Yet *Another* Beginningless-Universe Model . . .

[PaulSacramento]

Jac wrote:
... If God chose to create an eternally existing universe, then why not?...

I don't know if it's just me, but that doesn't make any sense. If something could exist eternally(without beginning or end), then it wouldn't be created, right?

Thank you Jac for that thoughtful response. And Rick - i totally agree with you here. Which for me it is a major theological problem. And going back to Genesis 1:1 I take some of the alternatives you suggested (I know you don't ascribe to any of them in particular) but the problem is not just in Genesis 1:1 but all through the bible - In the Psalms and the first chapter of John for example where God's creative power is described.

Silver,

Unless I'm missing something, I cannot see how an eternal universe would not be a MAJOR problem for the existence of God. Doesn't it go against what we believe about only God being eternal?

Well, one can argue that eternal is but ONE of God's qualities and if God has been around eternally then He has to have been "somewhere" eternally and that "somewhere" could be called the universe.

[Silvertusk]

Jac wrote:
... If God chose to create an eternally existing universe, then why not?...

I don't know if it's just me, but that doesn't make any sense. If something could exist eternally(without beginning or end), then it wouldn't be created, right?

Thank you Jac for that thoughtful response. And Rick - i totally agree with you here. Which for me it is a major theological problem. And going back to Genesis 1:1 I take some of the alternatives you suggested (I know you don't ascribe to any of them in particular) but the problem is not just in Genesis 1:1 but all through the bible - In the Psalms and the first chapter of John for example where God's creative power is described.

Silver,

Unless I'm missing something, I cannot see how an eternal universe would not be a MAJOR problem for the existence of God. Doesn't it go against what we believe about only God being eternal?

Exactly. This is my point as well.

[RickD]

Even IF the universe has been around forever, the fact is that we know it is changing ( expanding).
I don't know o f anyone that believes the universe has always been the exact way it is right now.

And I question that as well. Can something that is eternal, change? If it changes, then something outside of it must be causing it to change. And that gets back to the first uncaused cause.

How can God be eternal, and the universe be eternal, unless the the universe is God?

[RickD]

Jac wrote:
... If God chose to create an eternally existing universe, then why not?...

I don't know if it's just me, but that doesn't make any sense. If something could exist eternally(without beginning or end), then it wouldn't be created, right?

Thank you Jac for that thoughtful response. And Rick - i totally agree with you here. Which for me it is a major theological problem. And going back to Genesis 1:1 I take some of the alternatives you suggested (I know you don't ascribe to any of them in particular) but the problem is not just in Genesis 1:1 but all through the bible - In the Psalms and the first chapter of John for example where God's creative power is described.

Silver,

Unless I'm missing something, I cannot see how an eternal universe would not be a MAJOR problem for the existence of God. Doesn't it go against what we believe about only God being eternal?

Well, one can argue that eternal is but ONE of God's qualities and if God has been around eternally then He has to have been "somewhere" eternally and that "somewhere" could be called the universe.

Paul,

The universe is physical. God doesn't have to be "somewhere", because He is spirit, right?

[Silvertusk]

Slightly related to this thread as it is about Quantum Mechanics - have a look at these two videos - completely blew my mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM#

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4F ... K_&index=1

Edit: Maybe the world is not physical after all.

[Byblos]

Eternal procession aside(only God is eternal in the true sense. No beginning nor end, and The Son is God, so he is eternal), please explain how it can be logical for God to create something without a beginning, such as an eternal universe. If God creates it, it comes into existence. If it comes into existence, then it had a beginning.

If the Son can eternally proceed from the Father, why can't the universe?

[RickD]

Eternal procession aside(only God is eternal in the true sense. No beginning nor end, and The Son is God, so he is eternal), please explain how it can be logical for God to create something without a beginning, such as an eternal universe. If God creates it, it comes into existence. If it comes into existence, then it had a beginning.

If the Son can eternally proceed from the Father, why can't the universe?

I would say because the universe is not God, and the Son is.

Only God is eternal.

What am I missing?

[Jac3510]

More later, but for now, let's not confuse beginningless with eternal. Even if the universe has always existed, it would not be eternal. Only God is eternal. The universe would still be contingent on God, so while the divine procession of Christ provides a logical analogue, it is only an analogue, because Christ is eternal (ant not merely beginningless). So it is true that you can't have both an eternal universe and an eternal God. But it is not true that you cannot have a beginningless, contingent universe and an eternal God.

edit:

And just to emphasize again, I do believe the universe had a true beginning. I'm just saying that we ought not base our faith in God on that idea, and we certainly ought not allow ourselves or anyone else to suggest that a beginningless universe would create a problem for theism. For even if the universe had always existed, it would still demand God exist as we know and understand Him to be.

[RickD]

More later, but for now, let's not confuse beginningless with eternal. Even if the universe has always existed, it would not be eternal. Only God is eternal. The universe would still be contingent on God, so while the divine procession of Christ provides a logical analogue, it is only an analogue, because Christ is eternal (ant not merely beginningless). So it is true that you can't have both an eternal universe and an eternal God. But it is not true that you cannot have a beginningless, contingent universe and an eternal God.

edit:

And just to emphasize again, I do believe the universe had a true beginning. I'm just saying that we ought not base our faith in God on that idea, and we certainly ought not allow ourselves or anyone else to suggest that a beginningless universe would create a problem for theism. For even if the universe had always existed, it would still demand God exist as we know and understand Him to be.

Jac,

I'm still not grasping this. How can the universe be without beginning, unless the universe is God?

Specifically this:

Jac wrote:
...But it is not true that you cannot have a beginningless, contingent universe and an eternal God...

Explain how can something be both beginningless AND contingent?

[Jac3510]

When did the number three come into existence?

I would suggest that the number three is beginningless. It has always existed. Even in eternity past (whatever that means), it has existed, because there have "always been" (in the sense of not having a beginning) Three Persons in the Trinity.

So does the number three prove God doesn't exist? Or does the reality of threeness exist only because God does? (Ignoring some of the Platonic language there, btw, the point is still the same)

[RickD]

When did the number three come into existence?

I would suggest that the number three is beginningless. It has always existed. Even in eternity past (whatever that means), it has existed, because there have "always been" (in the sense of not having a beginning) Three Persons in the Trinity.

So does the number three prove God doesn't exist? Or does the reality of threeness exist only because God does? (Ignoring some of the Platonic language there, btw, the point is still the same)

But Jac,

The number three isn't physical. The universe is. Or at the very least, the universe consists of the physical.

Edit***
Jac, I'm basically getting at the same issue here.

[PaulSacramento]

The universe is physical. God doesn't have to be "somewhere", because He is spirit, right?

Its wording, humans trying to describe things the best they can and we typically come up short.
Point being is that even if the universe ( and by universe I mean all that exists) was eternal, that doesn't really effect God like you said.

[RickD]

The universe is physical. God doesn't have to be "somewhere", because He is spirit, right?

Its wording, humans trying to describe things the best they can and we typically come up short.
Point being is that even if the universe ( and by universe I mean all that exists) was eternal, that doesn't really effect God like you said.

And again, I'm asking what I'm missing.
How can something physical be eternal? Unless you're suggesting pantheism(which I know you're not), I just can't see it.

[Jac3510]

I hear you keep asking about why something physical can't be beginningless (sorry, I won't use the word eternal--they mean different things). Are you conceding that immaterial things can be beginningless? Is your question limited only to physical things?

edit:

And are you talking about a single thing or a series of things? The universe is not a single entity. Is is a collection of entities. When people suggest a beginningless universe, they are not saying that a single thing has always existed, but that there have always been things causing other things.

[PaulSacramento]

The universe is physical. God doesn't have to be "somewhere", because He is spirit, right?

Its wording, humans trying to describe things the best they can and we typically come up short.
Point being is that even if the universe ( and by universe I mean all that exists) was eternal, that doesn't really effect God like you said.

And again, I'm asking what I'm missing.
How can something physical be eternal? Unless you're suggesting pantheism(which I know you're not), I just can't see it.

The universe is all the exists, according to some, so if God exists He must be somehow part of/related to the universe and He is BUT not as part of but as SUSTAIN-ER of.
When people speak of the universe, they speak of all that there is as defined on wiki for example:

The Universe is the totality of everything that exists, has existed, and ever will exist.

Or:

The totality of matter, energy, and space, including the Solar System, the galaxies, and the contents of the space between the galaxies.

Whichever definition you may prefer, the point is that if you define the universe as the above then even if the universe is eternal, that has no baring on God because the only thing they would share is the nature ofbeing eternal.
God is still the sustainer and, as we know, since the universe is changing (expanding) then it can't be the unmoved mover, which is God.