I wrote previously about a couple of books about the nature of God and time that I have been reading recently. In addition, I presented a brief argument arguing that God must be temporal as opposed to timeless.
Well, subsequently to that I have now finished those books, and will start to offer some thoughts.
So, this book (God and Time: Four Views) had four different authors, each representing a different view about the nature of God and time.
Paul Helm was advocating the traditional view that God is timeless (outside of time).
Alan Padgett argued that God is relatively timeless, by which he meant that God was temporal, but within his own time. Our space-time is within God's own time, making God's time a sort of 'hypertime'.
William Craig adovated a mixed view that God is timeless sans creation, but temporal with creation.
Nicholas Wolterstorff argued that God was temporal, but did not render an opinion on whether time began, and consequently what was God's relationship with time before creation.
I will go through each of their arguments in more detail later, but initially I want to focus a bit on the two main theories of time, and how they impact the nature of God and time.
There are two main theories of time: the tensed theory of time (also known as A-theory or the dynamic theory), and the tenseless theory of time (also known as B-theory, the statis theory, or static theory). There are variations in the specifics of what different philosopheres believe within those theories, but the vast majority fall within one of those two categories.
The critical difference between the two theories of time is this: in the dynamic theory of time events are either past, present, or future (of course their effects can last over a period of time). That is, there is an objective 'now'. Events are first in the future, they become present, and subsequently become past. In addition, only present events are real: they no longer exist after they become past (again, their effects may last).
In the static theory of time, there is no such thing as the objective 'now'. This means events are only past, present, and future relative to each other. They are in no sense objectively just in the past. This basically makes time similar to a fourth dimension of space. Events always exist, as there is no objective 'now', and consequently they never become present in the sense that they do under the dynamic theory.
These theories of time have real significance once we start discussing God's relationship to time. All of the authors of 'God and Time: Four Views' agree that if the dynamic view of time is correct, God must be temporal (in time). The reason for this is that the Bible is fairly clear that God is omniscient (i.e. He knows everything). If the dynamic theory of time is true, but God is not temporal, then he cannot be omniscient. He may know that Neil Armstrong lands on the moon in 1969, but he does not know if Neil Armstrong has landed on the moon yet. God knows that I am writing this entry on January 29, 2006, but he does not that I am writing it now. However, if the static theory of time is true, then 'now' is just a subjective concept but has no objective meaning – events are never objectively past, present, or future.
While some philosophers of time have tried to redefine omniscience so that God doesn't need to know tensed facts (i.e. Facts that require knowledge of the objective 'now'), most have not, due to the clear biblical evidence or that.
So the conclusion of all the authors is that if the dynamic theory of time is correct, then God is temporal. Paul Helm believes the static theory of time is correct, thus leading him to argue that God is timeless, whereas all the others believe that the dynamic theory is correct, thus resulting in the conclusion that God is temporal.
So which view is correct? We'll look at the arguments for and against both views next time.
Well, subsequently to that I have now finished those books, and will start to offer some thoughts.
So, this book (God and Time: Four Views) had four different authors, each representing a different view about the nature of God and time.
Paul Helm was advocating the traditional view that God is timeless (outside of time).
Alan Padgett argued that God is relatively timeless, by which he meant that God was temporal, but within his own time. Our space-time is within God's own time, making God's time a sort of 'hypertime'.
William Craig adovated a mixed view that God is timeless sans creation, but temporal with creation.
Nicholas Wolterstorff argued that God was temporal, but did not render an opinion on whether time began, and consequently what was God's relationship with time before creation.
I will go through each of their arguments in more detail later, but initially I want to focus a bit on the two main theories of time, and how they impact the nature of God and time.
There are two main theories of time: the tensed theory of time (also known as A-theory or the dynamic theory), and the tenseless theory of time (also known as B-theory, the statis theory, or static theory). There are variations in the specifics of what different philosopheres believe within those theories, but the vast majority fall within one of those two categories.
The critical difference between the two theories of time is this: in the dynamic theory of time events are either past, present, or future (of course their effects can last over a period of time). That is, there is an objective 'now'. Events are first in the future, they become present, and subsequently become past. In addition, only present events are real: they no longer exist after they become past (again, their effects may last).
In the static theory of time, there is no such thing as the objective 'now'. This means events are only past, present, and future relative to each other. They are in no sense objectively just in the past. This basically makes time similar to a fourth dimension of space. Events always exist, as there is no objective 'now', and consequently they never become present in the sense that they do under the dynamic theory.
These theories of time have real significance once we start discussing God's relationship to time. All of the authors of 'God and Time: Four Views' agree that if the dynamic view of time is correct, God must be temporal (in time). The reason for this is that the Bible is fairly clear that God is omniscient (i.e. He knows everything). If the dynamic theory of time is true, but God is not temporal, then he cannot be omniscient. He may know that Neil Armstrong lands on the moon in 1969, but he does not know if Neil Armstrong has landed on the moon yet. God knows that I am writing this entry on January 29, 2006, but he does not that I am writing it now. However, if the static theory of time is true, then 'now' is just a subjective concept but has no objective meaning – events are never objectively past, present, or future.
While some philosophers of time have tried to redefine omniscience so that God doesn't need to know tensed facts (i.e. Facts that require knowledge of the objective 'now'), most have not, due to the clear biblical evidence or that.
So the conclusion of all the authors is that if the dynamic theory of time is correct, then God is temporal. Paul Helm believes the static theory of time is correct, thus leading him to argue that God is timeless, whereas all the others believe that the dynamic theory is correct, thus resulting in the conclusion that God is temporal.
So which view is correct? We'll look at the arguments for and against both views next time.
Comments
Thats some heavy reading you got there - you obviously have a lot of patience! Personally, to me theology is like calculus - I can see the point of it but I just can't get interested in it.
"However, if the static theory of time is true, then 'now' is just a subjective concept but has no objective meaning – events are never objectively past, present, or future."This is more than just a throwaway comment, it is the rebuttal of premise 3 in your last post on this topic. Because of this understanding of the relationship of time to knowledge, it could be shown that God is outside of time, as tensed facts are actually not a form of knowledge.Perhaps God has submitted himself to time for the duration of the creation-fall-redemption-consummation metanarrative.
That's definately true. If the static theory of time is true, there is no objective 'now', and so consequently there are no tensed facts for God (or anyone else) to know.Of course if the dynamic theory is true, then there are tensed facts and its difficult to argue that God is omniscient but does not know them.
What exactly are the biblical passages that support unreservedly that God is comprehensively omniscient? I don't know of any.
I've posted a response to Allan's question about biblical passages supporting omniscience as a new entry as I feel that this is a fairly important issue in its own right.