Time is linear as you defined linear but it has a beginning. Did you find anything wrong in my argument regarding that time has a beginning?
Is it just a “simple feeling”? Or in what sense is it an “idea”?
Do you also think that the movement of the car is a “tihng”, and the car another “thing”, or that the “movement of the car” is just the car moving?
Ok, so, are “time” and “duration” synonymous words for the same “thing”, or “duration” is kind of an aspect of “time”?
It is an idea: There should be a duration between any couple of states of a system which is in motion. Simply you cannot reach the second state of the system given the first state otherwise.
I think we experience motion. I however think that motion is created in our brain otherwise it should be a thing.
Duration is a slice of time.
I do disagree with time having a beginning based upon my argument:
As Catholics we believe that God always was, i.e. no beginning to His being. If God always was, then time has no beginning. Remember the word “always” is a limitless function of time.
According to Catholic teaching God is timeless which is different from what you are saying. The universe has to have a beginning otherwise the concept of creation becomes meaningless.
That’s false. Creation wasn’t the beginning of time.
Also, if God is timeless (which of course He is), then there was no beginning of time. There was never a time without God.
You say that time is not an idea, but a thing; and also that you have an idea of time, not a feeling.
From what you say I guess that for you an idea is always a rational elaboration. And I guess this is how you distinguish them from feelings. Please confirm.
I am interpreting this in the sense that in your opinion motion is not objective, but subjective. Is this correct?
Are you intending to be literal here, or you are intentionally using a metaphor?
I conceive slices of spatial things. Does your idea of “time” include space as one of its attributes?
Well, to the best of my knowledge the most of scientist agree with the fact that time started by Big Bang.
These are three statements. Could you please tell me what do you mean with timeless?
I also argue about the fact that time has a beginning so I am afraid that I cannot help it unless you show that something is wrong with my argument: Suppose time has no beginning. This means that time existed at infinite past. It however takes infinite amount of waiting to reach from infinite past to now which this is impossible. Therefore time has a beginning.
Finally I argued that time cannot be created. This is subject OP. So please let me know what you think about OP.
Yes. I agree with what you stated.
Yes. That is what I meant.
Umm… pardon? When, pray tell, was the “beginning of time”, then?
Your assertion doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. God, in addition to being eternal (i.e., ‘timeless’), is also ‘uncreated’. That doesn’t mean, though, that “there was no beginning of creation.”
Rather, since God is eternal and uncreated, He is the one who created time and the universe.
No I am intending to be literal here.
No, space is its own thing. It seems that spacetime continuum is doomed. Space also is emergent thing according to physicists:
No, the Big Bang explains how the Universe expanded, not how the Universe was created. Matter was present before the Big Bang proving that time was in existence already, otherwise the pre-Big Bang Universe existed in a timeless state.
I believe that we’ve taken this debate as far as we could. Thanks for your ideas.
There was no beginning of time. God has always been, He is timeless, correct? If God has always been and is timeless, then there was no beginning to his existence, thus there being no beginning of time.
“Time” does not measure God’s existence; time measures change in physical objects. In other words, ‘time’ is a characteristic of the physical universe. Inasmuch as the physical universe had a beginning, time correspondingly had a beginning.
To say “time has a beginning” is not to say “God is measured by time.” After all, even though time now exists (in our context), would you say “God is n years old”, or “God did such-and-such yesterday and this-and-that today”? Of course not – that would be nonsensical! Therefore, time does not apply to God, and God’s eternal nature does not impinge on time within its own context.
So tell me then, when was the beginning of time? The time that started before God? Of course that would be impossible since God, as you correctly state, is timeless. If time began at Creation, did God exist in a timeless state prior to Creation?
Follow the logic: yes God is timeless, He created all things including time, so if He always was, then time also always was. No beginning. As I said to STT, i think we’ve taken this debate as far as we can. Thanks for your ideas.