If there is a first moment in time, it didn't always exist.
Although time wise, and only time wise, nothing precede the first moment in time. First moment in time is like all other moments, coming to existence and that shifting to another moment in time.
Just like all other moments in time didn't always exist, the same is true of the first moment of time.
The only question remains, what ontologically preceded time. Preceded not as in time wise, but ontological precedence.
I would say there is 3 options:
Nothing.
Something without will.
Something with will.
As for nothing, I don't think first moment in time just appearing out of nothing makes sense.
Something without will, is problematic, in that it is timeless. As it timeless, time wasn't part of it's reality, and as such it cannot undergo change. Whatever that reality is, it cannot add to what's there, because ontologically is without time, without motion. Physical things without time cannot cause things to come to exist.
Something with will is the best reasonable conclusion, if there was a first moment in time, that caused the 1st moment in time.
Now when I say something with will, if we imagine will to be separate part of it's essence or part of it's essence, that has it's problems, but it's just semantics, and it means this thing that cause it, is will, because there is no divisions in God.
That is it is a will that causes the first moment in time to come to be. And God is a will. The best will at that.
But for the sake of argument, you can say the being has will or is will, doesn't matter.
Although time wise, and only time wise, nothing precede the first moment in time. First moment in time is like all other moments, coming to existence and that shifting to another moment in time.
Just like all other moments in time didn't always exist, the same is true of the first moment of time.
The only question remains, what ontologically preceded time. Preceded not as in time wise, but ontological precedence.
I would say there is 3 options:
Nothing.
Something without will.
Something with will.
As for nothing, I don't think first moment in time just appearing out of nothing makes sense.
Something without will, is problematic, in that it is timeless. As it timeless, time wasn't part of it's reality, and as such it cannot undergo change. Whatever that reality is, it cannot add to what's there, because ontologically is without time, without motion. Physical things without time cannot cause things to come to exist.
Something with will is the best reasonable conclusion, if there was a first moment in time, that caused the 1st moment in time.
Now when I say something with will, if we imagine will to be separate part of it's essence or part of it's essence, that has it's problems, but it's just semantics, and it means this thing that cause it, is will, because there is no divisions in God.
That is it is a will that causes the first moment in time to come to be. And God is a will. The best will at that.
But for the sake of argument, you can say the being has will or is will, doesn't matter.
