Cloudscape

""Before' implies time""


No, no.
"Time" implies "before."
Time is basically movement. There's no way you can separate the two concepts whatsoever.
If you remove movement, there's no more time, et vice versa.
So if you'd say there was no time before the Big Bang, how did it come into being?
Obviously such line of reasoning as what there was "before there was time" is bound to lead into sophistication, and therefore I will continue to assume in the nature of an infinite and eternal universe.
I just don't believe in a beginning of existence because of Occam's razor; an existence which had no beginning is simple simper, requiring less tortuous logic.
The only reason why one would favor a universe with beginning is because it's intuitive: everything in our world, after all, has a beginning. But if beginning itself would have a beginning, then that as well would have to be part of the beginning. In other words, there is no reasonable way in which one can "exclude" something from existence and assign it the cause of existence. Anything that would have caused existence would already have been part of it.