Space, Time, and God

By Stephen Terry

In our universe we have defined space and time in four dimensions. The first dimension is linear space, the second is planar space, and the third is tri-dimensional space. The first dimension of time could be considered linear time, if the parallels are consistent then the fifth dimension which would also be the second dimension of time would be planar time. Logically the third dimension of time would be tri-dimensional time.

If we were to construct a symbology meaningful to hypothetical inhabitants of these dimensions, we would perhaps do so using imagery from the highest attribute of the dimension in question.

For the first dimension, we might create a sacred line or point. The second might have a holy parallel. The third might possess a sacred structure. The fourth might have a sacred object constructed of linear time. Perhaps, this might be a day set aside for sacredness. Naturally, the possibilities would extend with appropriateness across each dimension. We might even be able to define the possibility that a substitution of an appropriate symbol for a particular dimension with one from a lower dimension might be seen as regression or heresy. For example, replacing veneration of a holy day in the linear time dimension with veneration of a holy object from the third dimension might be such a case.

Perhaps it can be seen from my poor attempts at description, my existence in the linear time dimension causes me to portray and may cause my reader to visualize these dimensions in a linear progression. However, these dimensions rather than being linear in nature are quite possibly co-existent and are simply to be understood as each lower dimension simply being a subset of and therefore contained within all the higher ones.

Just as I who exist in the linear time dimension can create in the second dimension, so those in the higher dimensions do not lose their ability to manipulate the lower ones. Those two dimensional inhabitants might consider my ability to enter their realm and create objects as “god like.” I in turn might feel the same about individuals who could enter my dimension and manipulate time. However, if we consider each subset to be of a continuum defined by eternity then another factor may come into play.

There might be a Remoteness Principle. This could mean that the farther two dimensions are from each other, the less likely the inhabitants of one would be to interact in any way with the inhabitants of another. This would be because the lower would be less and less likely to understand any interaction with the greater due to the limitations of their subset. For the greater dimensions, self-interest may be the only reason for remote, lower subset interaction. Perhaps illustrative of this would be the biblical story of the Tower of Babel.

This Remoteness Principle might be visualized as a hierarchy by beings in our dimension with our linear thinking. Lower in the hierarchy and less remote might be those who are most frequently involved in interactions with our dimension (angels?) while the hierarchy progresses in remoteness infinitely to that which by definition we would call God, although we could not actually define God since the definition is that definition is impossible.

For this reason, Jesus, is also an enigma. He is an interjection into our linear dimension of all that such a being could reveal of itself to us. We speak often of God willingly limiting Himself to human form, yet this is not adequately descriptive. Perhaps it would be more accurate to speak of a being who can no more fully interject Himself into our dimension than we can fully be integrated into the limitations of the second dimension. At most, we could only succeed in fully integrating a two-dimensional representation of our being into that dimension. In short, Jesus is the face of God we see and understand but that revelation is veiled by our own limitations.

If we turn now to the concepts of creation and creator, it can be seen that higher dimensions should be able to spawn subsets of themselves as a property of their being a superset of those subsets. The existence of those subsets might also be considered proof of the supersets’ existence, with each superset of course being a subset itself of the infinite set. While there may be little or no linearity involved, a creator/creation model might be a singularly adequate means to describe the indescribable to the linear beings of the fourth dimension.

Salvation might also be defined in this cosmology as a fully integrated restoration of a subset to its proper superset. Such restoration if infinitely applied across all subsets could easily mean immortality, although what that truly means could not be adequately understood within the confines of any subset short of infinity. Instead, attempting to visualize it would be like seeing “through a glass, darkly.” (1 Corinthians 13:12) Perhaps this is why our futile attempts to understand any revelations from these higher dimensional subsets must continually be constructed on a foundation of faith as opposed to substance. The tools of this dimension are inadequate to the task.