Do you mean to say that the justification for the scientific method, is evolutionary progress in the ability for animals to become more rational, and that we believe in evolution, according to the scientific method? I hope you see that this is circular. Please correct me if I misundestand your position.
Perhaps the unexamined life is absurd, but the over examined can be even more absurd.
Here is the link: http://reformedforum.org/he19/kind regards
All I could wonder is how they could so blithely speak about a group of men getting together and codifying nonsense that it would henceforth be a capital crime to question.
<FONT size=3>The concepts of time and motion, are meaningless in a metaphysical context. If time and motion began at the Big Bang, and exist only in relation to the universe, it is as meaningful to talk of God being 'frozen', as it is to talk of time before the Big Bang. The problem is we are using physical categories in a metaphysical context. Since metaphysics deals with the world of 'being' and 'essence', while physics deals with the world of 'becoming' or 'existence', it is necessary to use the language relevant to the argument being addressed.</FONT><FONT size=3></FONT> <FONT size=3>Time and Eternity are relevant to the God's creation of the world, from the perspective of individuals existing within that creation. It is meaningful for us to say God created or chose to create the universe at the Big Bang, if we mean to say that God is the cause of the universe, and that is when it began. Aquinas was an Empiricist, which is why his cosmological arguments involve motion, time, and causes. In order to speak of God apart from physical categories, we need to use the language of metaphysics. Anselm was a Rationalist, which is why the Ontological Arguments,and Leibniz's argument from contingency use the categories of necessity and contingency.</FONT><FONT size=3></FONT> <FONT size=3> </FONT><DIV><FONT size=3>So my main question is this. If everything is "frozen" in a state of being without time. wouldn't god also be "frozen"?</FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT size=3>or.</FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT size=3>Doesn't free will/ thought/decisions only work in time? so If god existed outside of time. how did he make the temporal decision to make time or our universe? </FONT></DIV><P><FONT size=3> </FONT><FONT size=3></FONT> <FONT size=3>If you mean by frozen, timeless, then yes. As for God's Will, God does not learn anything new. According to Christian Theology, God knows everything and so there is no procession of ideas in the mind of God. God decided to create the universe from all eternity. From God's eternal perspective, time is a contingent created property of the contingent created universe.</FONT><FONT size=3></FONT> <FONT size=3>But then, why are we in a certain moment of time? Why is it year 2011, and not year 38695? If God always existed, and God always willed for creation to exist, then is not the universe just as eternal as God is? Metaphysically, yes, and physically no. Metaphysically yes because God transcends time, and 'experiences' all of time, and all events. Physically no, because time in the universe presupposes motion, and cause and effect. Eternality is foreign to Physics, as Time and beginning are to Metaphysics. Since the time of the pre-Socratics, philosophers have struggled with the classic problem of 'the-one-and-the-many'. Is the world unchanging and one, or is everything always changing into something else, and many? This problem was solved by Plato and Aristotle by demarcating a world of essence (the one), as the metaphysical world, from the world of existence (the many) as the physical world. Since Aquinas was a student and advocate of Aristotle's philosophy, (Aquinas referred to Aristotle as 'The Philosopher'), and Craig is an advocate of Aquinas, this is relevant to the discussion.</FONT></P><FONT size=3>What is important is that we understand that if we want to talk of God 'before', or more precisely, 'apart' from the Universe, it is meaningless to use the concept of time. Conversely, we can have similar problems if we use the categories of metaphysics when talking of physical properties.</FONT><FONT size=3></FONT> <FONT size=3>I must mention that the view I have espoused here, is not the same as Dr Craigs'.</FONT><FONT size=3></FONT> <FONT size=3>kind regards</FONT>
</FONT><DIV><FONT size=3>So my main question is this. If everything is "frozen" in a state of being without time. wouldn't god also be "frozen"?</FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT size=3>or.</FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT size=3>Doesn't free will/ thought/decisions only work in time? so If god existed outside of time. how did he make the temporal decision to make time or our universe? </FONT></DIV><P><FONT size=3>
Troy, Actually I think your explanation is better than Dr. Craig's, with all due respect to him, and especially when he is supplying us this forum. I think it still leaves questions as does mine, with plenty of room doubt that any explanation is adequate. For all I know the materialists are right and the eternal is also material. Theists can argue that timeless spaceless matter is nonsensical, but so is a timeless spaceless person. there is no way for our time conditioned minds to really grasp what may or may not be possible in a timeless spaceless state, I think. One thing that somewhat makes me doubt materialism is that however likely or unlikey it is that life and consciousness could evolve from lifeless unconscious matter, and I think no one really has any idea how likely that might be, if it did evolve out of matter without divine assistance, then it at least has to be admitted that the potential for it is inherent in matter, and that potential seems to me more akin to idea than something physical. I suppose that it could be argued to be brute fact, but that is just as untestable an hypothesis, I think, as mine. Am I a rare bird? a radically skeptical, agnostic panentheist/deist?