Is the Almighty God Outside Space and Time?

[Jayhawker Soule]

God is not limited by anything. He created space and time how could it limit him?

Out of curiosity, according to whom?

 

[Nehustan]

Bismillah Ar Rahman Ar Raheem​

​

Allah. There is no god but He,-the Living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. No slumber can seize Him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth? He knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) before or after or behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His Throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth, and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them for He is the Most High, the Supreme (in glory). Sura 2:255

Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The Parable of His Light is as if there were a Niche and within it a Lamp: the Lamp enclosed in Glass: the glass as it were a brilliant star: Lit from a blessed Tree, an Olive, neither of the east nor of the west, whose oil is well-nigh luminous, though fire scarce touched it: Light upon Light! Allah doth guide whom He will to His Light: Allah doth set forth Parables for men: and Allah doth know all things. (Lit is such a Light) in houses, which Allah hath permitted to be raised to honour; for the celebration, in them, of His name: In them is He glorified in the mornings and in the evenings, (again and again). Surah 24:35-36

Regarding who says....well the Quran does for one.

 

[shrop]

Out of curiosity, according to whom?

That is according to the Bible. I understand that is not the reference point for everyone, but it apparantly was for the person I was replying to.

Question for you...If God did not create time and space, who did?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Thanks, Nehustan, I would not be surprised if your Quran endorsed such silliness. At the same time, I find it interesting that Sura 2:255 says absolutely nothing about creating space and time. Why quote something that is irrelevant?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

That is according to the Bible. I understand that is not the reference point for everyone, but it apparantly was for the person I was replying to.

Thanks for responding. Where in the Bible do you think it says such a thing?

 

[Nehustan]

Thanks, Nehustan, I would not be surprised if your Quran endorsed such silliness. At the same time, I find it interesting that Sura 2:255 says absolutely nothing about creating space and time. Why quote something that is irrelevant?

It does, though obviously not clearly, but then it does announce in those two ayat that things are often struck by parable. The key to undertsanding these ayat might not be immediately obvious. It rest very much upon the 'the niche' and also subsequently 'The star' in the lamp 'lit in houses'. One of the 99 names of Allah is the light, and when Allah is considered as infinite and absolute it is quite often that he is thought as a light which would blind. It is considered that Allah is established over the Throne. The prophet Muhammad said that the Kursi (footstool) when compared to the Arsh (Throne) is like a ring thrown in the center of a desert, with the ring as the Kursi, and the edge of the desert 'The Throne'. Although in the first ayat I posted it says 'Throne' this is actually more correctly translated as the footstool as considered by scholars. The name Allah when written in Arabic fits with these two ayat, and the cited hadith, in that the Alif is considered silent, beyond description if you will, being sounded by its vowels, whereas the Ha at the end, coincedentally circular, may be considered the Kursi surrounding the first heaven, ie. Space, or if you like 'A niche'. It also has a numerical value of 5 (the arabs like the jews used letters as numbers until they introduced Indian numbers), and thus is seen also to be representative of a star. Reconciling the four elements by the descending spirit.

Well you did ask.

 

[James the Persian]

It is if your faith anthropomorphises The God, i.e old man with a beard. Its is also probalamatic if you believe the Son of Man is part the God. However if you ponder the concept of The God beyond, Absolute and Infinite, shing his light into the creation through the word and the actions of his vice regents on earth i.e. the company of prophets, to percieve him as anything in his presence as beyond limitation is by nature to bind him (or at least attempt to) in a way your mind can comprehend. As is said as you believe you know God to be a thing, he may well cease to be that thing. There is a semantic trick I like to play considering things but I won't bore you with it unless you are particulalry interested.

My faith most certainly does not anthropomorphise God. In fact, if you look into Orthodox theology you'll see that we use the apophatic approach almost to the exclusion of cataphaticism. In other words, we acknowledge that the Creator is completely other than His creation and hence we can never really say what He is because any concept we apply to Him will be at best a poor approximation made intelligible to human reason. Rather than do that we tend to describe God by what He is not, except in those instances where He has revealed something of His nature to us. It is impossible to anthropomorphise God using the apophatic approach.

However, that is an aside. It is not the problem that I was referring to (though it is tangentially related). To say that anything is outside of space is logically nonsensical as 'outside' is a word specifying a spatial relationship. It is impossible to be in a position where all spatial relationships are non-existent and have that position described using spatial references. That is the problem I was referring to - one of language used to create logical impossibilities. God is, of course, not bound by time or space, but to describe Him as outside time and space is not correct either. If that were the case, quite apart from the linguistic difficulties mentioned, then you'd have to explain how He can have any effect on us who are bound by time and space without 'coming inside'. Inside/outside space or time is an idea that has no relevance to God whatsoever. He is unbound by anything.

James

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It does, though obviously not clearly, ...

That is, in my opinion, the strength of the Quran - and a reason that I tend to dismiss it ... but that is clearly a different topic.

 

[shrop]

Thanks for responding. Where in the Bible do you think it says such a thing?

John 1:3, However, that is under my belief that time was made, it has not existed eternally. What do you believe about time.

 

[Nehustan]

My faith most certainly does not anthropomorphise God. In fact, if you look into Orthodox theology you'll see that we use the apophatic approach almost to the exclusion of cataphaticism. In other words, we acknowledge that the Creator is completely other than His creation and hence we can never really say what He is because any concept we apply to Him will be at best a poor approximation made intelligible to human reason. Rather than do that we tend to describe God by what He is not, except in those instances where He has revealed something of His nature to us. It is impossible to anthropomorphise God using the apophatic approach.

However, that is an aside. It is not the problem that I was referring to (though it is tangentially related). To say that anything is outside of space is logically nonsensical as 'outside' is a word specifying a spatial relationship. It is impossible to be in a position where all spatial relationships are non-existent and have that position described using spatial references. That is the problem I was referring to - one of language used to create logical impossibilities. God is, of course, not bound by time or space, but to describe Him as outside time and space is not correct either. If that were the case, quite apart from the linguistic difficulties mentioned, then you'd have to explain how He can have any effect on us who are bound by time and space without 'coming inside'. Inside/outside space or time is an idea that has no relevance to God whatsoever. He is unbound by anything.

James

James if we understood how God's sovereignty and will prevaded the universe, it would be awfully easy to prove him to the atheists. I like to think that he moves the heavens and the earth by power and not by presence.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

God is, of course, not bound by time or space, ...

That statement is one of faith and deserves to be respected as such, but there is no "of course" about it. The Greeks, Romans, Celts, Norse, Sumerians, Babylonians, Egyptians - all had gods "bounded by time or space", and there seems to be good reason to believe that the Jews had no clear theology of creation ex nihilo.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

John 1:3, However, that is under my belief that time was made, it has not existed eternally. What do you believe about time.

Thank you. I am, in fact, somewhat embarrassed that I did not recall that verse - especially since John would be the perfect person to say such a thing.

I believe time is a component of space-time. If there were anything that could be construed as a creation event, it would created space-time.

Thanks again.

 

[James the Persian]

That statement is one of faith and deserves to be respected as such, but there is no "of course" about it. The Greeks, Romans, Celts, Norse, Sumerians, Babylonians, Egyptians - all had gods "bounded by time or space", and there seems to be good reason to believe that the Jews had no clear theology of creation ex nihilo.

Deut, you're quite right, but when I use God, rather than god, I mean the God I worship, not any others. The 'of course' refers to the Christian God and if you accept that He exists and is the Creator of all then it does follow logically, but I fully accept what you are saying. Obviously, I was trying to explain our beliefs and how they lead to a God unbound by time and space but that it is still wrong to describe such a God as being outside time and space. I wasn't trying to convince anyone that our concept of God was correct (though I believe it is) but rather to show Nehustan that the logical problem of the opening poster's phrase remains even with such a concept of God.

James

 

[James the Persian]

James if we understood how God's sovereignty and will prevaded the universe, it would be awfully easy to prove him to the atheists. I like to think that he moves the heavens and the earth by power and not by presence.

I fail to see how knowing that God pervades the universe with His uncreated energies (which is our belief and may be similar to what you mean by moving heaven and earth by power rather than presence) would have any effect on the conversion of atheists. Simply knowing something to be true is unlikely to convince those who require proof and I fail to see what proof we could ever offer for the nature, or even the existence, of God.

James

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Deut, you're quite right, but when I use God, rather than god, I mean the God I worship, not any others. The 'of course' refers to the Christian God and if you accept that He exists and is the Creator of all then it does follow logically, but I fully accept what you are saying.

Did you read my thread on Gen. 1:1-3? Given Clement's:

O King, great Giver of good gifts to men, Lord of the good, Father, of all the Maker, Who heaven and heaven's adornment, by Thy word Divine fitly disposed, alone didst make; Who broughtest forth the sunshine and the day; Who didst appoint their courses to the stars, And how the earth and sea their place should keep; And when the seasons, in their circling course, Winter and summer, spring and autumn, each

Should come, according to well-ordered plan; Out of a confused heap who didst create This ordered sphere, and from the shapeless mass Of matter didst the universe adorn;- Grant to me life, and be that life welt spent, Thy grace enjoying; let me act and speak In all things as Thy Holy Scriptures teach; ...

... would you insist that God as creator of space and time is fundamental to Christian theology? It certainly appears as if Clement was speaking of something less than creation ex nihilo.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

God is not limited by anything. He created space and time how could it limit him?

Originally Posted by JamesThePersian
God is, of course, not bound by time or space, ...

These are exacty the Beliefs I hold myself.
It would be difficult to comprehend an ageless God if it was not true. Or one that could be every where at once.

Deut, this is all a matter of faith and belief not science.

Terry________________________
Amen! Truly I say to you: Gather in my name. I am with you.

 

[Nehustan]

Quote:Originally Posted by Nehustan
James if we understood how God's sovereignty and will prevaded the universe, it would be awfully easy to prove him to the atheists. I like to think that he moves the heavens and the earth by power and not by presence.

I fail to see how knowing that God pervades the universe with His uncreated energies (which is our belief and may be similar to what you mean by moving heaven and earth by power rather than presence) would have any effect on the conversion of atheists. Simply knowing something to be true is unlikely to convince those who require proof and I fail to see what proof we could ever offer for the nature, or even the existence, of God.

James


I think James that as time progresses and with it our ability to measure that which is invisible today, i.e. science, we will understand more the mechanics of how He orders, sustains, and thus has sovereignty over the created world.

Nogah

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Deut, this is all a matter of faith and belief not science.

Of course it is, but that is not at all the issue raised by me with respect to James' comments. I simply wished to point out that creation ex nihilo is not a necessary component of Judeo-Christian theology.

 

[Nehustan]

Of course it is, but that is not at all the issue raised by me with respect to James' comments. I simply wished to point out that creation ex nihilo is not a necessary component of Judeo-Christian theology.

Creation of the 'Universe' or this Stellar System. I differentiate between the two for this reason, creation of the Universe would by its nature have been ex nihilo, not only from nothing, but also by 'no thing', i.e. that which is beyond quantifiability, whereas creation of this stellar sytem would have used the elements formed at the birth of the Universe. I often like to ponder the three veils Ain, Ain Soph, and Ain Soph Aur in this regard, Ain Soph Aur being synonymous with Al Nur, The Light which I previously alluded to by quoting Surah 24:35, and the Universe i.e Heavens alluded to by Surah 2:255

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

A request: if you're choose to respond to something I wrote, respond to something I wrote.