Can anything exist for an infinite time or outside of time?

Whatever your cosmology or worldview, in the end you are left with the truth that something is infinite/eternal.As we look back at history (and pre-history), we can continually ask, "And before that? Before that? Before that? Before that? ... etc. But at some point we are left with what we must consider our *beginning* point. Generally speaking, we are comfortable with beginnings. A sporting event has a definite beginning and a definite end and a duration of, say, 3 hours. A movie has a definite beginning and a definite end and a duration of 2 hours or so.The difference between games and movies and the history of being is that the first two are finite events while the course of history hints strongly of an infinitude. Finite events exist at points in the course of historical time. However, as we trace back chronological events to our eventual starting point that we label as the *beginning* we are left with the haunting sense that it could not simply be the beginning. For instance, the Big Bang Theory would represent an absolute beginning point for the existence of everything in the Universe. But we are left to ask questions like, "What was going on before the Big Bang (when all of the matter/energy in the Universe were supposedly consolidated into a singularity of space)? How long was stuff going on before the Big Bang? What CAUSED the Big Bang (because in our understanding of history, things do not simply happen un-caused...exempting quantum mechanics for the time being).All of this to say that ultimately we are left with the conclusion that the history of stuff before the Big Bang (in which nothing was happening, apparently) is infinitely long. It makes far more sense to say that before stuff started happening and history began was the existence of the eternal (outside of time), infinite God who then caused everything else in history to have its beginning.I hope this was clear...I worry it might not be so.

Alright, Oni, and anyone else concerned... I'll put the task to you then. Fill in the blank:"In the beginning __________________ ..."Now tell me what happened before that or caused it.

The point I want to establish is simply the difficulty in saying "In the beginning." The reason behind that is that everything we are familiar with is a product of causation. Try to name something in your world/life that is not directly/indirectly caused by something(s). You can have the Big Bang, if you like...I don't particularly care. The ultimate question comes down to what is the FIRST Cause.

That is, of course, not the only way to break down that *question* (though I did not actually pose a question, per se). Another way to do it would be this: Name an actual entity which is completely independent of outside causation. Off the top of my head, nothing would be possible except God.

You made my point for me.
In the end, you are left to say that either God is "God" or that the Universe itself is "God."
Part of the nature of God-ness is freedom from causality, I would think.
In the end, I suppose it will mostly come down to personal preference/prejudice/pre-commitment as to which side one lands on. But in the end, you are left with one infinite...God or the Universe itself.For me, it is a reach to say "there is stuff" simply because...well...there is stuff. It makes much more sense for there to be a reason for the stuff being there...a cause if you will.There are a lot of reasons why I see it as a reach simply to leave it as "The Universe Is, And That is Enough." We being *personal* beings, made supposedly by an impersonal force of the all-encompassing entity, the Universe, seems odd. Our features, the way we act and interact, the very fact that we are ALIVE...
Even if I were to grant to you evolution (which I also see as a reach for reasons unrelated to this), you still would have to explain to me where *life* itself came from. It is much less of a reach to say that the Living God (who also, then, would have already made the Universe) breathed into Adam the breath (spirit) of life than it is to say that the impersonal, inanimate Universe spawned the appropriate conditions on a very well suited planet in a fortunate sector of the galaxy in a fortunate sector of the Universe for the creation of life by a process of...let's see...mixing a saline solution of water and maybe organic compounds and having it charged by a bolt of lighting...er, um...yeah. People who have such a problem with God on such *scientific* grounds as that He complicates the process unnecessarily have failed to provide even a starting sample of an explanation as to how life *happened*.What else ya got?

The part about trying to find God with a telescope made me chuckle a little.He is the immortal, *invisible* God. 1 Timothy 1:17 Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.He is not embodied. John 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."God is bigger, greater, and more ancient than the mere Universe *in which* you seem to be trying to find Him. Ephesians 4:9-10 (What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions? 10 He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.)Do not confuse "Heaven" with "the heavens." They are altogether different locations of different orders. Please, don't go fly a spaceship in search of it. John 8:21-23 Once more Jesus said to them, "I am going away, and you will look for me, and you will die in your sin. Where I go, you cannot come." 22 This made the Jews ask, "Will he kill himself? Is that why he says, 'Where I go, you cannot come'?" 23 But he continued, "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.

The explanation of "how" God "could" have done Creation really doesn't seem that difficult to me. What is difficult to do is to trace the steps of the invisible God into a time before the world in which we live, before people, before written history. And on the other hand, it is difficult to say from any materialist/naturalist standpoint anything more than how it "could" have happened...that is all that science is when it comes to looking back at the past, no?

The First Law of Thermodynamics has been overturned in the nuclear age. The consensus is that, in fact, matter can be destroyed.

I'm sorry. Your (science's) evidence for how life is created was what again? We need evidence. And, no, it won't be coming because, no, it does not exist, lol. Careful with the hypocrisy.

You do realize we can't/haven't even seen the farthest reaches of the Universe, right? Go read something. There is a lot of guesswork and speculation to this. The Big Bang, etc., have not been as "mathematically demonstrated" as people would like to think.

And your empirical evidence against the existence of God was...? Please play by your own rules.

I'm not really following your angle, Chimp. Are you a Biblical theist or just trying to provoke a response? Yes, I have read and subscribe to Genesis.

Freedom from outside causation is an obvious characteristic of a universally sovereign God. No, it is not the exclusive definition of God. But to apply this freedom to the Universe is to free the Universe itself from God, so in a sense it commandeers his title as "God."As to the physicists who explain why there is stuff. My understanding is that the "why" in such a case is not the domain of a physicist, no matter how brilliant, but rather cosmologists, philosophers, and theologians. Physics is math...math does not do well with "why."

Forgive me, but you are responding to my response to onifre which I agree should seem simple and not overly taxing. But onifre seemed to demand the explanation for some reason...when it is well-accounted for in and of itself in the canon of Scripture.
So, you can believe it is "made-up" if you wish, but please do not insult me for meeting the explanatory demands of people from your own side.

And, yet, *if* in fact God created the Universe, then the Universe itself would not be independent of causation. And *if* there is no God to create the Universe, then the Universe more or less assumes the place of *God,* no?