Were you born again as a young child? How old were you when you were saved?

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]I never gave you one reason to believe I support pantheism...[/quote]

You said God is time...that is pantheism. Philosophically, scientifically, and theologically pantheism.

And completely goes against the teachings of orthodox Christianity.

[quote author=christundivided]Time at its core is cause and effect. God is "cause" and "effect".[/quote]

And no....time is not cause and effect.

[quote author=christundivided]He is the same through any measure of time.[/quote]

And yet time changes...

[quote author=christundivided]Eternity or the Eternal is not absence of time. Its is the immeasurable accumulation of time. [/quote]

Again no...this is completely unorthodox. The elect will live forever. According to you, that makes them eternal (and they are not). God has no end, but He also has no beginning. That makes Him eternal (and He is).

 

[subllibrm]

Time out from the time debate (which is a waste of time IMO)

rsc2a serious question.

Was there ever a "before salvation" condition in your life (after your physical birth but before now)?

 

[rsc2a]

Time out from the time debate (which is a waste of time IMO)

rsc2a serious question.

Was there ever a "before salvation" condition in your life (after your physical birth but before now)?

No. Or yes.

It would depend on what you mean by "salvation condition". There was however a time before I was aware of my salvation. And, to this day, there are times I live more like the world than like Christ.

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=christundivided]I never gave you one reason to believe I support pantheism...

You said God is time...that is pantheism. Philosophically, scientifically, and theologically pantheism.

And completely goes against the teachings of orthodox Christianity. [/quote]

No its not. If I say that God is love. Does that mean I support Pantheism? Tell why it different. I do NOT believe that the universe and nature is identical with divinity. You're a blathering idiot if you got that from what I said.

And yet time changes...

No. Time progresses but doesn't necessarily CHANGE. If you take a 1 billion year old rock and put it in a vacuum as to remove it from any influence of change. That rock will not change in a billion years.

 

[subllibrm]

Time out from the time debate (which is a waste of time IMO)

rsc2a serious question.

Was there ever a "before salvation" condition in your life (after your physical birth but before now)?

No. Or yes.

It would depend on what you mean by "salvation condition". There was however a time before I was aware of my salvation. And, to this day, there are times I live more like the world than like Christ.

I didn't mean anything by what you "quoted" because that is not what I said or asked. Why are you moving my quotation marks? My question was clear and requires a yes or no question. The cute attempt to muddy clear water doesn't change the fact that you didn't answer the question.

As has been shown with Eph 2, "before and after" is a biblical principle. Why you feel the need to make it more complicated than that is beyond me. Even weirder is that if you do hold some sort of special knowledge, your refusal to explain it so the rest of us can enjoy the blessing of that "truth" betrays a heart that wants to reserve for itself some position of superiority over the rest of the brethren.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]I never gave you one reason to believe I support pantheism...

You said God is time...that is pantheism. Philosophically, scientifically, and theologically pantheism.

And completely goes against the teachings of orthodox Christianity.

No its not. If I say that God is love. Does that mean I support Pantheism? Tell why it different.[/quote]

No...should I tell you why "love" and "time" are completely different animals now? (Hint: It's in my next comment.)

[quote author=christundivided]I do NOT believe that the universe and nature is identical with divinity. You're a blathering idiot if you got that from what I said.[/quote]

You may not think that you believe it, but your own statement reflects a belief in exactly that.

Philosophically: Time is a sequential collection of events. This definition of God is a pantheistic God.
Theologically: God is outside time. Before time began, God was. This has been the understanding of Christianity for over 2000 years.
Scientifically: Time is a dimension like length, height, and width. It is a created thing that is dependent on the existence of matter. Basic physics. And you have equated a created thing to God. But what would a "blathering idiot" know about special relatively that you are so clearly versed in?

[quote author=christundivided]

And yet time changes...

No. Time progresses but doesn't necessarily CHANGE. If you take a 1 billion year old rock and put it in a vacuum as to remove it from any influence of change. That rock will not change in a billion years. [/quote]

The rock has not changed. Time has. In fact, you have explicitly stated this.

 

[rsc2a]

Time out from the time debate (which is a waste of time IMO)

rsc2a serious question.

Was there ever a "before salvation" condition in your life (after your physical birth but before now)?

No. Or yes.

It would depend on what you mean by "salvation condition". There was however a time before I was aware of my salvation. And, to this day, there are times I live more like the world than like Christ.

I didn't mean anything by what you "quoted" because that is not what I said or asked. Why are you moving my quotation marks? My question was clear and requires a yes or no question. The cute attempt to muddy clear water doesn't change the fact that you didn't answer the question.

You asked about a "before salvation" condition which would imply an "after salvation" condition meaning there would be some "salvation condition" that would be different in the "before" and "after".

[quote author=subllibrm]As has been shown with Eph 2, "before and after" is a biblical principle. Why you feel the need to make it more complicated than that is beyond me.[/quote]

Because other passages speak about a "saved before the foundations of the world" biblical principle. Thus the reason I say "both". The answer to your "yes' or "no" question that "requires" an either/or is actually both/and.

[quote author=subllibrm]Even weirder is that if you do hold some sort of special knowledge, your refusal to explain it so the rest of us can enjoy the blessing of that "truth" betrays a heart that wants to reserve for itself some position of superiority over the rest of the brethren.[/quote]

I've actually explained it ad nauseum. Whether people comprehend it is a different question...

...I'll summarize it again. Salvation is a process, not a point in time. I was saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.

 

[ALAYMAN]

I've actually explained it ad nauseum. Whether people comprehend it is a different question...

...I'll summarize it again. Salvation is a process, not a point in time. I was saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.

Yes, subllibrm, bow down, you ditheringly dense dolt.

 

[christundivided]

You may not think that you believe it, but your own statement reflects a belief in exactly that.

I've had this discussion with dozens of men far greater than you. No one and I mean no one has claimed what you've claimed about me. You're a dishonest hack. You have no character at all.

[quote author=christundivided]

And yet time changes...

No. Time progresses but doesn't necessarily CHANGE. If you take a 1 billion year old rock and put it in a vacuum as to remove it from any influence of change. That rock will not change in a billion years. [/quote]

The rock has not changed. Time has. In fact, you have explicitly stated this.

What changed about time? By all means, go into great detail. I used the word progress because that is an accurate description of the relationship between the rock and time. Progression is not necessarily change.

 

[rsc2a]

You may not think that you believe it, but your own statement reflects a belief in exactly that.

I've had this discussion with dozens of men far greater than you. No one and I mean no one has claimed what you've claimed about me. You're a dishonest hack.

You also have stated that people often categorize your beliefs as Open Theism. It is no surprise that your understanding of the time/God is unorthodox.

[quote author=christundivided]You have no character at all.[/quote]

Clearly. After all, I am the one who ultimately resorts to name-calling and personal attacks in virtually every discussion we have. /sarcasm

[quote author=christundivided][quote author=christundivided]

And yet time changes...

No. Time progresses but doesn't necessarily CHANGE. If you take a 1 billion year old rock and put it in a vacuum as to remove it from any influence of change. That rock will not change in a billion years. [/quote]

The rock has not changed. Time has. In fact, you have explicitly stated this.

What changed about time? By all means, go into great detail. I used the word progress because that is an accurate description of the relationship between the rock and time. Progression is not necessarily change.[/quote]

See that bolded part...that's a change.

 

[subllibrm]

...I'll summarize it again. Salvation is a process, not a point in time. I was saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.

This line as written I can agree with. But I suspect that you and I do not believe it means the same things.

The bold part in my mind denotes a starting point. When was your starting point? Your answer was "before the foundation of the world". That is fine except you didn't exist then. Except you aren't sure that you didn't.

For you to say that there was no before or after means the Eph 2 passage is pointless. Or if it isn't pointless, what is it there for if not for the plain meaning it seems to be teaching? God is not the God of confusion and all I see in your answers is confusion.

You mentioned somewhere along the way of an awareness of your elect status. When did that happen? What were the circumstances involved? How did God manifest this truth to you? What did you believe before this enlightenment? Did this awareness happen before you were born (physically) or after? If after, how old were you when this all became clear to you?

 

[christundivided]

You also have stated that people often categorize your beliefs as Open Theism. It is no surprise that your understanding of the time/God is unorthodox.

Orthodox to who? Be specific. Those that claimed such soon abandoned their claim because I am not a Open Theist. Everyone that doesn't believe in time in the same manner as C.S. Lewis isn't an Open Theist. You don't know enough about what I beleive to even have an honest opinion. Thus, You're a hack. You're dishonest and you could care less about it.

[quote author=christundivided]You have no character at all.

Clearly. After all, I am the one who ultimately resorts to name-calling and personal attacks in virtually every discussion we have. /sarcasm[/quote]

You resorted to a personal attack by claiming I believe in Pantheism. That offends me. Just because you didn't call me a idiot doesn't mean you're not offending me. You could care less.... POT.

[quote author=christundivided][quote author=christundivided]
What changed about time? By all means, go into great detail. I used the word progress because that is an accurate description of the relationship between the rock and time. Progression is not necessarily change.[/quote]

See that bolded part...that's a change.[/quote]

How is that change? Don't just call it change. Tell me what changed? Nothing changed about the rock. Nothing.

 

[rsc2a]

...I'll summarize it again. Salvation is a process, not a point in time. I was saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.

This line as written I can agree with. But I suspect that you and I do not believe it means the same things.

The bold part in my mind denotes a starting point. When was your starting point? Your answer was "before the foundation of the world". That is fine except you didn't exist then. Except you aren't sure that you didn't.

For you to say that there was no before or after means the Eph 2 passage is pointless. Or if it isn't pointless, what is it there for if not for the plain meaning it seems to be teaching?

No. It doesn't mean the Ephesians 2 passage is pointless. It means that there is more than one "right" answer. Salvation is a process, not a point in time. I am more like Christ than I was last year. To use the Ephesians 2 language, I "walked according to the course of this world" more last year than I (hopefully!) do this year. I "walked according to the course of this world" more five years ago than I did last year.

[quote author=subllibrm]God is not the God of confusion and all I see in your answers is confusion.[/quote]

This is a classic proof-text that people have a habit of abusing/misusing.

[quote author=subllibrm]You mentioned somewhere along the way of an awareness of your elect status. When did that happen? What were the circumstances involved? How did God manifest this truth to you? What did you believe before this enlightenment? Did this awareness happen before you were born (physically) or after? If after, how old were you when this all became clear to you?[/quote]

- Was it when I was taught about God as a small child? Yes.
- Was it when I walked down an aisle and asked to be baptized? Yes.
- Was it when I "re-dedicated" my life as a teen (multiple times)? Yes.
- Was it when I realized in college that I had been pursuing God in a manner that was largely based on how I acted and not on what God did? Yes.
- Was it when I realized post-college that surrendering my life to God meant that there should be a distinct difference in my lifestyle and that of my co-workers? Yes.
- Was it when I discovered several years after that revelation that I had been pursuing the Jesus of conservative evangelical American Christianity and not Jesus as revealed in the Bible? Yes.
- Will it be when I understand that my current understanding of God is imperfect at best and try to live my life in accordance with what I learn in the future? Yes.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]Orthodox to who? Be specific. Those that claimed such soon abandoned their claim because I am not a Open Theist. Everyone that doesn't believe in time in the same manner as C.S. Lewis isn't an Open Theist. You don't know enough about what I beleive to even have an honest opinion. Thus, You're a hack. You're dishonest and you could care less about it.[/quote]

Orthodox to all of historic Christianity. Pick the Christian tradition, and I'll show you where they say you are wrong.

And honestly, I would grant that you aren't an Open Theist. Even Open Theists don't equate God to time.

[quote author=christundivided]

[quote author=christundivided]You have no character at all.

Clearly. After all, I am the one who ultimately resorts to name-calling and personal attacks in virtually every discussion we have. /sarcasm[/quote]

You resorted to a personal attack by claiming I believe in Pantheism. That offends me. Just because you didn't call me a idiot doesn't mean you're not offending me. You could care less.... POT. [/quote]

I didn't claim you believe in pantheism. You claimed you believed in pantheism when you stated that God is His creation. My pointing that out does not equal a personal attack.

[quote author=christundivided][quote author=rsc2a][quote author=christundivided]
What changed about time? By all means, go into great detail. I used the word progress because that is an accurate description of the relationship between the rock and time. Progression is not necessarily change.[/quote]

See that bolded part...that's a change.[/quote]

How is that change? Don't just call it change. Tell me what changed? Nothing changed about the rock. Nothing.[/quote]

I have stated the rock did not change. Time, however, did. In fact, you explicitly stated it: "in a billion years".

 

[christundivided]

I didn't claim you believe in pantheism. You claimed you believed in pantheism when you stated that God is His creation. My pointing that out does not equal a personal attack.

Did God create love in the Universe? Simple question. Please say yes or no?

If God did not create love, then how does love exist and from where did it come?

Do you see your failed logic? By your reasoning, since God is love, God is His creation. You're so silly sometimes.

[quote author=christundivided][quote author=rsc2a][quote author=christundivided]
What changed about time? By all means, go into great detail. I used the word progress because that is an accurate description of the relationship between the rock and time. Progression is not necessarily change.[/quote]

See that bolded part...that's a change.[/quote]

How is that change? Don't just call it change. Tell me what changed? Nothing changed about the rock. Nothing.[/quote]

I have stated the rock did not change. Time, however, did. In fact, you explicitly stated it: "in a billion years".
[/quote]

The "billion years" is only a measure. Nothing changed. The rock stayed the same. Time had no affect. The change did not come from time. Get it?

 

[rsc2a]

I didn't claim you believe in pantheism. You claimed you believed in pantheism when you stated that God is His creation. My pointing that out does not equal a personal attack.

Did God create love in the Universe? Simple question. Please say yes or no?

No.

[quote author=christundivided]If God did not create love, then how does love exist and from where did it come?[/quote]

God is love, ergo love comes from God and love has always existed.

[quote author=christundivided]Do you see your failed logic? By your reasoning, since God is love, God is His creation. You're so silly sometimes.[/quote]

No, He is not. Christian orthodoxy 101. And a very explicit claim of pantheism from you.

[quote author=christundivided]The "billion years" is only a measure. Nothing changed. The rock stayed the same. Time had no affect. The change did not come from time. Get it?[/quote]

"effect" and time is a measure. Thus the comparison to length, height and width. Meaningless without a material world. In other words, a created thing. And time, in your example, changed. Time does not cause change. Time measures change.

 

[christundivided]

[quote author=christundivided]If God did not create love, then how does love exist and from where did it come?

God is love, ergo love comes from God and love has always existed.[/quote]

You're talking around the issue. Nonetheless....

So can't time come from God in the same manner as love? If not, then why not?

No, He is not. Christian orthodoxy 101. And a very explicit claim of pantheism from you.

Nope. You're only one claiming such.

[quote author=christundivided]The "billion years" is only a measure. Nothing changed. The rock stayed the same. Time had no affect. The change did not come from time. Get it?

"effect" and time is a measure. Thus the comparison to length, height and width. Meaningless without a material world. In other words, a created thing. And time, in your example, changed. Time does not cause change. Time measures change.[/quote]

Time exists apart from any measure. You're the one hung in a silly dogma. Sequence exists apart from any measure of how that sequence progresses or at what rate it progresses.

You assume sequence means change. It doesn't. Prove it does.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]If God did not create love, then how does love exist and from where did it come?

God is love, ergo love comes from God and love has always existed.

You're talking around the issue. Nonetheless....

So can't time come from God in the same manner as love? If not, then why not?[/quote]

Because the Bible doesn't teach that. Because all of historic Christianity doesn't teach that. Because love is a concept that is not dependent on the existence of the material universe.

No, He is not. Christian orthodoxy 101. And a very explicit claim of pantheism from you.

Nope. You're only one claiming such.

"God is His creation" - christundivided

pan·the·ism  (pnth-zm)
n.
1. A doctrine identifying the Deity with the universe and its phenomena.

[quote author=christundivided]Time exists apart from any measure.[/quote]

So does the rock. But they are both created things. The very fact that you can measure them means they are created.

[quote author=christundivided]You're the one hung in a silly dogma.[/quote]

The "silly dogma" I hold to is orthodox Christianity. Insofar as you deny this, you are stating a belief in a heretical position.

[quote author=christundivided]Sequence exists apart from any measure of how that sequence progresses or at what rate it progresses. [/quote]

Yes...the object(s) affected by time and time are different. That's basic. The rock is not the billion years; in your example, one changed and the other didn't.

[quote author=christundivided]You assume sequence means change. It doesn't. Prove it does.[/quote]

sequence [ˈsiːkwəns]
n
1. an arrangement of two or more things in a successive order

 

[christundivided]

You're talking around the issue. Nonetheless....

So can't time come from God in the same manner as love? If not, then why not?

Because the Bible doesn't teach that. Because all of historic Christianity doesn't teach that. Because love is a concept that is not dependent on the existence of the material universe.

Sure it does. I gave the verse that say just that. I am the beginning. I am the end.

Does God change because He is both Beginning and End? Do you see a sequence anywhere. You're the one demanding sequence constitutes change.

pan·the·ism  (pnth-zm)
n.
1. A doctrine identifying the Deity with the universe and its phenomena.

You're selectively quoting a definition.

A doctrine that identifies God with the universe, or regards the universe as a manifestation of God.

I never claimed God and the universe are one in the same. Never. You're a liar. A dishonest liar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

Pantheists thus do not believe in a personal or anthropomorphic god.

I have shared my own personal testimony of my personal relationship with the personage of Jesus Christ. Pantheists do not believe such and no one but a dishonest liar like yourself would claim such.

So does the rock. But they are both created things. The very fact that you can measure them means they are created.

Now they are not both created things. Prove me that time was created. Just give me one verse. Just one. You can't.

Christ said I am beginning and I am end. He placed himself right in the middle of personally being time. A verse you still are ignoring though I've mentioned it multiple times. Be honest and deal with it.

The "silly dogma" I hold to is orthodox Christianity. Insofar as you deny this, you are stating a belief in a heretical position.

You're the one that doesn't believe in original sin. You're theistic evolution can't allow it. You don't even believe that Adam was a single humanoid creation of God. I wouldn't throw around the term "heretic" if I were you.

Yes...the object(s) affected by time and time are different. That's basic. The rock is not the billion years; in your example, one changed and the other didn't.

No they didn't.

sequence [ˈsiːkwəns]
n
1. an arrangement of two or more things in a successive order

Did you notice that word "arrangement". Did you notice that it proceeded "two or more"? Thus, two or more" are subject to the descriptive nature of "arrangement.  The measure of time is nothing more than arrangement. It doesn't mean anything changed.

 

[rsc2a]

You're talking around the issue. Nonetheless....

So can't time come from God in the same manner as love? If not, then why not?

Because the Bible doesn't teach that. Because all of historic Christianity doesn't teach that. Because love is a concept that is not dependent on the existence of the material universe.

Sure it does. I gave the verse that say just that. I am the beginning. I am the end.

That verse doesn't "say just that". It's a simple fact. Your belief is well outside of orthodox Christian faith.

[quote author=christundivided]Does God change because He is both Beginning and End? Do you see a sequence anywhere. You're the one demanding sequence constitutes change. [/quote]

No, I don't see a sequence. God is outside time. God is also in all time. God is not time.

[quote author=christundivided]

pan·the·ism  (pnth-zm)
n.
1. A doctrine identifying the Deity with the universe and its phenomena.

You're selectively quoting a definition.

A doctrine that identifies God with the universe, or regards the universe as a manifestation of God.

I never claimed God and the universe are one in the same. Never. You're a liar. A dishonest liar.[/quote]

You have explicitly claimed that God is His creation just a few posts ago.

[quote author=christundivided]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

Pantheists thus do not believe in a personal or anthropomorphic god.

I have shared my own personal testimony of my personal relationship with the personage of Jesus Christ. Pantheists do not believe such and no one but a dishonest liar like yourself would claim such. [/quote]

Pantheists also believe that God is creation itself. You've created a mush of Christianity and pantheism, but it's still pantheism.

[quote author=christundivided]

So does the rock. But they are both created things. The very fact that you can measure them means they are created.

Now they are not both created things. Prove me that time was created. Just give me one verse. Just one. You can't.

Christ said I am beginning and I am end. He placed himself right in the middle of personally being time. A verse you still are ignoring though I've mentioned it multiple times. Be honest and deal with it. [/quote]

I have dealt with it. All of Christianity throughout its 2000 year history has dealt with it. That's why I can clearly state that your belief in this area is heretical.

[quote author=christundivided]

The "silly dogma" I hold to is orthodox Christianity. Insofar as you deny this, you are stating a belief in a heretical position.

You're the one that doesn't believe in original sin. You're theistic evolution can't allow it. You don't even believe that Adam was a single humanoid creation of God. I wouldn't throw around the term "heretic" if I were you. [/quote]

I don't? It can't? Perhaps.

And, yes, heretic would be appropriate when someone rejects a doctrine of basic Christianity. Again I'll ask...pick a tradition...I'll provide the documentation where that tradition says you are wrong.

[quote author=christundivided]

Yes...the object(s) affected by time and time are different. That's basic. The rock is not the billion years; in your example, one changed and the other didn't.

No they didn't. [/quote]

Clearly not...that's why you have to talk about "after a billion years...". Because there was a change.

[quote author=christundivided]

sequence [ˈsiːkwəns]
n
1. an arrangement of two or more things in a successive order

Did you notice that word "arrangement". Did you notice that it proceeded "two or more"? Thus, two or more" are subject to the descriptive nature of "arrangement.  The measure of time is nothing more than arrangement. It doesn't mean anything changed.[/quote]

The measure of time is a measure of the arrangement. Special relativity and all that.