Our current understanding of the working of the computers that would drive such a virtual reality simulation is that they would have some very small but not infinitesimal clock cycle. Also, whatever reality they created would have some small but not infinitesimal resolution.
At one instant in time the virtual reality simulator could be stopped and polled to see where everything was located. So everything is as static as the arrow in Zeno's paradox during any one clock cycle.
The simulator, however, is outside the simulation and can move all of the objects in the simulator to the next state. If the simulator's clock cycle and resolution are finer than can be measured by those quasi-sentient objects in the simulator, then they will perceive themselves to be in a world with continuous time and space.
So I think a counterargument to Lynd is that so long as there is something outside the system (e.g. God outside the universe) to drive the objects from one static point to another, then motion will exist which will be observed by sentient components of the system.
There could still be a graininess to our universe which God can perceive, but that we are technologically incapable of perceiving. Some have suggested (whether or correctly or absurdly) that this graininess is the source of quantum uncertainty.
Or if there is no God outside the system, then even if we are currently in a virtual reality simulator with a certain graininess, there exist some beings in a real universe with no graininess. Either that or they are all frozen in time.
This is very, very good, wwfb, IMHO. Add consciousness and free will into the mix and the "objects" could move themselves to the next state. Were it also possible, and I think that it is, for the "Mover" to be simultaneously within AND external to the system, then I believe "our" model would even better represent reality.
As you see, some of my thoughts DO go "bump" in the night. Speculation is "free" is it not? ... ;-}