Oh no not another free will thread.

[Edwardo Piet]

Hammy, looks like you doing the same thing, having your cake and eating it to.

No. We agree that there was a first moment.

The way I understand the notion of something being temporally eternal is not that things stretch forward and backwards infinitely... temporally eternal just means things have always existed. There was no time before time. There will be no time after time. Those are tautologically true. Temporally eternal just means that reality has always existed in some way because there can't have been a time before it existed. Existence as we understand it and can actually make sense of it is temporal.

But what I'm saying is... if there's any kind of existence beyond time, we can't possibly describe it temporally. Our whole language is temporal, so anything outside of time, can't possibly be described.

And to be honest, I don't see any reason to believe there is such a thing as something outside of time. What would that even mean? Something that existed never? Existed at no times? What we call existence doesn't work that way. Whatever is outside of time... does it even make sense to say that it is? That implies presence and the present. If there 'is' something 'outside of time' we're talking about something so mysterious we literally will never possibly be able to describe it.

Noumenal reality may be atemporal... but noumenal reality means precisely those things which we cannot experience or know. So trying to describe it seems kind of silly.