, not any kind of predestination.

The point is that it's not forced and can't be forced, otherwise the purposes of love that are God's very nature won't be fulfilled. This is the point of time.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yeah I'm sure.

God is anthropomorphic.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
God is anthropomorphic.

You don't mean that humans are created in God's image and likeness?

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
No.

Is that your final answer?

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Is that your final question?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And Dave, you mean 'Yes'. Which is heterodox. God is not defined eternally by creation, which IS defined by God.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Is that your final question?

I don't know. But thanks for asking.

[ 19. April 2011, 21:33: Message edited by: Freddy ]

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
God is not defined eternally by creation, which IS defined by God.

Yes, creation is defined by God. God is not defined by creation.

He does, however, define Himself in relation to creation. This is why He seems to operate in time, to make decisions, to act or not act as He chooses.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Now He does.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave Marshall

Shipmate
# 7533

 - Posted      Profile for Dave Marshall     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
And Dave, you mean 'Yes'.

No, there's no dependency within the definition of a single entity.
quote:
Which is heterodox.
Why is that so significant for you?
quote:
God is not defined eternally by creation
Not what I said. God means eternal and creating.
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Same thing Dave.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And why's it significant? Because it's so tempting. Because I've been there. Because orthodoxy doesn't make sense. But there it is. Half way through eternity God created. First a supernatural realm, then aeons later a 'natural' one (the latter came as such a surprise it caused the former to fall perhaps).

Since Augustine at least we've been proudly telling Him how He had to have done that or more recently that He didn't to comply with our philosophy.

How ... human.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Now He does.

He always did.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Half way through eternity God created. First a supernatural realm, then aeons later a 'natural' one (the latter came as such a surprise it caused the former to fall perhaps).

I assume you're joking about eternity being halfway over before God got around to creating. Was He loitering over His morning coffee?

Yes, the supernatural realm came first, and then the natural one through it. How did you know that?

But aeons didn't elapse between the two events. They were simultaneous, part of the same instantaneous process.

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Nope and nope.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
sharkshooter

Not your average shark
# 1589

 - Posted      Profile for sharkshooter     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
... Half way through eternity ...

Eternity is not a very long time-line, it is the absence of time, so there is no such thing as "half-way through eternity".

--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]

Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That's nice dear.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365

 - Posted      Profile for Freddy   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
That's nice dear.

So you are saying that the movie "From Here to Eternity" is based on shaky assumptions about the nature of eternity?

It reminds me of a description of how Santa Clause is able to distribute presents to everyone on earth in one night. He spends half the night on the first house, and half of the remaining time on each successive stop. [Paranoid]

[ 20. April 2011, 19:44: Message edited by: Freddy ]

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
... that's nice dear. Why it reminds you of that particular Zeno's paradox I'm not sure.

Well I am.

Ever decreasing halves eh? Eternity is lots of time. Not timelessness. Which is an instant. Of time. Of no duration. An abstraction. Unreal. Meaningless unless you're doing calculus.

Unless you mean that all time, all nows are in Now in trying to make God "timeless". By which you mean changeless. For all ... time.

A-doo-doo-doo. A-dah-dah-dah.

Submit.

Accept the givens. They are uncomfortable, gob-smacking. Ineffable. But they're not risible. Meaningless. !parsnip.

They don't distort God and pretend that He is omni beyond meaning and therefore limited in love.

For eternity God did not create. Then He did. Quite possibly in two phases. 13.75 Ga into the second phase (which may have been concurrent with the first OR older, if the phases are states) He stepped in to it in phase two feet.

And He didn't change in ANY meaningful regard in ANY of this.

He was, is and shall be good throughout.

I don't see a problem.

I must be simple minded.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools