Can a timeless God exist?

Cmass · Post by **Cmass** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:26 pm

I am starting a thread based upon a comment I made in another:
Change and time go hand in hand.
Without time there is nothing. You cannot go from one event to another. That is why there is no God. (beyond the multitude of other reasons) If God is "timeless" then God is changeless. If God is changeless, then he cannot change anything.
Nothing to nothing from nothing.
Can a timeless God exist?

bernee51 · Post by **bernee51** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:44 am

jjg wrote:That's what I said. It's a relationship in our minds.

Simple thinking simplifies it. The only thing you cannot doubt is doubt itself.

It is recursive thinking, nothing more. What else does Self mean but individual self?

You can argue against First cause, but we can debate that somewhere else.

Affirming by fulfilling.

It would help a little if you directed your replies to the comments to which they relate.

What does this mean.? : That's what I said. It's a relationship in our minds.

Simple thinking simplifies what?

What do you mean by recursive thinking and how can my comments be seen as such?

What else does Self mean but individual self? I thought I was quite clear on the difference. The individual self is not 'real' - it changes over time. The Self (root consciousness) is real as it is unchanging.

There is no necessity for a first cause. It is an excuse to invent god.

Affirming by fulfilling. : Fulfillment arrived at through authorship and hermeneutics

jjg · Post by **jjg** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 1:28 pm

The "now" you are refering to is just a concept of the mind and therefore is no different than the concept of the "past."

In your previous post example, you are just talking about different aspects of the individual self, but they are all the same individual self.

We can debate First cause arguments somewhere else.

bernee51 · Post by **bernee51** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 9:46 pm

jjg wrote:The "now" you are refering to is just a concept of the mind and therefore is no different than the concept of the "past."

I'm living in the now - are you living in the past?

jjg wrote: In your previous post example, you are just talking about different aspects of the individual self, but they are all the same individual self.

Because you say so?

jjg wrote: We can debate First cause arguments somewhere else.

Bring it on.

Cathar1950 · Post by **Cathar1950** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 9:54 pm

I am just muttering.
But I see the self as a reflection of the past experienced now.
It is always now as experienced. We do not live in the past but the past lives in us in the now in a way that then didn't have now. The future is just anticipation. I am working on it.

bernee51 · Post by **bernee51** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:14 am

Cathar1950 wrote:But I see the self as a reflection of the past experienced now.

Reflected on what?

methylatedghosts · Post by **methylatedghosts** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:55 am

bernee51 wrote:
Cathar1950 wrote:But I see the self as a reflection of the past experienced now.
Reflected on what?

The self?

The soul?

bernee51 · Post by **bernee51** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:34 am

methylatedghosts wrote:
bernee51 wrote:
Cathar1950 wrote:But I see the self as a reflection of the past experienced now.
Reflected on what?
The self?

The soul?

This is the very point I was making. What we identify as the self (I am ...) is being identified as something by something. In vedantic philosophy that something is the Self (root consciousness), the Witness.

The soul is something else again - though my take on the soul is not the same as the eternal entity envisaged by the religious.

methylatedghosts · Post by **methylatedghosts** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 7:17 am

I view the soul and spirit as interchangeable - the same thing, just different names.

I say the self is a trinity. Mind, body, spirit. Superconscious, conscious, subconscious. Father, son, holy ghost. Whatever you feel comfortable with.

QED · Post by **QED** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 7:40 am

methylatedghosts wrote:I view the soul and spirit as interchangeable - the same thing, just different names.

I say the self is a trinity. Mind, body, spirit. Superconscious, conscious, subconscious. Father, son, holy ghost. Whatever you feel comfortable with.

Is any of this eternal? If so how do we know it is so? Can anything be eternal?

Confused · Post by **Confused** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 11:22 am

Cmass wrote:Bernee, this is priceless:
I would suggest that "I think therefore I believe I am what I think I am" would be a more accurate statement.

-----------

Is God CAPABLE of CHANGING His mind? Does God have the POWER or ABILITY to change his mind based on ANYTHING you do?

Think carefully about this.........I might be setting a trap! Snap!!Bang! YEEEEow!

I have already shown how God is capable of changing his mind with Noah. He obviously changed his mind based on Noahs doings. On the reverse side, I don't think he can change everything. If so, then he would not have had to sacrifice his only son to escape the wrath of the curse he placed on mankind to begin with. I think he finds loop holes in change to make it possible.

Now for those of you who are christians: if god is timeless, where did the concept of time come from then????