Thank you for your reply, Shri Devi

Submitted by jennifer solis (United States), Oct 20, 2007 at 00:02

Hello Shri Devi,

You make a good argument. As the Bible is perfect (I know that is quite a statement; but remember, I didn't start this study yesterday, and I am not liquidated nor influenced by religion*), the Bible explains what human experience can not.

God is. He is eternal. The problem lies with human ability to comprehend.

You are appliying "human viewpoint", that is, trying to apply human experience to God.

"Fabricated stories of organized religion", as you put it, has no place in my frame of reference.

*Definition of "religion" - man by man's attempt to gain the approbation of God or gods.

I do not, and have never, seeked to gain God's approbation. All I have done is accepted the free gift of eternal life by believing (which is non-meritorious) in Jesus Christ and what He did on the Cross. That is not religion.

Back to the concept of "Time". Again, I must stress God does not need Time. We need Time. It organizes reality for us. God also does not possess human physical atributes. However, for humanity in it's limited perception capability, God is said in the Bible to have "eyes", "hand", "face", etc. This is called an anthropomorphism - phisical attributes ascribed to God. God is said to "hate", "love", "repent" -all of these are called anthropopathism, which means ascribing to God human emotion (which, also, God does not possess).

Anthropomorphism and anthropopathism in the Bible are "language of accomidation", that is, in order for humankind to understand Biblical Doctrines in spite of humankind's limited capability, we can understand through "language of accomidation" the meaning of Scripture.

The Bible illustrating different Biblical doctrines by using human characteristic is one thing. But for humans to try and ascribe to God our concept of Time is absurd.

Can you honestly say you understand the concept of eternity-past as well as eternity?

Thankyou for an interesting exchange... Respectfully, Jennifer Solis

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".