← Defenders Podcast
Loading summary
Transcript35 lines
- [00:01]
A
Welcome to Defenders, the teaching class of Dr. William Lane Craig today the Doctrine of God, Part 5. For more information and resources from Dr. Craig, go to reasonablefaith.org We've been talking
- [00:15]
B
about God's infinite attributes, and we completed last week our study of divine aseity. Today we want to turn to a new attribute of God, namely God's eternity. And we want to look first at some scriptural data concerning God's eternity. First of all, the Scriptures teach that God exists without beginning and end. God exists without beginning and end. Psalm 90, Verses 1 to 4 Psalm 90, Verses 1to 4 Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God. So God exists beginninglessly and endlessly. Second, the Scriptures indicate that God's eternity contrasts with the transitoriness of man. God's eternal existence is in contrast to man's transitory existence. Psalm 102, 11, 12, 25, 27 Psalm 102, 11 and 12 and 25 to 27 My days are like an evening shadow I wither away like grass. But thou, O Lord, art enthroned forever Thy name endures to all generations of old Thou didst lay the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands, and they will perish but thou dost endure they will all wear out like a garment Thou changest them like raiment, and they pass away. But thou art the same, and thy years have no end. Here you have a beautiful comparison between the eternity of God, beginningless and endless, and the the creation that God has made, which is temporal and transitory. Psalm 90 again, and verses 5 to 6. Psalm 90 and verses 5 and 6. Thou dost sweep men away they are like a dream, like grass, which is renewed in the morning. In the morning it flourishes and and is renewed, and in the evening it fades and withers. Here human life is compared to a dream which is evanescent in its existence. It vanishes the moment that you awake, or the grass that in the morning is freshened flourishing, but then is burned and scorched by the evening. And similarly our existence is so transitory in comparison with God's eternal existence. We might compare here as well Job, chapter 36 and verse 26 Job 36, 26 which says, behold, God is great, and we know him not. The number of his years is unsearchable the number of God's years is unsearchable. And compare that with Isaiah 41:4, Isaiah 41:4. Who has performed and done this, calling the generations from the beginning, I the Lord the first, and with the last, I am he here. God is the Eternal One who is there in the beginning and there at the end of human history, the One who endures forever, whereas human existence is fleeting and transitory. And finally, in a difficult to express way. The scriptures seem to teach that God existed before time began. Although there are a number of passages like this, let's look at just one of them. Jude, verse 25, Jude, the last book before the book of Revelation in the New Testament, and verse 25. Here the author says, to the only God, our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority before all time and now and forever. What an interesting expression on the author's part. He gives glory to God before all time, before time began, now presently, and then forever into the future. So this suggests that time itself had a beginning and God in some difficult to express way existed, quote, unquote, before time began. Any comment on the scriptural data concerning divine eternity before we look at it in a more systematic way? All right, let's talk then about a systematic reflection upon this biblical data. The Bible teaches that God is eternal as we have seen, but it does not make it clear as to how God is eternal. Now, what do I mean by that? Well, there are two ways in which something can exist without a beginning and without an end. One would be to exist throughout infinite time. If we imagine time like a line which has no end but goes on forever and which has no beginning, then something could be beginningless and endless by existing throughout all time without beginning, without end. So that would be one way of being eternal would be to be beginningless and endless throughout infinite time. The other way would be to exist outside of time altogether. If we say that God isn't on the line anywhere, then he doesn't have any temporal location and doesn't have any temporal duration. He would be beginningless and endless simply because the concepts of beginning and ending wouldn't apply to a being who isn't in time. A being who transcends time, who isn't on the timeline, would have neither beginning nor end because he doesn't endure through time. And as I say, the biblical data leave it an open question as to whether God is eternal in the sense of being omnitemporal throughout infinite time, or simply being timeless or being a temporal. So that this isn't a question that can be decided biblically. Rather, this is a philosophical theological Question. This is where the biblical exegete can take you only so far, and then he has to hand the task over to the philosophical theologian if we are to go any further. So the core idea of eternity that both of these concepts encapsulate would be to exist eternally is to exist without beginning or end, or to exist permanently. That's the core idea of eternity. But then there are at least two modes of existence that could fit that definition. Either an omnitemporal mode throughout infinite time, or else an atemporal mode mode of existence. And the Bible doesn't settle that question. Now, before we proceed further, let me ask if there is any question anyone has of a comprehension nature about these two different concepts of eternity, because this is absolutely fundamental to everything else we're going to say about God's relationship to time. Any comprehension question about this? Yes, Steve.
- [09:21]
A
Well, wouldn't the scripture you just quoted from Jude speak that God existed before space time, in other words, are created, in other words, he existed before. That's kind of stating that time began at some time, space time. So it would neither be it could have been existing before there was such a thing as this realm with space time and then be in it as he created it.
- [09:48]
B
Yes. And the difficulty is how are we going to understand this? How are we going to unpack it? Because taken at face value, it would seem to be a contradiction to say that God existed before time because before is a temporal relationship. Right. So to exist before the beginning of time is in a literal sense would be a contradiction in terms. But obviously the Bible isn't a philosophy book and therefore we need to try to understand what Jude is trying to say and that will involve some sort of philosophical reflection to try to make sense of it. And that's what we're going to try to do. Now is there any question, as I say, about these two different modes of divine eternity, if we can call them modes of existence, so that we understand the different ways in which God might be eternal? Because this is an issue on which Christian theologians are deeply divided today.
- [10:51]
C
Yes, Dr. Bob Bill, I think I've mentioned this before. There is someone who came up with an idea which I had already agreed with, is that God must have his own time, let's simplify and say his own time. If you define time as what takes place between non simultaneous events, then obviously there was time before space time was created. Because if God has a thought and then another thought, those are two non simultaneous events and something had to fill in between it. Now if you want to call it something else? Okay. But it seems to me that God has to have that time even before he created the universe. Now you say, well, what about time and distance is relative and all of this, fine, that would be another time in my concept again. But before he created that, he would have to have done that. Now, in Jude 25, which you cited in the NIV, it says before all ages. And Brad just checked, the Greek is Aeon, is strong 65. And the Greek meaning of that is the same as our meaning of epic, like the Roaring Twenties. A time that had a certain characteristic, but no, perhaps definite beginning and end, but an aging. And generally when it says Christ in the New Testament says, lo, I am with you even to the end of the age. That's where that is meaning when he comes back for us. So rather than saying that verse, I don't think that's a strong argument that that God preceded time, but rather that he preceded all ages or all of the things which he created in the universe.
- [12:35]
B
Yeah, all right. That wasn't a comprehension question. What you have begun to do is to enter into systematic reflection upon this. And I think many of your comments were very helpful. I would say, though, with respect to Aion, the use of the word ages can mean different things in different contexts. And if you look at how this is used with respect to God and time, there are a number of verses that seem to suggest that prior to the beginning of any of the ages, that God existed alone and that he then created these. Now, it may be that you'll want to say, well, he existed in a time of his own that is different from the sort of physical space time that I think Steve was talking about. So we'll hold that thought for now and come back to it.
- [13:28]
A
Yes, the line that represents time, does it always have a value to it? Like today, time to me means seconds, minutes. But is that what it represents, that infinite time that always has a value to it?
- [13:43]
B
Well, if by value you mean that they can be intervals that can be specified in it. We are talking about this kind of time that will have metric units like days, years, seconds, and so forth. So. Right. That is what we're talking about. Is that what you're asking?
- [14:07]
A
Yeah, I'm just really confused now. Then time can't always exist because before the universe was created, how did. How was time measured then, or whatever?
- [14:18]
B
Okay, we're getting into exactly, as I say, these sort of systematic questions. What Bob wants to say is that God has a sort of time of his own. And that even if this time of our universe did have a beginning, say at the Big Bang, for simplicity's sake, then, nevertheless, perhaps God pre existed the beginning of physical time in a sort of metaphysical time in which he exists. So that's a question that deserves to be explored, yes.
- [14:51]
D
Don, Isn't it a little more accurate to define time not as a straight
- [14:57]
B
line, but as a circle? Well, now, I don't think that that would be right, Don, on a Christian point of view, at least. Because on a Christian point of view, time or history is not circular. Quite the opposite. It has a goal or a telos, which is to be reached in the kingdom of God, the establishment of an afterlife, heaven and hell and so forth. So that there is a creation and then there is an end toward which the world is striving and moving. So the Christian concept of time is linear. It's not circular. The view that time is circular would be a view that would be associated more with ancient Greek cyclical thought that everything will repeat itself over and over and over again, that there is no goal or destiny toward which the universe is tending, but everything just happens over and over and over again. But even if that were true of human history, it seems to me that what that would give you would be still something like this, where the events would repeat over and over again, but there still would be a linear time. For time to be literally circular like this, that would mean that some event, E is both before and after itself, which seems to be absurd. How could E be before itself and also after itself if time is circular? That would be the implication, which seems crazy, because if E has already occurred, then it can't be before itself. So I think the idea of cyclical or circular time is absurd, really, and that time, if it exists, is going to be linear, even if the events in time recycle over and over again.
- [17:11]
D
I understand what you're saying. I guess what I'm saying, and I didn't express it very well, is eternity would best be defined as a circle. It has no beginning, it has no end, no matter what point on the circle you pick. You can go to the left, or you can go to the right, you can go up, or you can go down. Whereas time, if you take it as a created event, does have a beginning, does have an end, and is defined.
- [17:42]
B
I have difficulty, again, Don, with this idea of it being circular, because that seems to mean that things are both before and after themselves. I think it would be better if you want to pick a geometry for a timeless God's Existence, I think a point, a single point, would be a better geometrical representation of eternity. There is no before, there is no after. There is no earlier or later. There is just that single state. So I would say if you want to represent eternity geometrically, then rather than any sort of a line, it would just be a point. Yes, Brad. I always think of time as something
- [18:27]
A
that we use as a surrogate for measuring change. And if God is changeless, then the God time is irrelevant because there is no change. And so if God has a thought and another thought and another thought, he doesn't change with his thoughts. So all the thoughts are simultaneous.
- [18:51]
B
All right. Okay. Now, see, this is a very different view than Dr. Bob's view. It is, and this is nice because we get here an example of where two people, both Christians, have different conceptions of divine eternity. One thinks of God as thinking in a sort of linear way, one thought after another, which, as Bob says, obviously sets up a before and after relation. Whereas Brad says, no, God doesn't think sequentially like that. All of his thoughts are in this single, in a sense, simultaneous point. And that exactly illustrates these two different conceptions of eternity. Many theologians would agree with Brad that a changeless God is simply timeless. Others, especially more contemporary theologians, would agree with Bob that God is in time and goes through a temporal sequence. So, as I say, this is an issue on which orthodox Christians disagree. But at least these differences are helping us, I think, to see very clearly the contrasting views. Now, was there a comment over here?
- [20:04]
C
Yes, of course, on this one, I'd probably stay closer with Brad, but I would Refer to Romans 4:17, one of my favorite verses. God calls the not being as being or calls all things as though they are. So I see God is living in the infinite now, that he doesn't have a time sequence of events, but that he can call all things as though they are, even though they aren't.
- [20:41]
B
That verse that you're referring to where it says God calls into existence the things that do not exist is probably a reference to his creation of the world from nothing. This is an expression of the doctrine of creation ex nihilo out of nothing. But I don't see that that would decide the question that we're talking about here as to whether God's existence is atemporal or temporal. Either of these views, we'll see God as creating the universe from nothing. The universe doesn't have a material cause. God created all the matter and energy, as well as everything that's made out of matter and energy. As well as the angelic realms. So I do think that this is an issue that we're not going to be able to decide biblically by quoting proof texts. This is going to be a philosophical theological question to which we'll have to give arguments. Yes.
- [21:40]
A
Is there an alternative view here? You said God's outside of time or he's in a temporal time that says God is at every point in our temporal time at the same time. Yeah, because ultimately, because he can see the. He's in our temporal time, but he's at the same point because he can see the past, present and future.
- [21:59]
B
Okay, now it's very hard to make sense of what you just said because you said God is at every time at the same time. Well, now which time is that? Is it, is it at 3 o' clock that he's at every time? Well, that wouldn't make sense because how could he be at every time if he's at that time? I think the only way to make sense of what you said would be if we had two dimensions of time or a kind of hyper time where, say this is. This is our timeline here. Now I'm drawing it vertically instead of horizontally. And here's to T1, T2, T3, and this is our timeline. And then you could imagine there's another time dimension going this way, and this is T1, T2, T3, and so on. And what you could say is that at every moment of hypertime, God exists at every moment of our time. So that these vertical arrows would go across hypertime. So that would avoid the contradiction. You're saying that God exists at every moment of time at the same moment of time. But you're talking about two different times, you're talking about ordinary time and then hypertime. And the difficulty I think, in that is not only is it sort of extravagant in postulating these hyper time dimensions for which we have no evidence, there's no reason to think these hypertimes exist. But in a sense it only kicks the problem upstairs because now you've got a God in hypertime who is just existing at one moment of hypertime after another. And so it's the same problem all over again.
- [24:10]
A
Another way to say it is he omnitemporal?
- [24:12]
B
Well, now to be omni temporal is just to be everlasting throughout infinite time. And that is one of the views. That is one of the two views we're talking about.
- [24:22]
A
Okay, which one would that be? Which one of those views would that be then?
- [24:27]
B
That would be the view where I originally Drew line and said God exists at every point on the line on the timeline.
- [24:36]
A
Okay, that would be the same as Omni without end.
- [24:39]
B
But what I heard you saying was that God exists at every point in time at the same time. Which to me sounds like this sort of hypertime view, which is a possibility. I mean, you can make sense of it. But as I say, I think it's extravagant and ultimately it just kicks the problem upstairs. It doesn't really solve it.
- [25:06]
A
Well, I guess it really gets down to the. What is the true definition of time here?
- [25:09]
B
Well, not necessarily. I mean, I'll say something about that. But I don't think that Bob and Brad differ on their definitions of time. They just conceive of God's relationship to time differently. I don't think it's a definitional matter here. It's just that one person thinks of God as being in time like us. He's enduring from one moment to the next. And the other person thinks, no, God is just completely outside of these dimensions. He's not in time at all. Now, there was a comment here, just a question.
- [25:44]
A
Bill, could you comment on God's relationship to time and his ability to answer prayer?
- [25:50]
B
This, I think, gets into the question of divine omniscience and his foreknowledge of the future. Some people have argued that God must be timeless because this is the only way in which you could explain his knowledge of the future. Given human freedom and indeterminacy, he's outside of time, and all of time is spread out before him. And so that's how he knows the future. And so that's how he can answer your prayers before you pray them. Because he has foreknowledge of the future. I don't think that's a good argument. When we get to omniscience and we talk about divine foreknowledge. I'll try to give an account of how God can foreknow the future without being timeless. But you're certainly right in drawing our attention to the fact that some people have said that this is why they believe God is timeless, because that explains how God can know a contingent future and so can answer prayers in advance of their being prayed? Yes. Jim, down here in the front had a question. In terms of God's eternality, is it wise to state it such as God exists and eternal now? Okay, this is a very common expression, isn't it, for those who think God is a temporal. That God exists in the eternal now. And I think that we need to understand that this is Metaphorical, it doesn't mean that there is a time in which God exists and this time is composed of only one instant, but it's kind of like an instant as, as I said in that on the atemporal view, eternity is sort of like a point geometrically. And in that sense it's like the present, which is also like a point geometrically. So in that sense people speak of God's eternal now in the sense that it is on the analogy of a single temporal instant. And, and as long as we understand the metaphor and the analogy, I think it's unobjectionable. But we shouldn't think that there is literally a sort of time in which God exists, which is a now. But it's like the now, it's like the temporal present in that it would be a single point.
- [28:23]
E
Yes, Tawan, a line has infinite points, a plane has infinite lines, and a space has infinite planes. So if we look at time, as Brett said, is agent of changes, it has infinite of space. So if we take snapshot of a space and the time is just an infinite of those spaces, and can we not in this, this kind of dimensional expansion think of God as one is a higher dimension than the time, so it has infinite time and yet he's a dimension above all.
- [29:11]
B
Right, this is a good question. We can picture geometrically our space time as a cylinder in which time will be the vertical dimension and then the two horizontal dimensions will represent our three dimensional space. Now we've suppressed one of the three dimensions of space, right? Because we being three dimensional creatures can't draw a four dimensional cylinder. So we suppress one of the dimensions of space and let that be time. And then we use the analogy of a disk here and this disk would be a three dimensional space. And we could imagine that this cylinder goes on forever and has existed forever in the past, so that time would be infinite and you would have these spatial cross sections, as it were, of space as time goes on. And I think what Taiwan is suggesting is maybe this cylinder is embedded in a higher dimension in which God exists, so that God is out here, so to speak, and that this dimension or this space time, this four dimensional thing, exists in this embedding higher dimensional reality in which God exists. And there are some theologians that hold to that view. Hugh Ross, for example, holds this, or at least he says he holds it. When you press him on it and point out some of the problems with this point of view, he will quickly retreat and say, well, this is just a metaphor. I don't literally mean that God is in a higher dimension. It's just a metaphor, metaphorical way of speaking of a timeless God. I think it would be better to see this Tawan as a model or illustration of a timeless God who just doesn't exist in four dimensional space time. He just transcends time. And we shouldn't think of this as embedded in some higher dimension, but rather God is just timeless, he's just atemporal. But you're certainly right in drawing our attention to this alternative. Now, Steve said something already, so I want to give someone else a chance. Yes, over here.
- [31:49]
A
So I'm just curious, when you had the two dimensional graph of hypertime versus current time and now this graph, don't you open the door for a multiverse explanation of the universe and does that cause a problem?
- [32:03]
B
I don't see how this opens the door to that. It seems to me that it's quite possible to say that God has created other space times besides our own. That would seem to be legitimate, but I don't think that that's implied by this or dependent upon this. That's just an independent question. I think that God may have created other space times besides ours. Yes. Kevin, Is it possible that one of the other space times that he created besides ours would be that which the angels inhabited? Well, the difficulty there would be if you put these angels in some other space time, say over here, then it's hard to see how they would have any interaction with us because they're in a different space time. So if we want to say that angels are involved in our history and space and time, then we need to keep them here rather than sequester them someplace else where they couldn't have any kind of causal connection with us or any kind of temporal relation. All right, let me wrap up this morning by saying that the question of God's relationship to time is an extremely difficult one that has puzzled theologians for centuries. And what I'll do next time is offer what I conceive to be the best argument for God's being timeless. And then I'll offer what I think are the best arguments for God being temporal. And then we'll explore how these ought to be then assessed and what is the best understanding for God's relationship to time. So that will be the next time in which I'll meet with you.
- [33:50]
A
The copyright for the content of this recording is held by Dr. William Lane Craig. For more go to reasonablefaith.org.