It seems faulty thinking to assume there is a "beginning" or an "end" to what is Time. Might it be a gliding ripple radiating from the middle reverberating in all directions? If time were a flat surface, would we look upon this circus to see us all as one event, and might we examine in its breadth that, while each moment had its depth, nothing was ever disconnected? When Van Gogh painted his night sky did he start from just one side, or was it wild from the start? Is what we call "cause and effect" more like a core cohesiveness, which turns "color" into “art”? What if the universe is making God’s glorious living painting in a ten trillion different hues? Why then be Mona Lisa’s eyes claiming DaVinci is to be despised when we wish he made us blue? So, then, how to do this "living" if there's no "logical beginning"? Offer all to Love it's due. You see, by virute of persisting in this thing we call existing there's more to love than we knew.
We are three-dimensional beings, limited, and attempting to understand a four-dimensional space in terms of continuity, which we call linear time. Linear time, however, is not linear when viewed from an external vantage. “Cohesion” from above appears as “continuity” from below.
It’s all relative to where you’re standing, which is another way to say that concluded philosophy is dictated by its initial premise. Forest or trees? It depends on which you’re looking for.
Omnia ad Jesum per Mariam
I think I tend to conceive of universe as a fractal
To know the seed is to know the forest; to know the forest is to know the seed from which it sprang.