Why Didn't the Universe Always Exist?

[David Davidovich]

According to the premise in the OP, from God's perspective, 100% yes. And it gets weirder when we start to consider not just what was, is, and will be... and start to consider what could be. All of those "could be" events exist concurrently as well. The result is a set of many worlds, many realities, and all of them are leading to "the world to come".

So, what would even be the point of "could be" events? Also, do you have a Hebrew text verse that you base your belief on?

free-will

So once again, is there anything in the Hebrew text that says or indicates that? Because that sounds more like something you'd see on Star Trek or in a science fiction movie.

Here's one:

Psalms 90:2

Before the mountains were brought forth, before you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting, you are God.
​

God is beyond time, before creation, before time, from everlasting to everlasting God is, was, and will be.

That's not a Hebrew text that supports the point of "could be" events. That's just a verse that says that God is from everlasting to everlasting. However, it says nothing about God entertaining possible occurrences in possible multiverses. Plus, I still don't see what the point of entertaining could-be events and countless possibilities would be for a monotheist God.

free-will

Sure. Why not? The beginning and the end are defined, and what happens in the middle is the result of what "could be".[/QUOTE]

Sorry, but that's a contradiction of terms. Plus, that sounds like the opposite of Isaiah 46:10.

 

[David Davidovich]

I know it ain't really helpful... but in a very real sense, the universe has always existed.

"Always" is a period of time. All of time, to be exact.
And the universe = the space-time continuum.

At any point in time, the universe existed. There is no point in time when the universe did not exist.

So yeah, the universe has in fact always existed.

My mind can't wrap itself around the implications of that.
But nevertheless, I don't see what is wrong with the logic presented above.

There is no point in time when the universe didn't exist.
Therefor, the universe always (=for all of time) existed.

Thank you, TagliatelliMonster. However, theist believe that there was a time that the universe didn't exist and that there was a time... or I guess was the 'right time' that God decided that the universe should exist.

 

[David Davidovich]

One note that I forgot mention. One concept, that has been stated from certain Torath Mosheh discussions of the Torah is that before reality, as we understand it and experience it, was established there was no concept of past, present, or future.

It is seen as the part of the Torah (shown below) is what established the reality of past, present, and future as we experience it.

View attachment 71480

I have no idea what that "part of the Torah (shown below)" is or means, therefore, could you elaborate a little bit more?

 

[David Davidovich]

Yes it has. It's called the big bang.

...theory. Not necessarily a fact.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

No it is not. There are a number of variations of the Big Bang Model and none represent tbe proposal that our universe had an absolute beginning. The current proposals range from our ubiverse originating from pre-existing matter and energy as a singularity in a Quantum World of a possible multiverse to other proposals such as a cyclic universe also in a Quantum World.

Science can only explore where there is space and time. It cannot test hypotheses of things like multiverses and stuff. Belief in those things are more similar to religious beliefs than science. What the big bang theory does state is that space and time had a beginning in the expanse of the singularity.

You have religious beliefs that the universe is eternal. that's fine. I'm used to religious people rejecting science. Believe what you want.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

...theory. Not necessarily a fact.

In science , even gravity is a theory. A scientific theory is an idea that best explains evidence coming in from many different sources. It is not the same as a hypothesis.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

So, could you transliterate into English what the entire Hebrew text says at Genesis 1:1?

It isn't something you translate word for word. This is actually one of the mistakes made by translators who don't know the oral Torah or who do but are conflicted with how much information they can pack into a translation concerning the words, structure, and meaning. It is something that you translate as a "group" of concepts - which makes the translation more lengthy and wordy. There are even entire discussions just about the letters of the first word alone.

For example, "In a beginning Elohim created/from non-established/non-existant material/principles/etc. the shamayyim and the eretz..." would be a "better" but not perfect or sufficient way of translating it rather than calling shamayyim "heavens" and calling eretz "earth."

The reason is because now you have to ask what is "shamayyim" and what is "eretz." Some English translations can give you the idea that by using the word "heavens" the sky is being talked about or by using the word "earth" the planet we are on is being talked about. In reality, this is not what is being discussed and one the reason is because of the words used in Hebrew and thousands of years of Jewish history describe what the text actually means as something way beyond the sky and even the earth, the planet we are on.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

The Abrahamic religions do express the needs for Creator deity in the creation

If this is concidered a Abrahamic religious principle then Torath Mosheh and ancient Judaism would not be an Abrahamic. Neither posit nor express a "needs for Creator deity in the creation." There doesn't have to be a creator in creation if in reality there isn't. The claim of Torath Mosheh and ancient Judaism is that the Source of the concept of creation/reality presented itself in a mass revelation to the Israeli/Jewish people at a placed called Har Sinai and thus the concept of such a reality was established for the Israeli/Jewish people in repeatable fashion to show that this was the case.

Yet, on its own without the claim of a national revelation there doesn't have to be a creator if in reality there was not one.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

I have no idea what that "part of the Torah (shown below)" is or means, therefore, could you elaborate a little bit more?

The words in the part shown below are words that are often translated as "the heavens and the earth." YET, in Hebrew they don't mean what heaven and earth often mean in English. Most ancient descriptions in Hebrew and Aramaic which discuss this particular statement would equate better to "principles of reality/natural laws of the universe and matter."

Again, the first part of the Torah has loads of lengthy discussions that are like reading text books on Physics, Thermodynamics, Chemistry, etc. A word for word translations is not possible, and when done is often like how one talks in English to children about the world.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Thank you, TagliatelliMonster. However, theist believe that there was a time that the universe didn't exist and that there was a time... or I guess was the 'right time' that God decided that the universe should exist.

Myeah... people "believe" a lot of things.

Doesn't really matter to the facts though.
They are welcome to try and point to any point in time where the universe supposedly did not exist.

They will fail to do so.

I don't care what they "believe" if they can't justify their beliefs properly. And especially not when the actual evidence flies in the face of their beliefs - whatever they are.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes it has. It's called the big bang.

The big bang is not actually a theory of origins though.

 

[stvdv]

Why didn't the universe always exist? Because since God is supposed to be outside of time and is supposed to have always existed, then how could God have used a point in time to start creation? Any thoughts on this?

IF a person claims/knows "the world always existed/exists" THEN this person always existed/exists

Wrong. Hypotheses can be based on things other than direct observation of the event by a individual.

You never met your great great grandparents, but we know they existed.

Irrelevant comparison

Untrue in the case I replied to
"The world always existed"

OR

Can you prove the world always existed

 

[dybmh]

So once again, is there anything in the Hebrew text that says or indicates that? Because that sounds more like something you'd see on Star Trek or in a science fiction movie.

First of all, we're talking about a god concept which is beyond time. So yes, science fiction is the genre.

You asked if there was "anything" in the text that I base my ideas on. The answer is, yes. Anytime God is described as from everlasting to everlasting that indicates that God is beyond time.

I didn't indicate something in the text to prove to you that "could be" events exist because I honestly think it's obvious. The concept of "could-be" events is based on the idea of choice, free-will. Each and every commandment given is a choice. So there's many examples in written text. The one that comes to mind is Deuteronomy 30:19. Moses is summarizing the entire Torah before his death.

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your seed may live;
​

There you have it. Choose. Free-will exists. God is beyond time. Based on the text.

That's not a Hebrew text that supports the point of "could be" events. That's just a verse that says that God is from everlasting to everlasting. However, it says nothing about God entertaining possible occurrences in possible multiverses. Plus, I still don't see what the point of entertaining could-be events and countless possibilities would be for a monotheist God.

Entertaining the possibility of anything is nothing more than giving choice.

The generation of multiverses is an extremely complicated concept. Multiverse - Wikipedia If you read the article, it's not a new idea. And there's a list of accomplished individuals who support it.

In order to approach an understanding of it in this context it takes time, effort, and an open mind. One needs to consider, how is God creating? To what can it be compared to? What is an example of something that exists, but was not created in the conventional manner? What does this word, "עוֹלָם", really mean? Not just on the surface, but what does it mean on a deeper level? What does this word, "בָּרָ֣א", mean? Each letter is significant. What does the aleph at the end mean? And why is this word reserved for divine creation?

You say that you don't see the point of having endless possibilities for a monotheistic god? Sure, that's because "monotheistic god" is a shallow superficial description. In order to "see the point" look deeper.

Sorry, but that's a contradiction of terms. Plus, that sounds like the opposite of Isaiah 46:10.

No it's not a contradiction. Free-will is not the same as absolute freedom.

Now let's look at what I said and compare it to the verse in Isaiah.

I said:

The beginning and the end are defined, and what happens in the middle is the result of what "could be".​

Isa 46:10:

I tell the end from the beginning, and from before, what was not done; say, 'My counsel shall stand, and all My desire I will do.'
​

Here's what I get from the verse:

• The end and the beginning are defined.
• "before" the beginning exists.
• "what was not done" are undefined "could be" events. Done means completed, finished
• all of this is God's desire

That pretty much matches what I said. Excellent choice on that verse!

​

 

[Ehav4Ever]

So, could you transliterate into English what the entire Hebrew text says at Genesis 1:1?

Sorry I just noticed. Did you mean transliterate or did you intend to state translate?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Can you go north of the North Pole?

Yes, given another dimension.

 

[Ponder This]

But that's different because the earth is only a very tiny part of the universe. However, according to many theists, the universe was only started (by God) 3.8 billion years ago. And as I said in post #53:

The size of the Earth is irrelevant to the theological question. I could've chosen any planet, any star, any blackhole, or even any universe. Why didn't the Earth always exist?

if God is outside of time and always existed, then how could he have waited until a point in time in existence to decide to create the universe? Why did he wait? Because he would have had to have waited until the 'time' was right, or else the universe would have always existed alongside with God.

If the Force that created the Earth is outside of Earth time and *always* existed, how could this Force have waited until a point in time to create the Earth?

How about a different question... this one pertains to the video game Minecraft...
Why didn't a world of Minecraft always exist?
(A world of Minecraft is an individual Minecraft universe. Worlds can be created with the "Create New World" button)
How could the makers of Minecraft have waited until a point in time to create Minecraft?
Maybe Minecraft always existed... ? (cue spooky music)

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, given another dimension.

Really? I have doubts about that. Of course it is a rather poor argument.

 

[shunyadragon]

Yes it has. It's called the big bang.

Yo add basedonprevious posts the Big Bang is possibly a beginning and not 'The' beginning of everything.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Yo add basedonprevious posts the Big Bang is possibly a beginning and not 'The' beginning of everything.

Shuny, I am baffled why you continue to argue with me. We are not going to agree. You have a religious belief that the universe always existed, so you filter everything with that idea. I accept the standard scientific theory that the universe had a beginning--the big bang. Now, it really doesn't make sense to keep arguing about it. We are just going around in circles. For me, I'm simply going to move on. You can have the last say.

 

[shunyadragon]

Science can only explore where there is space and time. It cannot test hypotheses of things like multiverses and stuff. Belief in those things are more similar to religious beliefs than science. What the big bang theory does state is that space and time had a beginning in the expanse of the singularity.

You have religious beliefs that the universe is eternal. that's fine. I'm used to religious people rejecting science. Believe what you want.

Not true, because science can and does propose falsifiable hypothesis concerning the nature of the Quantum World that the Singularity formed and our universe began from a singularity. Also it can propose falsifiable hypothesis that our universe is possibly cyclic it goes both in that there is no way to determine conclusively that the beginning of out universe was any sort of absolute beginning of everything. All that science can say at present is the Big Bang event(?) was possible 'A' beginning of out universe.

As I have said before and many times in other threads is that our universe and our physical existence of 'potentially infinite,' I never asserted nor proposed that it is infinite.

Do you understand what potentially infinite means.