God... Is Time.

[Boss]

We only perceive the present. That is the only 'time' that ever is.

No. It is impossible to perceive the present. Everything you use to perceive is reliant upon passing time. It takes time for light to travel from an object to your eye and the signal to travel to your brain and your brain to register what it experienced. By the time you have perceived it, the time has passed. It is forever a part of the past and you have no perception of anything in the present.

***cough...cough....***

"Ive never said we cant percieve the present"

"It is impossible to percieve the present"


Same goofy poster talking himself into circles playing pretend philosopher to fill the void of insecurity his lack of true faith in god provided him.

But im no psychologist.

We can perceive any goddamn thing we want to!

Not according to your former self on like page 3 of the thread we cant!!!

Again, you are trying your best to take me out of context by manipulation. I don't play those games. You have made no point except to show what an ass you can be. And your good buddy Hollie is here to slap you on the back and laugh at your lame jokes. You are truly one of the most pathetic trolls at USMB.

 

[Boss]

Trolls? Youre trolling our intelligence by making two blatantly contradictory statements in order to advance your narrative at 2 different places within the conversation.

Sorry player, thats red handed.

If you werent a narcissist, youd admit it, take the L on the chin, and keep it pushing. Onto your next fake smart idea to push god.

I have not made any contradictory statements, you're simply taking parts of statements out of context to construct a contradiction.

My narrative doesn't need advancing, it has yet to be challenged. We are unable to observe present time directly. The laws of physics prohibit it. We only have a perception of time which has passed and is forever history. I don't care if you don't like it or can't comprehend it. You can quote me out of context, flood the thread with stupidity and outright lies about what has been said, you can ridicule me and call me names or pretend my arguments have failed... doesn't matter, physics still prevails... we cannot observe the moment of present reality. Our perception relies on faith.

 

[BreezeWood]

I can't observe ... the actual present - -

I'm not the one trying to invent my own version of physics here, that's you, Hollie.

.
oh, not at all an egocentric declaration of ones personal physiology - in this case (obviously) void of an individual Spirit.

.

 

[there4eyeM]

Nothing has been proved about when consciousness occurs. It has not even been admitted by the poster that consciousness may not be limited by what is understood by physics, though physicists do consider that possible.
And for all the mentions of 'God', whoever and whatever that may mean, the Biblical 'name' for God has not been addressed, either. If one is saying, "God is time" in a conversation with people in our culture, one must either use this reference from the Bible or establish a new one.
"Yahweh" more or less translates into "I Am" in English. This is just about universally accepted by experts.
Not "I Was".

 

[Boss]

Nothing has been proved about when consciousness occurs. It has not even been admitted by the poster that consciousness may not be limited by what is understood by physics, though physicists do consider that possible.
And for all the mentions of 'God', whoever and whatever that may mean, the Biblical 'name' for God has not been addressed, either. If one is saying, "God is time" in a conversation with people in our culture, one must either use this reference from the Bible or establish a new one.
"Yahweh" more or less translates into "I Am" in English. This is just about universally accepted by experts.
Not "I Was".

Well, you are wrong about consciousness. We know when it occurs, how it occurs, what causes it to occur. We also know light and electricity travel which requires time. These are all supported with science and physics.

As for "What is God?" ...that's not the point of the OP. We can collectively agree that any belief in God requires faith. So the questions as to the specifics of such are ambiguous. If you read the OP, this is articulated in better detail. I am not making yet another theological argument for God. What is the point of that?

The OP is discussing "God" the concept, a derivative of faith and belief in something we can't observe. Like present Time.

 

[BreezeWood]

Nothing has been proved about when consciousness occurs. It has not even been admitted by the poster that consciousness may not be limited by what is understood by physics, though physicists do consider that possible.
And for all the mentions of 'God', whoever and whatever that may mean, the Biblical 'name' for God has not been addressed, either. If one is saying, "God is time" in a conversation with people in our culture, one must either use this reference from the Bible or establish a new one.
"Yahweh" more or less translates into "I Am" in English. This is just about universally accepted by experts.
Not "I Was".

Well, you are wrong about consciousness. We know when it occurs, how it occurs, what causes it to occur. We also know light and electricity travel which requires time. These are all supported with science and physics.

As for "What is God?" ...that's not the point of the OP. We can collectively agree that any belief in God requires faith. So the questions as to the specifics of such are ambiguous. If you read the OP, this is articulated in better detail. I am not making yet another theological argument for God. What is the point of that?

The OP is discussing "God" the concept, a derivative of faith and belief in something we can't observe. Like present Time.

.
this happens to be in the religion and ethics forum ...

"I Am"

the above is a reference to all freed Spirits, Admission to the Everlasting - accomplishable by life within Garden Earth post their physiological demise ... the OP would have one believe the Almighty is blind without a physical brain - and refuses to address the subject of what actually is the observer irregardless the observed.

Time nor Gravity = / = Spiritual constraint.

.

 

[there4eyeM]

"We" do know all this about consciousness? A link would be very interesting to see. Otherwise, you are just blowing this off because it absolutely goes against your pet concept and insistence.

To use your inferred definition of 'now', it doesn't exist. If there is no now, there cannot be a past or future. The existence of now, on the other hand, does not require that past or future exist, and in fact they don't exist the way now does. They are now places we can be. We can only be now.

 

[there4eyeM]

...sorry, should read, "they are not places we can be"...

 

[Boss]

"We" do know all this about consciousness? A link would be very interesting to see. Otherwise, you are just blowing this off because it absolutely goes against your pet concept and insistence.

To use your inferred definition of 'now', it doesn't exist. If there is no now, there cannot be a past or future. The existence of now, on the other hand, does not require that past or future exist, and in fact they don't exist the way now does. They are now places we can be. We can only be now.

First of all, I am not obligated to give you links to common knowledge. You can Google ":human consciousness" and find thousands of links detailing all we know. To pretend we are mystified by how our brain forms conscious thought is ridiculous.

I didn't infer a definition of "now" and was the one who pointed out that "now" can be completely ambiguous. I prefer to avoid the word "now" in this discussion because of the implied ambiguity. My phrase has consistently been "the instant of present time."

As for your circular reasoning (if there's a past and future there must be a present)...this is not scientific evidence. If there is a universe and life there must be God.... see how that worked? So circular arguments are pointless in this debate. Besides, I never said there wasn't a present, only that we can't observe it. I have faith there is a present like I have faith there is a God.

Now you keep wanting to say that we only have awareness of the present but we've already established through physics that what we experience as present has already happened and is forever in the past before we can even perceive it. So I hate to be a stickler about it but NO, we don't have any awareness of present, we have a perception after-the-fact, it's all we can have because of physics. Before anything "in the present" can be perceived by humans, physics and time have to transpire. The instant of present time is elusive. It's beyond our physical ability to observe and we must rely on our perception which happens in the past due to physics.

What this leaves us with is FAITH in a present that we cannot observe. Like God.

 

[there4eyeM]

Your faith is in the past.
My presence is now.

 

[Boss]

...sorry, should read, "they are not places we can be"...

I'm sorry... I was in North Carolina yesterday, I clearly remember it. I think I even took some pictures. Are you now telling me I wasn't ever there because it's today? This doesn't even make rational sense.

The only true perception we have is of the past. Physics and time have already happened before our brain can process the information. We cannot observe the present, we can only have a perception and faith in that perception.

 

[theword]

I know what you're trying to say but what you don't understand is that there's no such thing as time. Time is only observed as each picture is observed that gives us the sense of motion. All we ever see is one picture at any given moment, which is always the present. We can't possibly observe the past or present unless our Creator gives us some past or present pictures to observe, which is something I have experienced many times.

Think of us watching a movie from film, which are still pictures strung together and observed at 24 frames per second. This gives us the sense of motion as we observe the movie, even though all those pictures were filmed in the past. However, the past, present and future all exist in that film that you can store on a shelf. As you watch that movie, all you can observe is the present picture, even though it is also the past and present as it sits on that shelf. You don't even need a projector to look at the pics on film. You can observe the pictures backwards or forwards but only one picture at a time. This means you can only observe the present picture, no matter how long ago it was formed on film.

What we observe in this world isn't something outside of us, meaning there is no real universe. Everything we observe has already been programmed long before we observe it and contained as waves ( stored information ). The past, present and future exists in these waves ( information ), which can't be observed until this information is processed for us to observe a picture. If it would be possible for us to stop this flow of information like we can with a movie projector, you would be observing one picture, which would be the present picture. It would be impossible to see the next picture or the one before it, which would be the past picture.

This means we're always observing the present picture despite all the rest of the pictures that exist in that program that contains the past, present and future pictures as only information.

Why do you keep explaining this like I don't get it? I fully understand the concept you're talking about and it has nothing to do with my argument... this makes the third time I've tried to explain that to you. I am not contradicting what you're saying here but it just doesn't relate to what I am saying.

The "present picture" you're observing has already happened and you couldn't possibly observe it when it happened because physics and time had to transpire first. Just as you don't see a movie or film until light travels through the film and gets projected on the screen, bounces off the screen and travels to your eyes, then is computed by your brain... all that didn't happen instantly. It took time for light to travel.. it seemed like "now" to you, but it wasn't.

The physical fact is, we are NOT always observing the present, we can't observe the present. We have a perception which relies on faith.

We are not observing light bouncing off of objects. We are observing processed information which includes light information to give us the illusion of an object being illuminated. We can simulate this with computers today. Light is only information and nothing else.

Well, I disagree with you but still.. information has to travel and be received then processed. The "illusion" is already part of history before your brain is aware of it. You aren't explaining anything that refutes my point.

The illusions are the past, present and future. This is why God can show me pictures of the future that hasn't happened yet. All we can observe is the present picture at all times, no matter if it's a picture from the future or one from the past.

You simply don't know how God created everything.

 

[theword]

We cannot see the present.

As pointed out over and over, the present does not require that it is seen to exist.

Exactly. But many things exist without being seen. If it cannot be directly observed, it can't be tested, evaluated or measured. It's impossible to observe the present. The very best we can ever accomplish as physical beings is perception of time which has already passed. The laws of physics can't be denied.

When you listen to physicists instead of the voice of God, you can expect to remain thoroughly confused. Physicists do not understand how we were created or how life is experienced.

 

[there4eyeM]

You are, thus, stating that you have faith we cannot be in the present. Fair enough.
My perceptions are in the present and may even be said to be the present. That is not faith, that is what I perceive.

 

[Boss]

The illusions are the past, present and future. This is why God can show me pictures of the future that hasn't happened yet. All we can observe is the present picture at all times, no matter if it's a picture from the future or one from the past.

You simply don't know how God created everything.

All we can observe is the present picture at all times, no matter if it's a picture from the future or one from the past.

You're contradicting your own statement here. A picture from the past or future is not the present. All we can observe is the past. You're saying we observe the present picture always but that is not true. We can't observe the present, ever... because physics has to happen and time has to happen. What we perceive as the present is something that has already happened and is forever in the past. I have faith my perception confirms the present but I cannot observe the present so I can't prove it. There is no difference between this and faith in God.

You simply don't know how God created everything.

Well the thread and my OP argument have nothing to do with how God created things. But for the record, I disagree with this as well. Science is totally about showing us how God created things. What we truly don't know is WHY. I can explain to you HOW gravity works, I can't explain WHY gravity exists.

 

[Boss]

You are, thus, stating that you have faith we cannot be in the present. Fair enough.
My perceptions are in the present and may even be said to be the present. That is not faith, that is what I perceive.

I did not say that I have faith we cannot be in the present. It's a matter of physics that we cannot observe the instant of present time. Physics has to happen, time has to pass, then we have a perception of something. Does our perception of "the present" conform to what "the present" actually is? We can't know this without observing the present directly and we can't because of physics and time.

What you perceive relies totally on faith.

 

[Boss]

We cannot see the present.

As pointed out over and over, the present does not require that it is seen to exist.

Exactly. But many things exist without being seen. If it cannot be directly observed, it can't be tested, evaluated or measured. It's impossible to observe the present. The very best we can ever accomplish as physical beings is perception of time which has already passed. The laws of physics can't be denied.

When you listen to physicists instead of the voice of God, you can expect to remain thoroughly confused. Physicists do not understand how we were created or how life is experienced.

This isn't about how life was created or how we experience life. It's also not a pissing match between my God and your God. This isn't a theological argument.

I am not the least bit confused, we simply cannot observe the moment of present time because physics has to happen first, which means time has to pass first. Once time has passed it's no longer the instant of present, it's forever in the past. What we perceive as the present is already in the past, we rely on our faith in the perception we have of something that already happened and is forever in the past.

Now... We ASSUME the present is as we perceive it but we cannot observe the actual instant of present time, it's not possible because physics and time must happen first. If you can wrap your mind around this, then it's possible that the thing we perceive as "the present" is a creation by the Almighty Creator who is not constrained by limitations of physics and time. In essence, God is constantly creating the entire physical universe every nanosecond for us to perceive. We can't observe it because we're humans bound by physics and time.