Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
North of Lineland

North of Lineland

Last updated on: April 7, 2011 at 3:54 pm by Fred Clark

North of Lineland 2011-04-07T15:54:08-04:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Tony Jones, discussing Rob Bell’s Love Wins, asks:

Is God outside of time, or is God somehow bound to time as we experience time? … Rob takes biblical words dealing with eternity to mean the transcendence of time. This would seem to imply that God transcends time. But if God transcends time, what does it mean to say that God eventually gets what God wants? Is God bound by time or not? And, if not, what does “eventually” mean?

I realize such questions can seem like the old debates about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, but from my own pinheaded perspective, I find such questions fascinating.

I also suspect they may be important — actually of practical, day-to-day usefulness. Because if time isn’t all there is, then we likely haven’t got a very good perspective for thinking about things like constancy and change, cause and effect, choice, consequence, prevention, preparation, prediction, predestination, foreknowledge, memory, repetition, remorse, growth, death and rebirth. None of those things could possibly appear the same if viewed from outside of time. None of those could possibly appear the same to one not bound, as we are, in time.

If I ran the zoo, the book I would add to orientation for every seminary would be Edwin Abbott’s odd little allegory, Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions.

It’s an enormously helpful book for those attempting to think about things we’re not quite capable of really comprehending. That makes it as appropriate for seminary as it is for classes in mathematics and physics. Abbott walks us right up to the edge of what we’re able to think about, then points off into the abyss. He helps to explain not just that we are unable to understand what’s going on out there beyond the edge, but why we are unable to understand it.

And that, I think, is a very helpful thing for those beginning their studies in seminary. If one begins studying theology without appreciating that the subject, by definition, includes much that one will be unable to understand, then one will wind up doing it wrong.

“Eternity” is one of those words theologians toss around as though they or the rest of us were capable of really understanding what it means. We understand what they mean to mean when they use that word, but neither what they meant nor what we understood them to mean is even close to being adequate.

“Eternity,” we think, “that’s a very long time.”

But of course that’s precisely what it isn’t. We use “eternal” as a synonym for “for all time,” but those are actually antonyms. Eternity is what you get when you’re out of time — beyond time.

This is something I can’t grasp. I can’t even remember the future, how am I supposed to understand eternity? I’ve spent my entire life in time, moving through time — always in the same direction, at the same rate, without ever being able to stop — and I literally can’t imagine anything else.

What I can try to do, though, is to understand the limits of my ability to understand, and the misunderstandings that are bound to arise if I try to go beyond those limits.

And but so, Flatland. Here’s a bit of a rushed summary that doesn’t nearly do it justice.

Abbott’s hero is a square — an actual square, a two-dimensional, four-sided object who lives on the great plane of Flatland, a two-dimensional world.

One day our hero comes across the strange realm of Lineland, whose inhabitants are one-dimensional dots living out their lives along the line of their little world. To them, our hero doesn’t appear as a square, just as another dot at the point where he intersects Lineland. He tries to explain to them that he is actually two-dimensional, but that just blows their poor little 1-D minds.

I have two dimensions, the square tells the Linelanders, not just East-West, but also North and South. East and West the Linelanders understand perfectly, but North and South? Above and below the line of Lineland? That’s just crazy talk — nonsense.

After giving up on his frustrating conversation with the Linelanders, our hero comes across another strange character. This guy is a circle, but he has this neat trick where he changes size.

The circle explains to our hero that he isn’t actually changing size because he isn’t a circle at all. He’s actually a three-dimensional sphere, and he only appears to be changing size to our hero due to his moving up and down through the plane of Flatland. And now it’s our poor hero’s turn to have his own little 2-D mind blown.

Up and Down? You mean North and South?

No, not North and South — Up and Down.

More crazy talk and nonsense.

But then the Sphere does something that our hero didn’t think to do for the poor little dot-people of Lineland. The Sphere takes our four-sided, 2-D friend up out of Flatland into the third dimension of space.

Whoa.

From up there in Up, our hero can look down and see the whole of Flatland laid out before him. He can see inside his neighbors houses — inside his neighbors themselves. By transcending the 2-D world of Flatland, he is able to see the whole thing at once, in its entirety. It’s fantastic, beyond anything he’d ever imagined. Our hero’s mind is well and truly blown.

Let’s keep going, he says to the Sphere. Let’s go farther or further or whichever is the right word for it. If there is a third dimension, there must be a fourth, and a fifth and on and on. Further up and further in! Let’s keep going.

Four dimensions? the Sphere says. That’s crazy talk. Nonsense.

And so it always seems.

Everything we say when we talk about eternity tends to reflect this basic existential inability to grasp what it is we’re trying to talk about. Here I am moving through time at a single speed in a single direction, unable not to do so. Trying to describe eternity to me is about as hopeful a proposition as trying to describe North to a Linelander, or Up to a Flatlander.

And yet we carry on doing theology and saying things like “God is eternal,” glibly unconcerned with our inability to understand even one of those three words in a way that does any of them justice. We carry on speaking of eternity as though it meant only a very long time (“if a sparrow … sharpened its beak …”) and as though that endlessness were the most confusing or most interesting or most important aspect of the difference between time and eternity. No beginning — that’s much trickier. Beyond linear sequence — that’s downright bewildering. I couldn’t grasp that if I lived for 1,000 more years. Living for 1,000 more linear, sequential years would likely only further cement my inability to grasp that.

St. Augustine was better than most of us at thinking about this sort of thing — or at thinking about how we’re not well-equipped to think about this sort of thing. Centuries ago he wrote a fantastic, brain-bending riff about the hazards of trying to apply the logic of cause-then-effect to the category of eternity, the misleading dangers of using time-bound terms to describe that which is beyond time. Yet Augustine, a human living in time just like the rest of us, then turned around and wrote with misplaced certainty of his belief in “predestination” and “foreknowledge” — using just exactly those time-bound words with all that they entail of likely irrelevance outside the narrow bounds of our little world here in Timeland.

One of the things I like most about Abbott’s “Romance of Many Dimensions” is the way he portrays anger as the consistent response to people confronted with the mind-blowing possibility of a world beyond their ken — whether it’s the dots of Lineland being confronted by the impossible thought of North and South, or the shapes of Flatland confronted by the impossible suggestion of Up and Down, or the previously affable Sphere losing his patience over the suggestion that they keep going past the third dimension to the fourth and fifth and beyond.

That anger, a product of fear and stubbornness and simple incomprehension, is precisely how we tend to respond to being confronted by the idea that reality is, in some ways, just too big for us to easily understand. In understanding that anger, Abbott forgives it, and in forgiving it, he helps us to get past it. And that, too, is a big part of why, if I were in charge, every student entering seminary would be required to read his book during orientation.

The alternative to that anger is humility. Here we are, finite, mortal creatures bound in time trying to speak with certainty about things that transcend our ability to grasp. Some of us are quite clever by the standards of finite, mortal, time-bound cleverness, but still reality is bigger than we are. We want to understand — and that’s good. But sometimes that desire to understand causes us to pretend that things transcending our understanding are actually quite simple — that they are just as finite and limited as we are ourselves.

All of which brings me back to Tony’s questions and my own attempts to answer them from the limited perspective of my own little 4-D Timelander brain.

“Is God outside of time, or is God somehow bound to time as we experience time?”

Yes.

God is present in this universe — present with us — and this universe is a thing in time. But God is also present beyond/above/outside (we haven’t got a good word for this) this universe. God is bound by love for this universe, and it is bound in time. God is bound by love for us, and we are bound in time. But apart from love, I wouldn’t want to suggest that anything can or does bind God.

Is God bound by time? No. God is bound only by love, which is to say that God is bound only by God.

It might help to simply replace the word “time” in Tony’s questions with the word “space.”

Is God outside of [space], or is God somehow bound to [space] as we experience [space]? … Rob … would seem to imply that God transcends [space]. … Is God bound by [space] or not?

I don’t know or understand enough about physics to say whether that’s an analogy or just an equivalent statement. From what I think I understand, it makes no sense to say that God is “omnipresent” and then to pretend that an omnipresent being is stuck, just like us, at a fixed point in time, moving inexorably in a single direction.

If we believe that God is omnipresent — present in all presents — then we ought to acknowledge that God’s perspective differs from our own in exponentially greater ways than the Sphere’s perspective transcended that of Abbott’s square hero.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

April 6, 2011

Real information and actual facts

Next Post

April 8, 2011 Kerosene Kids

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is taught about promises or oaths?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Never promise Swear on everything Change your answer Let your yes be yes