Yes, it is a problem for Jews/Christians/Muslims who believe in an anthropomorphic God. Not necessarily for those who believe in a more abstract…deity? The cosmos, the universe, “the Tao that can be named is not the Tao,” because it by nature cannot be described.
And I wasn’t doing that.
But if god exists before the universe, god would be timeless. Which logically means god would be eternal.
You don’t necessarily have to say god, whatever just is before time, would be timeless and eternal.
Proving the existence of god is another matter.
How can anyone argue about an abstract concept, such as a god, with believers who consider their particular god to be a truth? It’s a pointless exercise.
Do you mean that in the social constructivist way, or like Terry Pratchett?
The main problem is GDS (God Delusion Syndrome). There should be a vaccine developed to combat it.
Well, no - if we’re gonna go there, it could exist before the universe, and not exist now, so wouldn’t be eternal. This is basically just an exercise in defining things at this point. 
(But how can we claim existence “before” time started? That’s a weird concept. Simpler to just say it’s before our understanding /conception of time. Again, definitions. ;))
You could start by trying to define “time”. As we all know, time is relative, and dependent on the perception of the person experiencing it. Einstein’s theory of relativity proved this mathematically and we know this from observations of deep space. Any sort God that exists for infinity would not be bound to the same rules of time as us or a mayfly that only lives for a day.
Right,so back to:
But hard to provide a definition of time that would encompass an eternity before time started, so back to:
What If NASA’s James Webb Telescope found a galaxy older than the Universe? What If NASA’s James Webb Telescope found a galaxy older than the Universe?
All that would mean is that our human-generated measurements are wrong, either our estimate of the age of the universe, the distance of those galaxies, the speed of light, or even the telescope itself. We’ve gotten the age of the Earth wrong many times before. No need to get existential, just readjust our calculations.
Yes, I agree that this is the (possible) implication of the new observations. We know that some time ago (13.8 billion years according to present-day findings), time, space, matter, and energy came into existence, and in an instant- everything. Hmmmm. It seems I’ve read that somewhere. Can’t put my finger on it.
“Cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape—they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.”
Alexander Vilenkin
Physicist Alexander Vilenkin proposes a model where the universe began as a quantum mechanical “bubble” that popped into existence from nothing—a state lacking even space and time. This spontaneous creation, described by the quantum tunneling concept, occurs because the total energy of a closed universe is zero (positive matter energy canceling negative gravitational energy), which is allowed by quantum mechanics. This “quantum origin” model provides a physical, uncaused explanation for the universe’s start and aligns with the theory of cosmic [inflation]-Wiki
Or as Alan Guth, the co-author of the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin (BGV) theorem said, “universes may just be the kinds of things that pop into existence now and then.”
Yes, exactly! Space, time, matter, and energy all came into existence at the cosmic beginning. They are not preexisting ingredients. They originate with the universe itself.
But, at least Vilenkin, would still maintain that the multiverse as a whole cannot be past-eternal. And as one of the authors of the BGV theorem, I would think Guth would also agree. Namely, any universe (or inflating multiverse) must have a past boundary. It cannot extend infinitely into the past. Even if universes can pop into existence spontaneously, there is still a cosmic beginning somewhere in the past. That’s the whole point of the BGV theorem, if my understanding is correct.
A simple thought experiment can show this. And it’s so cool.
c (speed of light) = distance/time
The speed of light cannot change. If the distance of the light traveled is different for the two observers, then the only thing left is that time MUST change. It is relative. “If two observers are moving with respect to one another, each perceives that the other’s time is flowing more slowly” (from the video).
What? Depends on the medium. The speed of light in a vacuum is constant.
Yes, you’re right. The speed of light in a vacuum is denoted c.
1 John 3:10
This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister
I read this as saying that many are unknowingly children of the devil.
The White House is full of them!
Exactly for example… Those who want to push to allow abortion
What’s wrong with abortion?