Is Time Real?

[Teallaura]

You tell me. You know space exists, because without 3 dimensional space there would be no universe for stuff to exist in. What happens if you take a 3 cubic foot box and remove everything inside it? All electrons, atoms, photons, energy, etc. Does the box disappear? Or is it still full of 3 cubic feet of "space"?

Um, technically, you'd have a crushed piece of cardboard from the air pressure...



























Sorry, couldn't resist...

[Teallaura]

Natural Laws.

If change is real, time is real.

Not necessarily. Temperature exists in a spectrum but 'cold' isn't truly real. It's just how we describe the absence of heat on a scale.

[Teallaura]

Time is relative.

The more time, the more relatives.

[Carrikature]

The more time, the more relatives.

Maybe where you come from.

[Cow Poke]

The more time, the more relatives.

Sometimes, the longer they stay, the longer "time" seems.

[Teallaura]

Maybe where you come from.

Really? Seems to me you have an additional little relative...

Whose picture you haven't posted in ages!

[Carrikature]

Really? Seems to me you have an additional little relative...

Sure, but I think the birth/death rate in my family favors the death side.

Whose picture you haven't posted in ages!

Was I supposed to be?

[Teallaura]

Sure, but I think the birth/death rate in my family favors the death side.

Was I supposed to be?

What do you think most of us girls come here for? It sure ain't the free Cheetos...

[Carrikature]

What do you think most of us girls come here for? It sure ain't the free Cheetos...

Gossip, of course. What else do women do?

[37818]

We see soace by seeing with light the matter in it. We experience time, yes we do. How? We see things move. We can feel acceleration. Gravity is felt because it is time dilation. Just as acceleration is time dilation. Force is time dilation or cause of time dilation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle

[shunyadragon]

Not necessarily. Temperature exists in a spectrum but 'cold' isn't truly real. It's just how we describe the absence of heat on a scale.

Huh!?!?!!?

A change in temperature would require time. A particular temperature simply exists at any one time does not require time.

The presence or absence of heat and changes in temperature would reflect Natural Laws.

[Leonhard]

We see soace by seeing with light the matter in it.

Soace?

[Leonhard]

As God the Son did not change. But how He was with God did change. The incarnation was a change. Not from being God. But from being God and with God. How He was with God did change in the incarnation. The Logos, God's Son was and is God's agent of change. Always has been. A cause is a change. The Son is the uncaused cause of creation. Uncaused being that He was God. A change in that He is the cause of creation (John 1:3).

I think we are in agreement, I didn't mean that a change of somekind didn't take place, however you said The Logos underwent change. However The Logos has always been used to refer to The Son that proceeds from The Father, and The Son cannot undergo change. However you do seem to mean that The Son took on a human nature in addition to His divine nature.

But its a different discussion so I won't say anything more on it here.

[Leonhard]

Then how could He love in either the emotional or the 1 Cor 13 senses of the term?

I don't - and this is from my somewhat limited understanding of Classical Theology - that God can have emotions the same way we do. In that sense God is entirely free of passion of any kind. That doesn't mean though that we can't describe Him in those terms and have it be meaningful. It can be proven, so has Christian theologians argued for millenia now, that God is entirely changeless and without such change it doesn't seem He can be subject to emotion.

Love is more than emotion, its purest form is that of seeking the best for someone else for his or her own sake. I think we have to understand love in that term, rather than in terms of what emotional feelings we have.

[Leonhard]

I thought I was clear about my view of time. God created all of time and space at once. It included all of our free will choices which from a "future" perspective might seem fixed, just as we see the past as fixed from our perspective, but that doesn't mean the people in the past did not have free will or that we do not.

I'm not talking about the nature of Freewill here, its not really relevant to the discussion as I see it.

I'm trying to understand what kind of view you have of time, because its not actually clear to me whether we disagree, or whether we are merely describe the same thing is different terminology. Lately I've tried to be extra careful about this because I've found that two people can wind up spending a lot of energy arguing over what things are called, and not what things are.

Do you believe that Christ is hanging on the Cross in some sense... displaced along some fourth space-time axis? That the past is not merely some state the world has passed through, but that it actually concretely exists? The same with the future?