In his book A Treatise on Time and Space, J.R. Lucas states that God cannot be timeless because a personal God who relates to humans is conscious and consciousness implies a being in time (the alternative would be a being not in time or without consciousness, essentially dead) . A Christian God, who is a person and is conscious, would imply that temporal distinctions would apply.
The manner and circumstances within which God recognizes time and acts in time could be simply subjective based upon contemporary theology and science which recognizes 1) Werner Heisenberg's "Uncertainty Principle"; 2) Heidegger's horizons of being in time; and 3) Einstein's theory of relativity. Lucas above would fail in his argument that God resides in time because God is conscious, because God has what scientists and theologians call "atemporal eternality" (eternal timelessness) not just infinite temporality (endless time). I side with the ancient philosophers Augustine, Anselm and Aquinas who all believed that there is no temporal location or duration in the life of God. God transcends space and time.
To support this argument we can first look at Heisenberg's "Uncertainty Principle." This philosopher/scientist had a surprising realization about the limits of physical knowledge by observation. He discovered that any act of observing alters the reality of the being observed, particularly at a subatomic level. In his experiments one needed to use a measuring device such as radiation or light to measure the properties of a particle such as an electron. Radiation however emits energy which affects the particle while it is being observed. Using high beam lights could tell you the position, but the energy emitted would throw off the particle's momentum. If you tried to adjust to a longer wavelength to lower the energy level, you could measure the momentum of the electron, but its position would not be accurate. Heisenberg realized that measuring with accurate precision was limited since no more than one property of the particle could be measured at one time. He would need to rely on math or probability to get any kind of reading. Like the ticking clock or passing day, you can only measure at specific points in time in order to understand the underlying qualities of anything. No one can with certainty account for anything other than observation at the precise point in time regarding momentum and/or position of any object.
Since we know God is not a memory, nor mere history, nor simple probablility, God cannot be unactualized in terms of potentiality. No mere change in momentum or position can add or detract from the value of God's perfect being as is.
Time as generally understood implies constant change and loss of event by way of passing into memory. God's omniscience implies God's knowledge of temporality by definition, but knowing and being in the constraints or limitations imposed by time are two different things.
Philosopher Heiddegger tells us that our being in time arises out of our horizons, perspectives and standpoints. Being finds its meaning in temporality, "regardless of whether or how Dasein (being) is an entity in time." We have the present, past and mere "anticipation" of future. Anticipation, since there is no future in actuality only the potential future. These are the "not yet" of the future and the "no longer" of the past as understood by St. Thomas Aquinas.
Philosopher J.R. Lucas argues in his book from the principle of the "Identity of Indiscernibles" whereby we discern things by the qualities which arise when they are not conceptually identical, for example, identical twins are distinct by name or birth order. The problem with quantification by time constrained concepts however is that we are not sure if there are more time dimensions to our universe than are now currently known. Further, quantum mechanics, Einstein's theory of relativity, string theory, and other ways of recognizing the space/time continuum and the like make such distinct ideas questionable. In Einstein's theory when we talk about observation, we need to consider the event relative to the position of the observer and the distance from the object observed. This as well as the event relative to the speed of motion of the observer with relation to the object. There is no identical world moment for all observers across the universe: think of time zones, daylight savings, leap years. Time is relative.
The understanding that time is continuous is an idealization, not an actual characteristic of time. Time can be other than linear, it can be periodic such as the rotation of the earth on its axis (seasonal) or proportional such as sand falling inside an egg timer. The ancients understood time as circular or constantly repeating itself seasonally. This would imply time is indeed circumscribed, but does not necessarily mean time is finite at any one point, simply continuous. Also, there is no such thing as an "actual" infinity, only a potential infinite place in time which in itself cannot be actualized in the mind other than by conceptualizing it by mere numbers or figures.
If one accepts the Biblical concept of God, God can change time. God added 15 years to Hezekiah's life and confirms this by sending the sun's shadow back 10 steps on a stairway (Isaiah 38:8). This would make the ancient philosopher Agathon's theory that "the power of making not to have happened those things which have been done" wrong. In Joshua 10:12, Joshua asks God to make the sun stand still so he could win his battle. Eccles.3:11 tells us God has "made everything appropriate in its time. He has also set eternity in their hearts; yet, so that man will not find out the work which God has done from the beginning even to the end." Job 24:1 asks "why are the times not stored up by the Almighty?" and Daniel 2:21 tells us, "And it is He who changes the times and the epochs." Jesus recognized time when he told his disciples that His "time" was not yet at hand (John 7:6, and Matthew 26:18).
Time may be bound up in the way we know facts by language and tense. For example, when I say "I love the 60s" do I mean now talking about an epoch in time or enjoying current senior citizenship? When Eccles. 3:1-18 talks about God's appointed times or Job at 22:16 refers to those snatched "before their time" the actual difinitive times are not the focus of the concepts, these are meant generally and nonspecifically. If God exists in time alongside us, it would only be in the way we conceive of time in our minds as in the nonspecific term "today is the day of salvation." Perhaps as physics advances, we too can conceive of God's atemporal eternality, but to do that we need to know that unlike math or physics God is not merely a concept of the mind, but exists in timeless actuality, God's own.
Published by reasonfaith
I am a disabled freelance writer and researcher. Reasonfaith is a charitable organization committed to the connection between logic and faith-based belief. Ethics and social justice are the inspiration for... View profile
God Exists: The Death of a Thousand ReasonsIt is an article about how easily people try to disprove God even with so many reasons for His existence. - Why God ExistsReasons for believing in God's existence.
- Innocence and Ignorance in The MonkMatthew Lewis' approach to the heroine shows a drastic contrast to other novels produced in the 18th century. His novel digs into previous models of innocence and ignorance, and questions whether you can have one wit...
- Autonomy, Independence, and Dependence in ExodusThis paper is an attempt to delineate the process whereby the Israelites gained autonomy.
Book Review: Karen Armstrong; "The Case for God"The ex-nun, documentary host and celebrated religious historical author tries to prove God exists in this 2009 outing.
- Contemplating on God and Who He Might Be?
- God: Prove it or Disprove it Man Still Proves Nothing
- Is There a God?
- An Interesting and New Religious Philosophy on God and Spirituality
- When Relationships Fail, We are Still Loved by God
- 99 Names of God (ALLAH)
- Modern Physics and T.S. Eliot's "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock"


4 Comments
Post a CommentI enjoy thinking about things like this. Great thoughts and expression of them!
Very interesting article!
Very deep.
Excellent writing and very interesting. Thanks for such a worthwhile contribution.