In the beggining,, you should have stopped right there..
The first three words of the Bible show the creation and start of time, physical time as we know it..
No they don't. There is absolutely no indication that the "beginning" is the beginning of time. In fact, the clear indication is that it is the beginning of creation.
So, again, can any of you who claim time was a creation of God and not simply extant as a result of existence itself [that is God's existence as He has always been] show me that He created it?
And can you logically explain what God was doing before time?
Hint: No.
Do you know why you can't? Because the phrase "before time" is an oxymoron and non sequitur, as if there is no time there can be no "before."
To say that God is in time would be to say a cartoonist is In the cartoon, that a programmer is in the game, that an authors is in the pages...time as we know it I. The physical realm began with.. In the beginning. Period, stop right there,, in the beginning of what? Of time of coarse .God created the heavens and the eArth .. First we have a plane drawn.. A blank canvas we call time space, then God created the heavens and the eArth within timespace..
:rotfl:
Your argument only works if God created time, which is something you, and a host of others, have failed to demonstrate.
You claim that the "beginning" of Genesis 1:1 is the beginning of time without any clear evidence to support it.
And if you want to make your claim then explain what the "beginning" of John 1:1 is as it is clearly not the same as that of Genesis 1:1, seeing as how it discusses the Word [Logos] being there, being with God and being God. God has always been, and thus has always been the Word, therefore the "beginning" of John 1:1 must necessarily take place prior to the "beginning" of Genesis 1:1, as Genesis 1:1 is clearly about the time God created the Heavens and the Earth. Unless you think God created them at the same exact moment He began to exist? Which would them mean you think God began to exist at some point. You don't think that do you?
You openly pull your argument that it means the beginning of time out of thin air, as you clearly admit that it doesn't state within the verse, therefore you openly assume it means what you think it means, without any support. You are reading your own bias into the verse.
You have failed just as spectacularly as Aimiel.