Timeless Causation

[cutupmaster]

This is an old objection, but I was wondering how a proponent of the KCA would answer it. It goes like this. If God caused the first state of the universe into existence, and therefore caused space and time to come into existence, then how could God's causing of the universe be "before" the universe came into existence? And if the act is not "before" the universe came into existence, then how could it be the cause of the universe?


1. Either God's causing the first state of the universe (E) into existence preceded E or it didn't.
2. If God's causing E did not precede E, then the act of causing E must have occurred simultaneously with E.
3. If God's causing E is occurred simultaneously with E, then it makes no sense to say that God's causing E is the cause of E, since causes precede their effects.
4. Therefore, God's causing E must have preceded E.
5. Therefore, God's causing E was not a "timeless" act. (from 4).

One might object that causes occur simultaneously with their effects, but I see a problem with this view. Say A and B are occur simultaneously, and one is the cause of the other. How do we know which is the cause and which is the effect? It doesn't seem like we can know.

 

[The Nihilist]

what is the KCA?

 

[cutupmaster]

KCA = Kalam cosmological argument.

 

[elman]

This is an old objection, but I was wondering how a proponent of the KCA would answer it. It goes like this. If God caused the first state of the universe into existence, and therefore caused space and time to come into existence, then how could God's causing of the universe be "before" the universe came into existence? And if the act is not "before" the universe came into existence, then how could it be the cause of the universe?


1. Either God's causing the first state of the universe (E) into existence preceded E or it didn't.
2. If God's causing E did not precede E, then the act of causing E must have occurred simultaneously with E.
3. If God's causing E is occurred simultaneously with E, then it makes no sense to say that God's causing E is the cause of E, since causes precede their effects.
4. Therefore, God's causing E must have preceded E.
5. Therefore, God's causing E was not a "timeless" act. (from 4).

One might object that causes occur simultaneously with their effects, but I see a problem with this view. Say A and B are occur simultaneously, and one is the cause of the other. How do we know which is the cause and which is the effect? It doesn't seem like we can know.

How about it being outside of time and not before the beginning of time?

 

[levi501]

Why can't something be before the universe?

 

[TeddyKGB]

How about it being outside of time and not before the beginning of time?

How about because no one has any idea what "outside of time" means? "Before time" is at least able to be arrived at mathematically.

 

[elman]

How about because no one has any idea what "outside of time" means? "Before time" is at least able to be arrived at mathematically.

Before time would also be not understanable. How can something be before time and not in time or a part of time?

 

[talkingmonkey]

You could bring in the idea of the hypethetical based multi-verse. The idea that perhaps God is in a parallel plane (universe) to our own. Therefore, theoretically, God may have existed before our time, and out of our time-line.

On another note, through theorising multiverses, could it be said that there are many universes side by side, similar to a bubble bath - where each bubble is a universe. As with bubbles, the universes expand and contract with differing variables. What if the Big Bang was actually the end of a previous universe that had been squashed by parallel universes, only to create another new (our) universe as the others around it receded again. Our universe is ever expanding, so perhaps in billions of years (or tomorrow for that matter) another parallel universe will be partially crushed by ours.

See Bubble-Theory in Multiverses. It is a proposal by Andre Linde, a Soviet theoretical physicist and professor of physics at Stanford.

 

[TeddyKGB]

Before time would also be not understanable. How can something be before time and not in time or a part of time?

You are starting from the wrong perspective. "Before time" is not a philosophical concept; it is mathematical in nature, a product of the equations that we use to "rewind" the expansion of the universe.

 

[solarwave]

What I am thinking is that God is outside of time, that is how he is eternal, as it is impossible to have time if there is no matter. God always has existed and always will do, and so does not need to be inside time.

 

[daniel777]

If God caused the first state of the universe into existence, and therefore caused space and time to come into existence, then how could God's causing of the universe be "before" the universe came into existence? And if the act is not "before" the universe came into existence, then how could it be the cause of the universe?

you're transposing the laws of time on to something outside of it.

this also, subtly, assumes that "things" and concepts cannot exist outside of time, or at least, outside of our current and finite understanding.

and you're right "before" is the term used because it best describes the situation to the best ability of our finite minds.

Christians aren't interested in going philosophically deep in our evangelism to the common man, but in trying to help them understand, not confusing them further.

well that's my crack at it :/

 

[Patashu]

What I am thinking is that God is outside of time, that is how he is eternal, as it is impossible to have time if there is no matter. God always has existed and always will do, and so does not need to be inside time.

'impossible to have time if there is no matter'
For one, why does what God is made out of not count as a kind of matter?
Secondarily, how do you know this is the case?

 

[solarwave]

'impossible to have time if there is no matter'
For one, why does what God is made out of not count as a kind of matter?
Secondarily, how do you know this is the case?

Because matter is the physical stuff we live on, like earth, stars, chairs, and God is a spirit. And I'm not sure of the details but Einstein's general relativity shows that time is linked to matter and space.

 

[TeddyKGB]

you're transposing the laws of time on to something outside of it.

You are assuming that "something outside of it" is a meaningful phrase.

this also, subtly, assumes that "things" and concepts cannot exist outside of time, or at least, outside of our current and finite understanding.

Seems like an awfully well-evidenced assumption.

I understand that the whole "outside of time" business is a convenient and useful apologetic, but that alone does not justify broader consideration.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Considering that time refers to change, how can something "happen" outside of change?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[solarwave]

Considering that time refers to change, how can something "happen" outside of change?


eudaimonia,

Mark

God is changless so I think that fits in quite well. God exists 'outside of change' but acts inside time.

 

[Eudaimonist]

God is changless so I think that fits in quite well. God exists 'outside of change' but acts inside time.

If God was changeless, he would be like a statue, doing nothing. How can God think or act without a change of state?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[daniel777]

If God was changeless, he would be like a statue, doing nothing. How can God think or act without a change of state?

no, he's more than a statue..... so you're not going to let this go until I can provide a definition for God and provide you with an equal example? I'm sorry, but I can't give you a perfect example.


I think you are oversimplifying the character of God by comparing him to a statue.

if something is unchanging about God, it's his character, and when i said "things" i didn't mean matter. that's why i put it in quotes.


also, God doesn't think, he knows. (sounds like a Chuck Norris joke )

and this is just guesswork, but when God acts it could be possible that everything changes so essentially he never acted..... or you could say that he only acts in time, and exists unchanging outside of time....

The Bible does call him himself THE Beginning and the End.

this is all just guesswork however, there's no way to know for sure when talking of things that none of us have any knowledge of whatsoever.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

What I am thinking is that God is outside of time, that is how he is eternal, as it is impossible to have time if there is no matter. God always has existed and always will do, and so does not need to be inside time.

I have concluded a very similar thing for the universe itself.

 

[daniel777]

I have concluded a very similar thing for the universe itself.

oh, what's that?