God and Time

Jeff Webster (Jeff_Webster@dts.edu)
Tue, 19 Mar 96 13:31:27 CST

Paul Arveson Wrote:

A less problematic example for me would be Augustine. His idea (expressed in
the Confessions) that time is a creature, is I believe an important insight into
the distinction between theology and cosmology. I think it is also consistent
with the modern conception of the universe as a 4-dimensional space-time
continuum, as opposed to the Newtonian concept of absolute time and space.

This doesn't solve all the problems by any stretch, but I can see that it
doesn't agree with Whitehead's panenthism. I guess that was your general point.
If so, how did Whitehead deal with this distinction?

Dear Paul,

Yes, Augustine is really the thinker to consider where God and time is
concerned. Quite frankly, Plato rather than Aristotle would have been better to
consider for my original comments; I think I used Aristotle merely as an example
of a hellenistic thinker. (So much is made in theology about the disctinction
between the Hellenistic and the Hebrew worldviews, and a lot of modern
theologians believe that temporalizing God brings him closer to the God of the
Old Testament than the God of classical Christian theism, which they believe are
contradictory.)So, I really should have been referring to Plato; sorry for the
inaccuracy. (My degrees are in physics and theology, with just enough
philosophy to highlight my ignorance.)

I also think that Augustine is closer to the truth than Whitehead concerning God
and time: Augustine saw time as the creation of God, whereas process theology
(following Whitehead) sees it as the very essence of deity and the universe,
which are but loosely distinguished in process thought.

However, the question of time is still a thorny one. For example, many
theologians have abandoned the view that God is "outside time." He is not at its
mercy, but is rather the "lord of time," to quote Richard Swinburne again. They
adhere to the creator/creature distinction very strongly, but feel that removing
God from time altogether is too extreme and Biblically untenable, eg. the
incarnation poses enormous problems for the traditional view. Therefore, they
take a middle ground between the classical and process theologians, at least
where time is concerned.

Also, I certainly agree with your comment about the 4-d universe according well
with the classical view. Interestingly enough, process theology impales itself
on this very point, for it demands an objective, universal "now" for the
evolving universe. That is, it posits an absolute simultaneity for all
observers, contrary to special relativity. Some process theorists, aware of the
problem, are trying to get around it, but I'm not sure if any advances have been
made.

Thanks for the discussion,

Jeff