> On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 19:55:44 -0500 Massie <mrlab@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> > The reference to Schroeder is ISBN 0-684-83736-6 and the title is
> > "The
> > Science of God." THis is not his only book but it is a good start.
> >
> > Good reading.
> >
> > Bert M
>
> May I suggest, before one takes Schroeder's view of time, including that
> the 15x10^9 years of cosmology and the 6 days of Genesis 1 are both
> literally true because of the deity's relativistic motion,
In the first place this is not about the Dieties motion. It is about which
clock one uses for counting time. It is about gravity (General Relativity)
not motion (Special Revativity) and it have nothing to do with the clock of a
diety. God is NOT confined by time as we know it. But, if HE talks about
time, what clock is he using is the question.
> considering
> one requirement of this view: God must be totally within the space-time
> universe.
No. God is not within SPACETIME. Quite th contrary, it is proposed that he
spoke into existence the SPACETIME of Physics. But, the issue is if he spoke
of time (a human and universe thing) then what clock is he using?
> This precludes Schroeder's deity from being the Creator of
> orthodoxy.
No. I do not see the connection with all of this and certainly no Spinoza.
Perhaps you should read Schroeder first. I do not necessarily agree with him
but he makes some pretty good points and there in the view of this physicist
nothing in his analysis as bad as Humphries who is simply a lously
mathematician and physicist.
> It may be the panentheistic deity of process theology or other
> heterodox pantheistic views, or even the _deus sive natura_ of Spinoza.
> But these are poor substitutes for the Father revealed in the Son.
>
> Dve
Bert M