- “Le Chatelier’s principle predicts the effect of a change on system at dynamic equilibrium. Changing the conditions of a system at thermodynamic equilibrium (concentration, temperature, pressure, volume, etc.) causes the system to react in a way that counteracts the change and establishes a new equilibrium. While originally described for chemical reactions, Le Chatelier’s principle also applies to homeostasis in biology, economics, pharmacology, and other disciplines. Other names for Le Chatelier’s principle are Chatelier’s principle or the Equilibrium Law.”
- However, one might say that Paul first proposed the Equilibrium principal in Ephesians 2:8-10, where he wrote: " For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them."
- IMO, Grace is “the cause”; the “rescue” [i.e. “the Salvation”] is “the effect”. Grace saves when and where “Faith” is created and increases. No faith; no effect. But, as Paul says: our faith is “not of our selves” so that no one may boast. The absence of faith is a denial of God’s grace through Jesus.
- The date that some claim they “were saved” is nothing more than the date that the person “began” to understand. Salvation continues from that date on, … or it doesn’t.
Cool… perhaps I will look into that book.
I am very much a believer of a God outside the space-time structure of the universe. The Mormon god as an entity which is a part of the universe does not interest me. But being outside the space-time structure of the universe does not make God timeless. That is another way of making God something smaller and incapable of the things any human being can do and thus chained by human theology.
I believe in an ultimate infinite God who is and has everything and naturally that would include time. Not time over Him but time within Him. One who can use time as He chooses. The result is that asking what God was doing for an infinite time before creating the universe is nonsensical, but still a God who can do everything that we do and more.
2 Likes
And I know even more about spacetime slices than Dale does, but I don’t think his argument holds any water either.
And I think it is unwise to equate a lack of ability/interest in math/physics with intellectual limitations. I know first hand that this is hogwash. I know people who are far smarter than I am who are not so good at math. People are not good at math just because they are smarter. They are just good at math – one skill among a very great many skills. Frankly I am far more impressed with the intelligence of those who use psychology to understand and predict people. People are so much more complicated than mathematical equations.
2 Likes
I’m not sure I believe you had even heard of them before I introduced them to you via Brian Greene. Anyway, the concept is not that difficult. And you did not even believe God is omnipresent! The two combined entail God’s omnitemporallity.
That part you have correct.
You might just be right about that too, but it’s a real stretch. 
That by itself proves my point… LOL as if you think spacetime slices is some esoteric new physics. It’s not. Its pretty basic and pretty old.
Pretty old, ca. 20 years? 
How?
So why is God’s omnitemporality such an apparent stretch for you? At least we agree that there is no such thing as absolute time.
ETA: Yes, the basic physics (we agree) is as old as relativity and big bang cosmology, but I would be interested in seeing anything older than Brian Greene’s analogy about angled slices through the spacetime loaf and what it says about time.
(You might revisit our conversation here and following, where it appears you try to limit God to Minkowski spacetime, God who is limited by neither space nor time.)
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.