Philosophical argument for the temporality of the universe

[Lord Emsworth]

"No God" is not the same as "no universe," since I am not a pantheist.

"No universe is absolutely nothing." - JBrian

(Just winding you up a little)

It is a category mistake to use time to say "before the universe," since time cannot be applied to eternity. There was no time before the universe. However, time can be created. Which is what happened.

I guess I already addressed this option:

Or you could question whether the question actually makes sense. But this is a typical atheist's tactic; in short state that there is no before the universe and deny the coming into existence altogether. And no coming into existence means no creation.​

And this is what follows, and not what you outline above.

After creation the universe existed.




There is no "before" the universe in the sense of time, that is not to say that God has not existed in eternity however. The universe "coming into existence" was the creation of time, not a creation in time.




The "state of affairs" "before" (used loosley, for a lack of a better way of putting it) was God. "After" the creation of the universe God existed as did the universe. However, there is no change, since nothing remained the same in relation to the universe; it was simply added, not changed. There was no "state of affairs," there was only an eternal being. Then the eternal being created (no change, simply something added) something. The thing that was created did not undergo change, since nothing remained the same from "before" it was created and "after" it was created. It simply did not exist, and then did exist.

I only can repeat myself here:

So, the only sensible thing from a theist's POV would be to answer "No" and "Yes."​

And this is what you affirm here in your last sentence. No, "it [...] did not exist" and yes it "then did exist."

And there you have it. Creation ex nihilo constitutes a change:
State of affairs before creation: "God" and nothing else
State of affairs after creation: "God" and the universe​

And so my previously outlined argument stands:

Since time is a property of the universe time cannot exist without the universe. And this shall give my first premise:
• P1 Time cannot exist without the universe

A second premise I take from your OP:
• P2 "[C]hange only occurs within time"

• C1: Change can only exist in the universe
• C2: Without the universe there is no change

• P3: An act of creation ex-nihilo constitutes a change - to wit: a change from nothing to something

• C3: Creation ex-nihilo of the universe is impossible.​

Statements to the effect of that addition is not a change ("(no change, simply something added)") are strange at best. I cannot even begin to grasp what this is supposed to mean:
X+1 = Y and not X+1=X
And this is true even if X=0

 

[JBrian]

"No universe is absolutely nothing." - JBrian

(Just winding you up a little)






I guess I already addressed this option:

Or you could question whether the question actually makes sense. But this is a typical atheist's tactic; in short state that there is no before the universe and deny the coming into existence altogether. And no coming into existence means no creation.​

And this is what follows, and not what you outline above.






I only can repeat myself here:

So, the only sensible thing from a theist's POV would be to answer "No" and "Yes."​

And this is what you affirm here in your last sentence. No, "it [...] did not exist" and yes it "then did exist."

And there you have it. Creation ex nihilo constitutes a change:​

State of affairs before creation: "God" and nothing else
State of affairs after creation: "God" and the universe
​

And so my previously outlined argument stands:

Since time is a property of the universe time cannot exist without the universe. And this shall give my first premise:​

• P1 Time cannot exist without the universe

A second premise I take from your OP:
• P2 "[c]hange only occurs within time"

• C1: Change can only exist in the universe
• C2: Without the universe there is no change

• P3: An act of creation ex-nihilo constitutes a change - to wit: a change from nothing to something

• C3: Creation ex-nihilo of the universe is impossible.
​

Statements to the effect of that addition is not a change ("(no change, simply something added)") are strange at best. I cannot even begin to grasp what this is supposed to mean:
X+1 = Y and not X+1=X
And this is true even if X=0

Ok, here we go. Before (only for linguistic simplicity, since there was no "before" the universe) the universe was created only God existed (I won't complicate matters by talking about angels). After the universe was created God and the universe existed. So where is the change. It is not in God, since He is outside of time, eternal, infinite, etc. He cannot change. It is not with the universe since it did not exist in order to change. In order for a change to occur something must remain the same throughout the change. Otherwise their is one being that ceases to exist and another that comes to exist. However this is not a change since nieither of the beings are the other.

You will no doubt argue that the state of affairs change. However this is impossible. Before the universe was created only God existed. The universe did not exist, it was nothing -- no-thing. Nothing cannot change. Their was no state of affairs regarding the universe prior to its existence since nothing does not have a state of affairs. A state of affairs cannot contain nothing; it is just that, no state of affairs, nothing, non-existence.

After the universe was created it existed. Now the state of affairs of the universe exists, but only subsequent to its creation.

Since God, nor the universe, nor the state of affairs changed there is no change from nothing to something. It is not a change, it is a creation. A creation is not a change of affairs, it is the beginning of affairs.

God's relation to the universe did not change, since He had no relation to it prior to its existence. After He created it He now had a relation to it. However, this is not a change, but rather the creation of a new being.

God did not change, the universe did not change, and the state of affairs did not change.

1. Only God exists
2. Now God and the universe exists

This is not a change since nothing remained the same concerning the universe. God can't change, the universe did not change from some prior state to a new state (nothing is not a state, it is nothing; no-thing). One cannot predicate an attribute (a state) to nothingness, there is no subject to be predicated upon; nothing is nothing.

There is no change whatsoever. There is however a creation, which now adds a new being to the sum total of being. (In a matter of speaking anyway. God is infinite, and infinite being. And more than an infinite is not possible, but that is another debate.)

So no change occured in the creation of the universe. God's relation did not even change since there was no relation to begin with.

The original OP stands, an eternal being cannot change. The universe is changing, so it can't be eternal.

Thank you for your posts!!!

Brian

 

[Exist]

I only read the OP.

I'm sure this has been said a billion times already in this thread, but...

"What is eternal is necessarily outside of time."

You haven't (at least, not in the OP) shown this to be true.

Why can't something exist eternally in time?

 

[JBrian]

I only read the OP.

I'm sure this has been said a billion times already in this thread, but...

"What is eternal is necessarily outside of time."

You haven't (at least, not in the OP) shown this to be true.

Why can't something exist eternally in time?

Because eternal (a-temporal) means timeless, changeless, etc. Time cannot be applied to an a-temporal being, To be eternal is to be a-temporal. To say a being is temporal and a-temporal is a contradiction.

Thanks for the note.

Brian

 

[Exist]

Because eternal (a-temporal) means timeless, changeless, etc.

I thought that "eternal" meant that it lasted forever?

Time cannot be applied to an a-temporal being, To be eternal is to be a-temporal.

So a being that is a-temporal cannot act, as there is no time to act in?

To say a being is temporal and a-temporal is a contradiction.

Maybe so, but what about eternal, and ever-changing? It's not eternally the same, but it has an identity in it's eternal history and future. Is there a flaw in that belief?

 

[JBrian]

I thought that "eternal" meant that it lasted forever?

There is an idea of "eternity" in the common, everyday use of the term that something has "lasted or existed forever," however it is impossible for the universe be infinite, that is, infnite in time. An infinite has no beginning and no end. This moment is the end moment in time. If the universe has existed from the infinite past we never would have reached this moment. But we have, so it is not infinite regarding time.

So a being that is a-temporal cannot act, as there is no time to act in?

A being that is not in time cannot change. That is not to say, however, that an eternal being eternally decree or act.

Maybe so, but what about eternal, and ever-changing? It's not eternally the same, but it has an identity in it's eternal history and future. Is there a flaw in that belief

To be eternal is to be outside of time. However, time is the measurement of change. So to be eternal is to be outside of the realm of change. Therefore, since the universe is changing it is not outside of time, but inside or in accordance with time.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Ok, here we go. Before (only for linguistic simplicity, since there was no "before" the universe) the universe was created only God existed (I won't complicate matters by talking about angels). After the universe was created God and the universe existed. So where is the change. It is not in God, since He is outside of time, eternal, infinite, etc. He cannot change. It is not with the universe since it did not exist in order to change. In order for a change to occur something must remain the same throughout the change. Otherwise their is one being that ceases to exist and another that comes to exist. However this is not a change since nieither of the beings are the other.

You will no doubt argue that the state of affairs change. However this is impossible. Before the universe was created only God existed. The universe did not exist, it was nothing -- no-thing. Nothing cannot change. Their was no state of affairs regarding the universe prior to its existence since nothing does not have a state of affairs. A state of affairs cannot contain nothing; it is just that, no state of affairs, nothing, non-existence.

After the universe was created it existed. Now the state of affairs of the universe exists, but only subsequent to its creation.

Since God, nor the universe, nor the state of affairs changed there is no change from nothing to something. It is not a change, it is a creation. A creation is not a change of affairs, it is the beginning of affairs.

God's relation to the universe did not change, since He had no relation to it prior to its existence. After He created it He now had a relation to it. However, this is not a change, but rather the creation of a new being.

God did not change, the universe did not change, and the state of affairs did not change.

1. Only God exists
2. Now God and the universe exists

This is not a change since nothing remained the same concerning the universe. God can't change, the universe did not change from some prior state to a new state (nothing is not a state, it is nothing; no-thing). One cannot predicate an attribute (a state) to nothingness, there is no subject to be predicated upon; nothing is nothing.

There is no change whatsoever. There is however a creation, which now adds a new being to the sum total of being. (In a matter of speaking anyway. God is infinite, and infinite being. And more than an infinite is not possible, but that is another debate.)

So no change occured in the creation of the universe. God's relation did not even change since there was no relation to begin with.

The original OP stands, an eternal being cannot change. The universe is changing, so it can't be eternal.

Thank you for your posts!!!

Brian

X+1 = Y and not X+1 = X
And this is true even if X = 0

 

[k]

There are two types of "eternity." That which is forever and that which is simply time-absent. God is outside of time yet God changed instruction for us, so it is incorrect to state anything outside of time is immutable. Time is an invention, a control device with some good and not so good benefits.

The universe is constantly changing, but more importantly, physical and anything that is physical is temporal.

 

[JBrian]

There are two types of "eternity." That which is forever and that which is simply time-absent.

I am assuming that you mean by forever, the span of time since it began, all time. Or, for all time.

God is outside of time yet God changed instruction for us, so it is incorrect to state anything outside of time is immutable.

What instruction did God change?

Time is an invention, a control device with some good and not so good benefits.

No, time is a property of space and matter.

The universe is constantly changing, but more importantly, physical and anything that is physical is temporal.

Right.

 

[JBrian]

X+1 = Y and not X+1 = X
And this is true even if X = 0

In this scenario the formula looks more like this.

God

God and the universe

However, God did not change, the universe did not change (it was simply created) and the relationship or state of affairs did not change because there was no state of affairs in regards to the universe in the first equation. It is simply a new being. A creation is not a change, it is a creation.

 

[k]

I am assuming that you mean by forever, the span of time since it began, all time. Or, for all time.

No, I mean the area where there has never been an extrapolation on the concept of time.

What instruction did God change?

Heb. 8 covers it better than I can.

No, time is a property of space and matter.

If this were true, then space and matter would have at least some contingencies on time, but they do not. I.e. Tell us what time it really is. Not according to the big clock in Congress, but what time it really really is.

Our finite minds are inextricably connected to the construction of time because without it, we feel utterly lost and insecure.

 

[JBrian]

Heb. 8 covers it better than I can.

What is the reference?

If this were true, then space and matter would have at least some contingencies on time, but they do not. I.e. Tell us what time it really is. Not according to the big clock in Congress, but what time it really really is.

Space and matter cannot funtion or exist without time. Just because time is a debated issue doesn't mean it is not a property. We don't understand a lot of things. This does not mean it isn't part of the spacio-temporal world.

Our finite minds are inextricably connected to the construction of time because without it, we feel utterly lost and insecure.

We are connected to time because we are physical, finite, temporal beings who exist in a spacio-temporal universe.

I am interested in the argument you are making from Hebrews. Can you touch on that some more?

Thanks,

Brian

 

[k]

What is the reference?



Space and matter cannot funtion or exist without time. Just because time is a debated issue doesn't mean it is not a property. We don't understand a lot of things. This does not mean it isn't part of the spacio-temporal world.

When I put something cold into a microwave and set the timer, is it time or heat that causes the change?

We are connected to time because we are physical, finite, temporal beings who exist in a spacio-temporal universe.

I don't think change is equitable to time.

I am interested in the argument you are making from Hebrews. Can you touch on that some more?

Thanks,

Brian

Heb. 8:7-13. v. 13 is the most specific as it states, "In speaking of 'a new covenant,' he has made the first one obselete and growing old will soon disappear.

There are myriad examples of how we are told changes in the NT about how to handle exact situations as contrasted w/ the OT.

 

[JBrian]

When I put something cold into a microwave and set the timer, is it time or heat that causes the change?

Both. In fact you can't warm your food outside of time, because there would be no "before" you nuked it or "after you nuked it. I really don't understand your point. Change occurs within time.

I don't think change is equitable to time.

Change cannot occur outside of time. There is no "before" or "after" without the concept of time. However, since God exists outside of time there is no "before and after" for Him. He is outside of time and thus changless.

Heb. 8:7-13. v. 13 is the most specific as it states, "In speaking of 'a new covenant,' he has made the first one obselete and growing old will soon disappear.

There are myriad examples of how we are told changes in the NT about how to handle exact situations as contrasted w/ the OT.

Simply because God may change something within time in no way proves that God metaphysically changed. That is, His nature did not change, nothing within God changed. What changes is events within time.

 

[k]

Both. In fact you can't warm your food outside of time, because there would be no "before" you nuked it or "after you nuked it. I really don't understand your point. Change occurs within time.

Let's say my microwave is a hoopty and has no timer so that as soon as I shut the door the heat starts permeating throughout the food?

Change cannot occur outside of time. There is no "before" or "after" without the concept of time. However, since God exists outside of time there is no "before and after" for Him. He is outside of time and thus changless.

When did Lucifer get thrown out of Heaven?

Simply because God may change something within time in no way proves that God metaphysically changed. That is, His nature did not change, nothing within God changed. What changes is events within time.

Sorry for the miscommunication....I wasn't intending to claim God changed, but that God is outside of time and yet change instruction for us.

If we threw away all of our calendars, clocks, watches, and stopped counting the time, would we cease to change as well?

 

[JBrian]

Let's say my microwave is a hoopty and has no timer so that as soon as I shut the door the heat starts permeating throughout the food?

A device called a "timer" does not create time. Just because you don't have a timer so to speak does not make the property of time disapear!

When did Lucifer get thrown out of Heaven?

That's an interesting question. How were the angels created outside of time? Let me get back to you . . . hopefully tonight.

Sorry for the miscommunication....I wasn't intending to claim God changed, but that God is outside of time and yet change instruction for us.

But what is being changed, instruction as you say, is not outside of time. God can intervene in temporal matters. However what is being changed is in time.

If we threw away all of our calendars, clocks, watches, and stopped counting the time, would we cease to change as well?

Getting rid of calendars, etc. does not do away with time, it only does away with one's keeping track of it. Closing one's eyes does not make the external world go away.

The question you brought up about Lucifer is a tricky one. I will get back with you, again, hopefully later tonight.

Thanks for the dialogue,

Brian

 

[k]

A device called a "timer" does not create time. Just because you don't have a timer so to speak does not make the property of time disapear!

But that's part of my point...time does not cause the change in the temperature of the food...the heat from the microwave does. The timer is there to let us judge how much heat should be applied, so the only property I am able to see is heat.







[qutoe]But what is being changed, instruction as you say, is not outside of time. God can intervene in temporal matters. However what is being changed is in time.[/quote]

I agree that God can come into and out of our comphrehensive world because God is not restricted to our constructs. Is what is being changed germane to time or issues?

Getting rid of calendars, etc. does not do away with time, it only does away with one's keeping track of it. Closing one's eyes does not make the external world go away.

Time is not equitable to the external world and my question is this: if we do away with keeping track of time, how do we know it still exists?

The question you brought up about Lucifer is a tricky one. I will get back with you, again, hopefully later tonight.

Thanks for the dialogue,

Brian

Thank you because this is very interesting and the concept of time is an interesting.

 

[Exist]

There is an idea of "eternity" in the common, everyday use of the term that something has "lasted or existed forever," however it is impossible for the universe be infinite, that is, infnite in time. An infinite has no beginning and no end. This moment is the end moment in time. If the universe has existed from the infinite past we never would have reached this moment. But we have, so it is not infinite regarding time.

I've heard this thought many times, and I still do not understand it.

You have an infinite line. 0, 1, 2, 3, etc. Also, in the other direction, there is 0, -1, -2, -3 and so on. Can any number truly be a number, or have any value, just because it's surroundings are infinite?

If you had an infinite universe all around you, in all directions, would it be impossible for you to exist in space?

A being that is not in time cannot change. That is not to say, however, that an eternal being eternally decree or act.

Moses was in time, and he talked and saw God....who also happened to be in time. God could not act in time if he was eternally static, would you not agree? He could not regret, he could not go from not declaring something to declaring something, because, as you said, time is the measurement of change. Without time, that means there is no change.

To be eternal is to be outside of time.

I'm still not convinced of this.

 

[JBrian]

I've heard this thought many times, and I still do not understand it.

You have an infinite line. 0, 1, 2, 3, etc. Also, in the other direction, there is 0, -1, -2, -3 and so on. Can any number truly be a number, or have any value, just because it's surroundings are infinite?

You can have an infinte mathematical concept, not an actual infinite length.

If you had an infinite universe all around you, in all directions, would it be impossible for you to exist in space?

It would be infinite space . . . so no.

Moses was in time, and he talked and saw God....who also happened to be in time. God could not act in time if he was eternally static, would you not agree? He could not regret, he could not go from not declaring something to declaring something, because, as you said, time is the measurement of change. Without time, that means there is no change.

God does not decide in time to do things, He decrees from all eternity. Moses saw God, however God does not have a body to be seen. Moses saw God's glory. The bible also says (John 1:18) that no one has ever seen God at any time. Moses did not metaphysically see God, he saw Him in His glory. God does not regret. That, and other figures of speech like God changed His mind are anthropomorphisms. That is, they give God a man-like quality. We can only discuss God by use of our language. So authors had to resort to anthropomorphisms.

I'm still not convinced of this.

What is your definition of eternal? If it is the sum total of time you have an infinite regress which is impossible.

 

[JBrian]

When did Lucifer get thrown out of Heaven?

By asking this question I am assuming that you are trying to show a change (the relation of Lucifer) that occured outside of time. However, we have no way of knowing when Lucifer (Satan, since the name Lucifer is not in the original Hebrew, but is rather a translation from the Latin which simply means "Light-bearer.") was thrown out of heaven. For all we know, it could have been after the universe was created. Either way he existed in time, since they (the angels) are circumscribed to a particular location, and so they had to move, and to move implies a before and after, so the angels were in time. So no change is occuring outside of time.