The Opposite of Time

What is the opposite of time? The opposite of light is darkness and the reverse of yes is no. You can say that time “stands still” as an attempt to articulate its opposing characteristic but that doesn’t describe an opposite. That’s merely a “neutral” position. I recently asked an astronomer, “What do scientists call the area outside the boundaries of the universe?” The answer was “there is no area outside the universe because there is no boundary.” The argument is that since it cannot be observed or measured, it simply cannot be. My little pea brain has much difficulty with this reasoning. I don’t doubt it is understandable by those with an E=MC2 conceptual capacity but for me it is out of intellectual reach. The universe is space/time/matter/energy. These are physical dimensions, measurable, observable and calculable. If that is true it qualifies as the major premise of the syllogism. The minor is “everything measurable, observable and calculable has limits.” The conclusion has to be “the universe is not limitless.” Ergo, how can there be no boundary to the universe.

It seems to be an axiom that the physical universe is expanding. The only debate is whether it is slowing down or continuing to speed up. Nevertheless, if it is expanding, it stands to reason it is larger now than it was. At one point in the history of the universe, the young body was just 300,000 years old. Today the estimate is 13.7 billion years, or so. As I understand “expanding,” that information tells me the universe is much larger today than it was in its youth. So, if the universe is not expanding into or displacing a boundary entity, how can the science of measuring, observing and calculating be trusted?

I know there are those who like to imagine the universe simply self-initiated somehow. This is a convenient proposal to dodge the question of God but just cannot seem to avoid it as the argument of First Cause will always interfere. Therefore, the answer to the initial question “What is the opposite of time?” must be “eternity.” Even for those who cannot bring themselves to accept God as a possibility, the shear limits of their own science demands an uncomfortable hypothesis. Then is when they begin to apply the principle of “limits” since they will argue, using as a premise, “since it cannot be measured or observed, it cannot be reliable.” That’s like saying for centuries that since we could not measure or observe neutrinos until 1956 they did not exist until then. This is not to say that we can observe and measure God (notwithstanding 2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15), but to ignore Him and His realm is not only self-imposed ignorance, it turns out to be sloppy science as well. Since the universe was spoken into existence by Him, He infused it with laws and principles that reflect His glory, there for all to observe, even to measure and calculate when the time is right.

Come Let Us Reason

COME LET US REASON

Bring a cup of irony unto myself
Statues laid out socially upon the shelf
Myriad chorus eyes a cappella sing
As Congress waltzes through the land
Keeping watch with scepter safe in hand
Fingers waving in reprimand
And citizens in the cross beam swing

From a shadow with cool abrogation
A corpse wins a ballot revocation
Carnations fall under solemn feet
Across the river sit jealous guns
Like sissy braves or shiftless Huns
While idiots cook like hot-cross-buns
And the dragons of the hill wax indiscreet

The song of legions begs to testify
To the calm perfidy of the sirens' cry
In a forum naked and thrust adrift
The harmony of aggression discordant loud
White flags amusing the piquant proud
The heart of a people doth lay in shroud
But for the prayer offered meek and swift

Come let us reason or at least not fear
And make a covenant fast reappear
Draw nigh with care and mindful price
Under brows of dauntless courage tread
With icy rags across thy forehead
Make haste to slice the nation's bread
Attentive to the heart of sacrifice

Liberation Theology

Sigh! The advocates of Liberation Theology must live in constant exasperation at those of us who seem to behave with disdain and contempt for the unfortunate and disenfranchised. Otherwise, how could we continue to resist the progressive philosophical directive to exercise compassion for them, preferably through government programs that wisely redistribute the wealth and resources of the country as the bureaucrats see fit? In a recent letter to the editor, one advocate cited the admonition of Luke 6:17-49 as authority and justification for this endeavor, referencing the Rev. Dr. Susan Brooks Thistlewaite, failing to mention her being a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. The frustrating factor for us unsympathetic conservatives is usually our interpretation of Scripture, using the hermeneutical approach that applies a coherent explanation to the text that clearly illustrates the intent to the reader as an individual. The concept of Luke’s passage, as well as all others in the Bible, nowhere even hints at a directive for governments to assume the responsibility to execute compassion on behalf of the individual. The Gospel says that whoever gives can become a disciple and reap a reward. When government self-righteously takes from individuals and reallocates those resources, that’s called despotism.