[quote="empther, post:5, topic:274988"]
So far so good. :cool: I think. It's hard to know what you're saying.
It could not. I'm really surprised you said that. :eek: How could any event have happened an infinite time ago?
Even Aristotle said you can't go back to infinity and he did not have Revelation.
Actually, Aristotle is extremely well-known for his belief that the world is eternal. You seem to have that wrong.
St. Thomas addresses this question in Question 46 of the Prima Pars. Article 2 is especially helpful. In it, he says quite clearly, "I answer that, By faith alone do we hold, and by no demonstration can it be proved, that the world did not always exist..." St. Thomas was influenced very heavily on Aristotle's argument for the eternity of the world.
Aristotle presents his arguments in the Physics, and one of his more important points can be found in section 1,7:
"Everything that comes into existence does so from a substratum. If the underlying matter of the universe came into existence, it would come into existence from a substratum. But the nature of matter is precisely to be the substratum from which other things arise. Consequently, the underlying matter of the universe could have come into evidence only from an already existing matter exactly like itself; to assume that the underlying matter of the universe came into existence would require assuming that an underlying matter already existed. The assumption is thus self-contradictory, and matter must be eternal."
I think you mean effect, or cause and effect. Anyway, can you give an example of a cause and effect that does not occur within time?
No, I did not mean to say effect. Anyway, I can provide an example of an effect without a beginning in time. Actually, St. Thomas talks about this in the Reply to the First objection in Article 2, so I will just quote him:
Reply to Objection 1. As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xi, 4), the opinion of philosophers who asserted the eternity of the world was twofold. For some said that the substance of the world was not from God, which is an intolerable error; and therefore it is refuted by proofs that are cogent. Some, however, said that the world was eternal, although made by God. For they hold that the world has a beginning, not of time, but of creation, so that in a certain hardly intelligible way it was always made. "And they try to explain their meaning thus (De Civ. Dei x, 31): for as, if the foot were always in the dust from eternity, there would always be a footprint which without doubt was caused by him who trod on it, so also the world always was, because its Maker always existed." To understand this we must consider that the efficient cause, which acts by motion, of necessity precedes its effect in time; because the effect is only in the end of the action, and every agent must be the principle of action. But if the action is instantaneous and not successive, it is not necessary for the maker to be prior to the thing made in duration as appears in the case of illumination. Hence they say that it does not follow necessarily if God is the active cause of the world, that He should be prior to the world in duration; because creation, by which He produced the world, is not a successive change, as was said above (Question 45, Article 2).