tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1639243498431739110.post3890103728765748668..comments2023-10-28T00:35:51.842-07:00Comments on Learning to Breathe: Does God Learn?Cameronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05463528540193976036noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1639243498431739110.post-45039656407107588302009-11-27T15:10:17.918-08:002009-11-27T15:10:17.918-08:00Hi, thank you Tim for stopping by!
"But the ...Hi, thank you Tim for stopping by!<br /><br />"But the content of that 'Knowing' is in a state of constant change. Open Theists I believe would affirm that God's character doesn't change, just the content of His 'Knowing'."<br /><br />I agree. This is usually the case with open theists. I have seen Boyd over-emphasize God's willingness to change occasionally, however.<br /><br />Invoking Einstein's relativity theory is certainly a popular thing to do to suppress open theism. Einstein's theory, though, actually presupposes irreversible sequence, but states that some beings perceive the rate of change of that sequence differently. Which is what open theists generally affirm.<br /><br />The basic idea of Einstein's theory is that if you are in a jet, time will actually be passing more quickly from your perspective than mine if I am walking on the ground. This presupposes sequence, just that we experience sequence in different measurable quantities.<br /><br />"Can you get a bucket full of 'time'?"<br /><br />That is a really good way to look at it! I suppose to say that God is above time, in that light, is like saying He's 'above' righteousness simply because it has a name.<br /><br />"When you boil it down it seems bizarre to think that anything can be outside sequence. The question is when did we begin to think that God was outside time? And when did it become 'heretical' (like a lot of blog entries call Open Theism) to believe otherwise?"<br /><br />I agree entirely. I think it's mostly a result of pagan Greek philosophy getting into the church. <br /><br />And I have to say, it is quite popular to denounce 'radical' thinking as heresy. The really sad part is that such 'radical' thinking might actually be the correct way to think, just forgotten over centuries of errant philosophy.<br /><br />Anyway, thanks a lot for the comment, I appreciate the company here at my blog.<br /><br />In Christ,<br />-CameronCameronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05463528540193976036noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1639243498431739110.post-51537509722741481312009-11-27T05:13:08.930-08:002009-11-27T05:13:08.930-08:00But the content of that 'Knowing' is in a...But the content of that 'Knowing' is in a state of constant change. Open Theists I believe would affirm that God's character doesn't change, just the content of His 'Knowing'.<br /><br />Interesting to reflect on where this notion of God being outside time began. In fact I am not sure that the sentence 'God is outside of time '- is even a coherent sentence. Do we have any experience or thing to base that anything can be outside sequence?<br /><br />To me it is a classification problem. God created all things we believe (rightly). Time is a thing, therefore God created it. God cannot be bound by something He created, hence He is outside time. The mistake in logic here is to consider time a 'thing'. Before you evoke Einstein to me, pause to think here. Can you get a bucket full of 'time'? Now God may not (and probably doesn't) perceive the change of time like we do. However, I do believe He is 'in sequence'. This happened, then that happened, and after that this happened etc. How He perceives that sequence no-one but He knows.<br /><br />When you boil it down it seems bizarre to think that anything can be outside sequence. The question is when did we begin to think that God was outside time? And when did it become 'heretical' (like a lot of blog entries call Open Theism) to believe otherwise?Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04460812192907456301noreply@blogger.com