The work of Boethius in ‘Consolation of Philosophy Book 5’ has strongly influenced Christian belief of God being eternal. Boethius argued that God is changeless and doesn’t exist in time, here he adopts the timeless view of God; “Eternity is the whole simultaneous and perfect possession of unending life”. This highlight Boethius’ view that God is wholly simple, meaning timeless and paramount to his belief is that God exists eternally and all of time is present to God at the same time. For Boethius God doesn’t see the future as it happens, instead Boethius argues all time is present to God “simultaneously”. Christians base their understanding of God being eternal on the ideas of Boethius.
However this concept is criticised by Anthony Kenny, among others, who argued that the notion of all time being simultaneously present to God is incoherent. He argues that saying all time is simultaneously present to God means that all time is happening at the same moment and this appears to be incoherent. Kenny’s argument against the traditional Christian idea of God being eternal is coherent and could further suggest that the whole Christian idea of God being eternal is very flawed. Swinburne supports the criticism posed by Kenny stating that he could not ‘make much sense’ of talk of all events being simultaneously present to God.
Paul Helm however suggests talk of God being eternal does not involve the ‘reductio ad absurdum’ suggested by Kenny and Swinburne; he argues that the eternal God is timeless and acts eternally. Thus it can be understood that the traditional Christian concept of God being eternal is coherent because Helm says God “timeless in the sense if being time free”.
Another criticism is that the Bible implies that God is personal and acts in creation, for instance he responds to the Israelites prayer for freedom from slavery in Egypt. This event implies God is personal and acts in time. However philosophers respond that God is not a person and language that personifies God in the Bible reflects the experience of those in past times who described their encounters with God using personal language. Philosophers deal with this by saying that language used of God is analogical or symbolic.
Anselm says that existence is a predicate of God, thus it is reasonable that God is eternal and not subject to time. Further criticisms are made of the traditional Christian concept of God being eternal. Critics pose the question, accepting that God is timeless “How can God love his people and respond to them?” They say love involves a two way process and ability to respond. If God is eternal how can God love his people and respond. Aquinas says in response that prayer is the act of being aware of God’s activity in the world; it is not about making requests. This appears to deal with the problem of God not responding to prayers. However philosophers still bring up the problem of evil, if God sees everything simultaneously surely he can eradicate those who do evil things. On the other hand Wiles argues that the universe is part of God’s ongoing creative activity thus He is always acting, and there is no selective response by God. Others claim God is in time and can act and respond to prayers.
A possible solution to the problems raised by the traditional Christian concept of God being eternal is to suggest that God is not timeless, but instead he is everlasting. Everlasting meaning that God always exists and will without end, however time does pass for God. This is perhaps more coherent as this would allow God to act in time and He would not be so restricted. Also it fits more appropriately with God, as revealed in the Bible. The traditional concept of God being eternal has many criticisms, but it can still be concluded that God is eternal but is not the eternal God described by Boethius and Aquinas. Instead God is everlasting, and this way of thinking of God satisfies our understanding of God from the Bible.
by
bbomb (student)
