|
theo_book -> RE: Old God New Earth? I don't think so. (7/10/2008 10:13:57 AM)
|
quote:
(hellohellohi)
The funny thing about God creating time is time may just be convention. No to say its not an important convention and one initiated by God.
But, to use t_b's concept of existence, to say that time "exists" is to say that it has duration in time, I believe. Obviously, this is a peculiar statement.
Not quite. "Duration" is a noun describing what other things do IN time. Time itself does not have duration, but things have duration in time. Duration connotes the length of time required for something to exist or to function.
quote:
(hellohellohi) Does it have physical effects? Yes. But does time "exist" in the sense of time as the parsing of duration? No, only by convention. Days are a convention -- though one that God has explained us are important. For instance, one could say "I don't wear a watch and I just don't care about distinctions between weekday wnd weekend." There is nothing for us to objectively point to (secularly speaking -- I mean except God's word) to say that they are trying to deny something patently real, such as gravity. One cannot defy the convention of gravity, because it is real. One, of course, cannot stop oneself from aging, either, tho, so perhaps my analogy is unfair. But, certainly, while it is true to say that effects can be seen from the process of realizing duration, the way we measure duration is by convention.
If by "convention" you mean "convenience" or "agreement" I disagree with your conclusion. Time passes whether we are cognizant of it or not. I think you are referencing the "measurement of time," not time itself.
And the way we measure duration is by the Sun and Moon which were given to us by God for that purpose; rather than by man's "convention." (IF I understood your point)
quote:
(hellohellohi) Another way to say this is that we have the concept "existence." However, there is no such thing as existence without duration. If something exists for less than an instant, it cannot be said to have ever existed.
If you can say "It never existed" how then can you say "It existed but less than an instant?" An instant is not the measure of existence, it is the measure of duration of existence. In the age of "nano-seconds" and "giga-seconds" or "pico-seconds," I think an "instant" would appear to be a considerable duration.
quote:
(hellohellohi) For instance, if this life is but an instant, then we can make sense of the fact that there are some that we know now on this earth but of whom it will be said in eternity, "I never knew you." Of course, that is not the only way to make sense of that phrase. Nevertheless, I find it intriguing to consider the unrepentent to have never existed at all, because existence is something bestowed by God.
Actually it makes no sense at all when phrased that way. When God says "I never knew you" it is a disclaimer by God to the rituals and traditions some claim makes them belong to or be closer to God. He is saying "your ways are not my ways and your thoughts are not my thoughts." "While You may claime ME, I never knew YOU."
If non-repentance equates with non-existence, then God does not exist, because many times he failed to repent of the evil he intended for some nation or another. "Therefore also now, saith the LORD, turn ye even to me with all your heart, and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning: 13 And rend your heart, and not your garments, and turn unto the LORD your God: for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repenteth him of the evil." [Joel 2:12-13]
"And said unto them, Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel, unto whom ye sent me to present your supplication before him; 10 If ye will still abide in this land, then will I build you, and not pull you down, and I will plant you, and not pluck you up: for I repent me of the evil that I have done unto you." [Jer 42:9-10]
"Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the LORD your God; and the LORD will repent him of the evil that he hath pronounced against you."[Jer 26:13]
But the strongest example is recorded in Exodus, when Moses pleaded with the Lord God for Israel - "And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand? 12 Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. 13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever. 14 And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people. [Exo 32:11-14]
quote:
(hellohellohi) Aside from this, my point is that existence implies duration, so to speak of the salience of another concept time, which we could only understand as the parsing or convention of measuring duration, is not possible. Uh, I mean, it is not a salient or independent concept with ontological exigency. Like this: if existence implies time and time implies existence, then we are talking about the same thing.
But the truth of the matter is, Existence requires time, while time only allows for existence and measures it with duration.
Very good observations but only if I am understanding your point.
|
|
|
|