John wrote: > The fact that time and it's passing is relative > to the speed of light means it is not "just like" > God's "eternity."
Are you talking about Einstein's relativity theory? If so, then if time were relative to the speed of light, it would be constant because the speed of light is constant in the assumptions of this theory. I think perhaps you meant to say that time is relative to motion, and that time appears to hold still (be non-existent?) for objects that travel at the speed of light. Even if all this were true, it does not mean that the word "eternal" could not apply. Rather than progress down this rabbit trail, let me address something more to the point. What you take to be fact is only an assumption of relativity theory. The failure of relativity theory to evolve into a TOE, and evidence in the field of quantum mechanics (something you have acknowledged to have knowledge about in past posts), should give us pause concerning this assumption. We certainly should not consider it a fact. The study of physics needs another revolutionary break through and theories that would better explain our universe. Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
