Ok. It’s mind boggling but ok.
The Big Bang happens everywhere, because the whole universe in the beginning exists in a single point. The framework is the result of the Big Bang, not the cause or context. That is the point of unified field theories, to trace the genesis of forces in the Big Bang.
At least, that is the understanding I retain from study done many years ago, which could be entirely wrong.
Timeless state is one point, otherwise has duration.
You are correct of course.
The point is neither in space nor time. The question is whether God was alone before act of creation or not?
Let’s say Yes.
The word “alone” implies the existence of at least a very simple numbering system: 1, many. That simple numbering system (or a more complex one) has to exist for God to be “alone”
As far as I understand the article talk about changes. Here we are talking about God who is changeless.
And now there exists a universe. Therefore God created the universe. Therefore there was a before and after that God was within. There should be a duration between before and after otherwise the change does not take place. Therefore God is subjected to time.
The point that I am trying to make is that there is a duration if God was alone then God plus creation. Therefore God is subjected to time.
You are making 2+2=5.
Before the universe God existed, The Word. And this was for a time however brief, and it’s true that we call that a duration, but God is not limited by time. As far as I know time does not exist for God since He is aware of all past, present and future.
We cannot conceive of the essence of God, it is beyond our abilities to imagine Him, therefore we cannot say that God is subject to this thing or that thing, God is not subject to anything since He has power over all things.
I don’t see how you can go further with this questioning my friend?
Yes God does not change and creation appears to change. God is not conditioned by His creation.
I am the Alpha and Omega the first and the last the beginning and the end
This seems to be true. 3000 years ago, God was in heaven. Then 2000 years ago, God came down from heaven and was made man.
Ahh… but then it means that it’s somewhere. Which means physical extension (regardless how miniscule). Which means that the framework is already in place.
Nope. The ‘before’ and ‘after’ are in the context of the universe, not the context of God.
God has been outside the physical universe always. 2000 years ago – within the context of the universe – Jesus became incarnate. He had always been; but He became human – in the context of the framework of the universe – at a particular time and place within that framework.
Not true. God is present in the Holy Eucharist which is inside the physical universe.
True. I’m not talking about the Incarnated 2nd Person of the Trinity, just the general descriptor ‘God’. Please re-read what I wrote, and try again. Would you say it’s false that “God has been outside the physical universe always”?
(And yes, Jesus has been present inside the physical universe – first physically, and now, sacramentally – and within our perception of the temporal framework, that has been true for 2000 years. It doesn’t change the fact that God has been outside the temporal framework always, though.)
The universe is somewhere, even at the Big Bang. That does not mean physical extension, because when at the moment of the Big Bang, the universe is at a single point. It is not at one of many points, but at the only point which exists. It is there because it was created out of nothing. The Bang creates the structures of the physical universe.
That is the Big Bang theory. Maybe there was a Smaller Bang instead, in which creation was introduced into an already existing framework. It would not take much tweaking to create such a theory, but it would not be a Big Bang theory.
You need to find a faulty in my argument. You are not offering that.
The fault is that you are trying to dictate limitations on God, it cannot be done. God is unlimited by time, space or anything imaginable by us.
God existed before time which is an attribute of the physical universe.
I can’t prove this and you can’t prove I’m wrong, so I don’t see how we can discuss it.