[James C. Bennett]

Excellent reply there in #331, Kosta!

The distinction between the term ‘Universe’ to mean everything that exists, and everything that had existed prior to the Big Bang, of which we know nothing about, needs to be specified.

Additionally, a timeless, everlasting entity - an entity outside the realms of time, is also a changeless entity. How then did this entity, that from all eternity, suddenly rose up just prior to when the Big Bang occurred, to create it?

In other words, how did the changeless entity change, without itself being under the realm of time?

[James C. Bennett]

rose = rise

Additionally, can change occur without time?

[James C. Bennett]

Placemark.

[kosta50]

Thank you JCB. It never ceases to amaze me how people jump to a conclusion that the Big Bang was the "beginning." The world appears to be more something of a perpetuum mobile, a repetitive exercise of redundancy whose main characteristic, if not purpose, is to endlessly recycle.

"In the beginning" is a box, and those inside that box cannot think outside of it, unless they free themselves of the confines of the box they are in and realize that if we can assume an eternal deity, we can just as easily assume an eternal universe with eternal "beginnings" repeated eternally.

A presumed eternal deity creating the world presents a paradox precisely, as you said, because that unchanging deity has change. It's an oxymoron. On the other hand, an eternal, recycling, self-contained, pepertuum mobile universe doesn't pose that paradox because cyclical change is its very nature, or essence. The problem to many, however, is that one cannot feel a personal "fellowship" and likeness with the universe as much as with an imaginary personal deity, who "hears" us and "answers" us.

An eternal recycling universe poses a perceptual problem in some. It makes us no different than the leaves on a tree that are recycled every season. This seriously affects our need for purpose and worth, or even a reason to live; it clashes with our narcissistic need to be gods of sorts, and although we have no choice but to admit we lack immortality, we at least like to "know" that we are connected most closely to the "Force" that will make us immortal one day. That's nothing new; it's been around longer than most people realize (see my new tag line).

[D-fendr]

I think you are getting into the classic First Cause argument - which hasn’t been definitively decided/proved/disproved one way or the other.

[TXnMA]

"Additionally, a timeless, everlasting entity - an entity outside the realms of time, is also a changeless entity."

"Changeless"? How did you determine that?