Origen and some early Christian thinkers speculated that God may have created and destroyed worlds in cycles before the current creation described in Genesis 1. This idea, though speculative, raises the question: since Scripture does not detail what God did in His eternal past (before "In the beginning"), on what biblical basis do Christian traditions reject such views? Given that: - God is eternal and existed before time, - Genesis 1 focuses on the beginning of our world, not necessarily God's first act of creation, - Ecclesiastes 3:11 says, "He has put eternity into man's heart, yet so that he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end," How do Christians who reject Origen’s cyclical creation model ground that rejection **biblically**, rather than merely philosophically or theologically? Are there specific Scriptures or doctrinal principles that limit God's act of creation to a single beginning as described in Genesis?

What in the Bible makes people think that time has a beginning? I understand that Genesis says, "In the beginning....", but we use that expression for many things, such as "In the beginning, Mary thought that John was...." Gen.1:1 is not the beginning of everything. It is certainly not the beginning of God. It probably wasn't the beginning of Jesus. It probably wasn't the beginning of the angels (see Job 38:4-7 below that *seems* to imply that the morning stars and the sons of God pre-exist Gen 1:1). So why believe it was the beginning of time? Or why believe time has a beginning? Job 38:4-7 (KJV): >4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. > >5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? > >6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 7 **When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God** shouted for joy?

90% of Christians believe in pre-tribulation rapture. Nevertheless in Matthew 24 verses 15 to 31 we read: *when ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place .......... let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains ......... for then shall be **great tribulation** such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be .......... immediately **after the tribulation** of those days ......... shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven .......... and he shall send his angels .......... and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other...........* Is Matthew 24 verses 15 to 31 a proof of post-tribulation rapture because if the rapture happens before **the great tribulation** who will the angels gather *from the four winds from one end of heaven to the other* **after the great tribulation**?

According to Luke's genealogy Jesus is the 76th great grandchild of Adam . But in the holy bible how many years elapse between the creation of Adam and the birth of Jesus? I have googled the question, but I do not believe the answers given by google to be accurate. All the answers point to a time period of around 4000 years which would bring us back to only 4000BC. However according to Wikipedia Adam was 930 years old when he died, Seth was 912, Enos was 905, Kenan was 910, Mahalalel was 895. Therefore we still have around 71 generations left to go and we are already beyond the 4000BC period.

I've been reading about Eastern Orthodox theology and one thing that caught my attention is the unusual view of time that some Eastern Orthodox theologians have, in particular Fr. Alexander Schmemann. Can someone please explain to me what he means by what happens after the ressurection when time is "perfected" and turned into an "eternal temporality" or the "temps Immobile?" Does he literally mean that time will freeze and that our experience in our resurrected bodies will be entirely immutable? Or is something else meant by that, as I've read an article saying that in eternity the distinction of past, present, and future will not be erased but "clarified" and "perfected." (I read this in an article about the EO theology of time called the [Chalice of Eternity](https://bogoslov.ru/article/2668945) that left me with more questions that answers) I genuinely can't make heads or tails of any of this.

According to [Enchiridion Indulgentiarum](https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/tribunals/apost_penit/documents/rc_trib_appen_doc_20020826_enchiridion-indulgentiarum_lt.html) , a plenary indulgence can normally be granted only once per day (Normae de Indulgentiis No. 18 - § 1) unless the believer is at the point of death (§ 2). How is it determined when the next day starts for the purposes of gaining a new plenary indulgence? For example, if (this is an extreme example to illustrate my question) Bob gains a plenary indulgence at 11:59 PM on May 30, can he obtain another plenary indulgence at 12:01 AM on May 31 or does he have to wait until 11:59 PM on May 31 to get another? Similarly, if Bob gains a plenary indulgence at noon on May 30 and then takes a one hour flight westbound across the International Date Line to a place where it's already May 31, can he get another one immediately or does he have to wait 23 more hours? Yes, I know, one can gain unlimited partial indulgences a day and an otherwise plenary indulgence which fails to meet all the criteria for its reception drops down to a partial one, so Bob's efforts would not be completely wasted, but I'm curious if this is discussed anywhere. - Are days reckoned according to local law and custom (i.e. the civil time zone and calendar date)? This would mean, for example, that if the Ruritanian Parliament passes a law on January 1 at 7 AM making it immediately and legally January 2, Catholics in Ruritania can go out immediately and get another plenary indulgence even if they just got one an hour ago. - Do days begin and end at astronomical midnight at the location where a person is currently present, without regard to local custom, law, or time zone designation? - Are days reckoned per Old Testament practice as beginning at sunset rather than midnight, and one must wait until sunset to get another plenary indulgence, and it doesn't matter if sunset is one minute away or eleven hours and 59 minutes away? - Does the granting of a plenary indulgence have a strict cool-down period of 24 hours as measured by a stopwatch? If there is a more general (not explicitly tied to indulgences) teaching in Catholicism or Canon Law on the definition of "once per day" or "daily" that could reasonably be understood to apply to this situation, I would accept that as an answer. For some background to this question, there are a fairly large number of posts on our sister site Mi Yodea (and in Judaism in general) on the exact nature of the beginning, ending, and succession of days and how civil time zone changes, rapid long-distance travel, the International Date Line, and even travel into space affects time-bound commandments that must be observed on a specific date or day of the week. I'm curious as to whether Catholicism has anything similar.

How can time not exist before creation? For God to exist for infinite time before creation, there had to have been some kind of time or time-like object causing -infinity to turn into the time of creation. Wouldn't God have created time before time so there was still time before creation but it may have had different properties? Because eternity into the future is always described as infinite time in the future, but infinite time into the future can't actually happen technically and only approaching the infinite future can happen but never reaching it. So kind of like on a coordinate plane for e-x, where the coordinate plane tries to approach zero but it never actually is able to reach zero unless a value of infinity is placed in the value of x, which can't be shown on a coordinate plane. So is it kind of like the graph that I described in that eternity can never be reached and it doesn't exist at least in the future side, and eternity in the past does exist and has to exist? So does ever-increasing finite time give the illusion of eternity?

It is common to hear phrases such as "God exists outside of time" used to explain away anachronism or avoid addressing it altogether--for example, the idea that God has in the past progressed to become Who He Is today is sometimes dismissed as nonsensical because being "outside of time" is interpreted to preclude such contemplation. But if that were true, then why do Scriptures make reference to the acts of God within time, and ascribe causality at all to His acts and attributes? We might take license from such expressions so as to hand-wave further understanding of the true nature of God out of our minds. However, numerous passages in the Bible describe God and His acts in time, including His progression and development. The law of causality is never violated. For example, Luke 2:52 states, "And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man." The central message of the Bible is that the Son of God came down from the presence of His Father, took upon Himself a tabernacle of flesh, and submitted to the Father in all things, including paying the price for sin so that we could be redeemed on conditions of repentance. For all we might say about being "outside of time", an assertion that God does not obey or is not consistent with laws of causation is clearly untenable. What Bible verse or verses suggest that God "exists outside of time", or gives a sensible definition to what that might more appropriately mean? I am not asking for philosophical interpretations, lawyerisms or hand-waving references to what so-called "mainstream Christianity" teaches. I am asking what the Bible says. Note that verses saying or suggesting that God has always existed or is eternal (which I accept) are not the same as saying He has never changed or is "outside of time". Such verses explicitly mention notions of time and causality as being valid and applicable to God as well as everything else.

I often hear that God caused time to exist, or created time. But causality is relatable to us as a temporal concept, at least in the sense that it requires strict ordering; nothing caused can logically precede its cause (otherwise we could never prove for example that God is Supreme because of His power to cause anything, if causation is meaningless or without order or hierarchy). Time certainly teaches us this and causality is an attribute of time--but perhaps causality is not unique to time? It must be so if time was indeed "caused". Therefore no definition of "eternal" may ignore causality, eternity itself providing for and always being consistent with causality; causality necessarily transcends "time" as we know it, because "time" as we know it was at least purportedly "caused". Further compounding the subject is the fact that time is not always a singleton nor is it always referred to with the definite article in Scripture; it may be used in an apparent singleton sense as in Revelation 10:6 ("there should be time no longer"), but in other places the indefinite article is used, "a time", as in Ecclesiastes 3 . Given that there are multiple "times" in God's purview and appointed by Him to His creations, what sense are we to make, Scripturally, from the assertion that God created time, if the causal aspect is discounted? For example there is no verse in any translation I am aware of that states that God "created time" or that He "caused causality to exist", since the latter would require circular definition. One could purport that God is able to make no sense or have His attributes be circularly defined, but that would make Him unknowable (and void of virtue), contradicting John 17:3. Therefore what is causality, or eternity for that matter, according to the Scriptures? How do time, eternity and causality relate, according to the Scriptures? Is there any inherent attribute of time, if causality is not unique to time?

I'd like to know if according to the Catholic teaching I can pray for the past events that didn't happen? For example: If a woman miscarried a child which means the child wasn't baptized and at that moment woman didn't know it was necessary for the child to be baptized in order to get in heaven. And now after some time she gained the knowledge and ask the angel in a prayer go back in time and perform the prayer of baptism over the baby. Or when some relative dies and after 5 years I gain the knowledge that the person might be in purgatory and maybe I should pray for the person. Can I offer all of my prayers I've done since and pointed them to the moment when the relative died? Will that be added to that soul to the moment of her death or only to the current moment? Is this something we can do according to the catholic theology? Or we can only pray for the present situations and is everything bound to the present moment only? I know this can be difficult to research but maybe someone can find something within the tradition.

I’m not asking what this question asks. The statement often is made that God exists outside of space and time. The Logos was with God in the beginning. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Is it the belief of mainstream denominations that time began when the universe was created? Or did time begin when time keepers started keeping time that is to say when humans were created? Would time exist prior to physical creation? Doesn’t our counting of time rely on planetary movement? What does before time mean? Angels were on hand to applaud the foundation of the earth. Were angels created outside of time?

According to the following excerpt from the "Called to the Faith" sermon of St. John Vianney, > The theologians [at Jerusalem] told them [the Wise men] the prophecies announced that > the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, and that the time had come. I know that the prophecy in Daniel ch. 9 indicates that the Messiah would be *cut down* before the destruction of the Temple---and so, must have already been on earth prior to 70 A.D. However, I ask--- Which prophecy[ies] might suggest, more specifically, that "the time had come" for the Messiah to be born? The where portion (i.e., Bethlehem) is nevertheless, clear to me.

I read in 2nd Samuel from the time that David was anointed with oil to the beginning of Judges to Davids death and burial. Davids life is described in much detail, great detail. Both good and bad are described and a full accurate picture is formed of David, his time and run-ins with Saul, his Kingship and many battles and wars that brought about. His relationships and friendships, his wives and children. His many travels and explorations. Of course, his sins and wrong choices. His blessing and curses, David and his own Book of Deuteronomy, lol. But in all this great detail of his life only one sentence about being laid to rest with his fathers in the City of David. I find that extremely odd. Thus far, I can only chalk that up to, it doesn't matter the final resting spot; as far as a tomb or the process of the dead. It matters what was done in life. It matters what was done in and with the time allotted, given to us, by the Father. I just found it really odd that chapter after chapter you read about the life and all the good and bad of David, then all of a sudden 1 sentence and that is a wrap, on to Solomon. But I guess that is sort of what life is really like any way. Out with one, on to the next one. Sad to say, so do something in Life that will last, the Light will last. Do something in the Light, ya, thats it...God Loves You...Thank you for your time

From the Wikipedia article on [Determinism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism) : > **Determinism is the philosophical view that all events are determined completely by previously existing causes**. Deterministic theories throughout the history of philosophy have sprung from diverse and sometimes overlapping motives and considerations. The opposite of determinism is some kind of indeterminism (otherwise called nondeterminism) or randomness. Determinism is often contrasted with free will, although some philosophers claim that the two are compatible. > > **Determinism often is taken to mean *causal determinism*, which in physics is known as cause-and-effect. It is the concept that events within a given paradigm are bound by causality in such a way that any state (of an object or event) is completely determined by prior states**. This meaning can be distinguished from other varieties of determinism mentioned below. And from the Wikipedia article on [Causality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality#Volition) about the topic of volition: > **The deterministic world-view holds that the history of the universe can be exhaustively represented as a progression of events following one after as cause and effect**. The [incompatibilist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incompatibilism) version of this holds that there is no such thing as "[free will](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will) ". [Compatibilism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism) , on the other hand, holds that determinism is compatible with, or even necessary for, free will. If we define the *volitional state* of a person as all the contents of their consciousness, their thoughts, emotions, desires, intentions, plans, decisions, tendencies, habits, etc., at a specific point in time, would Reformed Calvinists then say that all *volitional states* of a person are *causally determined* by prior causes in time? More formally, if we define - V(*p*,*t*) as the volitional state of person *p* at time *t*, - U(*t*) as the state of the universe at time *t*, and - *t1* and *t2* as any two different points in time such that *t1* 2*, would Reformed Calvinists agree that V(*p*, *t2*) is causally determined by U(*t1*) for each person *p* in the universe?

I know that many verses can be cited to argue for Jesus' pre-mortal existence (e.g. [here](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/80957/what-is-the-biblical-basis-for-jesus-pre-incarnate-existence)) . I'm also perfectly aware that a [question asking for the biblical basis for Jesus being God incarnate](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/78/what-is-the-biblical-basis-for-jesus-being-god-incarnate) has already been asked. However, I want to defend the validity of this question on the grounds of the following reasons: 1. Pre-mortal existence does not logically entail *eternal* pre-existence. In principle, if the only thing we know about a being is that it had a pre-mortal existence, then we cannot rule out *a priori* the possibility that that being could still have had a beginning in the past, either recently or a long time ago (e.g. see [the viewpoint of Jehovah's Witnesses on the nature of Jesus](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/75149/what-is-the-biblical-basis-for-jesus-christ-being-a-created-being-according-to-j)) . 2. Eternal pre-existence does not logically entail being God (or does it?). In addition to being eternal, a being needs to be omniscient, omnipotent, and many other things to be regarded as God. So I don't see the two as equivalent statements, although I acknowledge that there is a clear overlap. Having presented my reasons for asking the question, I ask: What is the biblical basis for Jesus having eternal pre-existence? Are there passages in Scripture that strongly suggest that Jesus never had a beginning in time?

Dutripon, *Bibliorum Sacrorum Concordantiæ* pp. v -xii gives a chronological table divided into six ages, numbered by years of the world (*anno mundi*) and years before Jesus Christ (*ante J. Ch.*). He says the creation of the first man and woman occurred in *anno mundi* 0 (=*anno ante J. Ch.* 4054). Have any exegetes made similar tables, charts, or "family trees" chronicling genealogy beginning with Adam & Eve? What is the most comprehensive one ever made?

If God exists outside of time and space, he isn't bound by their physical laws. In particular, he may be able to ignore the flow of time, experiencing different places and times in non-sequential order. Now suppose that when a person dies, God immediately takes their human spirit (or whatever one calls the essence that defines what they are) and transports it to the time of one of the general resurrections. Both for that person, and in reality, their resurrection really is within seconds of their death. There would be no supernatural "place of the dead", no "intermediate state"; the physical parts are decomposing in the grave, and the spirit parts have jumped into the future. Those other concepts have become meaningless. For "soul sleep" advocates, this would mean that they are wrong about people "sleeping" between death and resurrection, but correct that the dead have no awareness between death and resurrection. For "consciousness after death" advocates, this would mean that they are wrong about the dead being aware of the present time, but correct that, except very briefly, the dead never really lose awareness. **Is there any biblical scripture that would disprove such a process, or at least present a conflict with it?** (Note that I don't want a rehashing of why one side or the other is wrong; I want to know why the Bible says that my specific scenario must be wrong.)

It would appear that ***defining the word ‘day’*** in Genesis ch. 1 has a profound bearing on stances taken. Young Earth Creationists take them to be literal 24-hour-earth-days, but Evolutionists say they must have been millions of years each. The question seems to be boiling down to seeking an explanation from Old Earth Creationists, but I don’t like pigeon-holes, nor do I want to cramp anyone’s style here, if they consider themselves to be Christian, but not an Old Earth Creationist either! ***My second query*** is that if, indeed, the word ‘day’ as used in Genesis has diverse or non-literal meanings, would the elephant in this room be that no time-line is required for believing and understanding the six days of creation? The time factor would not be the point, but could remain unstated because how long it took God to create everything is neither here nor there, from a Christian faith point of view. The universe could have been in process of forming for an unspecified time, so that when planet Earth is first mentioned, its age is simply not known. Nor does its age matter. ***Finally,*** I don’t want anybody to go into whether Christians can rightly claim to be Evolutionists or not; for once I’m prepared to take Stack’s definition of a Christian as the basis for answers – whoever self-identifies as a Christian is to be considered one, when asking or answering.

**What is the gold mark or point in time for a tradition being considered a tradition within Catholicism?** This question is very similar to the question: When does a tradition become a Tradition? This question will simply deal with time frames for declaring a tradition as a recognized tradition within the Catholic Church? Is it 50 years, 100 years, 200 years or something else? In the Hebrew Bible, forty is often used for time periods, forty days or forty years, which separate "two distinct epochs". The fiftieth (50) is associated very closely to the duration in time for the Biblical Jubilee . The one hundredth mark seems to be the logical mark that a tradition would be considered a an established tradition. In fact this is the point in time I was taught when younger, but I have not found a reference indicating one way or another if it is valid. Is 200 years the golden mark? On 14 July 1570, Pope St. Pius V promulgated ***Quo Primum*** , abrogating rites less than 200 years old: > This new rite alone [the Tridentine Liturgy] is to be used unless approval of the practice of saying Mass differently was given at the very time of the institution and confirmation of the church by Apostolic See at least 200 years ago, or unless there has prevailed a custom of a similar kind which has been continuously followed for a period of not less than 200 years, in which most cases We in no wise rescind their above-mentioned prerogative or custom. My present question was curiously inspired by Peter Turner’s post: Does ***Traditionis Custodes*** have any effect on Novus Ordo mass? It could be noted that ***Taditionis Custodes*** is curiously timed for the 1970's 50th anniversary of ***lex orandi***. Is 50 years the golden number for a stable recognized tradition? Thus can anyone reference what the Catholic Church uses as a time qualification duration for establishing tradition as such?

I have a question regarding the "properties" of heaven. As far as I understand heaven is place outside of space and time. I imagine it like this since it is the only way i can make sense of eternity. However if we believe in resurrection, then it we will have our bodies which are material. If we are alive then our hears will beat. If there is a beat then time must exist since a beat represents a change between 2 instants. How does Catholic doctrine reconcile this (possible) paradox?